/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3874935
well if you cant use loomis and you say you used loomis it will be flawed

>>3874935
Looks fine to me, blog?

>>3874935
Flawless.

Flawless bro.

>>3874935
It's a trick and a crutch. Useful to know, but you shouldn't rely on it.

>>3875023
This

No rules just tools, nigga

>>3874935
It just works

>>3874935
amidoingtrite?

>>3874935
>Haha, I am ebin rebel who doesn't listen to Loomis like those /ic/ crabs who NGMI do. My style far trumps construction because I understand gesture better than literally everyone here. I'm too cool for reading, 100 page books with 10 size fonts are for losers. Don't forgot to give me likes.<div class="like-perk-cnt">&#x274C;</div>

>>3875098

>>3874935
depends how horny you are.

>>3874935
Is this really the right book to recommend to beginners?

>>3875157
Funny thought, i only make the head ball and go from there.

>>3875166
Fuck no. I think beginners should get decent/competent at observational drawing first (Keys to drawing is a good book for this). Getting rid of symbol drawing is the first thing someone should do. It also helps build a visual library / mileage.
Then learn the basics of perspective and consequently how three dimensional shapes work (Draw a Box should help, I'm going through it right now. Dynamic Sketching is good too, but it expects you to already know how to draw, intersect and chop 3D shapes, so it's more advanced).

The issue here is that beginners jump to fun with a pencil without knowing how to draw a sphere, let alone chopping it and adding stuff to it.

>>3875109
oh shucks, you caught me Anon!

>>3874951
Fukken NICE!

>>3874951
>>3875219
Post more examples like these, please.
I always thought Loomis just worked on realistically shaped/proportioned heads (like pic related), not anything stylized.

Could you really push it and do some weird shit with it too? Like non-human subjects?

>>3875219
The upwards perspective one fucks me over, I can't make it work.

>>3875464
This >>3874951 is from an anon who posts regularly in the /asg/ threads you love to trash talk. Fuck you. I won't deliver anything.

>>3874935
It's not. Sometimes you have to not be autistic and combine it with some intuition though. There are no shortcuts to drawing well, you just have to grind.

>>3875098
Holy shit I love this

>>3875532
everyone trash talks in every general threads, retard

>>3874935
Every method is flawed when you're shit at drawing.

>>3875464
Loomis says in his own goddamn book you can use it for comic characters.

>>3875219
maybe its just me, but i think learning either in any order is fine. i know people who are beyond /beg/ and havent touched either book, let alone know either exist

>>3874935
>>3875464
You wouldn't be saying this if you understood form. Learn to apply form first before moving on to stylized heads. It's literally a framework for the upper part of the head and the cranium. I don't use it, but I have and it works.

>>3875532
What are you talking about? I've never been in those threads. I'm rather new here. I just wanted to see other ways the principle applies to other shapes. I didn't think there was anything negative about what I said, I just wanted to learn more.

>>3875686
I hadn't really dove that deep into that section of the book. I was more focused on getting the regular stuff down before I moved on. Plus the examples I replied to are different than the ones in the book, so I just wanted to see how they applied to different styles rather than just what's there on the page.

>>3875708
I'm not OP, just someone who stumbled upon the thread and liked some of the examples posted, and asked to see more. I understand the principles that the framework seeks to accomplish. I want to get a grasp on how others apply it as well in different ways. I understand form, I've done still life drawings and stuff for a good while and in class. Just drawing from imagination is what I'm trying to get a better grasp on now. Trying to do better than just doodles.

>>3875757
>I'm not OP, just someone who stumbled upon the thread and liked some of the examples posted, and asked to see more.
cool.

>>3875792
I'm just saying, everyone decided to jump on me just because I wanted to see some more stuff.
Don't see why learning some more shit is a bad thing.
Have a like :^)

>>3875795
I mean, you coulda experimented on different heads. Considering it's just a sphere with sliced sides. It's easy to grasp when you observe and wireframe anime stuff by observing their shadows and stuff.

>>3875795
Not saying that you shouldn't check out how other people do things, just saying.

