Is Loomis good?

[Dshevn No.3325632]

So I have been drawing for a couple of months now and I haven't made a lot of progress. That's because I haven't had focused practice. I just doodle here and there.

Now I am buckling down and diving into the content in the /beg/ stick. I'm going to start with ALL of Loomis' material that I can find. So far I have:

Creative Illustration
Drawing the Head & Hands
Figure Drawing - For All It's Worth
Fun with a Pencil
Successful Drawing
The Eye of the Painter - And the Elements of Beauty

For anyone who has read this content, are there any knowledge gaps that I will have to supplement? Or is this a good launching point in term of knowledge that will help foster a good mentality for construction?

My end goal (if that matters) is to get to the same level as Artgerm. From traditional to digital.

Any other book recommendations is certainly welcome as well.

[Anonymous No.3325661]

>>3325632

[Anonymous No.3325692]

>another loomis thread

AAAWYDAYWFGA)TSGFASYIFAsu

[Anonymous No.3325746]

Loomis is just a meme, hi's books are really outdated and he has a lot of errors. Look up for some modern material instead.

[Anonymous No.3325749]

>>3325746
>he has a lot of errors
What errors are those?

[Anonymous No.3325750]

>>3325749
You know, the usual stuff. Drawing and all that. Too many errors and they're shit books.

[Anonymous No.3325751]

>>3325750
So, as expected, you have nothing to show.

[Anonymous No.3325754]

>>3325751
Read the books yourself, it's clear as day!

[Anonymous No.3325756]

>>3325754
Die unmourned.

[Anonymous No.3325764]

>>3325632
>I'm going to start with ALL of Loomis' material that I can find.
Anon, Loomis alone isn't gonna give you most of the answers.
You need to compliment it a little bit with other books.

Also, drop The Eye of the Painter. That one is worthless.

[Anonymous No.3325770]

>>3325756
I will anyway.

[Anonymous No.3325783]

>>3325749
Loomis is like trying to learn how to use a computer with a manual from Windows 3.1

[Anonymous No.3325846]

>>3325661
>Cherrypicking

[Anonymous No.3325849]

>>3325661
>No form

[Anonymous No.3325852]

>>3325661

>Does not lift
>Scribbles
>Balding

[Anonymous No.3325853]

>>3325661

failed to upload pic related.

[Anonymous No.3325894]

>>3325846
>>3325849
>>3325852
>>3325853
I'll take "What is a joke?" for 500 Trebek.

[Anonymous No.3325898]

>>3325894

>sarcasm in a place full of crabs
cmon

[Anonymous No.3325900]

>>3325853
I actually love being able to know almost all these muscles feelsgood

[Anonymous No.3325901]

>>3325632
>HE FELL FOR THE LOOMIS MEME
GOTTEM BOYS HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.3325903]

>>3325783
It's okay as long as you have Windows 3.1 too.

[Anonymous No.3325942]

>>3325903
Well, that's the problem right there, todays now we all have and use Windows 10.

[Anonymous No.3326232]

>>3325632
Loomis is a forced meme and outdated. You can learn a little bit from him, but Michael Hampton is better for getting into anatomy, or even long time artists to improve their gestures. Learned a thousand times more from Hampton's books than Loomis.

[Anonymous No.3326270]

>>3325942
>he uses windows 10

end your existence immediately

[Anonymous No.3326298]

>>3326270
>using outdated OS

[Anonymous No.3326300]

>>3326298
>the non-botnet adware version
>outdated

[Anonymous No.3326311]

>>3325632
its a good starting point but like others said it wont take you all the way there, you're going to need to supplement with other books, the good news is once you draw you'll start to see where you're lacking and from there you'll know what to improve

[Anonymous No.3326316]

>>3325632
Fuck Loomis.

[Anonymous No.3326353]

>>3326298
Newer doesn't always mean better, you retard.

[Anonymous No.3327772]

>>3326353
>Didn't even read the posts
Who said anything about being better? i stated that most people has an updated system.
Also nice image, what are you? 12 years old?

