/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.2145673]

Where is all the love for the two Michaels (Hampton and Matessi)? Two absolutely brilliant educators. Their teaching methods are proven, and they aren't old fucking hat like Villpu and Loomis. Start with Matessi's "Force" then go on to Hampton's "Figure Drawing : Design and Invention". It's literally, and unarguably, the most comprehensive system for self-teachers. You go into it focused, cover to cover for each book, and you'll be a fucking master.

[Anonymous No.2145678]

Post your work, master.

[Anonymous No.2145686]

>>2145673

They're both good books and mentioned here plenty. Idk why you're pretending they're anything special.

[Anonymous No.2145709]

Matessi's character designs are embarrassing. If you start with him I guarantee you all of your figures well end up looking like mush.

[Anonymous No.2146621]

>>2145673
never heard of matessi.

Figure drawing by Hampton is really good, but Bridgman's constructive anatomy is unarguably better, if less accessible. For someone without any knowledge of form, I'd recommend Hampton then Bridgman.

[Anonymous No.2146623]

I dunno theres always a couple of guys (or maybe one(maybe even you OP)) that keeps mentioning these whenever they have a chance

[Anonymous No.2146637]

Topkek at claiming it is the most comprehensive system to use only Hampton and Matessi. Neither of them are very medically thorough and both stylize and simplify a ton. If you want comprehensive you need a more scientific book, something like Goldfinger, Peck, or Bammes.

>>2145686
Yeah Hampton gets mentioned constantly. Matessi less so, but still often I think.

>>2146621
Yeah! Based Bridgman for life!

[Anonymous No.2146717]

>>2145673
when will Hampton get an editor? we used his book in figure drawing class but even in the same exact numerical edition the some of the content was different. didn't matter much to students but the prof was pissed.

that being said it's a great book

[Anonymous No.2146885]

>mister beginner man thinks he's got it all figured out

They're decent books, but it's hardly ''literally, and unarguably, the most comprehensive system for self-teachers''.

There's a ton of good art books, and art teachers.
You should try them all and see which ones click, and even what you can learn from the ones that don't click.

[Anonymous No.2146914]

>>2145673
Because instead of studying hampton, you can study from the guys that hampton studied from ;)

[Anonymous No.2146951]

>>2146914
That doesn't necessarily mean those artists are better to learn from, you idiot ;)

Older is not always better, especially when it comes to teaching. You cut away what doesn't work and you improve on the methods that have proven themselves to work. Hence why no one in their right mind would recommend Bridgeman to some absolute beginners instead of Loomis, yet he was the one Loomis studied from.

[Anonymous No.2146991]

Vilppu is more skilled, more experienced, and a better teacher. His courses are far more comprehensive and his has way way more content out there to study from. Pic related was more succinct, and taught me more than either Hampton or Matessi. They're both great artists and good teachers, but why not learn from the master?

I would let Vilppu take my anal virginity.

[Anonymous No.2147036]

>>2146991
Can you post some figure drawings of yours that show what you've learnt from Vilppu?

[Anonymous No.2147061]

Does anyone have a off for Hampton's book?

[Anonymous No.2147065]

>>2145678
>>2147036
Will someone get this hothead outta here

[Anonymous No.2147261]

>>2145673
hampton's great. His work also made other instructional books like loomis's stuff easier to get around for me.

[Anonymous No.2147343]

>>2145673
Your forgetting about Joe Weatherly as well. Has a similar look and method that hampton does. Hampton helped him with his book on drawing animals as well.

[Anonymous No.2147678]

Sorry I meant, does anyone have a pdf*

[Anonymous No.2147877]

what about based huston