/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.3778055]

Let's settle this one and for all /ic/, is loomis completely useless for anime or not.

[Anonymous No.3778063]

>>3778055
>Draw loomis person
>make the head ball slightly larger then usual
>make the bucket portion slightly smaller then usual
tadah

[Anonymous No.3778067]

loomis in anime styles has its usage but you probably wont stay with it unless being on the more realistic side of things

its good to use to grasp 3 dimensionality

[Anonymous No.3778071]

Its not useless. You need to think in form to convey a character, whether you use that form or compromise which pieces you break away from.

[Anonymous No.3778084]

The eyeline of the Loomis head ceases to work because of most anime stylizing them as very large, and with that the rest of the construction lines are thrown off (most importantly bottom of the nose). Loomis is still good for at least drawing the chin and sides of the head for, that’s the most flexible part of the technique.

[Anonymous No.3778098]

>>3778055
Loomis is completely useless for any kind of style.

[Anonymous No.3778100]

>>3778055
lmao

[Anonymous No.3778115]

>>3778055
>anime
anon...

[Anonymous No.3778116]

>>3778055

No, you just need deductive reasoning to figure out how loomis can be adapted to animu. It's not about sticking to the guide lines, the form around the outside of the skull changes as well. That's why cross-reference is very important

>Freeze the brow line in place
>Stretch the the size of the eye socket and lower the cheekbone
>Pinch the flat bottom of the chin and curve the jawline to the ear

That's all there is to it.

[Anonymous No.3778121]

>>3778055
>>3778084
I use loomis construction but instead of a sphere I just make the whole thing a cilinder and draw cranium afterwards. Drawing consistenly good spheres is a waste of time.

[Anonymous No.3778181]

>>3778055
loomis is fine for anime, just draw under the eyeline for neoteny

[Anonymous No.3778186]

>>3778055
>he didn't read the baby portion of Heads and Hands

[Anonymous No.3778190]

It's not Loomis it is your inability to utilize Loomis to meet the application of your moeshit. Loomis himself says that the point of his instructions are to help you develop an approach to the problem of solving dimensions when it comes to form and perspective and the foreshortening involved.

His construction methods are but one approach to the many variables to fit different styles but the fundamentals that he teaches you are all the same.
>t. drawfag that specifically uses Loomis for weebshit.

[Anonymous No.3778356]

>>3778181
That’s not even construction, you’re just scribbling

[Anonymous No.3778394]

>>3778356
There are very clear construction lines/guides. It is not any more scribbling than this, because it is literally the same method.

[Anonymous No.3778397]

>>3778394
Not that guy, but no, there is no construction there. It's just >>3778181 randomly putting down lines without actually thinking about the form. There's no point to construction if you're not thinking about the underlying form - that's what construction is all about.

[Anonymous No.3778399]

>>3778394
No it isn’t, you retard. Construction isn’t just putting in fucking guides, it’s using 3 dimensional forms to construct an object.
You’re literally just symbol drawing and using lines to mark where to put in the symbols, and you’re not even entering the eyes on the fucking centerline, not to mention that the retarder scribble that is supposed to be the side of the cranium doesn’t even serve any purpose in your drawing and the perspective is off.
When will you mouth breathers understand loomis isn’t a fucking cross on a sphere?

[Anonymous No.3778400]

>>3778397
>Not that guy, but
>proceeds to parrot the same opinion
Ok, your turn. Post your anime Loomis construction gif/webm.

[Anonymous No.3778401]

>>3778399
>not to mention that the retarder scribble that is supposed to be the side of the cranium
The second plane is clearly there to indicate where the ear goes
>doesn’t even serve any purpose in your drawing and the perspective is off.
Redline. No calling something as off without putting your money where your mouth is.