[Anonymous No.3327910]

>>3325632
Honestly i don't recommend it it's fucking meme
My friends and i saw lot of idiots just copying all of that shit and they never improved 3 fucking damn year


+Also that's not fomula, art is's experience and understand of how shit is work

[Anonymous No.3327915]

>>3327910
Why do you guys always so terrible at English?

[Anonymous No.3327922]

>>3327915
Stop fucking talk about ebglish i'm tired at that shit just fucking stop

I'm not gonna give a shit anymore

[Anonymous No.3327929]

>>3327915
>Why do you guys always so terrible at English?

[Anonymous No.3328002]

>>3327772
>being this much of a faggot

[Anonymous No.3328014]

>>3327922
It's an English speaking site.

Honestly, I'm just curious why the people who shit on Loomis are always so terrible at it.

[Anonymous No.3328036]

There are plenty of great older comic book artists and illustrators who used Loomis' stuff and recommend it

They are just figure construction books, and while they are very helpful, it's just one part of learning to draw. You have to combine it with life drawing, still life studies, quick sketch, master studies, etc. There are plenty of other books that cover similar subjects by artists like Bridgman, Burne Hogarth, Hampton, Vilppu, Steve Huston, etc. Jeff Watts online atelier and New Masters Academy are great resources too.

You don't have to stick to one artist to learn from, and you probably shouldn't. Things that don't make sense in one book might be easier to understand in another, or in a video demonstration. Also, things that don't make sense now may make a lot more sense after a lot of practice so it's always good to pick things back up later after you've been grinding it out for a while.

When studying from a book, copy out all the illustrations after reading the text, and think about how it applies. With art, you learn by drawing. Seeing the pictures isn't enough. Lot's of people skim through Loomis, or make a half-hearted attempt at copying the drawings once, and then give up and call it shit. This stuff takes real work and effort to absorb, you have to be consistent, think about it like trying to get through a brick wall by bashing yourself against it. It's not supposed to be fun or easy, and it's not going to happen your first time, and probably not the hundredth, but it's the only way to do it. Your brain is not a sponge, it doesn't want to learn art so you have to force it or it will filter everything out.

[Anonymous No.3328559]

>>3328036
due to the nature of the weebtards at /ic/ your incredibly informative post will be ultimately ignored.

[Anonymous No.3328602]

Nothing beats just practicing everyday and drawing from life with actual will to learn and understand what you're seeing.

[Anonymous No.3328668]

>>3328036
>Lot's of people skim through Loomis, or make a half-hearted attempt at copying the drawings once, and then give up and call it shit.
This especially. Jeez. Every time I see someone showing their practice work, it's always just mindless copies of the same old guy heads. You can use those principles to make your own shit too and learn from that. You're learning construction, not observation. APPLY the lessons.

[Anonymous No.3331292]

>>3325661
Take your autistic nigger ass back to >>>/trash/ and stop misusing memes you absolute shitskin.

[Anonymous No.3331314]

>>3331292
>stop misusing memes
T.

[Anonymous No.3331317]

>>3325632
>Is Loomis good?

fuck no

it used to be the only book available online back in dinosaur age . Now every other book is way better and more complex

Go read Michael Hampton´s design and invention and Anatomy for sculptors

>is to get to the same level as Artgerm.

Not from loomis you wont, crab that shill it stay at the same level for years and years, instead of moving on with better material


>>3328036
>When studying from a book, copy out all the illustrations after reading the text

don´t copy loomis for gods sake, how retarded, you are just memorizing loomises lame drawings and not analyzing jack.

Draw from good reference and actual analitical approaches

> Lot's of people skim through Loomis

Because loomis is meant to me skimed, he only deals with surface level shit, you are a loser for actually taking it seriously and not inmediatly moving on

[Anonymous No.3331320]

>>3325661

>both garbage
>Bridgman incorrect as fuck, as drunkards tend to draw

[Anonymous No.3331322]

>>3331317
>more complex
Anon. That's the problem. Loomis is a beginners series. It's made to be simple and easy to get. Light and designed for newcommers. Your recommendations are for people at a later stage.