>>3875799
I'm not saying I haven't but I guess I had dialed back how extreme I was gonna take it, so it was still "realistic" but with slightly exaggerated proportions.
Seeing it applied in a completely different style like anime or similar is what caught me off guard because I didn't know it could be used in that way because I thought the head styles were completely different. It's not from a lack of understanding of how the head works, just like "woah, I didn't think of that, what else can it do?". More of a reason to experiment more I guess.

>>3875803
I see, cool beans

>>3874951
this looks bad actually

>>3877414
post your work

>>3875109
top kek

>>3877414
shut the fuck up.

>>3877416
>>3877449
seething.

>>3877414
>>3877500
Post your work

>>3877503

>>3875103
stop sucking that kike balls, you dont need a fucking book to learn, just copy everything

It gives a nice generic nice attractive face, however everyone’s face shapes are different. Some people have very short noses but long chins. It’s just a guidance for beginner artist, it should not be taken as a rule.

>>3874951
I bet this guy learned to draw without loomis. It's easy to apply whatever retarded technique you want when you already can draw.

>>3877664
you bet wrong.

>>3875475
Upwards is some kind of fucking cursed thing. Spent 3 pages just trying to copy this head angle. Still sucks.

>>3874935
Loomis is not flawed but it's time we accept it's exclusively designed to teach contemporary commercial art the same way Jack Hamm is exclusively designed to teach 1940's newspaper cartooning.

Everyone and their mom have designed new canons, methods and systems since his passing, and if you already can copy his illustrations and want to start drawing art of your own, it's time you design your own.

>>3877516
cute

>>3875464

>>3877516
Hey, you look really familiar anon.

>>3880247
Source?

>>3874951
What if I don't want to make anime shit but instead want to draw characters with an actually human relationship between jaw and maxilla?

>>3877516
if youre hiding your mouth chances are you have a malocclusion, fix it anon

>>3880260
Then use loomis as it was intended to

>>3880260
The era of asking if Loomis can be used for anime is over.
Now we open a new generation of asking if the Loomis method can be used in the exact same way as it has been extensively and exhaustively expounded upon in the actual book.
/ic/ never fails to astound me. I feel like nobody actually reads the book here.

>>3880278
>I feel like nobody actually reads the book here.
They probably just copy the pictures without reading any of the text.

What is so hard about understanding that you should use basic shapes to define form before applying details?
Why does this board keep treating Loomis like he's some magical wizard with a technique that automatically changes the style, when all he did was develop a way to build up proportionally succinct drawings with basic perspective?

>>3880282
to be fair, loomis talks a lot in his books

the part in fun with a pencil where he suddenly jumps into racial caricatures always makes me laugh

>>3881460
From the hardcover reprint

>>3875166
>>3875219
Frankly, his unfinished "I'd Love to Draw" book would have been a far better option than Fun with a Pencil.
He actually explains how to draw form step by step and the mechanics behind it, unlike FWAP which assumes you know how form works from the beginning. It even has pages about how to draw from life.
Too bad he never finished it, but what's already there is far better than FWAP. Weird how it hasn't been leaked yet.

>>3874935
"Good morning a-anon!"

>>3883529
I always noticed how he completely glazes over ellipses in FWAP when it's so important to construction

>>3881460
>the part in fun with a pencil where he suddenly jumps into racial caricatures always makes me laugh

I wonder if A. Wyatt Mann learned from Loomis books

>>3875464
You can draw a lot of things if you get your fundamentals down to a certain level. After that, it all boils down to creating a style that is appealing and that is where the most difficult work is.

>>3874951
What is it with anime girls and that bangs with hair behind ears hairstyle you never see in real life

>>3880260
Learn the jeet kune do method of drawing, then you can draw whatever you want.

>>3885912
please elaborate anon

>>3874935
That shit sucks OP

>>3880260
WE HAVE GONE FULL CIRCLE
WHAT THE FUCK

>>3885917
learn the fundamentals but later be "too good" for them

>>3884677
Anime isn't supposed to be real life.

>>3875464
This post highlights why people think loomis is a meme, of course it works for EVERYTHING. It's literally just construction, it's a far simpler way to start off drawing something with better measurements, proportions and perspective. The loomis head is just a very useful example of construction.

>>3874951
what tablet do you use

>>3886698
This

secret tip:

learn to draw skulls too if you want to draw heads.

>>3888525
Not much of a secret when Loomis himself covers that topic. But then again I realized no one actually reads it here.