JUST

>>2868917
Congratulations he found out what symbol drawing is. How impressive.

>>2868917
▲
▲▲

memes

>>2868917
>overexpose

>>2868921
>assumes two female portraits are a male drawing the same model rather than a female doing her own portrait

>>2868975
There are no girls on the internet.

File: John_William_Waterhouse_-_Hylas_and_the_Nymphs_(study).jpg (154KB, 778x1024px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 778x1024px

>>2868917
The technical progress is good but nonetheless the picture on the right has little artistic value

>>2868975
>constructs an entire narrative based on the normal usage of a pronoun
Not sure if autism or identity politics, but either way just fuck off to whatever hugbox you came from.

>>2868995
Yeah but most people draw for 2 years and don't gain any technical skill OR artistic value

>>2868975
#Triggered!!!

>>2869004

tfw that's me

islam will dominate

>>2868995
Who made that drawing?

How do I get from op 2012 level to your pic's level?

>>2871927
Draw for years.

>>2868917
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyFQVZ2h0V8

>>2868917
That face reminds me of charliezzz

It's not that impressive. I've been casually drawing for 6 months, Keys to Drawing is all I've read, and I can draw like the right. Drawing what you see isn't hard. What's hard is drawing something actually aesthetic and creative.

>>2872534
By the way bros, what do you do after you've "mastered" life drawing and can easily draw stuff that impresses normies (realistic portraits, photorealistic "art", etc)? I can't keep practicing my pencil technique forever.

>>2872534
>What's hard is drawing something actually aesthetic and creative.
just draw 2" thumbnails that take 30 sec and see what sticks. Thats what Syd Mead does.

>>2872571
That's for you to find out. Usually you should have learned composition though.

>>2872574
That sounds like a great idea actually, thanks. I still need to develop a cool style of my own, and then I need to study the real creative artists and get some inspiration. I hope I can truly express myself creatively through drawing. I don't want to draw figures over and over again; I don't want to draw from photos; I don't want to draw things laying around my house; I don't want to just draw what I'm seeing. Wish me luck!

>>2868975
fuck off back to tumblr and kys you'reself

>>2872584
this 2bh fampai

>>2872571
I doubt you've mastered life drawing, you should always be doing that. Otherwise you should draw whatever you want, or whatever you see yourself drawing for money in the future. Photo studies have very limited value, make something original and work on it the way you would if you were trying to impress a client. This is the best way to transfer what you know about anatomy and what you see in reference photos, to what you create from your imagination, and along the way you will see what you're missing. Creating something original from your mind is the way to go no matter how noob you are, and I highly recommend to anybody that you pretend that you need to impress someone impartial like a boss or a client even if they don't exist, because that will force you to really strive to improve quickly.

>>2872534
>>2872534
>I've been casually drawing for 6 months, Keys to Drawing is all I've read, and I can draw like the right

Kinda hard to imagine doing that with only Keys, I'd have thought that you'd need to have at least done Fundamentals of Drawing as well. Could you post your work please?

>>2872670
What is Fundamentals of Drawing? Was that in the sticky?

>>2872672
I don't know if it's in the sticky, haven't checked that in years

It's the manual they use in the Russian Academy, personally I found it extremely helpful and everything I know about drawing people from life/photos was from it. The PDF is probably still floating around (see fundamentals of drawing - mogilevtsev)

>>2872534
Post work

File: 1487716234858.jpg (17KB, 455x406px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 455x406px

>>2868917
>not posting their imagination drawings

>>2874016
EVERY DRAWING HAS TO BE OF A REAL OBJECT THAT PEOPLE CAN IDENTIFY IN 5 SECONDS OR LESS OR ITS SHIT

File: 1280-catcher-in-the-rye-cover.jpg (210KB, 960x450px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 960x450px

>>2872592
I mean I haven't literally mastered it, but I can draw whatever I see (unless it's really mind-bogglingly bamboozlingly unusual). I can draw other people's drawings, I can draw things laying around, I can draw buildings, I can draw photos, etc etc. It's literally just looking at something, placing down lines, measuring proportions with my pencil, repeat until all of the lines are down, render (the hardest part), and done. My rendering does need practice, though, and I'm working on that.

I won't stop life drawing completely, it can be very relaxing and non-artists get impressed by it, but what I really want to draw is aesthetic, creative stuff. I don't know if I can even get good at that, but I'll try. Look at the Catcher in the Rye cover art (pic related). So aesthetic. I want to draw stuff like that. I guess I'll just practice random shite, try to draw whatever ideas come in my brain, and solidify my fundies until I'm skilled enough to have my own unique style and the ability to creatively express myself.

