Talented people don't need Loomis

[Anonymous No.3099078]

That paragraph is from Vetyr who pretty much got good by studying photos. She's not the only one. Most talented artists don't fucking go through erik olson's 90 hour perspective course and still end up drawing shitty perspective vehicles, or read tons of figure drawing books and end up with shitty looking figures, talented people just get it. Loomis, bridgeman, erik olson, are designed for talentless autistic hacks who essentially need special ed to get anywhere. If you drew on your own for a while, and you still then chances are you lack any iota of talent my friend. It's okay though, most of us do. Does that mean you should give up? No, but you should stop having unrealistic expectations. What would take someone like vetyr 2 years to understand will essentially take you 5 times as long, assuming you work hard and have all the special ed AHEM i mean loomis books in your grasp.

[Anonymous No.3099083]

>>3099078
new excuse of the day: random mediocre DA artists says I don't need books! HA!

[Anonymous No.3099086]

Nosebro is a prime example of a talentless hack who won't use his special ed and as a result fail to progress. Doing mental studies isn't necessarily the 'wrong way' to study, it's just that it doesn't work when your brain is less developed.

[Anonymous No.3099105]

>>3099078
This is either one retarded shitpost, or bait. But even if it is bait I'm going to take it anyways in case anyone else has the same mentality.

First off, art books and lectures are designed to help artists, regardless of whether or not they are talented. Studies from life and photos will also help you get better at art. There is no such thing as "oh, I'm talented, so I don't need lessons from books or video lectures, those are for autistic people." Vetyr didn't get good at art by just studying photos BECAUSE she was talented. It's because it's possible to get good at art by only doing studies/referenced drawings WITHOUT books/lectures, but this applies to EVERYONE, not just talented people. However, in my opinion, books and lectures are helpful for everyone, it's just that studies and reference drawing are more important, because you need to APPLY the information you learned, whether from books/videos or from referenced drawings that you have done previously. Books and lectures are like teachers, they guide you and provide useful information. If you don't use books/videos and just do studies and ref drawings, you just need to realize the information by yourself, which should definitely happen with enough mileage.

[Anonymous No.3099109]

>>3099078
>also >>3098940 ?
stop posting shit you hack

[Anonymous No.3099111]

>>3099078
Looking at vetyr's work, it's very apparent she relies heavily on photo reference. When a drawing looks like it was drawn from her imagination; the features look misaligned.
So, your point is?

[Anonymous No.3099114]

>>3099086
Nosebro isn't actually that bad, in terms of just drawing. He just makes everything in one line without a sketch, which makes him look bad, even with ctrl+z. His bodies show at least some knowledge of anatomy, but his faces are another story. Considering the fact that most of the work he posts is from imagination, he's better than most people think. He just never refines his shit, and his work doesn't showcase the true extent of his ability. If nosebro bothered to polish something it might actually look good.

[Anonymous No.3099116]

>>3099114
If Nosebro polished his work it would not 'actually look good' because he has no experience in ever finishing something. Every time he paints something it's muddy, monochromatic, and amateurish, and then he goes back to doing mindless comfort-zone sketches for another three months.

[Anonymous No.3099126]

>>3099116
I was talking about in terms of just drawing, so if he made, say, a finished lineart then it would at least be decent. I see your point though, he doesn't have much experience in rendering.

[Anonymous No.3099132]

>>3099126
You get good at what you do. He has no experiencing in finishing anything be it painting or lineart, therefore, any type of finished work from nosebro will be shit. Probably, one of the reasons he never shows he's finished stuff is because it's shit and he wants to hide behind his shitty doodles.

[Anonymous No.3099141]

>>3099078
There are also examples of artists a million times more talented than Vetyr who have studied Loomis though.

[Anonymous No.3099147]

>>3099141
When talanted people study Loomis, it just speeds up their progress even more. If vetyr studied 16 hours a day from Loomis like some of the talentless hacks on here, she'd be God level a

[Anonymous No.3099157]

>>3099147
Are you stupid? Obviously talented people would learn more from Loomis. That still defeats your entire argument that talented people don't need Loomis though, because why wouldn't you want to improve even faster just because you're talented?

At least put a little bit of thought and effort into your low-talent trolling.

[Anonymous No.3099159]

>>3099116
Not nosebro, but I have the exact same problem - been drawing seriously for 4 years and never finished a single thing, no joke.
I feel like no idea is good enough for me to take it to the finish and I love so many art styles that I fear that settling for just one will limit my soul for all eternity, but if I don't settle for one, I have zero chance of being successful.

