/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6155351
Why would you draw a scribbly mutant hand when you could draw an actual hand? You even have two of them you can use as ref.

>>6155351
bridgman's fist is wrong, why does the seam between the fingers extend to the knuckles?

>>6155390
what

>>6155360
its good to copy from drawings, as the interpretive decisions have already been made for you. for example, notice bridgman did not render any cast shadow in the OP pic in order to not destroy the form.

>>6155511

Please dont type like you know anything. You sound so stupid right now, we are laughing at you in discord. Holy shit.

>>6155360
Ah yes, I'll get much more out of studying this photo of some manlet's ugly-as-fuck actual hamfist than from studying Bridgman. Thank you anon for steering me straight.

>>6155532
that anon has a point though, Bridgeman stylized in a way that emphasized distinction between muscles and bony structures. Guess what? pyw, you and everyone in your discord group laughing can post their work right now.

>>6155575

Bridgeman is a meme anon. pyw and stfu.

>>6155582
>>6155532
Fuck off retard

>>6155532
>we are laughing at you in discord rn
this was supposed to be an own?

studies from a while back

>>6155532
>discord

>>6155351
why not just use /msg/ or academic general

maybe its the low res scans but im having trouble understanding what a lot of bridgeman's lines are meant to be

>>6155838
>he fell for the just-brainlessly-copy-bridgman meme
you’re supposed to know some basic anatomy to study bridgman, that way you’ll know what he’s trying to emphasize in his drawings

>>6155838
If you're able to decipher his scribbles you actually don't need Bridgman anymore.

>>6155351
I tried doing this Frazetta style a couple years ago but never finished, I burned out around 60% of the way though. Not all the pages were scanned on that attempt though they are laying around somewhere.

Might try a full constructive anatomy copy again while this thread is alive, but not all in one day this time.

>>6155390
fking kek you absolute retard

>>6155754
That's where I've been posting mine, not sure it needs its own general

>>6155390
You are symbol thinking. It's not the "seam" between the fingers, it's outlining the form of the fingers

what's the difference between this and the masters study general?

>>6156054
Did it improve your drawings?

>>6155615
>>6155838
>>6156054
>>6156092
Lookin good

>>6155351
how do you copy, without constructing and still keep on model?

>>6156770
I suppose I keep the placement and proportions in check by breaking it down into simple shapes in my head, then try to reproduce his lines and interpretation of the forms.

>>6155351
I really enjoyed the neck portion

>>6156054
>>6156819
Awesome, keep it up lads

>>6155390
I noticed that too. I guess bridgman just symbol drew instead of using reference.

>A short time later, Frazetta began to work at Standard/Better Comics with Ralph Mayo. While Mayo appreciated the style Frazetta had developed over the years he was quick to instruct Frazetta to get a firm grasp on human anatomy and provided Frazetta with a copy of ‘Constructive Anatomy’ by George Bridgman. Frazetta went home that same evening and copied the book from cover to cover, twice!
How is this even possible?

>>6157062
Yeah I highly doubt that. You’d have to go so fast that you don’t even learn anything. What’s this excerpt from?

>>6157069
https://www.frazettagirls.com/blogs/news/frazetta-learns-anatomy

>>6157062
Actually looking at “constructive anatomy”, it really isn’t that long so this isn’t too unbelievable

>>6157074
isnt there like 200 plates?

>>6157113
I’m assuming you meant pages, and yeah. Honestly I feel like the dude telling the story messed something up because there’s just no way it took him just a day. Maybe a week but a day? I doubt it

>>6155351
Useless exercices, pathetic amerishit.

Good thread

Though doing memory drawings may yield better results

>>6157269
Second time I copy will be from imagination

>>6155351
when copying do you try making 1:1 copies or put more focus on capturing the form?

>>6157414
Both. They're not bargue copies, you build them from the ground up, but make them as accurate as possible and try to understand what Bridgman is doing and where he's putting the planes.

