Hoping to get one drawing a day in here using some popular study sources (loomis, bridgman) etc. For me perhaps my most important goal is to is to learn to manage the ability to see mistakes/failures and build on that without going insane. I stumbled upon this quote somewhere, probably here:
"Those who cannot begin do not finish"
Incredibly appropriate for me. I'll post what I did today--did a bunch of posemaniacs that were rather jarring since I have been out of the saddle for a a couple months now and then decide to go back to basics with some loomis mannikins...and a study I did more then a year ago to remind myself that all you need is mindful study. I look forward to interacting with all of you more in the future!
e: Man that was a big pic. I will keep it smaller in the future
Last edited by confusedbat; July 1st, 2010 at 02:18 AM. Reason: explanation of incredibly large image
Hey dude, yea I use Photoshop. Yea my lines are feather/pet Something I've worked on for a while then stopped and it really shows. Its a bad habit! something that should be worked on, but the practice is kinda boring heh, just drawing straight lines and curved line. Though I try and not do it so much when I am doing digital lines but they still coming through.
Continuing the basic mannikins from loomis started last night followed by some posemaniacs studies. the "first" image was me trying to remember the basic poses or recreate balnace left foot right foot. things I can improve on are: larger ribcage oval. better understanding of hip angle and hip size. As far as the posemaniacs go, I felt a lot better about them last night but they are overall prety messy. need to spend less time on the head, less nervous strokes at joints, and completion of the figure. this might be accomplished with smaller figures on the page, but when i do that i feel much less loose. The exercise of redoing the study from memory was pretty useful and I will definitely be continuing to to that; study -> no reference repeat of the study.
BTW, didn't say it in first post but of course critiques, comments, etc are welcome, for what there is to comment on. Thanks!
Last edited by confusedbat; July 2nd, 2010 at 02:31 AM. Reason: incomplete sentence and thought
1-6 are posemaniacs studies. I learned tonight that i need to keep them smaller, and also if you think about it you only really have time to get about 15 strokes down in 30 seconds. When i used simply wireframes I think I got some of the best results. need to work on not going over lines again and again--this applies to the pieces in 7 too. I did some loomis mannikins from imagination and then a strudy of the bridgeman pelvis since i have a hell of a time with the disks loomis uses for hips. hard to figure out extremem foreshortening with a single line. wanted to try to repeat the pelvis from imagination but that will have to wait until tomorrow.
also need to figure out scanner settings, i think most of the images in this dump are pretty blurry etc.
tried to get some drawing in today. mostly working on skeletons still. Tried some more stuff with the loomis skeletons and then realizing that those freaking disks suck to work with. Tried playing around with another book I have written by Victor Perard; think his pelvis may be more useful but is harder to draw. Also looked at the Bammes thread and saw the way he broke the pelvis down, could be handy but i think the proportions would be tricky/sensitive. conclusions are that i still need to draw lighter (i grip the pencil funny) and that loomis's skeleton may bee TOO idealized for me? going to try to draw the ribcage without an arc on the front, more angles maybe like bridgeman. Dunno. Will try to work with perards stuff more tomorrow. as a whole my proportions, balance, shapes, are still way off. was still fun for some reason despite recognizing the flaws in what I was doing, which was awesome!
additionally im finding that the concept art sketchbook as a goal every really does help me focus. im feeling much better as a whole even though i have a really long way to go.
need to draw something fun to not go insane. probably robots. yeah definitely robots.
wow man, the studies look great. glad to see that you are getting so many in! i have struggled with pose maniacs, haven't been back there in a while. last time i was there i just got really confused and couldn't seem to get my bearings on the poses before they changed. i think im going to give it another shot and try your method of smaller drawings with less strokes. great start to your sb, keep it up!
Just keep practicing your anatomy. And when you learn something try your hardest not to forget it. Which forgetting stuff is a big problem with anatomy.
"Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiasum." Cliff Blezenski
Permanoob: Thanks for dropping by! ill be checking by your sketchbook a lot.