[Anonymous No.3331328]

>>3331322
>oomis is a beginners series.

i dont mean complex as in difficult but complex as it has much more depth to learn from.

Michael hampton will be a lot more intuitive than loomis, i guarantee you that. it is the same approach a lot of academies use, also CGMA courses. You will actually understand things that will only leave you confuse in loomis and it is very easy step by step method you can later apply to draw from imagination.

For the usual people who spend a bunch of time stuck trying to make something out of loomis, just start with Hampton and using anatomy for sculptors where everything is pointed out in a very clear as day way.

also Anatomy of Facial Expression is the absolute best fucking book on drawing heads and faces in existence. I swear on that.

Loomis doesn´t get any deeper than just explaining the ball memei in his entire book of the head.

[Anonymous No.3331333]

>>3325661

Both technique can be used to draw all body type. It is a tool. Now fuck off and practice.

[Anonymous No.3331336]

>>3331328
>i dont mean complex as in difficult but complex as it has much more depth to learn from.
That's exactly my point. Straight up beginners don't need that much info when just starting out.

[Anonymous No.3331346]

>>3331336
>Straight up beginners don't need that much info when just starting out.

the opposite is true, that is a very bad logic, beginners won´t be able to fill the gap of the info they are not getting, they´ll simply get frustated, confused, won´t understand why they observe different things that wasn´t mentioned ever and will learn bad habits. Michael hampton gives you a method which is very easy to grasp and actually fun to practice.

Seriously, discussing this is pointless as fuck, anyone can download the books and compare for themselves. I am amazed some are that lazy or intimidated they don´t even do that. Its not gonna fucking bite you.

If you are a beginner open scott robertson´s how to draw, open michael hampton, open anatomy for sculptors, and yes, open loomis if you want, fuck staying with the meme instead of judging for yourself. People who see the difference will undestand , and those who want to limit themselves at least would know it is by choice and not ignorance.

[Anonymous No.3331356]

>>3331346
I'm amazed you get this fussy about people recommending a decent starter guide to people who haven't drawn anything more complex than a "Q" in their whole lives.

If I started recommending your books after they get through the concepts in Fun with a Pencil, will you get less upset at least?

[Anonymous No.3331441]

>>3331356

>>3331356
>I'm amazed you get this fussy

I actually care a shit ton about art teaching. Unironically and irl

>a decent starter guide

Its a crotch . Art communities are masturbatory and a lot of people who are self taught will seriously cling to that since they put so much hope and fears. Buck memes when it comes to study backfire

Standards need to be updated and people need to stop hindering themselves from very tired parroting. That clingy shit with loomis and never wanting to drop it and finding other resources intimidating is all illusion

And desu all those feels threads and "ngmi" threads are really sad brah.

>Fun with a Pencil

but why tough? wathever, that books is easily skimable but i absolutely recommend Scott Robertson How to draw as intro. Unless maybe its a pretty small kid we are talking about here.

[Anonymous No.3331446]

>>3331441
>I actually care a shit ton about art teaching. Unironically and irl
Gross.

[Anonymous No.3331478]

>>3331446

everyone has a fetish

[Anonymous No.3331726]

>>3331314
t. actual brainlet

[Anonymous No.3333057]

can you paint at this skill level? no? then yes he's good relative to you and most people on /ic/.
>>3331317
disregard this psychopath, he's spamming this in other threads too. of course a medical like textbook describing individual muscles is a better overall coverage of anatomy but that isn't the intention behind loomis' books or why they're recommended.

[Anonymous No.3333058]

>>3331478
I just know in my soul you can't draw worth dick.

[Anonymous No.3333068]

was loomis mormon or something? there's like zero edge or darkness to his work. just stubby nosed germanic wageslave normies experiencing various stages of first world problems.