/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>human photocopier

>>6590266
It's not a copy from photo, this will train your observation skills

>>6590263
30+ hours for the block out? Is this common practice?

>>6590266
>human photocopier
Anon, you don't even have to PYW to prove anything. We can tell you've been symbol drawing for 3 years now.

>>6590268
If you wanna be a fineart aka printmachine, yesish

>>6590268
Yeah, the finished academic drawings you see take a shitload of time. He's using sight-size, too, which is a little easier, and it doesn't actually look like he works conceptually with rendering beyond finding terminators. Modeling at a high level is very labor intensive.

>>6590276
nta
but if you are talking about improve your observation skills/accuracy, drawing from life is the worse way to improve now that digital tools exist

>>6590263
god I hate this autistic shit

>>6590263
I remember my atelier instructor stressing the importance of keeping the tones smooth. If a bit of graphite or charcoal grabbed the tooth of the paper, creating a darker speck, we would make a point with the kneaded rubber and pick it out. Similarly, if the texture of the paper caused lighter specks between the tone, we would darken them using the tip of the sharpened pencil. This method of drawing is very laborious but it does teach you to observe and really see in a way that's only possible by slowing down to an almost meditative pace. I think it's worth trying, even if you don't carry your training farther than copying Bargue plates. I see people here all the time who don't notice obvious errors in their own drawings from reference, which shows a lack of training in observation. And this carries over to drawing from imagination, as well. You should be able to tell if a simple shape is lopsided, or if an angle is a right angle (and, if not, roughly how much it deviates from a right angle), or be able to find the half-way and third-way points on a line by eye, for example.

>>6590298
Really disagree, the accuracy you learn from life drawing (or even cast drawing) is different than copying 2d -> 2d. The ability to sizematch at any scale and measure super precisely can actually be hindrances because they encourage a process of accurate mark making that doesn't translate well to describing real 3d objects.

>>6590268
They're using a tooth pick to shade in a 16'x16' space. Sight-size is a horribly inefficient technique based on a flawed interpretation of the atelier method. You can do the same shit and shave off 20 hours if you used a pencil and a stump.

>>6590312
If you're just working visually, maybe, if you're actually modeling there's a reason you don't just smudge your shit all over the place (even if 99% of viewers won't know the difference).

>>6590311
insta feedback(aka deliberate practice) + you dont need a instructor to check your proportions, even proko said the same when asked about how to improve accuracy
https://youtu.be/HMX3K3YMbd8
and
min 2:26 (CC subs)
https://youtu.be/594WhCme2pQ?t=146

>>6590311
>>6590276
proko is prime example why you are wrong

>>6590314
If your goal as a teacher is to train someone's eye then you train their eye, not train them to dig into micro divots in the paper with a needle made of graphite. At that point, you're just training to copy, anything more than 10 hours is just diminishing returns when it comes to observation. I mean, if you want to do it, then do it, but don't mislead people by saying it's a good method, it really isn't.

>>6590322
Ok, that's fair if you just want to grind sight size 2d->2d accuracy, but it locks you in to a process that keeps you from doing 3d->2d comparative measurement that frees up your ability to move and scale your composition (and in understanding form separation). I think the need for a teacher and the ability to get good at checking yourself are worth it. It's not so one sided as digital being clearly superior.

>>6590330
I don't work sight size. Yeah, it's observational drawing, the goal is to get accurate to improve your skills. You "train the eye" the way you're talking about in the block in, and in modeling you're working conceptually, so the rendering process takes a long time to planarize the form and get the gradients smooth. The whole point is to have the illusion of dimensionality come not from a big ol soft edge smudge but an actually accurate illustration of the way the light source reveals the structure. If you're just working visually and saying "why work harder than this lol who cares" then fine, but I think you're not accurately valuing what you get from learning how to render deeply.

>>6590339
I get the value out of rendering things out for a long time but the method they employ is inefficient and there are and has been better methods but have seemingly become lost with time. The whole sight-size rendering for 100 hours with a needle point is a misunderstanding of how the ateliers used to render their drawings, they didn't do that, they used stumps although I think their paper was special in some way. Take this drawing by Sargent for example, done with charcoal and a stump.

>>6590263
I hope this does help him to learn some applicable skill he'll be able to use in making something interesting at a later date because as an artistic endeavor of it's own I don't understand the waste of time and energy. Literately just take a photo.

>>6590332
>scale your composition
>3d->2d
>understanding form separation
Learn perspective LOL
40:50
https://youtu.be/kbKqIJcIUCw?t=2450

>>6590328
Proko never practiced drawing from imagination dumbass . The fact that so many people here are incapable of making refuse to acknowledge that fact is incredible. Not surprising since this is a degen weeb board. Nobody is going to call an F1 driver trash for sucking at drifting . Nobody is going to call a hockey player trash for sucking at figure skating because that's not what they trained for . Fucking skill issued permabeg ,go back to watching your dogshit anime.

>>6590360
>ad hominem
concession accepted

>>6590360
You let me know when that hockey player starts teaching figure skating, livestreams it when they clearly can't and makes a total fool of themselves trying to do so. They'll be a laughingstock in the same way Proko is.

>academic drawing
There are none more worthless than this. An insipid circlejerk.

>>6590360
>Proko never practiced drawing from imagination dumbass
my point is that life drawing is not essential to learning

>>6590393
How can you follow tutorials if you can't even draw what you're observing on these tutorials?

>>6590396
what tutorials?
master studies are not life drawing
even bargue plates is 2d image copy

>>6590268
There are benefits to such extremely slow and precise drawings, especially for students.

As professional, you should be more pragmatic: you can get to 80% in 20% of the effort.

But those guys struggle hard with finding interesting things to express, so they tend to stick to extremely accurate copy, even as professionals. I don't blame them: there's so little to feed one's inspiration in today's society.

>>6590266
>>6590282
You don't ear people calling those who learn to play hours of Bach "human radios".

Copiyng is how people learn any discipline. Even learning science is about reproving theorems, endlessly drilling exercises, redoing experiments that has been done thousands of times

>>6590475
>endlessly drilling exercises
disagree
exercise without goal/feedback is useless
in mathematical/etc disciplines there is one correct output
but art outside feedback is necessary to judge correct/false
tutorial hell is to be wary of

This guy's channel is highly underrated. He's pretty funny

>>6590504
>in mathematical/etc disciplines there is one correct output
this is essentially wrong. kindergarten mathematics, yeah why not.

"real" mathematics is about say, proving theorems or establishing connections between too seemingly unrelated subdomains.

generally, there is more than one way to prove things, and it requires a certain amount of creativity to come up with new/simple/original proofs. mathematics *is* creative.

physics too: Maxwell's law's original version, there were like 16? they were later simplified to 4; in some context they can be reduced to one or two. not a single correct answer. more down to Earth (pun somehow intended), when you have to solve problems, you can do so using a wide variety of approaches. again, creativity is important.

but most importantly

> exercise without goal/feedback is useless
"endless drills" doesn't imply in no way exercising without goal/feedback, it simply means you need to practice for hundreds of hours anyway