>>6157113
only 87 of them have images on them though

>>6157417
>but make them as accurate as possible
thats gonna take some time then but i heard pretty good things about copying bridgman, also thanks for the answer

>>6157466
IMO if you're new, you should start with Michael Hampton's Figure Drawing: Design and Invention. He takes a lot of concepts that Bridgman uses them and explains them in a digestible way for newbies (CSI curves, opposing masses, tilt proportion perspective) and as I was copying Bridgman after going through Hampton's book and video course, I found myself recognizing those techniques, which I probably would have missed if I hadn't read Hampton first. For reference, I'm >>6156092
picrel is from a few months ago as I was going through Hampton's course. Full disclosure, one of them is a study from Hampton's book and the other is photo ref, but I don't remember which is which. I'd like to re-draw them with skin on after I finish my second pass of Bridgman.

>>6155532
that anon is right and you should 41 percent yourself

Going through "Complete Guide to Drawing from Life"

>>6155351

Brigman's hands are too exaggerated they look like hands with osteoarthritis

>>6157062
anything is possible if you're a liar.

lmao wtf brideman is hard. I've always had his books but never tried them out before. The way he draws people is weird, like everyone is fucking superman or something.

>>6160341
holy fucking kek

>>6160341
Well, you've drawn the arm, the skeleton and the fist pretty nicely, so i think it's working.

Breasts are not chest muscles. it is fat shaped like drips.

>>6157980
perfect for drawing instruction. the drawn hands don't look like your picture because artists will tend to make the lines and forms more subtle when drawn, hence the exaggeration. even drawing feminine hands with the knuckles in mind, i've never had a problem with them turning out masculine or diseased looking.

I legitimately think Bridgman is a meme. What are you supposed to even learn from him?

>>6163182
Artistic anatomy

>>6163182
>I legitimately think Bridgman is a meme.
Good thing no one cares what you think

>>6163182
You could literally learn to draw to a high level by studying dirt, dead leaves, pieces of garbage, etc. If you think you can't, it means there are critical things you don't understand regarding learning art.

Then, why not studying Bridgman?

>>6155351
>fall for the Bridgman meme
>Copy it anyways cause nothing to lose
>Only 70% of copying the book, already see huge improvements
Fuck, and I'm told you truly don't start improving till the second time you copy it but more so from imagination. Damn, glad I listened to David.

haven't drawn in a few months but always enjoyed bridgman studies

>>6155351
watch the angles of the landmarks/fingers. the middle finger's base knuckle is lower in the original. i had to redraw parts of mine several times over because i was too lazy with noting vertical and horizontal relationships

>>6163344
Because you can study real life instead of some symbol drawings.

>>6163355
Can you post a before and after?

>>6163477
You're missing the point anon, you don't seem to understand the point of doing master copies

>>6163477
Those aren't symbol drawings, though.

If anyone is unsure how to interpret Bridgman, this video should help a lot. There's some shorthand in the sketches you might miss such as how shading is conveyed. It does help to have some anatomy knowledge beforehand otherwise you won't know what's actually being shown. the cross-sections are also incredibly helpful in better understanding the forms and planes but might seem too weird or irrelevant at first.
https://youtu.be/R4ERO4Duqao?t=33

>>6163477
Top kek, do you label anything you don’t like as symbol drawing?

>>6157062
Pic related are Frazetta's copies of Bridgman
I just bought his Constructive Anatomy book and honestly, copying it at least once should be very possible if you draw through the night

>>6164589
Thank you, this was helpful. Never studied any bridgman books but his shape design is so cool.

>>6161692
lamo

>>6155351
anyone have 5th edition pdf? it's not in the book thread

>>6166235
Constructive Anatomy is the better book to copy and I have both the 5th edition and Constructive Anatomy

>>6166369
Why? Doesn't the complete guide include all the drawings from constructive anatomy?

digi/trad doesn't matter yeah

>>6166369
thanks ill look into it

>>6155351
Bridgman

I wonder how many people actually manged to copy his whole book. I'm just 30 pages in with about 180 drawings, almost all of it hands and I already feel like I'm going insane

>>6166369
But Complete Guide has the section on clothing and drapery. I own both as well, they're different form factors and nice to have. Constructive Anatomy I can toss into my bag but I wouldn't with Complete Guide.

