/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4520284
Vilppu says you're supposed to have got the basics down before you even star his course. Same for reilly, good luck starting at this shit if you don't have enough practice to draw simple shapes.

When I say boxes I don't mean literal boxes, I mean simple shit in general, like two houses next to each other in 2 point perp. You'd say "but that's not shitting dick-nipples I want" yeah, that's order of magnitude simplier than a human body, let alone the coomer body, with abs, detailed ass muscles and shitting dick-nipples.

>>3544312
>You just have to look for the lack of good 3/4 examples of the Reilly abstraction to see that it isn’t as simple as it looks

I disagree. When people have problems with 3/4 perspective it's just because it takes more abstract visualization in general. Many beginners don't take protrusions into account. It's no different than being able to draw contours, which many beginners also can't do well.

It sounds like you expect the Reilly method to be some kind of formula. It's just a tool which's usefulness depends on the skills of the user.

>>3313961
Mostly to dedicate a part of my life to get really good at something and to stick with it even when I get really old. I did that with guitar for over a decade and disciplined practice until I hit a point where getting better had no practical use for me personally. Not saying that I was incredible, but you can hit a point in guitar where you just push yourself into weird musical niches to challenge yourself that actually sound like shit in the end. Not so much with art and that's what I like about it. I am just in love with discplined practice and craft, not so much with a specific artistic statement or specific story that I want to tell. I am probably a bit lame in that regard, which is why teaching art might be the right ambition for me, instead of trying to get fame or working for a big company.

Hey guys.
How are YOU drawing your heads? Do you start with a box or a circle? Or do you go straight towards a headshape? Or something else?

Can anyone who has used the Reilly method extensively fill me in on how it has helped you?

I'm more of a Loomis/Bridgman/drawing the Marvel way guy myself. I'm working as a pencil artist for a comic at the moment so I draw plenty of faces everyday. Regardless of the feedback I receive I'll try it out for a couple of weeks and see if I gain something from it but I'd love to hear some opinions too.

How well do you think the Frank Reilly method works for learning about the structure of the face and body? I'm looking to practice creating structure in my figures and I want to know if it's a good way to doing so.

Anyone got some books on the Reilly method?

REILLY > LOOMIS

as far as i know, the bad thing about the reilly method is that he himself never wrote a book or guide illustrating the concepts of said method, so all we know about it comes from students of his and the notes they took from the lectures he gave. This translates to different people teaching different ways to the reilly abstraction

>>2195147
>>2195282
Thank you for such kind words~

>>2195207
I use the Loomis method for the structure, but only after I get the general shape down in a gesture first. Loomis doesn't explain the planes of the head very well imo, so it's good to supplement with other books. Bridgman and Hampton are both good in my experience.
It may also be worthwhile to look up some material on the Reilly head abstractions (I used the anatomy ImagineFX from the book thread)
They're very useful for finding feature and plane change placements.