[Anonymous No.3778410]

>>3778401
>Redline. No calling something as off without putting your money where your mouth is.
top lel
I’m not going to waste effort to point out the obvious to a retard too stupid to read the book cover to cover

[Anonymous No.3778414]

>>3778410
You just conceded that you're not interested in doing constructive replies in a thread about construction. gg

[Anonymous No.3778415]

>>3778400
You seem to misunderstand what construction is. Construction is not randomly placing guidelines and hoping everything turns out okay. It's the process of 'constructing' a 3D form using primitive forms. In loomis' case, it's a sphere and a box (for the jaw). Unfortunately, most newbies tend to just draw a circle and a cross then call it a day, without actually considering the form of the head like you were doing. Loomis doesn't do a very good job of showing it, so look at pic related. It's a bammes head, and does a very good job of showing the head's construction.

>Post your anime Loomis construction gif/webm
Not sure why you need a gif to understand it. Just look at pic related and try to understand the primitive forms. It's simple.

[Anonymous No.3778420]

>>3778414
What’s constructive to you isn’t constructive to me, retard. There is literally no reason for me to waste time on you beyond explaining what I already did. If you’re too lazy to actually read the book, I have 0 interest in helping you.

[Anonymous No.3778421]

>>3778415
>Not sure why you need a gif to understand it. Just look at pic related and try to understand the primitive forms. It's simple.
Because if anyone stepping up to talking about how someone else misunderstood a technical concept was part of the norm, we'd get a lot less pussy replies with second-hand knowledge parroted.
Please go ahead and do this simple work so that anyone reading this thread will benefit from the demonstration. If not, accept that you're part of the problem.

[Anonymous No.3778422]

>>3778420
You're failing at owning the libs too by being too much of a bitch to put your money where your mouth is and drawing.

[Anonymous No.3778423]

>>3778422
What the fuck are you even saying, retard?

[Anonymous No.3778425]

>>3778423
I have no interest in explaining to you. There is literally no reason for me to do so.

[Anonymous No.3778428]

>>3778425
okretard.jpg

[Anonymous No.3778444]

>>3778421
The lines in your gif didn't mean anything - they had no grounding in 3D space, and therefore no construction. I don't draw anime, but here's what I mean (pic related).

[Anonymous No.3778445]

>>3778421
The lines in your gif didn't mean anything - they had no grounding in 3D space, and therefore no construction. Here's what I mean (pic related).

[Anonymous No.3778634]

>>3778445
There we go, one poster isn't a coward.

[Anonymous No.3778726]

>>3778055
This has been settled "once and for all" several times. Also pic related. Also try to think of your own solutions.

[Anonymous No.3778746]

>>3778055
As someone who has learned from loomis and also fools with anime and the relations there of i can say ....no
loomis methods of construction must be modified to suit it but if you know the basics and all that its not really a problem to work it out using a similar idea.
loomis is very 3 dimensional and realistic
style thinking where as in anime the heads are sort of 2 dimensional making them difficult to form using boiler plate loomis methods
the loomis figure construction methods are useful if you know how to modify them.
the perspective techniques are also useful of course.

>>3778084
this is correct , the loomis head brow line and proportion definitely needs to be changed to suit anime for it to be of any use.

[Anonymous No.3778769]

>>3778186
this. People shitting on Loomis are either kicking your kayak or room temperature retards that cannot read or interpret, or adjust concepts to get the results they want.

[Anonymous No.3778782]

>>3778726
The left eye perspective is all messed up, the sketchy eyes look a lot better with this construction technique.

[Anonymous No.3778790]

[Anonymous No.3778791]

>>3778790

[Anonymous No.3778793]

>>3778791

[Anonymous No.3778794]

>>3778793

[Anonymous No.3778796]

>>3778790
>>3778791
>>3778793
>>3778794
What a mess.

[Anonymous No.3778797]

>>3778790
>>3778791
>>3778793
>>3778794
>cutting,resizing and moving shit around every 10 mins
yeah no

[Anonymous No.3778799]

>>3778796
Seems to be how it always starts.

[Anonymous No.3778800]

>>3778799

[Anonymous No.3778803]

>>3778790
this guy has a chickenscratch issue. I've never seen such insecure lines, what a mess

[Anonymous No.3778810]

>>3778803
Most of these artists seem to fall under two camps: a lot of thin exploratory lines, or thick lines that get sculpted down. Either way, messiness seems to be a trait of those artists who draw without direct reference. They are constantly open to changes and adjustments in the drafting stage.