>>6166572
artists love to brag and lie about things. it's something you can study for a lifetime honestly, always going back to look at the drawings and study the forms often recognizing something you didn't know or notice before. i don't copy the tendon images and you're not supposed to copy it front to back, pick the things that you think will help you or that you need clarification on. it's ok to put it down for a bit and come back to it.

>>6166461
>what is stylisation
>what are strong fingers
>what is a day of physical work
>what are my spindly little boney fingers doing oh god i cant even open this soilent
I'm sorry macaco

>>6166461
the entire point is to show the bones and anatomy underneath which informs how the surface looks

>>6164589
This video just tells me how horribly Bridgman's teachings are explained. Imagine if the concepts were actually explained in a sensible and understandable way.

>>6155351
Should I try this grind as a beg?

>>6167883
no. if you have to learn anatomy, find scott eaton's anatomy course. then you can grind through bridgman. if you're a beg look at huston's figure drawing book and hampton's but hampton teaches incorrect simplification and weird men that don't actually correspond to anatomy.

>>6156054
wait, you did this all in a day?
what power level is this?

>>6160341
why is betty's right side of the brain drawing exercise on that page?

>>6168088
>what power level is this?
not being lazy

but from a scientific point of view, copying a to in a single day isnt very effective compared to copying the whole Bridgman books over the course of a week then repeating it again over time

long term permanent BIG gains come from long term practice

>>6166572
don't forget to copy everything a second time when you're done

In order to prove this bridgman shit
post the work of someone before and after 2 copies of bridgman

>>6168247
there's nothing objective to prove, either it works for you or it doesn't. try copying a few pages and make your mind up instead of having to listen to what other people say.

>>6168247
>post the work of someone before and after 2 copies of bridgman
Did anyone on /ic/ even do it?
Only famous examples so far are:
>Frazetta
>David Finch
>Kyle Hotz

>>6168247
this isn't a video game, there isn't XP or levels or new spells/abilities you will gain after "grinding" There is effort needed every time in order to learn. If you need proof you won't get anything done. You are the type to winder around looking for a magic pill or the so called correct pat instead of just taking every path. You've wasted enough time, choose and read every book, choose and watch every teacher, choose and try every method. Stop waiting around.

can i ignore the words and just copy

>>6168650
yes, most of the words don't mean anything. they're there as an option to skim if you want if you don't understand the pictures like when he's talking about architecture or woodworking. some of the intro stuff is maybe helpful to understand his philosophy.

>>6168653
thanks!

>>6168650
no read it all. finch is an autist, the words give a lot of context and ideas that isn't easy to figure out from just looking at the drawings

>>6168679
@.@

>>6168679
the main things you need to know from the words are how bridgman emphasizes the volumes wedge and mortice into each other. and the parts around square/round alternating. later pages are mostly in-depth internal anatomy that isn't important for a working artistic knowledge.

>>6168075
>find scott eaton's anatomy course
What's good about his course

>>6168075
>weird men that don't actually correspond to anatomy.
Huston does that too though, he shows you how to draw a head with a weird alien

>>6168845
the sailboat sail head has a purpose for instruction in figure drawing

>>6155532
>dumb fuck moment

>>6164589
Speaking of Bridgman youtube vids, Vandruff put up his entire Bridgman Bootcamp video series on his youtube for free earlier this year:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrPi92DnMis
anyone go through it? his old ass perspective video lectures are top notch (even though he himself isn't that awesome of an artist, he does seem to be a good teacher)

>>6169610
I'll check this out, didn't know it was finally posted. I like Bridgman a lot and looking at artistic anatomy resources, also have the patience for Marshall. I remember at the time it was not reviewed well so maybe that's why it's free now. I can immediately see why this turned people off because of how he teaches, a lot of people probably wanted direct information instead of a lecture with history and storytelling to engage the students so they can remember things.

never heard of bridgeman until now. i'm gonna do the book! here's day 1.

Studying after a few drinks tonight. Kind of shows, kek.

