Is Michael Hampton tier muscular simplification alright for an artist to do, or is it simply damaging over a long period of time?
As in deleting the drawing of the insertion of the adductor, pectinus, etc, and simply clumping all of the muscles together and making it "one" muscle.
Superficially, yes. Especially in the learning process if you're a beginner - I see way too many (including some on this board) that obsess over understanding each and every little muscle and how it works when they can't draw a box in perspective well.
>>2736820
It depends on how relevant it is to the final drawing, dude. If the knowledge of anatomy is in your visual library, you don't need to peddle it out when it's not going to affect anything in the final product.
I may get flak for this, but I think Hampton is just a worse Steve Huston (Hampton was his student for some time iirc).
Hampton is good for understanding anatomical placement, certainly, but when compared to the more simple technique Huston advocates for (similar to Vilppu's technique), I think there is no contest.
Pic related, and I don't want to strawman Hampton, but this is the only painting of his I could find.
>>2736828
Where can I get access to Steve Huston's teaching of anatomy?
>>2736820
The purpose of his material is IMO primarily to teach you HOW to think and simplify forms. His actual proportions are often quite wonky. I think it can be harmful to only look at heavily stylized stuff for anatomy; I know I got some weird ideas from only studying Vilppu stuff without actually looking at real people for too long. I was copying the simplification without any real understanding. Look at someone like Sycra, the guy seems to be nurturing his own idiosyncrasies rather than growing. And it add up over the years and shows up as weird habits that don't look all that great.
I have a art friend who is a fantastic artist in many respects and quite well known but without taking anything away from his abilities he has grown a bit complacent and it shows in his anatomy. He's regressing I'm afraid. And that kind of thing scares the shit out of me personally.
The best artists seem to consider themselves the eternal student no matter how good they are. You'll never graduate from figure drawing, it's something you have to keep studying your whole life.
I draw a lot of figures for my commissions and I've found that I've organically developed my own short hands and stylizations over the years. All artist that draw from imagination do. But IMO you should aim to continually improve that visual library :)
>>2736830
He has a book which isn't that good, but there are a few lectures of his on youtube.
Though, the really good stuff by him is on New Masters Academy, which has a paywall. I think there may have been a torrent kicking around for a while, but I'm not sure if it is still around.
>>2736828
Damn, didn't realize Huston channeled a bit of Leyendecker.
>>2736836
OP here,
I'm hardly an intermediate artist, but I can't believe people actually think "I'LL GRADUATE FROM X" and you hear them talking about how they've gone through anatomy as if they've studied it to finality.
They're good, but I doubt they've done all that they can. You can always be better no matter what you do.
>>2736841
I don't think most people do it consciously, but it's easy to get complacent if you have a big support system of sycophants that kiss your ass about your art all day long as is the case with some people who get a bit of success. It's an advanced version of "muh style" essentially
>>2736822
S-STOP!! I DOING MY BEST!
>>2736862
Art is about fucking it up and realizing how to do it right afterwards. You'll make it eventually.
>>2736899
>Art is about fucking it up and realizing how to do it right afterwards
suddenly all this years of fucking around don't seem as wasted
>>2736913
It doesn't really count unless you actually do it right the next time.
>>2736913
fucking up, not fucking around
>>2736940
yeah, sorry for the bad wording, now I see how that could be interpreted for procrastination