[Anonymous No.3778814]

>>3778810

[Anonymous No.3778818]

>>3778810
vilppu says when drawing from imagination he is constantly correcting himself later in the drawing processes and that some exploratory lines are necessary . working that out is the fun part he says. the better you get the less you have to use. no rules just tools

[Anonymous No.3778821]

>>3778818
Sure, I think most artist who draw from imagination do that. Drawing is about how lines relate to each other, and one can't do that until there are enough lines on the paper to compare.

>>3778797
I doubt these sketches took very long. Otherwise he wouldn't be the mangaka for Kill la Kill.

[Anonymous No.3778844]

>>3778797
>hurr durr if I zoom in my lines are blury because I've resized lineart

[Anonymous No.3778858]

Whole new level of NGMI is watching anons here talking about the line quality/workflow of digital rough sketches by people who certainly are miles ahead of them in drawing skill. Villppu out there drawing with a literal dirty rag and not giving a fuck about lines so long as he gets the action and feel of the pose down, but /beg/ gurus are suddenly too good for a Jap's short lines when the end result looks great.
It's like they absolutely need to find a flaw in someone else or they can't live with themselves.

[Anonymous No.3778870]

>>3778858
Don't pay them no mind, they've always been a part of /ic/ and always will be.

Here, have another.

[Anonymous No.3778875]

>>3778821
Not true, ideally you are not supposed to create from output, in that case art controls you.
If you are actually developed enough as an artist your input, your minds eye should be the one dictating form.

[Anonymous No.3778879]

>>3778858
I think you are overestimating most mangakas, they make very appealing art but I wouldn't call that good traditional artists.
Let's be honest, there are people in draw threads right now that have superior grasp of fundamentals.

[Anonymous No.3778880]

>>3778875
Maybe people have different workflows and not every drawing needs to be defined before you start?

[Anonymous No.3778884]

>>3778879
>Let's be honest, there are people in draw threads right now that have superior grasp of fundamentals.
Good thing they all want to teach art in schools and not draw waifus then, right?
Fundies are literally useless to an artist without appeal.

[Anonymous No.3778885]

>>3778880
That is true, but the kind of exploration the artist is doing will result in broken form, that is a given and it's alright.
But you can't argue against the fact that it's not actually constructively consistent, if he wasn't drawing anime it would probably look very broken and odd.

[Anonymous No.3778894]

>>3778884
Appeal is most often cheap tricks and trends
I certainly don't find him more appealing than Takehiko Inoue for example

[Anonymous No.3778895]

Loomis and indeed all fundamentals are universal. You can use them for any style you want.

[Anonymous No.3778899]

>>3778885
I agree.

>>3778894
>Appeal is most often cheap tricks and trends
Appeal is all that matters. No one cares about rotated boxes until they make a cool composition. Fundies only exist to give you a set of tools towards appeal, and yet people tend to treat them as substitutes to it. It's a really simpleminded way to go about it.

[Anonymous No.3778900]

>>3778803
those are not chickenscratch lines. shut up you are only embarassing yourself

[Anonymous No.3778917]

>>3778899
That's not true
If you are a professional artist working for a big production you will need really good fundies, and 3d skills too probably. There are fields where certain level of skill is a must.

[Anonymous No.3778926]

>>3778917
A certain level of skill. Usually not mastery. Meanwhile, appeal is non-negotiable at any level of being an artist presenting your work.

[Anonymous No.3778927]

>>3778899
horseshit, there is a reason why most japanese games today outsource half of their work to foreign concept artists
because there is a HUGE power gap between artists like Yoji Shinkawa and most mangakas in Japan

[Anonymous No.3778929]

>>3778810
>>3778818
This. I've seen some great artists who draw with some of the messiest underdrawings. It's important not to get married to the sketch, unless you're KJG. All that matters is if you can understand the information it's telling you before finalizing.