>>6157062
>went home that same night
>then copied the book twice over a few weeks

>>6155351
progress so far going through constructive anatomy

>>6167527
read Figure Drawing: Design and Invention

>>6167527
i mean as far i know bridgeman never really created any book or educational mateiral, all we have are the notes taken by his former students and surviving drawings from his lectures and his stuff was published after his death but not sure on that

that is why his stuff is hard to figure out and very badly explained, the guy simply never bothered making any resource himself

>>6172687
>i mean as far i know bridgeman never really created any book or educational mateiral,
You're wrong, he authored all of his books himself, except the Complete Guide to Drawing from Life which was made by former students

>>6172733
i stand corrected

>>6172687
That's what I meant with my post, his students explained his concepts like shit.
>tfw we'll never get see his actual lectures where he drew big ass drawings in the ceiling with a 6" feet stick with charcoal on the end for a classroom of around 60 students

>>6157062
I'm copying his Constructive Anatomy book right now, managed to do around one third in 3 days.
I don't think it's impossible to copy in one night, especially if you're Frazetta and draw like a madman through the entire night

is he right?

>>6173769

>>6173769
no, retard can't even spell bridgman correctly

>>6173769
What crab wrote that?
>noooooo there aren't actual constructions in there

Meanwhile Chad artists just copy his "subjective visual simplifications"

>>6176574
Gottfried Bammes, who is literally one of the most respected figure drawers ever, and far better than you will ever be.

>>6176820
Boring academic, who never produced good artwork
I'll go with Frazetta over Bammes every day

>>6177017
Also not a single notable student while Bridgman taught some of the best of the 20th century
Get the fuck out with Bammes and never mention him in the same sentece as Bridgman ever again

>>6176820
>Gottfried Bammes
>figure drawer

a little google search is all thats needed to know which artists advice and footsteps you want to follow kek

you can keep your bammes i rather do what Frazetta did if these are the results

>>6176820
>who is literally one of the most respected figure drawers ever
he's not but you keep saying this everywhere. he was a dumb commie. some of the stuff in his books is good but it's the pictures and not the words. he was a salty academic mad at loomis for making money with commercial art lmao

>>6166592
Studying rheumatitis is like watching Bridgman's works, I don't know why the castrated Westerners get so angry when you show them their pathetic truth.

>>6178967
have you ever studied the plates of loomis' drawing the head and hands? the hands section is terrible especially compared to bridgman

>>6178997
bridgman completely mogs loomis

>>6178998
Loomis separated the hands according to age, basically the hands of an old man have the shape of rheumatic hands, for Bridgman they all have the same hands

>>6157023
Looks really good, anon.

>>6178967
>Westerners
This is getting boring anon. Remember our gifts to your people. Opium. Hiroshima. Communism.

Stop meddling with us. You know who you're dealing with.

almost done i've done everything but hips and legs... round one of Bridgman almost complete....

>>6155351
current progress on constructive anatomy, been slacking on it only doing 1-2 pages a day

want to move to the bigger Complete Guide Drawing From Life after constructive is done and apply some memory drawing, but what would be the best method?

a typical and simple 1. draw the ref, 2. redraw from memory

or just stare and analyze the page for 20-30 secs then try drawing from memory, and repeat as necessary until i can redraw that page/drawing well enough

>>6179407

Almost finished copying the entire Constructive Anatomy book.
Am I really not gonna make it if I don't copy it twice?

>>6181128
i mean it doesnt matter if its copying Bridgman twice or any other resource or drawing form life or wtv, you will still need the mileage and study anyway and as long as you keep studying you will do the same workload and dozens times more with many resources and methods

so yes, if someone cant even copy Bridgman twice then it shows they have a lack of discipline needed to get the mileage in

>>6155532
Faggot

>>6181128
>Constructive Anatomy book
which one is that specifically?

>>6181128
yes, no one made it without bridgman.
repin, bouguereau, raphael were all permabeg ngmi.

>>6182966

>>6182969
I get your point, but Bridgman learned from the guy who did this. Unless you're apprenticing under a master, you should be suckling on Bridgman's teat like a baby calf.

>>6155532
>discord
Got em! totally owned!

>>6157069
>You’d have to go so fast that you don’t even learn anything.

Dude bridgman ain't that hard to copy fast if you're already at good at drawing and Frazetta's mentor Michael Falanga had already called him a genius

Not to mention Bridgman only had a handful of drawings.

