Proportions?

[Anonymous No.1600775]

So ive started to atleast try to work on proportions, and i thought id ask you for advice on how to do this?

also id like some critique on my most recent attempt
Left: attempt 1 Middle: attempt 2/exaggeration Right: original

[Anonymous No.1600811]

#3 would be particularly helpful for you. Look at that back leg it's totally fucked up. And your drawing doesn't look very exaggerated, just looks like it's tilting back.

[Anonymous No.1600812]

>>1600775
First attempt is better.

You should be focused on getting a strong gesture and the base forms to read well. Proportions are easy once you have an idealized model to compare with, and you can work freely with perspective.

[Anonymous No.1600848]

>>1600775

Since you are drawing from photo, before you even gesture, you should try to find major angles and relationships first. Look for pairs such as the shoulders, hips, knees, bony landmarks, and mentally draw lines between them. Get the angle of those lines as accurately as you can. Also simplify and get the angles of the longest, straightest sections of the body contour. You can even do this with the entire silhouette, such as a line between her right hand to her right foot.

Think geometrically, in terms of height, width, and angle. If you can get only two of those three right, the third will automatically be correct.

These lines are not the figure yet, but they serve as a bounding box for your gestures, upon which you box, construct, round out, repeat, etc. Using this approach to your drawing, you should see that the relationship of the shoulders and the knees are quite off, which in turn makes the width and length incorrect as well.

[Anonymous No.1600895]

>>1600848
>you should try to find major angles and relationships first
why do all that? it teaches relationship in only ONE particular viewing angle. might as well just draw on top of reference... "upon which you box, construct, round out, repeat"

[Anonymous No.1600954]

>>1600895
because ???????

[Anonymous No.1600972]

>>1600848
Goddommit Teal. Did you get all self-conscious because that one foreignfag insulted your handwriting? Keep writing on the images, your writing is perfectly legible.

[Anonymous No.1600973]

>>1600895
>why do all that?

Because judging angles is a skill that needs to be developed, and is applied in both constructing from imagination and drawing from reference, albeit in slightly different ways.

It takes only a few seconds to do. When drawing a figure from imagination, I wouldn't do this at all.

>it teaches relationship in only ONE particular viewing angle.

This is about learning to see angles accurately, not remembering them. This also doesn't conflict at all with construction. It is a way to guide the placement of forms.

[Anonymous No.1600991]

>>1600972
>because that one foreignfag insulted your handwriting?

Didn't see that. I just typed it up because I had 10 minutes and I needed to make breakfast.

[Anonymous No.1600998]

>>1600973
>(this skill)... is applied in both constructing from imagination...
but then you say
>When drawing a figure from imagination, I wouldn't do this at all.
...

>This is about learning to see angles accurately, not remembering them.
fair enough. but might as well draw on top of reference...

[Anonymous No.1601003]

>>1600998

Are you implying that judging angles correctly in relation to each other is not something you would need when constructing with shapes?

Doing this with a photo study will boost this skill. This doesn't mean it has to be done for construction, since you are drawing from imagination, not replicating something else.

>fair enough. but might as well draw on top of reference...

What makes you think that judging angles and doing sight measuring is the same as drawing on top of a picture?

[Anonymous No.1601013]

>>1601003
alright, symbol drawing ftw.

[Anonymous No.1601022]

>>1601013

How about you read more carefully.

>These lines are not the figure yet, but they serve as a bounding box for your gestures

[Anonymous No.1601036]

>>1601013
>symbol drawing

What the fuck are you talking about? Please stop using words you clearly don't know the meaning of.

How is it symbol drawing to use lines to find the major angles of the figure? It's one of the most basic concepts of gesture drawing and it's simply a tool for you to simplify the figure and get the right angles. C curves, S curves and straight lines, that's the 3 basic concepts of a gesture drawing. Guess what the straight lines are for? To figure out the angular shapes of the figure you are studying.

[Anonymous No.1601052]

>>1601013

you're super new at this. I don't think you even remotely understand how important it is to get rid of symbolism with careful observation. Angles, negative and positive spaces, rythms are a great way to break the illusion and expose the biggest errors in your current composition. You'd be surprised how well they translate to drawing from memory if you actually kept them in mind. Old masters used it as a tool to manipulate and create interesting shapes in big pieces.

