what percentage of people do you think can draw well? i understand

>>3047853
90% of people haven't drawn or gotten better at art since kindergarten. Of the people that have drawn since then, 90% of them are just hobbyists who have never heard of Loomis or any technical thing. Of the few that have heard of this stuff and gone to art school or something there is still 95% who suck and can't draw.

As far as an actual percentage of people who are good, it would be very very low, unless you have set the definition of "good" to be very low.

>>3047865
>Of the few that have heard of this stuff and gone to art school

You make it sound like there's a significant overlap between these two groups.

>>3047853
It depends on what you mean as good. If you mean ARC level good as in top notch fine artist. less than 1% and even among artists they only make up like 10% or less.

>>3047930
ARC is pretty shit for the most part actually. And even then, they make up wayyy less than 10% of people who can do stuff even at their level. Pro tip: most artists suck balls. Just go to artstation and click "new" and see how bad most things are, then remember the people posting on that site are mostly people who are "serious" about art.

>>3047930
>ARC
>top notch

stop this meme

>>3047936
I think it's more that people genuinely are impressed by ARC until they have a few years of experience and painting under their belts to be able to see it for what it is.

>>3047853
Less than .01%. I see a lot of flaws in the work of people that are considered good artists. It's strange because I look at random illustrators of the 1950s and the majority are amazingly good and you don't see that level of art since then. Post modernism really fucked the arts.

>>3047954
While there has been a lot of loss of technical skills and teaching of it, I think you're falling prey to survivorship bias. There was a LOT of crap made in the 50's but you just don't see it much now since people don't bother scanning it and putting it online.

>>3047963
Yeah there is some survivor ship bias but you can essentially go to the 1970s and 80s and see that what has survived from that era isn't very comparable to stuff from the 50s.

>>3047853
6,34% of the world's population

>>3047954
Fuck off and fix the site Lava

10% of /ic/ if you believe the memes

>>3047865
>
90% of people haven't drawn or gotten better at art since kindergarten. Of the people that have drawn since then, 90% of them are just hobbyists who have never heard of Loomis or any technical thing

This made me wonder, if someone draws a lot since childhood, actually spending hours per day rather than now and again, but doesn't learn about fundamentals or structure or anything, how good would their art be? Could they pick it up despite not learning anything technical?

>>3048407
Yes i think so, such a person would have an intuitive grasp of everything, some of the posts and questions i see on here seem so retarded when its really so easy to shade something with values, and create forms etc. not saying youre like that but its just a reflection of those that dont get it, in spite of seeming to want to get it but i understand everyone is at a different level. Taking a basic art course will teach those folks immediately how to "get it"

File: pme.jpg (33KB, 316x499px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 316x499px

This is all the persective you need. Now hop to it faggot

>>3048016
Personally I think the 50's were not as great as the 60's. See: http://illustrationart.blogspot.ca/2014/12/remembering-our-debts.html

File: catXdog.png (901KB, 3380x4268px) Image search: [Google]

901KB, 3380x4268px

>>3048407
I did that, drawing loads and loads every day but not really making any efforts to learn fundamentals until I was about 17. My art looked something like this back then, this one was when I was 16. It's weeb shit, but still pretty alright for not having ever read a book or watched a video about art, I guess.

>>3048473
Yeah I feel like lots of those people (most of them on tumblr) draw stylised stuff, not weeb, but you know what i'm talking about, those red-nosed chib-like stuff. They started drawing cartoony and just refined it, never learning how to draw realistic. So they'd be shit at that and that's why they never move out of their comfort zone.

Not a whole hell of a lot, and it depends how high your standards are for art. If you think dA tier stuff counts as good then a lot of people can draw well, if you only count the people who can sell their artwork then the pool shrinks considerably.
Out of 100 people I know fairly well I'd say half of them would hang out in the beg thread and stay there while only like 5-10 people I know draw decently, 3 of those people I know are really good, then only 1 got picked up by Cartoon Network for concept stuff and another 1 person got an art scholarship and does a ton of graphic design for local businesses.

How many of working artist are there?

>>3048473
and your age/level now?