/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4097833
fundamentally anon, you're trying to draw things without understanding them first. even the most exaggerated cartoon characters are still based in the principles of representational art.
you say the hair design feels iffy and it does, have you spent any time at all trying to observe how hair exists in the real world and what in a fundamentally graphic sense, makes it look like hair? the way you're approaching drawing right now is like trying to learn to read by copying all the letters that you think look cool and mashing them together to try and get them to look like other words you've seen.


>https://livlily.blogspot.com/2011/01/books.html
give preston blair's books a read and pair those with the perspective and anatomy resources in the sticky

>>3313714
who cares, loomis covers this exact shit in his books. are their preston blair books in publication where he covers the construction of forms from simple shapes all the way to realistic heads? no? then why are you being so pedantic? by all means stockpile everything you can of early disney animation and study them but loomis is not bad at teaching this.