Why isn't this god-tier book recommended more? It should

>>2657531
post link to download, and stfu fag

>cover drawing SUCKS
>using this as a guide

File: Untitled.png (38KB, 695x332px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 695x332px

>>2657531
Thanks for the insight, I've had it for a while, gonna move it up the list.

>>2657567
>pic related
Faggot

>>2657531
I read some of the practice and science of drawing by Hale and that wasn't very easy to read, it put me to sleep, is this really any better?

>>2657722
Never read that one, but this is very concise and to the point. Effectively outlines all the aspects of construction, how and why the old masters used them, and hammers home the importance of anatomical knowledge and drawing from imagination.

>>2657575

This, some of the old "masters" are pretty overrated desu desu

>>2657649
post link to download, and stfu fag

>>2657531
>>2657820
I wouldn't call it a book on construction from what I remember. Old masters didn't really construct in the same way that we think of the term or even use the term. The drawings are generally much more intuitive and direct. Hale talks about certain devices that old masters used that show form though line and shade, and indeed talks about it using the same language that constructivists use (and they can be described by such means but so can any formed drawings), but the process of working of these same constructivists is still quite different to the old masters, generally speaking.

>>2657575
>>2657828
Props to Robert Hale, if he put an attractive colorful picture on the cover, the book would attract the kind of people who can't yet benefit from its contents.

Hale was along with Keller or Reilly among the best teachers of fine arts New York ever got to cherish, he could've put Michelangelo or Caravaggio there, but he'd found this one to be more fitting.

>>2657531
Can vouch. One of the best. The drawings reproduced inside range from strange to stunning- but are in a great range of styles and each one is used to convey a specific lesson. One of the rare books that focuses on teaching design and draftsmanship- a topic not really covered in most instructional books. Very good design knowledge to be gained.
Was a real turning point when I started out.

>>2657886

... Or you know, a good drawing. That would have worked aswell.

>>2657531
seriously get this fucking book

>>2657531
dude in the pic seems to have some kind of infection starting at the back of his neck and growing towards his jaw and in his ear, looks gnarly.

File: SF-060.jpg (442KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

442KB, 640x640px

This book is one of my all time favorites. Have a physical copy.

>>2657531
>shit talking Loomis
>not posting a download link so I can get blown the fuck out
>lqpaf

File: hank.jpg (45KB, 680x521px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 680x521px

>>2657920
>>2658077
>these are the kinds of people that """"""""""""critique"""""""""" your work

>>2657722
aren't you talking about The Practice and Science of Drawing by Harold Speed?

>>2658308
fuck, I just realized they are two different people, speed and hale were one person in my mind

>Its another "Yeah fuck Loomis ive got this COOL NEW THING instead!" thread
youre never gonna learn if you just diss your teachers all day. Loomis is so fucking simple I cant believe /ic/ has such a problem following it.

its like whenever /fit/ has some new meme workout thread or some guy fucks up on something as simple as bulking/cutting and blames the whole system that he's a fat shit.

It's a solid book, works as a art history lesson too.

Beginner here, going through Betty's book right now. Should I pick this up after that or should I just do what the sticky says and pick this later?

>>2657531
but that face on the cover looks fucked up
ears are too far back
nose looks fuckhuge
tell me there's better drawings in the actual book

>>2661124
>but that face on the cover looks fucked up

that drawing was done with a reed pen
straight ahead
in one sitting
over 5 centuries ago
by some guy called Albrecht Durer

For the people who talk shit about drawing on cover..

If you can't see that this portrait is all about implifying construction, similar to Bridgman's "blocky" construstion, then good luck with never gonna make it and quiting art.
Because neather Loomis, Bridgman, Bammes, Hoghart, Vilppu or Hale will teach you the very basics of drawing.

>>2661119
It's worth a casual read to see how the fundies work in art

How are we supposed to study this

File: Durer_selfporitrait[1].jpg (93KB, 801x1116px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 801x1116px

>>2661188
/ic/ knows better

File: Adam_and_Eve_LACMA_M.66.33.jpg (1MB, 1616x2100px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1616x2100px

>>2661188
some of Durer's work looks pretty fucky nowadays, so does a lot of renaissance stuff. If Durer was missing some of the fundamentals it's because he hadn't invented them yet, still stuff does like kind of fucked sometimes.

>>2661636
Teutons just never really had the grasp of beauty as well or fine as the Greeks or Romans. What do you expect from a barbarian race? Even the attention to detail in Durer has a lineage from the Gothic and art of wandering tribes without respect for the civilized way of life.

File: Untitled-1.jpg (34KB, 188x194px)

34KB, 188x194px

>>2661636
Medic! We have a serious case of a sameface syndrome here.

Gotta respect Durer for proving the laws of perspective, though, with picture plane and everything. Some faggots can't invent it even know, with loads of torrented videos from Vandruff and Scott Robertson.

>>2661119
I would learn and practice pure observational drawing for a bit, then migrate to constructive concepts. Learning the latter will expand your conception of drawing greatly and will make drawing from life a lot more fun and somewhat easier - but it's important for beginners to grind observation a decent amount at first imo.

>>2661553
read the words written on the page and try to understand them with your mind. then put them into practice. also helps to study the drawabox website alongside it.

>>2657531
Oh shit I bought this book for like $1 a while ago and haven't even looked at it yet. I thought it was going to be something more like an art history book rather than something to improve technical skill. I'll have to read it this week

>>2661673
>We have a serious case of a sameface syndrome here.

They're (kinda) twins so it's likely intended by the artist.

>>2661967
Were they intended to look inbred?

>>2662062

Well she was made from his rib, so yes.
I'm more surprised by the belly button, considering they weren't born from a woman.