They are THE tools to detect obvious errors in proportions, perspective, placement and immediately tell you if your observation of reality is inaccurate. If you ignore the problems, then the figure from imagination will, at best, look like the carelessly observed figure from life & photo.

but hey it's your choice in the end, you will eventually find out that they're important even if you are ignorant now.

[Anonymous No.1601060]

>>1601036
>>1601052
2-dimentional design is what is is and that is the definition of symbol drawing. i am not implying that it's bad, though you might be preconditioned to think that it is.

[Anonymous No.1601063]

>>1601060
Are you also the retard in the draw thread saying "using reference defeats the purpose of studies"?

[Anonymous No.1601064]

>>1601060
fuckin lol, just leave.

[Anonymous No.1601065]

>>1601063
i don't know what you're talking about, but if anyone who disagrees with you is a retard, you might as well be one yourself.

[Anonymous No.1601070]

>>1601060
if two dimensional designs were symbol drawing, all line based drawings would be symbol drawing.
It's only symbol drawing if you are using shapes to draw but don't actually understand what the object behind the shape is supposed to look like.

of course, they are somewhat related, but usually you'd only call it symbol drawing if it's in the beginner stage.
with stuff like >>1601036, where the artist obviously shows some additional information through observation and knowlegde, i'd call it more of a stylistic/personal bias/preference.
because people are not photocopy machines

[Anonymous No.1601074]

When drawing from reference you can benefit from and learn both by considering the geometrics in the 2D plane and the construction of the 3D volume. Neither of you seem to disagree with this. Considering the 3D volume, the pose and the proportions in 3D space is overall more important in practicing figure drawing and learning about anatomy, however learning to see 2D relationships is important especially for beginners so as to be able to see and draw 2D angles and areas precisely, be able to translate perspective accurately and be able to check for mistakes, among other things.

[Anonymous No.1601090]

>>1600848
i dont know how much if any better this is but i made a attempt at using something along the lines of what you suggested

[Anonymous No.1601131]

A good way to start off the drawing is to look at how many head heights she is first. Measure it with the tip of your pencil and thumb.

Then rough in a basic circle for the head as big as you want it to fit on the paper and transfer how many head heights she was down the same way with measuring the tip of your pencil and thumb.

>>1600811
Then start doing it as he said with number 3 look for relations and points to accurately draw out where things line up.

Good luck.

[Anonymous No.1601133]

>>1600848
I love you.
Do you have a page where I can look through your work/tutorials?

[Anonymous No.1601135]

>>1601133
Nevermind, found
http://imgur.com/gallery/8eHzD

[Anonymous No.1601158]

How to set up proportions:
1. Check the obvious symmetrical points, like hips, shoulders and chest. In red
2. Get the overall gesture and masses of the body. In blue
3. Start dividing it up into smaller parts such as the ribcage, knees, facial features, fingers etc.. In orange

[Anonymous No.1601214]

>>1601090

You're drawing a bit too tightly, too much like your are trying to draw the finished figure, or a contour drawing.

Measuring lines are not the figure. Construction lines and gestures are not the figure. All of these things are just to guide you toward the finished drawing, starting with large angles and primary shapes, working towards more nuanced lines and complex shapes. Imagine a map. Measuring and construction are the paths and landmarks and the scale and grid of the map. Without those things, the map makes no sense, and you cannot draw the outlines of the continents accurately.

There's more separation between the visual measuring stage, and the gesture and construction stage in this pic. Don't copy this. Rather, I want you to think of why I chose to draw the lines I did in the 1st drawing, and also think about lines I *didn't* draw, or the lines I simplified.

For example, what is the diagonal line at the bottom? It represents the relationship between the ankles, not the ankles themselves. Look at the straight line I drew for the left leg. The actual contour is obviously more complex than a straight line. But, it's far easier for me to get an accurate contour by drawing it in relation to that straight line. Does that make sense?

[Anonymous No.1601223]

Is most of the /ic like this?
Filled with posts with that whiny, indignant attitude so prevalent among retards (like the "2-dimentional design is what is is and that is the definition of symbol drawing" poster) when they are called out on their bullshit? What can you learn here? Even to someone like me, who just likes to look at pretty pictures, time spent here is time wasted if your intention is to improve yourself.

