>mfw Loomis is dismissed as a meme now What is wrong with

>>2923359
"Loomis is a meme" is a meme.

He rambles like an old man, never getting to the point, he's geared towards to 1950's illustrations market and style, a long gone time. People that take his books like the gospel (and some still do) end up with a shitty loomis-y style.

>>2923363
You say that as someone who already understand figure and portrait drawing (presumably. You probably a fucking scrub)

Loomis + Proko is a top tier track to git gud quickly.

>>2923359
Other resources teach anatomy in a more intuitive manner, he's still good.

He's unique in that he has a well rounded perspective, he understands art on a more holistic level (compared to someone like Hampton). This makes him useful as an intro to illustration in its totality.

>>2923363

He does get to the point, that's why he has plates.

>>2923363
>end up with a shitty loomis-y style
How is it shitty?

>inb4 the only book you're referencing is FWAP

>>2923363
loomis is geared towards making good pictures in general, pretty much 99% of his teachings can be applied today
>>2923374
loomis barely touches anatomy, and he urges you to study it from other sources like bridgman

What is the least memey art textbook? Seems like everyone hates everything

>>2923359
Loomis is great but as always dont get hung up on it read it all do every excercise youre talking about less than 70 hours on fun with a pencil and then around 80 on head and hands, wow youve spent a month drawing from a basic book now move on.

I always get the feeling that you guys dont spend the time to read and use a book properly. Just do a whole book very few are fundamentally wrong and loomis is not one of those

>>2923359
Hampton is better. I don't get why Loomis is so popular around here.

>>2923519
At first I though it was an /ic/ meme but it turns out a lot of artists mention him, even people who teach like Proko and Eaton

>>2923599
Its because studying with loomis doesnt make you wanna kill yourself

>>2923519
loomis is a way better artist and covers a way wider range, hampton is great as an introduction to anatomy though and definitely recommended for beginners.

>>2923519
why not both, they're both recommended here

hampton derives his methods from loomis, but yeah they're both good, study both!

File: 51FFnW4Z47L._SX258_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (24KB, 260x341px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 260x341px

What do you guys think of Jack Hamm?

>>2923466
Have you considered the possibility that /ic/ isn't one person? And that there is an ENORMOUS amount of stupid and bitter people here?