Purple Nug: I agree. thanks for checking out my drawings. Just have problems taking anything home from those anatomy studies even though im trying my damdest to. Maybe ill do some more tomorrow and try to start with big shapes and get the proportions of those. too detail focused.
did some more posemaniacs tonight. was testing out drawing the wireframe first and sort of felt ambiguous about it. i think it helped me see the whole picture better but many of the figures were subsequently incomplete. after that i just tried to turn off my brain and use my eyes which was "felt" better. altogether its sort of a wash though. i used to get a ton of pleasure out of these but now for some reason it hasnt really been the same. i guessed i learned tonight that i get stuck on details and looking at the bigger form is helpful. also i need to keep in mind that i believe posemaniacs (30 sec) is more gesture/gestalt focused rather then specific anatomy, so of course its going to be hard to port anything learned from a focused anatomy breakdown. also lol if i expect to become loomis after 3 nights.
tried to follow up with the promised ROBOT but just wasnt clicking so it was random strokes on the page. all in all frustrating but i think perhaps i learned i need to veer away from posemaniacs and try to stick to the smaller anatomy studies which while i havent been churning out anything great with them have still been satisfying. sorry for the shitty scans im still trying to figure out this freaking thing
Did some more posemaniacs tonight. not gonna post em because what is there for people to look at? cont really use 30 sec posemaniac studies to make any incredibly solid statements other then "practice more"
worked from bridgeman's neck sideview today. having a hard time finding a take home from it--i think maybe ill try drawing the neck from visual body tomorrow. i guess one major one is that the neck is always arced towards the jaw/sternum, even when its looking up or down. also its cylindrical. looking forward to figuring out how the sterno mastoid does its thing. the pit of the neck is formed by where each sterno mastoid meets the clavicle/sternum, i think also since it wraps around behind the spinal attachment to the head its also used for turning. havent grokked that yet though. i relearned some of the jaw muscles at least.
still trying to work out a non ridiculous disk based method for the pelvis. im finding that bammes' arc for the top of the illiac crest to be useful. perard's might be too complicated for a reductionist skeleton.
after copying loomis's stuff (and learning that balance is hard) i did my own based of the CHOW this week, sky captain. probably wont submit but im going to work on it anyways. it was fun to lay down the skeleton, we will see what i can do with it tomorrow!
Last edited by confusedbat; July 6th, 2010 at 01:39 PM.
ugh what a night. i was actually on doing a finished long term study on the sky captain guy so i tried to expand on the thumbnail and learned I NEED MORE PERSPECTIVE STUDIES. *&^%&^%&*^*(*&)(**)(*. s. literally took me forever to get that figure, and it looks so simple and its not even proportional. s'ok though. will be good to start fleshing it out tomorrow. maybe after some perspective studies.
before that i did two more of the loomis bending over skeletons. still isnt right but at least i got a balanced one in there somewhere. no posemaniacs tonight, i think i need to do at least a little bit of those to loosen up.
so on the table for tomorrow is: perspective studies. muscles of the neck to continue from the other night. i need to start doing basic studies and then repeating from memory. all in all despite the total lack of progress still a good night, because i managed not to get incredibly frustrated, and also convinced myself to post.
Last edited by confusedbat; July 19th, 2010 at 09:13 PM.
Did an attempt at the apple tonight with photoshop. First time painting ever. I was terrified of this program until I learned about the history Palette...then I felt dumb.
Anyways, comments are that I needed to draw the apple better to begin with; the bottom is all wonky. I think I also needed to block in the original colors better. Really, all the colors. I had a heck of a time with the reflection off of the table. I also need lots of practice with it. ALthough I am proud to say that i only used a hard round brush with the opacity setting pressure sensitive and tried to minimize blending. it at least has some form, even its from another dimension. Goals: need to check out idiot apathy's thread. do some value studies. but before that, perspective, which I will go do RIGHT NOW.
Lastly, this was really fun.
Last edited by confusedbat; July 8th, 2010 at 04:21 PM.
Ah, so this is where all the Penvirates are hangin' out. . . .
Hey! That's a pretty good apple.
That's the thing to do-- lots of studies from life.
Keep at it!
i did some villpu sphere studies (the centermost ones were my beginning attempts) follwed by a perspective study, the challenge of which was attempting to draw a perfect cube in 2 point perspective. The reason for this is that you cant lay down a 2pt grid (i.e. such as a checkerboard) unless you have those distances right, and the mthod which loomis describes on page 49 of creative illustration has arbitrary measuring points. although now that i think of it, the station point is also arbitrary. but = distance measuring points may only apply to a 45 deg 2 pt perspective. man this shit sucks.
I think i have a method but damn does it take a long time. im going to try to post my notes tomorrow. its all based on loomis successful drawing page 46.
Am I just supposed to eyeball it? Am I making this too complicated? probably.
e* thanks to marlee i have found some better ways to measure distance, so ill try to post compose my thoughts on those sometime.
Last edited by confusedbat; July 10th, 2010 at 01:27 AM.
Hey confused bat! I found this tutorial the other day : http://www.sonjebasa.net/Instruction/2PtPerspective.pdf for drawing a perfect cube in 2 pt. REALLY helped me out, hopefully it'll make it simpler and more understandable for you too
Good dedication in here! The studies will all pay off, don't worry.
