Hampton vs Loomis

[Anonymous No.5073365]

Who is better?

[Anonymous No.5073374]

>>5073365
Andrew hampton

[Anonymous No.5073377]

>>5073365
Michael Loomis

[Anonymous No.5073379]

>>5073374
Why? Why Hampton is better objectivelly?

[Anonymous No.5073384]

Stan vilppopenko

[Anonymous No.5073396]

>>5073365
Steve Hogarth

[Anonymous No.5073403]

>>5073365
Burne Bridgman

[Anonymous No.5073427]

>>5073379
Hampton actually teaches the fundamentals. Gesture, construction, anatomy, light and shadow. The Loomis books are a bit half-assed. Only fun with a pencil is good, but even then it’s kinda minimal

[Anonymous No.5073428]

>>5073427
Finally a normal human being on this board.
Thank you my friend.

[Anonymous No.5073430]

>>5073365
Hampton is basically Loomis but made modernized, clearer, cleaner, and easier.

Loomis gets bonus points for racist caricatures in his books though.

[Anonymous No.5073433]

>>5073428
4 months wasted doing nothing but michael Hampton and I never made it

[Anonymous No.5073499]

>>5073433
no

[Anonymous No.5073521]

>>5073365
The problem with comparing Loomis and Hampton is that a lot of people never read past Fun with a Pencil.
Hampton teaches you to draw a person. Loomis teaches you to be an illustrator.

[Anonymous No.5073525]

>>5073521
>Hampton teaches you to draw a person. Loomis teaches you to be an illustrator.
What is the difference.

[Anonymous No.5073536]

>>5073521
>Hampton teaches you to draw a person
Hampton teaches you how to draw lanky horse faced humanoids

[Anonymous No.5074047]

bump

[Anonymous No.5074068]

>>5073521
elaborate
>t. never read pas fwip because houston’s book was out and even in the state it was published it was far more consistent in my eyes

[Anonymous No.5074103]

>>5073427
what are hampton books named?

[Anonymous No.5074106]

>>5073427
you are fucking idiot, you didn't even read beyond fun with a pencil

[Anonymous No.5074240]

>>5073365
>>5073427
>>5073521
For figure construction I go hampton but for everything else I go with loomis. He's such a well rounded artist and his work is so nice to look at even his sketches are nice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUvutNmaCXU

[Anonymous No.5074613]

>>5073365

[Anonymous No.5074699]

Who should I study when I want to draw the body? I feel like it has too much focus on the head

[Anonymous No.5074707]

>>5074699
Vilppu

[Anonymous No.5074750]

>>5074068
>>5073525
>What is the difference.
Loomis' series of books cover the entire gamut of producing a commercial illustration in his era, including color choices, composition, mood, and flattering a subject.
Of course, Hampton is very good and I recommend him to everyone who wants to learn a system of abstracting and condensing anatomical information. But because of its specificity, the danger is always that one becomes locked to those proportions and do not consider the wide range of human physiology and age. Loomis is looser and more about teaching you to observe. He's a complete illustrator-painter.
In short, these are different books serving different purposes. It's foolish to pick one or the other.

[Anonymous No.5074803]

>>5074750
>But because of its specificity, the danger is always that one becomes locked to those proportions and do not consider the wide range of human physiology and age
This shouldn't be a danger if you understand how to use the book. You are supposed to apply the methods Hampton shows you to practice life drawing and understand and interpret the model first and foremost. Source: the first page. You are not supposed to just copy his diagrams and figures alone without bothering to draw from life.

[Anonymous No.5075260]

>>5074803
Stop. Get some sleep.

[Anonymous No.5076115]

>>5074803
Yeah the "analytical figure drawing" courses (not just Hampton's) endorse you to do so. If you just copy without making your own analytical figure drawings then you aren't following the course as intended.
The book is a companion. Can be studied separately but you are most likely to fail.

[Anonymous No.5076333]

>>5073430
>Loomis gets bonus points for racist caricatures in his books though.
based

[Anonymous No.5076336]

>>5073365
Hogarth

[Anonymous No.5076360]

>>5073365
I prefer learning from how to draw in anime style videos

[Anonymous No.5076404]

>>5074240
did you draw that?

[Anonymous No.5076411]

>>5073430
what's all this math shit? just draw the head, it's that simple

[Anonymous No.5076415]

>>5073365
Hampton has clearer instruction.

[Anonymous No.5076421]

>>5076411
do you need to count to 10 to know 10 is 10 or did you learn to count that automatically through practice as a kid? same thing apply here

[Anonymous No.5076424]

hamptom is a mediocre draftsman, i dont even want him to teach me how to sharpen a pencil, let alone how to draw

[Anonymous No.5076452]

>>5076424
The rendered stuff in his book is good. His digital work in his videos are much worse than his book stuff but I assume he was just a late adopter of digital. Similar to Ron Lemen having amazing traditional stuff but a terrible digital course.

[Anonymous No.5076471]

>>5076452
You're blind

[Anonymous No.5076475]

>>5076424
Craig Mullins and Jeff Watts both recommend him

[Anonymous No.5076505]

>>5074613
kino

[Anonymous No.5078835]

>>5074240
>>5076404
It's loomis' drawing from his personal sketchbook.

[Anonymous No.5078842]

nigga please, Hampton sketches ara much better

[Anonymous No.5079044]

>>5078842
So this is the power of construction?

[Anonymous No.5079116]

>>5079044
yes, it's magnificent.

[Anonymous No.5079121]

>>5073365
I prefer Hampton. They're both good though. Just study both. And Vilppu.

[Anonymous No.5079125]

>>5078842
is this a man or a woman?

[Anonymous No.5079129]

>>5079125
yes

[Anonymous No.5079134]

>>5079121
Is Loomis harder to understand?

[Anonymous No.5079136]

>>5079134
I'd argue so, yes. Hampton's book is my personal favorite.

[Anonymous No.5079139]

>>5079134
yes, if you are retarded.

[Anonymous No.5079157]

>>5073365
Hampton

[Anonymous No.5079174]

>>5079157
god, hampton is such a hack artist