>be a d/ic/k's grandson >he's on his deathbed

>>3068192
because i never started using it

Half the digital art I see praised on this site is nothing but chickenscratch... but then I tend to overwork my stuff with hatching that doesn't need to be there. I always figured I'd get more refined with it after awhile

File: loomis girl 2.png (387KB, 519x645px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 519x645px

>>3068192
I must confess that the way Loomis draws women is my goal. One day I hope to be able to gorgeous women like he did. Also I think the aestethic and fashion of the women he draws (which is from the 30's/40's right? Basically retro?) is the best and women used to look a lot more elegant than they do nowadays
r8 my taste I guess

>>3068224
I'm thinking closer to early 50s, personally

I'm gonna disagree, I think a lot of the ways women fashion appeared in that era is just as fake as nowadays, and feels a bit... stiff? But I do get what you mean, just personal taste.

>>3068224
>>3068192
That's a beautiful model.

>>3068225
>stiff
I'm not sure you understand what that word means

>>3068224
How do I get this good with a pencil?

File: loomis.png (285KB, 509x690px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 509x690px

>>3068192
my grand dream is drawing tons of beautiful naked women from life like he did.

How do I do this, /ic/?

>>3068289
fuck, meant to quote >>3068224

That was week anon

>"Its that I didn't post my work"

>>3068224
No, girls from the 20s were much more beautiful

>>3068224
40's and 50's - his style is very much the classic Hollywood look for women.
If you want a good source of images for this look, go to the auction site Profiles in History, and poke around in the auction catalogs. Very often people sell off archives of photos from the era, and you can download a decent resolution PDF of the catalog.
https://profilesinhistory.com