[Anonymous No.3778932]

>>3778927
>horseshit, there is a reason why most japanese games today outsource half of their work to foreign concept artists
citation needed

[Anonymous No.3778934]

>>3778929
Yesterday I asked this on Dave Rapoza stream, and he answered me in a way that hit it on the nail for me, even though it might not relate to others.
He basically told me that no matter what I try to do I can not escape my fundamentals, if you can't draw to the level that you feel you want to draw, no cheating will save you because internally you will always feel dissatisfied.
It's not the matter of what gets the job done, at least for me I just feel like shit when I realize that I have to cheat to deliver a product, even though there is nothing sinful in that and it might net the same results.

[Anonymous No.3778938]

>>3778932
How can I cite that? Look at credits of any major japanese production, Metal Gear Solid V, Soulsbourne series etc.
Traditionally trained artists in Japan can be godly, but again there is a power gap between guys like Yoji Shinkawa, Tatsuya Yoshikawa and most mangakas.
If a japanese studio needs to go out of the boundaries of anime design they are forced to outsource at least partially, and when they don't outsource there is the same small circle of amazing artists because most of the animu artists can't even draw an accurate orthographic view from all sides of a character.

[Anonymous No.3778942]

>>3778938
>If a japanese studio needs to go out of the boundaries of anime design they are forced to outsource at least partially, and when they don't outsource there is the same small circle of amazing artists because most of the animu artists can't even draw an accurate orthographic view from all sides of a character.
Probably cheaper labor, a common reason why a lot of businesses outsource. Not skill. Korea is just cheaper.

>How can I cite that? Look at credits of any major japanese production, Metal Gear Solid V, Soulsbourne series etc.
Post any interviews, articles that imply or say that it's to do with skill. Otherwise, your guess is as good as mine, only mine sounds a lot more plausible due to how Korean, Chinese and Vietnamese studios have been used in everything for the past 20 years or so.

[Anonymous No.3778951]

>>3778942
There are no interviews you can find that would talk about that, and you know that, but just look at this
>>3778821
With it's broken left arm and zero sense of perspective on the scythe and look at pic related
The reason why pic related can do both anime and Dragons Dogma is because he is actually a skillful artist, objectively

[Anonymous No.3778956]

>>3778951
So you concede that you were talking out of your ass and your current comparison is anecdotal?

[Anonymous No.3778959]

>>3778956
No I don't.
Majority of mangakas are objectively shitty artists that trained themselves to draw only in one way and they would be completely useless in any sort of production, this makes up most of japanese artists.
Those japanese artists that are art directors and concept artists are objectively miles above likes of Akizuki to the point where it's even laughable to compare them, but sadly they are the minority. There is no real way to even dispute their superiority, because there is nothing that Ryo Akizuki can do that Tatsuya Yoshikawa wouldn't be able to do while the reverse isn't true.
Look back at your argument yourself, where you claim that appeal is all that matters, I claim that if "appeal" is all that mattered than you would not need objectively more skillful people for harder tasks that can not be done by shitty run of the mill mangakas.

[Anonymous No.3778964]

>>3778790
Hply duxk this person broke my redrawing record.

[Anonymous No.3778966]

>>3778959
>I claim that if "appeal" is all that mattered than you would not need objectively more skillful people for harder tasks that can not be done by shitty run of the mill mangakas.
So appeal is not all that matters but one "shitty, run of the mill" mangaka making up some character designs and story, makes fat stacks from doing so and gives an entire army of offbrand asians with better fundies a job for 6 months? Why not the other way around?

[Anonymous No.3778969]

>>3778966
People I posted are shitty run of the mill asian? Have you no shame?

[Anonymous No.3778970]

>>3778966
>>3778969
If you want a popularity contest, Metal Gear is a far more popular series than KLK, what are you even trying to prove?

[Anonymous No.3778972]

>>3778969
You're the one arguing that appeal is secondary to fundies here. If that was true, surely the average mangaka that you yourself portrayed as not that great at fundies would not be the one reaping the glory and money, the animators and others that have to fix their work for bigger projects would be. But this isn't how this goes, because appeal matters more. Objectively.

[Anonymous No.3778975]

>>3778972
What does the word "matters" mean to you? No matter what, without certain level of skill there are things you can't do, if being locked in a certain path that is guaranteed for you is good enough, sure.
But I would argue that being the most appealing and also the most able is what matters, if you know that there are certain things you just can't you are just limited.