I want to start churning out consistent work and theoretically I should be able to, but I don't.
Is there a practice, a book or anything to make me normal or am I too autistic to be an artist?
>pic related, the furthest I've ever taken something
(Sorry for the wall of text.)

[Anonymous No.3099165]

>>3099157
It doesn't defeat my point you stupid fucking Retard. I'm saying they don't NEED it to get good. But if they do use it then obviously it would speed up the process.

[Anonymous No.3099183]

>>3099078
cool. Good to know because I've been learning the same way. Get cucked tryhards.

[Anonymous No.3099208]

>>3099159
cute drawing, i like her face

>I feel like no idea is good enough for me to take it to the finish
you're afraid that if you finish something and it turns out shit, then you will be 'proven' bad. whereas if you don't ever finish anything, you can shrug it off with 'it's just a sketch, it's ok if it's bad' to cushion the blow to your ego.

there's nothing that can make this better, you just gotta bite the bullet and do it and make a finished piece of crap.

>and I love so many art styles that I fear that settling for just one will limit my soul for all eternity
this doesn't happen unless you're a shit draftsperson. the same disney artists worked on all the animated movies and they kept to the style of each movie and accurately to each model sheet, because they're good at drawing.

>but if I don't settle for one, I have zero chance of being successful.
never finishing anything and therefore stagnating will make you unsuccessful a lot faster. a style is just a habitual way of doing things, stop attaching so much importance to it.

[Anonymous No.3099228]

>>3099078
>Be me
>Be Talented
>Draw from imagination and only imagination
>Never bother drawing from life ever or do "studies"
>Draw favorite art sometimes.
>Become pro in 4 years

Feels good having talent :D

[Anonymous No.3099235]

Another shitpost, report and hide.

[Anonymous No.3099264]

>>3099078
LOL. does /ic/ really use loomis? We never used loomis in any of the art classes. Normies b normies.

[Anonymous No.3099265]

>>3099165
talentless people don't NEED it either, it just takes them to longer to get good but doing studies alone.

[Anonymous No.3099288]

>>3099208
I didn't think such a vague problem could have such a specific answer, but here you are.
Thanks, man.

[Anonymous No.3099290]

>>3099264
Art classes obviously do direct teaching. Loomis is more of a self-teach book.

[Anonymous No.3099292]

>>3099228
>be me
>show lots of potential/talent early on
>people predict that I will be the next big artist and go super far
>put in some work but not as much as I could
>laziness and mental health issues
>still turned pro pretty quickly but never reached that potential fully
>still not famous or top tier
A-at least I have made it according to /ic/'s standards, but I still feel like I squandered my chances.

[Anonymous No.3099322]

>>3099228
post work.

[Anonymous No.3099334]

>>3099078
I could get good like Vetyr but never be able to draw without reference. In fact, I can't draw without reference.

[Anonymous No.3099337]

>>3099334
>not using your memory as reference
Say it with me. Not gonna make it.

[Anonymous No.3099341]

>>3099337
In a few years neuroscience will be able to project memories. If you look at professional artists they use enough 3D that it doesn't matter how shit they are.
>that one artist on CA commended for his improvement in figure art which was due to photobashing

[Anonymous No.3099348]

>I'm a professional internet content aggregator and my talent is shitposting and creating (you) simulators on 4chan
fuck off, go draw, go study loomis, do anything else

[Anonymous No.3099351]

>>3099348
What kind of professions are those talents good for?

[Anonymous No.3099412]

>>3099078
Am I the only one that doesn't get the Vetyr hype? I feel that her drawing skill is okay and her render style is appealing but I feel she's a one trick pony. I believe in her but she always draws the same things in the same rendering style over and over and over. Go look at catbibs artwork or something

[Anonymous No.3099496]

>>3099078
BUT YOU'RE NOT TALENTED, ARE YOU YOU LITTLE DIPSHIT

GREAT FUCKING EPIPHANY YOU HAD, PEOPLE WHO AREN'T FUCKING AUTISTIC DON'T NEED SOMEONE TO HOLD THEY'RE FUCKING HAND WHEN THEY'RE STARTING TO DRAW WOW THAT'S A REAL SHOCKER!!!!!11

GET DADDY A FUCKING BEER, GET THE *FUCK* BACK IN YOUR ROOM AND KEEP WORKING BEFORE I GET THE BELT