I will keep your advice in mind, sounds quite useful.

>>2872670
>>2872732
What's Fundamentals of Drawing? I'm drawing this really cool painting by a 19th century master, I'll post that in a few days.

File: 2013_page_2_large.jpg (68KB, 480x333px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 480x333px

>>2874913
"I've mastered life drawing" fucking dunning kruegar, unless you can draw like this, you haven't mastered shit.

>>2874913
post work.

>>2874917
None of those "people" look like they are from life. It looks like the artist spent all his time on fisheye perspective and forgot about the anatomy.

>>2874917
T-those aren't life drawing... I can't draw like that. I can draw what I see. I can't draw from imagination, all of those guys are clearly drawn from imagination.

File: ..jpg (36KB, 593x490px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 593x490px

>>2874917
>you haven't mastered life drawing unless you can draw from imagination

File: IMG_20150611_0211.jpg (3MB, 2480x3507px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2480x3507px

OP you draw like an angel, each beautiful artwork like creating a new life for us to admire

>>2874953
>shitting on kjg
This nigga knows absolutely nothing.

>>2875329
>maximum dc

>>2874913
dont make claims without posting work

>>2868975
#LiterallyShaking

File: shucks-guy.png (2KB, 196x160px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 196x160px

>>2877652
>>2868996
>>2869005
>>2872584

Unironically feeding the troll

File: 1488147876909.jpg (16KB, 415x479px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 415x479px

>Id rate myself as only slightly better than the one on the left
>it hurts
>I want to die

File: 344ecbdcf1372dc2c9155631dc5187c0.jpg (58KB, 478x658px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 478x658px

>>2868975
>assumes what is true for over 99% of portraits of females

god, how racist

>>2880195
I'd like to see a source for that statistic, but please don't post a picture of your ass.

Honestly, learning the fundamentals only can get you so far. Yeah you can make huge leaps of progress in a short time, but milage is truly king.

Mileage is the secret everyone tries to find shortcuts for. Unfortunately it won't work like that.

You will not get good by drawing less. It just won't happen.

File: aa3dd0c409b8b7e11035d76b2c03557a.jpg (66KB, 600x797px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 600x797px

>>2880758
Fundamentals is the most important thing. Someone who studies his fundamentals will improve 100x times as much as someone who doesn't.

I was watching a krenz cushart podcast where he mentioned how people spend too much time studying the same thing. For example, I shouldn't need to draw 1,000 hands before I can draw hands from imagination, if I understand the proportion and construction then practicing a few angles will allow someone to draw from multiple angles.

It's similar to learning to draw boxes.You aren't supposed to memorize box angles, instead you're supposed to understand perspective, that way you can draw the box from any angle.

included an example. By understanding the torso from a couple of angles, you should be able to invent the rest without actually practicing it from ref. Many people spend unnecessary time thinking in 2d and having to draw poses over and over again because they don't make the connection.

>>2880195
You're not even close to the trush.

>>2878899
And you should be working instead of whining online.

>>2881058
Wait who's Krenz is he the guy who posts all these "in perspective" type exercises? Where can I find more of these?

I've seen tons of them with like fingers and boxes and stuff. I didn't know it was one person making them all

>>2883553
He has a gumroad. Just google "krenz gumroad"
He also has a deviantart page. You'll have to pay $10 for each tutorial pack tho

English sin't his first language so grammar is a bit off in some of his explanations but not to a distracting level.

>>2868917

Isn't that just from a reference? I mean if I have reference I could do the right one.

>>2881058
>For example, I shouldn't need to draw 1,000 hands before I can draw hands from imagination, if I understand the proportion and construction then practicing a few angles will allow someone to draw from multiple angles.
People will ACTUALLY believe this bullshit like it's magic. But can anyone prove it? Nope. It's all talk.

>>2884735
It's not magic? Wtf? Krenz cushart relies heavily on perspective in order to invent angles and hand positions that he hasn't drawn from ref. It's really advanced level perspective. You have first be able to rotate boxes while maintaining the proportions and then you simply apply that to human anatomy.

File: a3bda5e32b102b941efcab55ead991c9.jpg (55KB, 736x412px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 736x412px

>>2884882
Example of him rotating the finger from every angle. Note that these are done from imagination.

>>2884734
It's an artist doing a self portrait with a mirror. So I guess drawing yourself from life counts as a reference, yes.

File: IMG_9941.jpg (122KB, 750x857px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 750x857px

>

>>2868917
Can someone please tell me what is wrong with the one on the right? I've been staring at it, trying to find the "symbol" drawing flaws, and just can't. The one on the left is obviously "symbol drawing", but the one on the right looks tightly constructed to me. Please help.