[Anonymous No.3778978]

>>3778055
>clearly hasn't read any Loomis

[Anonymous No.3778981]

>>3778978
>reading Loomis

[Anonymous No.3778983]

>>3778975
>without a certain level of skill
My point this entire time has not been that fundies have no value, but that people will value appeal over those and forgive imperfect drawings because what the general public really cares about is that it's interesting to look at, period. As such, mastery of fundies is beneficial, but not a requirement for an illustrator/characters designer. You don't need to be perfect, just appealing. Misunderstanding that is why a lot of /ic/ spends years drawing boxes while much inferior in skill girls on tumblr are not only out there getting fans and money, but hating the process a lot less.
It is not an argument appealing to ignorance of fundies; it is an argument that people should probably worry a little more about the aspects of the drawing people will care about instead of fretting over things only other artists really care about. And the people that get all the fundies grinding here shoved down their throats are largely hobbyists trying to do cool shit, not people who will work on the industry in any capacity. So bottom line, placing that much importance on fundies that you neglect appeal and downright neg artists with different workflows because someone told you every line has to be fluid from the get-go is playing against type.

[Anonymous No.3778986]

>>3778983
I can agree with you on that point

[Anonymous No.3778989]

>>3778986
I'm glad we could reach common ground through arguing. Hope you have a good day, man.

[Anonymous No.3778990]

>ITT: Sperges sperge instead of drawing

[Anonymous No.3778991]

>>3778983
The problem is that drawing fun stuff gives less improvement than straight studies of course

[Anonymous No.3778992]

>>3778991
I need to start doing this more.

[Anonymous No.3778994]

>>3778991
Of course it does. But you don't have to just do x or y. And a lot of people in the board grind x to a retarded extent while hating all about it and wonder why they can't do y at all, or even x as well as others, since they're in too deep to know a little less improvement is still improvement, and morale being high goes a long way.

[Anonymous No.3778998]

>>3778790
>>3778791
>>3778793
>>3778794
>>3778799
>>3778800
>>3778870
>messy AF undersketch
>finished product is nice anyway
No rules, just tools.

[Anonymous No.3778999]

>>3778998
vilppu is always right.

[Anonymous No.3779019]

>>3778998
While the draft is messy, the lines are not without purpose. The artist explores, adapts, adjust, then starts to draw confidently as the ideas become set.

This is the kind of stuff most artists don't like to show (or deliberately hide because they're not actually drawing from imagination). There is often an ugly, indecisive portion to imaginative drawing, and this is like seeing how the sausage gets made.

[Anonymous No.3779022]

>>3779019
>>3778870
>>3778814
>>3778810
>>3778799
>>3778794
>>3778793
>>3778791
>>3778790
Do you have the sources for these process videos? I would love to know where they're from.

[Anonymous No.3779023]

>>3779019
I don't think this is what people mean.
In your WEBM the artist is making longer and more confident strokes from the get-go.
Ryo is very scratchy desu.

[Anonymous No.3779024]

>>3779019
>iterative drawing
I work in much the same way, and usually it helps me explore and be more creative with poses, clothes etc. Downside is it takes forever.

[Anonymous No.3779035]

>>3778814
Name of this artist?

[Anonymous No.3779040]

>>3778844
>not using vector layers for lineart

[Anonymous No.3779070]

>>3779023
I wasn't posting that as an example. But to your point, the artist in that webm isn't any more or less confident, he's just drawing fewer lines because he's using a thicker brush that fills up the white space faster.

If the final product is supposed to be a fine line drawing, the thicker lines of the draft itself is a kind of fuzziness that needs to be whittled down and redrawn several times. So the two approaches serve the same function.

>>3779022
These are what I've collected from Twitter. I bet there are longer youtube versions to some of these, maybe even live streams. I just prefer these for posting because Twitter videos are usually under 2 minutes so I can convert them to 4chan's webm specs easily.

