I'm trying to revisit my understanding of Loomis because

You are too technical about it, just loosen up.
The skull isn't a perfect circle its just kind of like one.

>>2957199
Post faces.

>>2957228

Voila.

Maybe it's more an issue of me not placing the features correctly, but my good friend Loomis says that this shouldn't be an issue with good construction.

File: faces.jpg (1MB, 2668x1480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2668x1480px

>>2957228
>>2957273

My bad, here's the faces.

>>2957274
Your construction seems solid, you're proportions are wack. The eyes should mark the halfway point between the top of the head and the chin. Some of your heads place the eyes above that.

>>2957274
>>2957274
you're -not memeing here- symbol drawing the features.

the eyeballs are spheres encased in another cut sphere (the eyelids) and the brow ridge.

you draw the nose in the same perspective regardless of the head's orientation

the mouth isn't drawn on, it's a complex shape that sort of bulges out the main mass of the face. teeth and lips form an arc and the tip of the mouth is only slightly less prominent than the tip of the nose (on average).

>>2957296
>>2957286

Thanks for the critique. I guess I have to revisit the construction of the individual features then.

>>2957306
Remember that the main ellipse that you use to construct (the one that gives you the brow line) also gives you a guideline on the orientation of the features. Also you should definitely do these head studies with reference. Especially at extreme angles the features are really counterintuitive to place (becahse of foreshortening) so you can figure out the construction much better if you have a photo at hand.

Practice on basic figures. Boxes, spheres, cones. From the life study. You don't understand the perspective at all. Stay away from Loomis, it wont help at this level. Good luck.

>>2957338
>don't know what he's talking about the post

>>2957343
Try harder

>>2957338

I'm not so sure about this. I think I'm decent enough in terms of drawing shapes in perspective to move on to constructing figures out of them. I think what the other anons said about constructing the features is more relevant here.

>>2957411
Ur faces says youre not.
Post shapes. From nature. Pencil on paper.

>>2957411
Can you draw a cube from imagination?
What about a cone?
A cylinder?
Can you rotate them arbitrarily, draw them from any angle?

If not, practice that first.

>>2957411
Anon disregard what these other guys are saying, just study the features and you'll do better. Cheers!

>>2957274
>>2957199

I will propose to you an alternative - draw half of a cylinder (or whole if it is easier for you) and place features on it according to Loomis.

I can assure you that your faces will looks much better. Right now I see that front of your faces, that is, all the important things are flat/drawn on mostly flat surface. The change in volume that you have is mainly from the skull Loomis ball and elongated jaw that I think you draw unconciously specifically to combat the flatness.

Initial circle is not important, if anything, it leads to stuff, inorganic shape of the skull, you can succesfuly draw a box for the not-face parte and it should look better.

So again, what I recommend you to try:

1. Draw cylinder or half of it on space.
2. Put facial features on it like you would according to Loomis.
2b. You can omit jaw at the beginning and focus on features like eyes, nose and mouth.

It shall combat the flatness of your faces and built up for proper planes of it. Good luck.

>>2957561

Half of a cylinder vertical or horizontally? I assume you intend vertically.

>>2957561
Another one.

Buy yourself a bag of potatoes.
Contemplate the shape of each one for about one hour.
Open loomis and draw some faces on the potatoes.
Make some studies.
Post faces.

>>2957585

...
Yes, vertical cylinder, tilted when the face is tilted. Draw a line cutting it in half from the top, place a nose there.
As you can imagine, it's also good in a way that it's easy to construct nose in perspective thanks to that guide and normal/orthogonal arrow to the surface that you can use as the basis for the bottom of the nose/its direction.

Then if you are having trouble with perspective on other features, check out with that.

Forgot to mention - when making eyes you can try cutting a sleet in cylinder beforehand, so it will look like a whistle. You then place eyes in that sleet.

>>2957590

Maybe it's ok for caricatures/trying for stylized, kind of exercise in shape design and something to get your creativity and imagination going.

>>2957274
Is it me or does it seem like they all share a slightly long chin?

File: f26935c5578679b0d4de87936a30a69d.jpg (29KB, 433x600px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 433x600px

Also try the Reilly method to really learn how to "lock in" the features and mapping the whole face in better detail

>>2957663

OP here

Yeah, It's a pretty consistent problem of mine. I've been trying to tackle it but I can't seem to ever get the chin right, which is weird because according to the Loomis method I should easily locate the chin.

That's why I made this thread. I figured it was either a problem of construction or something else. I also wonder if I'm just not making the chin wide enough or the jaw wide enough.

>>2957651
The idea is NOT to draw from imagination at this stage. It has nothing to do with caricatures and stuff.

File: loomis-planes.jpg (17KB, 392x441px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 392x441px

>>2957274
PLAAANNNEEES

OP, the mistake here is that you are trying to gain a understanding of the anatomy of the head by practicing Loomis heads. This is not possible. You can only actually grasp how the head looks from every conceivable angle if you draw it from every conceivable angle from life and reference. Quick hint: the skull is not actually formed like a sphere. The Loomis head is not about learning anatomy, it's about learning a method to deconstruct anatomy. Keep practicing Loomis heads, but also draw heads from life and refence. It's also good to trace Loomis heads over magazine pictures.

>>2957274
In addition to what other people are saying, draw heads from views that you rarely see in everyday life. Top down or near to, from under the chin, odd tilted angles. There's an incredible amount of details that are overlooked in normal viewing that are apparent in unfamiliar views. Also I see no sideview practice here.

>>2957274
This is what loomis does to people. Go with burne hogarth instead.

>>2957651

It's an interesting method. It forces me to think of the face as a curved surface, which is good. I'll try using it a bit more and see where it leads me.

>>2957762

I think this is partially where I'm going wrong, even though I try to apply the planes as much as I can.

>>2957664
>>2957842

I'll check them out too, thanks.

>>2957798

This is what I've settled on doing. I'll be using references until I feel comfortable enough with the general structure of the face to draw them from memory, as well as focusing more on the construction of the features themselves, because as some anon pointed out I don't really know how to construct lips, noses or eyes.

>>2957842
go with both, that poster is not indicative of loomis. that's like one exercise from a beginner stage. he goes in to tons more depth. hogarth and reilly are also both good. just for different things. Loomis is aimed at teaching you commercial, expressionful faces for magazines and marketing and stuff. reilly is great for making extremely impressive realistic portraits. hogarths fine but doesnt have the same amount of material.