I'm about halfway done copying drawing from life, is it worth doing constructive anatomy afterwards?

>>6184270
it's practically the same drawings. drawing from life is a bit more comprehensive though with the additional things like the square/round alternating stuff to explain his methodologies.

>>6166461
Damn these hands look sick as hell

why is bridgeman better than Hogarth

>>6187715
I've spent more time with Bridgman than Hogarth, but what I've come to appreciate about Bridgman over other anatomy books is how he interprets and stylizes anatomy, which you don't really get from anyone else. He "bridges" (haha) the gap between clinical study and actual art.

>>6155351
Finished Constructive Anatomy

Gonna do Complete Drawing From Life next

>>6190672
You've done it fren. Thank you and great work.

>>6190672
good job. how you feeling?

>>6190672
are some of the drawings in black skewed, they have a bit of a tilt to them and seem more narrow?some nice interpretations of some of the rendering. do you have any takeaways from it, any favorite body parts that you liked his plates for? arms, skull, hands, and feet have stuck with me the most.

>>6190672
Nice. What would you say you got most out of it now that you've done the whole book?

What book should I start with?

> 1 For safety as well as to see and to hear, the head and shoulders must be able to turn in all directions.
> 2 The head is a lever of the first order.
> 3 The muscles that move the atlas.
Fucking Bridgman, wtf does all this shit mean?

>>6157062
The next day he arrived to work to show Mayo he had learned anatomy. Mayo laughed, “Oh, Frank, you haven’t learned anatomy. I’ve been studying for ten years and I still don’t really know the human anatomy.”

>>6155532
tranny

>>6191255
in bridgman's time, the average person was better read and intelligence wasn't discouraged. you could google all three to find them if you weren't a retard. think about 1 for 5 seconds and it makes sense. no wonder bridgman gets a bad rap when the average reader is 80 iq
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_(anatomy)

>>6169610
this is incredibly insightful

>>6169610
Fucking leyend.

>>6191255
Yup, it is common for people who have in-depth knowledge of a field to use a specific, precise terminology. Most of those words/concepts are useless on a day-to-day basis, so regular people don't know them, but they are key for field experts to communicate efficiently/precisely.

Think, "I broke a bone in my arm" vs. "I have a distal ulna fracture".

>>6155532
we?

>>6190802
>are some of the drawings in black skewed,
ye this is because i was drawing big but using select-transform to make them smaller ad organizing them on the page

this fucked up some of the drawings on the final image lmao

>>6191066
my pure technical skill didnt level up, small time scale for that obsviously, but my knowledge improved so in a way my drawig is more "correct"
also it helped me create the figure 3D forms instead of just blindly slapping muscles on a construction mannequin if that makes sense

overall anatomy study = better knowledge, bridgman specifically = better understanding on actually creating the 3D forms

>>6190794
good how bout you anon?

>>6190778
thx, still got the famous 2nd copy to go and a lifetime too

>>6191071
whichever one you can find, it's easy to find a copy of constructive anatomy
https://www.scott-eaton.com/outgoing/books/George-Bridgman-Constructive-Anatomy.pdf

So how does one study his book? Do I just read everything and copy the drawings?

>>6195265
Read something else and copy the drawings. I think they're clear what they're representing from a constructive standpoint but some of the text is just awful.

critique on my digital master copy of Caravaggio?

>>6195967
my b wrong site

Really imagining the aroma on this page. I think I went too far with the rendering in some places, I was also testing out some new brushes

>>6195265
Pretty much, I think the text is worth glancing over, but it tends to be a bit opaque. Just find some youtube videos that explain it. As I understand it, you're supposed to copy but also extrapolate things, like his hatching he just throws down some lines down over an area for expediency but you're supposed to take the time to make it look good (not that I did a good job of that).

when do you "study bridgman" during your art career? before perspective, after perspective? after learning how to draw cubes? 2 years? 5 years?

>>6197328
After you've got a basic foundation in the fundamentals. It's not that advanced, but it's not something a complete beginner would jump in on. As I understand it, the biggest thing to get out of Bridgman is interpreting and translating anatomy into something artistically useful.

bump