/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

I've recently been going through Preston Blairs Animation Book and Im having a bit of trouble. I just cant get my characters to look three-dimensional enough. When I attempt draw the examples given in other positions, my features appear as though they are floating, not wrapping convincingly around the form.

I have issues drawing say the eye in perspective with the rest of the face, and having the pupil follow the form of the eye, or having the fur and face mask wrap along the surface of the form. The end result is that my features end up looking like flat shapes floating in space.

Its frustrating because I know what Im doing wrong but I dont know how to correct it.

>>3429323
they use preston j blair fundamentals instead of confused loomis construction and random tutorial fundamentals

>>3313441
It's literally classic cartooning, just paint the eyes on, don't make them bulge out or they'll break the simple form of the face.

>>3310244
these are fundamentals

>>3243642
Draw something anon, and fuck up.

>Man, my character's face looks completely fucked. How do I fix it?
>I know, let me see how my favorite artists draws said faces. Let me see how other people draw faces
>Well that's odd, I wonder what features they are exaggerating.
>I know, I'll study my fav art, as I study from life, while I draw my own personal work!!
>Maybe some studies like learning perspective or watching Vilppu may also help...

>>3157315
As far as I'm aware there is only really the Bill Nolan book as an authentic 1930s cartooning book
https://archive.org/details/Nolan.zip/v2
He doesn't go into very much depth about form though. The Preston Blair book better covers that much better. He's 1940s style though which is a bit more sculpted and organic than 1930s stuff, the same rules basically apply though. Here's a very important lesson in head construction from it which is very applicable to 1930s cartooning.

Then watch real 1930s cartoons and see if you can figure out the construction of the characters. Most of them can be made with spheres and tubes, characters like Popeye or Betty Boop, use more specific shapes but their underlying structure still doesn't have anything more complex than an oval.

>>3053283
Is there any good book about shapes and shape design? I dont know what tjey mean when people say "good shape design" is it just mileage and taste based or is there theory behind it
pic related is a bit like it, but is there something more on depth?

>>3002161
The only tip for avoiding Cal Arts style is to construct your characters' faces using a 3D form, that's it. I'm not kidding.

>>2812899
>>2812907
>>2812911

Not sure if I made myself clear here. Pic related is the kind of construction I'm talking about, like this and the loomis stuff.

I guess I could take basic shaped stuff in real life and practice that way. Books/actual boxes as boxes, actual eggs and balls as spheres, tubes as cylinders, etc.

I'm more interested in just getting the whole 3d space projected on a 2d canvas thing correct than learning how to render accurate life-like drawings.