>>2868995
>the picture on the right has little artistic value

what does that even mean? what gives a drawing "artistic value"? are you implying the pic you posted HAS artistic value?

>>2885523
It's hard to define and put clearly into words, but it essentially comes down to the decisions the artist makes while drawing. The OP is a very mechanically copied result with no real design put into it, and while it looks like a woman and has a full set of values and whatnot, it's not actually very skillful. The Waterhouse drawing has a lot of knowledge and design being put into it as he draws, and it shows. It's an interesting drawing and not just a literal copy. The difference in skill to pull off those two drawings is absolutely immense, and to really understand the difference you need to have done a lot of drawing yourself.

>>2885558
Sounds like a completely arbitrary term that has no real meaning. You could have just said "I like this drawing better".

>>2885569
Art is subjective, sure, but at the same time there are artists generally recognized as masters and artists who are seen as beginners or terrible at art. It's not completely arbitrary who gets classified as what.

>>2885450
Did you ever think that maybe, I dunno, it's actually a good piece of work?

>>2885580
The pic you posted & the pic in the OP are both not beginners. Neither is really a "master" either.

Beginner is not arbitrary, master is.

And either way none of these pieces have intrinsic value. They're just digital photos and maybe physical items on paper. They have economic value when someone gives them value, but intrinsically they are tied to markets and what others are willing to pay.

Water has intrinsic value because we need it to live. Paintings are just pretty pictures.

File: picasso.jpg (199KB, 576x700px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 576x700px

>>2885580
>It's not completely arbitrary who gets classified as what.

Of course it is. If I posted >>2868995 and asked for feedback, I would get told to go to the /beg/ thread. You only think it has artistic value because of the name attached to the piece. Picasso knew this about the art community and became a master troll.

File: 1479770859266.jpg (72KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1000x1000px

>tfw drawings 5 years ago are completely indistinguishable from my drawings today

WHY CAN'T I GET BETTER

WHAT AM I DOING WRONG

GOD DAMN IT I AM SO TRIGGERED REEEEEE

>>2885605
I would consider the pic in OP a beginner/intermediate, and Waterhouse was definitely a master.

>>2872571
How is photorealistic art not art?

>>2885656
Go back to the basics. That's what I'm trying to do while continuing at the current "level" I'm at. Even the greats go back to the beginning.

>>2884958
The one in the left looks fun even if ti's horribly drawn.

>>2885656
Actually draw every day you faggot it's that simple. Pick up a pencil for christs sake and stop moaning about you're inefficiency

>>2885523
Well... i think that anon sounds a bit jealous. But basically the drawing on the right has a little artistic value because it doesn't deliver a lot of emotion. nowadays an art work that is "merely an impression" is seen as an artwork that has a lot of artistic value.

>>2868917
What is so special about this? All she did was copy a photograph? You could probably learn this in 3 months if you tried.

>>2886318
How do you know it wasn't a self-portrait she did while looking at a mirror.

>>2874024
the fuck are you talking about? it took me just 1 second to identifie that kangaroo

File: 989ae43f07d72af87cb1880bdb83864b.jpg (39KB, 420x535px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 420x535px

>>2886387
>the fuck are you talking about?
People who do self portraits use a mirror while drawing. The OP's drawing looks like it's an attempt at "before & after" by the same artist.

So she probably didn't use the same photo twice at 2 years apart. She probably drew HERSELF using a fucking mirror, like a normal artist would do to gauge their skillset. Pic related.

I think the better question is what the fuck are you talking about? Do you not understand what a self-portrait is? There is no kanga here so eff off to one of the dozens of proko threads

>>2886190
If you dont turn it into something.. more

Then you might as well just take pictures mate

>>2885609
Watched a documentary about Duschamp. That nigger told his gf that she'd improve her painting by glueng a bar of soap on it. She did and she said she liked it.

How can that not piss people off, she didn't even know why she was doing it.

>>2886373
How do you know it was?

>>2886431
>How do you know it was?
Because this image is from the portfolio of Jessica Mack which you can see below:

http://www.brownpaperbunny.com/my-story/

It covers her journey learning art at age 30. It says the 1st is a portrait she did in some crappy art class, the 2nd is one she did in some place called Academy of Art.

Maybe these photos are two different female models so they may not be self-portraits. But they're definitely not copies of shitty photographs.

>>2885600
People were complaining about it in this thread and I wanted to know why. Maybe they were being sarcastic, I dunno. I do think it's good, but if there are better artists than me saying it's not that good, then I'd like to know why.

>>2886412

It'd seem a little unusual that she'd draw herself looking away if she used a mirror. Why does it seem so unbelievable to you she'd ref from a photo?