[Anonymous No.1601246]

>>1601223
>Is the internet full of immature idiots?
Yes. Don't dignify them with a second response if they throw good advice back in your face. If they wanted a real argument or the chance to learn they wouldn't act like an ass. If someone doesn't have good sense enough to know good advice when they see it then they wont take it now matter how your repackage it. There are plenty of other people who want to learn here.

[Anonymous No.1601296]

>>1601214
Not OP, but you're fucking awesome! Thanks for taking the time to help us.

[Anonymous No.1601298]

>>1601214
hey teal line guy, haven't seen you in a while.

[Anonymous No.1601299]

>>1601223
>being this new
you get used to it, i just take in the advice and scroll past the arguments, plus you can normally tell you is "teacher" status in these threads anyway and the others arguing are just jelly.

[Anonymous No.1601396]

>>1601214
>Rather, I want you to think of why I chose to draw the lines I did in the 1st drawing, and also think about lines I *didn't* draw, or the lines I simplified.

Too much background knowledge is left out, and you're suggesting someone to think about what wasn't there? Knowing what you didn't draw requires expectation of what you did draw, and since it's assumed the person doesn't know entirely where you're coming from with your way, it can be expected for the person to overlook all other possible expectations and even confuse those with the ideas of what you didn't draw. Without first knowing the method to your madness the person can't be expected to distinguish what from madness.

And the nature of giving examples only amplifies that really.

[Anonymous No.1601494]

>>1601396
I wouldn't expect anyone on here to elaborate on everything from the ground up; books and other types of resources are there for that. It's already very generous that he has taken the time to not only reply via text, but draw out his example. Responsibility for figuring out any background knowledge needed falls on the shoulders of OP. I don't want you to reply to this post because I just want to simply put this out there for all the lurkers. Besides learning how to measure things (which was already covered by the first response) I would thereafter encourage OP to draw exaggerated gestures. With the drawing of gestures in an allotted time frame, you have to think about economy and essence; deciding what is essential and what is omitted.

[Anonymous No.1601637]

>>1601214
OP here again
at first i misread a bit too thightly as too ugly
i can see what you mean with the lines not being the figure, ive tried to incorperate your advice
and ive drawn 15-20 different poses from nude models trying to understand how to work

the picture in this post is the first drawn without a reference since, im quite happy with it.

anyhow thanks for taking your time to help, you are awsome!

[Anonymous No.1601665]

>>1601494

I'll reply anyway cause lurkers also need to understand a few things here.

>I wouldn't expect anyone on here to elaborate on everything from the ground up

No reason to argue an unreasonable binary opposite of that extreme. Not assessing the anon on the other side and then expecting them to see what someone didn't do and why they didn't do it, leaves the anon to basically guessing. A place not far removed from their original spot. There is a level of moderation in background knowledge that is needed and the struggle of knowledge gaps can be alleviated simply by asking more questions than just repeating conventions.

>Responsibility for figuring out any background knowledge needed falls on the shoulders of OP.

Then you shouldn't give advice to begin with, because the anon already knows the answer, right? Again the problem here is not knowing the right background information. And particularity the problem of not knowing what the anon knows, or the gaps in their knowledge against what you know. Without assessing the anon, you blatantly become an echo of conventions, making your advice no more valuable then a google search. We have to remember part of the reason an anon would ask for help to begin with, is to acquire an engagement of some kind. They need some kind of assurance that they're on the right path. And to be extremely effective, any anon willing to help needs to know how the other anon got to the crisis.

All the problems of drawing can't be fixed by rote alone.

[Anonymous No.1601686]

>>1601214
umm.... thanks for the Art-gasum teal.

[Anonymous No.1601704]

>>1601665

Then you should take it upon yourself to do something better than pointless arguing or saying Loomis. You're just noise.

[Anonymous No.1601711]

>>1601704
You're the only one that said Loomis, and you aren't make that much of a point, besides complaining. STFU.

[Anonymous No.1601790]

>>1601686
He's trying to help and this is your reaction?

[Anonymous No.1601793]

>>1601790
an art-gasm* is a good thing, no?

[Anonymous No.1601802]

>>1601793
Yea, but it came off kind of weird with the "ummm:.
Maybe it was just a over reaction, sorry for the trouble