Alright. Tonight I did a bunch of super basic vilppu gesture studies off of posemaniacs, 30 secs each. At first I was just doing the basic lines as I vaguely remembered them from the manual. Then I reread it and tried to capture the most important action lines. This was hard. the mantras to follow:
"when you are walking, you are walking" - stanchfield
"dont copy the model, analyze the model" - vilppu.
However, I do think that the sphere-sack stuff i did yesterday did actually help although i dont have a systematic way of implementing it, its definitely helping me think in volumes. It also may be ok to subordinate the spine to other forms in front of it if necessary? I think I got one actually good gesture out of the evening.
i also worked off of a tut that Marlee linked (thank you again!), the 1 point perspective. It was great to work though although I made conceptual mistakes. Main goal wasnt the typical YAY DRAW CONNECTING LINES but actually drawing a cube properly and then being able to place an identically sized cube anywhere in the picture plane. Need to learn the impact of station point more--how far do the unit demarcations along the central vertical axis indicate on the ground plane? I know the for the half height it indicates a distance twice as far away on the ground plane. Next time im slapping a grid down. It looks sloppy because i went over it in pen rapidly to scan.
Last edited by confusedbat; July 12th, 2010 at 02:01 AM. Reason: spelling
Another night of studying 1 point perspective. I tried to be as precise as possible but double checking my work with median lines etc revealed in fact i was not.
I need a t square and triangle.
In any case I was reading loomis more in an attempt to synthesize the perspective information from sonjebasa into it. loomis doesn't deal with station points at all. Additonally he defines hieght and width directly on the perspective plane, and i am 99& sure that he marks depth arbitarily. I was hoping to get some other studies from characterdesign. sort of pathetic that two cubes in space is all i got but i feel like its important to get this stuff down pat. might try working out these problems in illustrator tomorrow. main goals will be to reattempt a grid, next time ill put even markins on each side of the CVA and try to be more precise.
Raquel--Thanks! Its piddling stuff I've got here, but the only person holding me back is me. Onward and upwards as they say!
Marlee--Never said thanks on the forum directly...so thanks!
Diarum--Respectfully, I disagree. if you mean to compose anything in a proper perspective thats based in 3 dimensions (in 90 degrees), you need to know how to draw a perfect cube. What if you want to draw something that is 1.5 by 1 by 1 feet, 20 feet above your point of view in 1 point perspective? What about if its to the left 20 feet in 2 point perspective? you need to know how to do this. Drawing random cubes in perspective is fine, but a bigger challenge is drawing the EXACT same size cube anywhere on the grid. Regardless, thanks for the encouragement.
Last nights showing was sort of frustrating. To perk up I tried to do another apple study today. I just used light from the window--it was overcast outside. I missed the soft lighting on the top right half of the apple, screwed up the terminator, and also the stem looks too deep withing the apple, and I also forgot the stem shadow, but it was getting dark and I spent a while on it and i dont think it looks incredibly awful? I am learning that you really do just want to save the blending for last. Different parts of the apple change between different colors at different rates; sometimes this requires a color gradient over a large field of view while in other spots it is a really fast change. Really now I just want to start going through idiot apathy's thread and also dig through huevaluechroma.com to I can learn how light actually works rather then just flubbing around with my eyeballs.
now I am going to move on to some more perspective studies, posemaniacs. Expect a post later this evening.
Last edited by confusedbat; July 12th, 2010 at 01:48 AM.
did some posemaniacs today. mostly putting down blobs on paper. but im trying to follow vilppu's suggestion and sort of feel the form and flow. sometimes i get somewhat close, for me, and it feels awesome.
1 point perspective: 2
this site rules. its a bit heavy at parts though. Finally figured out a good way to handle the challenge I set for myself. draw 1 ft3 cubes, 2ft3 cubes, 1x1x2 cubes, all in scale. basically you need to define a 90 degree viewing cone and then, from that, a 60 degree viewing cone. you use the intersection of the 90deg cone with horizon line and central vertical axis to do everything awesome. the 90 deg cone only applies when the viewing distance and viewing height are equal. i need to learn more about defining the viewing distance and height and how to properly to construct from a tall perspective, or from an ants view. I also need to figure out a better way to scan.
for tomorrow: neck anatomy continued, back anatomy, vilppu sacks.
Thanks for the drop by to my SB!
Looks like you're nailing that apple down closer each time.