[Anonymous No.3779074]

Dave Rapoza suggests using clip studio for drawing and I think he is right
Photoshop is very shit at intuitive drawing and I don't understand why people are too lazy to use two softwares

[Anonymous No.3779079]

i tried, always hated loomis heads, and im still p shit at heads in general but i think id rather not use loomis construction for this.. i think a rougher approach would be better desu. anyways loomis heads are only meant for understanding, not to permanently use imo.

[Anonymous No.3779113]

>>3779079
construction isn't there for understanding, it's there to be construction
loomis heads are simplified construction, you can absolutely use it and similar structures permanently

[Anonymous No.3779117]

>>3779113
Loomis heads are a highly simplified and abstracted head construction method intended for beginners. It's meant to be used as a stepping stone for more complex construction methods that provide more information. Hence the word "simplified" - you can only take it so far before you realize it's too simple to be used in certain situations (like tight, close-up, or extreme perspectives).

[Anonymous No.3779124]

>>3779113
desu it isnt really even that simplified, its kind of a bother to do it and stiffens up the results. i think its nice to use for a while to get a sense for perspective in the head, and once comfy with it move onto more light 'construction', like idk an oval with crosses like most examples in this thread

[Anonymous No.3779128]

>>3779117
This, I don’t understand how people think muh loomis is the be-all-end-all of head construction. Just look at the information he gives on eye construction, it’s literal garbage, you can learn more about eyes from 2 bargue plates than loomis’ entire bibliography.
Loomis was the “yeah go read this, kid” guy because his shit is simple, relatively well rounded and fucking free. Bargue, Bridgman, Asaro, Hogarth are all superior resources when you actually go beyond scratching the surface, but the retarded eternal /beg/s that never even read the books just kept parroting loomis until it became the fucking meme it is.
It’s like thinking ctrl+paint is some sort of ultimate comprehensive instruction on painting.

[Anonymous No.3780720]

is this good enough? I don't usually draw eastern stuff

Almost everyone starts with the loomis head, but very few stick with it, they just adjust the model to suit their own workflow.

[Anonymous No.3780833]

>>3778181
what a shit ear.

[Anonymous No.3781271]

>>3779070
Who is/are the artist/s of those webms?

[Anonymous No.3782465]

Can't you do this with Loomis?

[Anonymous No.3782492]

>>3782465
Yep, same way you can do this with Loomis.

[Anonymous No.3782537]

[Anonymous No.3782554]

>>3782537

[Anonymous No.3782560]

I went to a Trigger panel at Anime NYC and to be fair the guy puts those under sketches down REALLY fast. They take him maybe 20 seconds max. It's a joy to watch, I wasn't paying attention at all to what they were talking about (Promare details, answers to questions) because he worked so quickly and seamlessly. If I can upload the (secret do not tell on me) videos I took I'll post here. It shows real time work.

[Anonymous No.3782562]

>>3782537
sauce

[Anonymous No.3782756]

>>3782562
Learn to use twitter, man. These are everywhere.

[Anonymous No.3782783]

>>3782756
Pretty sure they meant the specific artist (although their signature is in that one). Could you post the artist along with the webms?

[Anonymous No.3782789]

No.

[Anonymous No.3782807]

>>3782789
I really hope this is a shitpost.

[Anonymous No.3782818]

>>3782783
>Pretty sure they meant the specific artist

I know that, I just can't help you there because I follow them on twitter so that I don't have to remember their names.

[Anonymous No.3782822]

>>3782818
Alright, thanks for posting them anyway

[Anonymous No.3782823]

Jesus Christ.

The Loomis method is literally just showing you how to plan out drawings with general shapes and landmarks. You can use it for literally anything so long as you actually think how to adapt it. It's not just copying his example and thinking that makes you a better artist. He said as much in his books.

[Anonymous No.3783238]

I normally lurk this board when I get bored but this thread is actually inspiring me and giving me motivation to take up drawing as a hobby to have fun with.

[Anonymous No.3783319]

[Anonymous No.3783321]

[Anonymous No.3783323]

[Anonymous No.3783324]

[Anonymous No.3783328]

[Anonymous No.3783330]

His fun with a pencil shit was a lot more distorted than anime.

[Anonymous No.3783970]

[Anonymous No.3783973]