/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3041295
Alright, faggot. I guess KJG is 'constructing' his drawings because the shit that goes on in his mind, even though that's not all what is colloquially meant with construction.

>plus what you said about zero evidence is plainly wrong

Literally show me one drawing that isn't Cambiaso or the like 2 Durer drawings made by the old masters that show them using construction as taught by contemporary teachers like Vilppu or Michael Hampton. Pro tip: you can't.

>>3041328
>Construction was derived from the old masters
100% empirically false. Constructions is something that literally got made up in the 20th century.

>literally drawing boxes doesn't mean they aren't thinking about those basic forms

'Thinking about stuff' is not construction. If he's not 'literally drawing boxes (or cylinders, or whatever the fuck)' then it's not construction.

>Michelangelo was thinking about construction

He can think about all he wants, be he's not using construction. You're calling me fucking stupid, yet the picture you posted exactly proves my point. You can see Mike just used direct drawing. He literally just draws in the mass using contours. Just because he, quite obviously, was aware of forms doesn't make it construction.

Construction as being taught by Vilppu et al. is a meme.