Yeah, I agree with Kamber, the apples are getting better. I'll admit I'm particularly impressed about it because I tried a still life apple about a week ago and it was the saddest, most pathetic result you could imagine. So, lets see some more digi still lifes from you, and I'll contribute some horrible attempts of my own
Kamber: thanks for coming by. As you can see, I think you need to figure out cubes before you can figure out how to carve stuff out of them, even if they are wonky skulls. especially if they are wonky skulls.
Marlee: ill try to do more, but i really want to focus on form and proportion, and then light. Whats the point of painting an apple if it looks like a deflated beachball? probably going to dig into idiot apathy's thread next time I do still lifes. Ill be eyeballing your thread though! I have subscribed to it!
Racquel: Loomis said "the difficulties of not knowing are always greater then the difficulties of learning." truth. keep at it!
Today I sketched a massive urn that i sat directly in front of to emphasize the 1 pt perspective. took me a really long time to get the construction down, like 15 minutes and its still crooked. Sort of throws everything off.
I also did some neck studies. bridgman has beautiful drawings but its sort of hard for me to understand them. things i learned is that i freaking HATE VERTEBRAE. but seriously, i need to re-look at the notes i put in the scan tomorrow. Main take home is that the pit of the sternum is 1/3 head below the chin, just like loomis, that wonderful man, said. Its just a matter of defining the positions of the vertebrae in terms of head lengths now.. Its just difficult getting the smaller proportions right. Tomorrow, finishing up some muscle studies on the neck and then application, some turned heads etc. Im sure everyone knows this but i think ive seen this site linked before here on CA and also i found it by googling. sweet, naked slovakian people.
I forgot to post a drawing i did of a dude on the bus yesterday.
more neck studies today, both on the bus and also at home. these are mostly from imagination. the non moleskin ones were a bit bigger and did use visual body a bit, but there was no specific thing i was working off, more like 3-4 sources at once. Is this bad? Main leaning point is that you really need to pin down the pit of the neck, 1/3 hd below the chin. also, as muscles contract they thicken? vertebrae/ribs may be about 1/6 head thick. The clavicle is curved to accommodate the first rib. and lastly, the sternocliedomastoid rules. it does all the cool stuff with the head. because the SCM connects to the the mastoid process, which lies behind the atlas/turning point of the skull, the SCM can turn the head, depress the head, and tilt the head. i think its involved in raising the head upwards? also for bringing it forward. i also need to keep in mind that the action of one muscle is framed/opposed by another. in this case, the trapezius (sp). bonnet strings indeed.
i tend to draw too small and too hard, and also work over lines too much. solutions--draw bigger, hold pencil like non-idiot, and think about lines more before putting them down. The main problem with overworked heavy lines is that my drawings appear smudgy and gross because i tend to erase a lot, let alone the line quality issues. really need to get disciplined about this.
on board: some vilppu form studies. some neck studies with no looking at any resources. then, another muscle group, probably the girdle/shoulders/trap. I should probably also do some longer gesture studies to keep an eye on the greater form.
Last edited by confusedbat; July 14th, 2010 at 04:59 PM.
tired tonight. got a decent length study of a guy reading on a bus. need to learn eyes--i reworked them throughout the day and had to remember that they sit deeper in the face then the brow. drew lightly nearly the entire time, and drew bigger too, so theres an improvement.
drew a head turned from imagination, as promised. used prismacolor first--is that cheating? threw my pencil down a couple times--need more reference studies. need to relearn general face proportions and angles. i need to to deeply study side poses so i have the proportions of each side of the cube, both for the body and the face.
on to vilppu sacks.
did vilppu ssacks last night. sketched a dude on the bus this morning. in reality he does not have a noodle arm--this drawing was a crime against humanity. got home today, did some line exercises, some posemaniacs, a 1pp slope study, some freehand cubes (harder then i thought) and finally another try at the sky captain CHOW (now expired, but its still a cool concept) using some references from flickr. sorry for the crappy scans.
what i learned: projecting the ground plan in various ways onto the 90 viewing cone can tell you your angle. i really dont get this method from handprint, but thats because i didnt memorize the 20 arcane rules of perspective or whatever. Alternatively, I am sure you could figure out how sloped you want it and then work backwards from there. Despite the slope, lines that lie along your viewing line still recede towards the principle point. tsqaure + triangle makes short work of perspective studies.
need to practice cubes more. need to do some anatomy studies of the chest, hands, feet, everything. flickr is a jerk about photos and you have to go into the page source to get them sometimes. i think the bammes pelvis is going to be better to use then loomis'. im starting to pay attention to line more, still need to work on being more selective with placement etc
finally, i learned that you have to power through lack of motivation. ive done that every night this week so far and had a satisfying night of drawing. never give up, never surrender.