/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>7076085
>>7076141
There's literally nothing wrong with any of them. I don't know much about this pawell guy but from the looks of it he's an extremely literalminded grindfag that is completely incapable of seeing the forest for the trees. He's not understanding the concepts and the abstract meaning because he is stuck hard in concrete thinking. I'm no great artist but I learned plenty from Loomis, Vilppu, Bridgman, Hogarth, and etc. just by skimming through and gleaning the concepts that they were trying to teach. Like Loomis, it was pretty easy to get that shaved ball + wedge = head and that I could modify the 3D form to build different shaped heads and stick whatever kind of facial features I wanted onto them constructed out of different 3D volumes. Or constructing the body in proportion in 3D, all I had to do was place rectangles in perspective, divide them into 8 sections, and draw the body parts in the correct places on the grid, and then after some practice and a lot of doodling mannequins I learned to eyeball the proportions. I never, EVER copied, I always created drawings of my own BASED OFF OF the CONCEPT that was being taught at the time.
Construction is the most important fundamental, sorry not sorry desu fampai. Draw your boxes and cylinders and blobs and wireframes and get a sense of perspective ingrained into you on a subconscious level.