/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.5100575]

What is /ic/‘s verdict?

[Anonymous No.5100597]

>>5100575
better than drawing on the right side of the brain

[Anonymous No.5100599]

Keys to drawing on the right side of the brain

[Anonymous No.5100623]

A better introduction to drawing than loomis by far, but at this point a video course is probably a better option.

[Anonymous No.5100631]

>>5100575
what is this book about?
I'm high /beg/ can i still benefit from it?

[Anonymous No.5100634]

>>5100623
What course is best for absolute /beg/?

[Ban me Faggot No.5100635]

>>5100623
what courses would you recommend?

[Anonymous No.5100653]

>>5100634
>>5100635
Brent Eviston the art and science of drawing is a beg tier course. It teaches the fundies (how to draw lines, circles, etc), shading, copying from reference, measuring ... Unlike DaB and loomis, it covers several aspects that noobs usually ignore, and I think it is a better introduction to drawing.

[Anonymous No.5100733]

>>5100575
The best and only book a /beg/gar will ever need

[Anonymous No.5100772]

>>5100653
Has anyone ever tried his becoming creative course? I'm not really uncreative but it gives me sperg rage to see that it's the only one not in the 2TB mega and I want to buy and upload it, but only if it's good

[Anonymous No.5100781]

>>5100635
Honestly that's not the craziest story ever happen to someone, animals can act retarded there is nothing unusual to the story on your picrel.

[Anonymous No.5100791]

>>5100575
It's good. You could also just watch Iten's accuracy guide video and get 3/4 of the book in 30 minutes.

[Anonymous No.5100793]

>>5100772
I would run like hell from "learn to be creative" courses. Unless the person teaching it inspires you.

[Anonymous No.5100794]

>>5100653
>udemy

[Anonymous No.5100800]

>>5100781
>Honestly that's not the craziest story ever happen to someone
For example?

[Anonymous No.5100817]

>>5100772
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316979839.007
sci-hub.se

[Anonymous No.5100837]

>>5100631
>high beg
It teaches fundies. Of course you can benefit from it.

[Anonymous No.5100866]

>>5100575
Get a redpilled book instead.
>Of figure drawing, nothing is said in the following pages, because I do not think figures, as chief subjects, can be drawn to any good purpose by an amateur.
>It is one of the worst errors of this age to try to know and to see too much: the men who seem to know everything, never in reality know anything rightly. Beware of handbook knowledge.
>Also, never make presents of your drawings. Of course I am addressing you as a beginner—a time may come when your work will be precious to everybody; but be resolute not to give it away till you know that it is worth something (as soon as it is worth anything you will know that it is so). If any one asks you for a present of a drawing, send them a couple of cakes of color and a piece of Bristol board: those materials are, for the present, of more value in that form than if you had spread the one over the other.
>You ought to love color, and to think nothing quite beautiful or perfect without it; and if you really do love it, for its own sake, and are not merely desirous to color because you think painting a finer thing than drawing, there is some chance you may color well. Nevertheless, you need not hope ever to produce anything more than pleasant helps to memory, or useful and suggestive sketches in color
>All men can more or less copy what they see, and, more or less, remember it: powers of reflection and investigation are also common to us all, so that the decision of inferiority in these rests only on questions of degree. A. has a better memory than B., and C. reflects more profoundly than D. But the gift of composition is not given at all to more than one man in a thousand; in its highest range, it does not occur above three or four times in a century.

[Anonymous No.5100878]

>>5100866
Where can I get this based book?

[Anonymous No.5100889]

>>5100878
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/30325/30325-h/30325-h.htm

[Anonymous No.5100892]

what's up wit /ic/ that constantly recommends art books from a century ago

[Anonymous No.5100902]

>>5100653
I downloaded it from CGP but I haven’t gone through it yet. Usually I go through a thing before I give it a thumbs up/down, but I did see the preview and the outline. I think it’s a good approach over all. I’m a huge fan of training your eyes first and then training your mind.

My gripe with this whole thing is that the ways which we see and learn hasn’t changed much. It’s true that we don’t all learn the exactly same way but at this point the reading material out there has covered just about every possible way of presenting a given subject. Drawing isn’t new. We don’t need 100 artistic anatomy books - our bones and muscles aren’t changing (though some veins we have are becoming more common than they were before, not everyone had the same ones). So this whole hunt for the latest anatomy book is just chasing stupidity.

KtD is okay but my main con is that I prefer to be taught by professional, working artists who have a high standard in what they do. So Loomis will almost always win out. Any historic books written by academic painters like Solomon J Solomon and Speed will also win out before KtD and others. While it’s true that not everyone who is an artist can teach, it’s up to me as a student to decide if what I’m reading is applicable and valuable to me and where I am in my journey.

[Anonymous No.5100903]

>>5100892
because they are based

[Anonymous No.5100907]

>>5100635
>pic related
What the fuck did I just read?

[Anonymous No.5100911]

>>5100892
From >>5100902

It’s because they tended to be less touchy feely, they were written by men who weren’t afraid to have concrete opinions and serve as a good starting point because it gives you a definitive goal to strive towards. David is sculpted as an ideal. Today you’d be hung by your intestines if you suggested that because you’d be accused of body shaming.

[Anonymous No.5100973]

>>5100866
> One task, however, of some difficulty, the student will find I have not imposed upon him: namely, learning the laws of perspective. It would be worth while to learn them, if he could do so easily; but without a master's help, and in the way perspective is at present explained in treatises, the difficulty is greater than the gain. For perspective is not of the slightest use, except in rudimentary work. You can draw the rounding line of a table in perspective, but you cannot draw the sweep of a sea bay; you can foreshorten a log of wood by it, but you cannot foreshorten an arm. Its laws are too gross and few to be applied to any subtle form; therefore, as you must learn to draw the subtle forms by the eye, certainly you may draw the simple ones. No great painters ever trouble themselves about perspective, and very few of xvi them know its laws; they draw everything by the eye, and, naturally enough, disdain in the easy parts of their work rules which cannot help them in difficult ones. It would take about a month's labor to draw imperfectly, by laws of perspective, what any great Venetian will draw perfectly in five minutes, when he is throwing a wreath of leaves round a head, or bending the curves of a pattern in and out among the folds of drapery. It is true that when perspective was first discovered, everybody amused themselves with it; and all the great painters put fine saloons and arcades behind their Madonnas, merely to show that they could draw in perspective: but even this was generally done by them only to catch the public eye, and they disdained the perspective so much, that though they took the greatest pains with the circlet of a crown, or the rim of a crystal cup, in the heart of their picture, they would twist their capitals of columns and towers of churches about in the background in the most wanton way, wherever they liked the lines to go, provided only they left just perspective enough to please the public.

[Anonymous No.5100992]

>>5100973
Holy fucking based

[Anonymous No.5101046]

>>5100772
It's on SkillShare, there you can make a trial account for free and rip the course. What's better is that even a trial account logs into the course the instructor will get paid nonetheless.

[Anonymous No.5101127]

>>5100973
And then he wrote a book teaching perspective.

[Anonymous No.5101174]

>>5100781
>>5100800
>>5100800
Probably some sort of brain parasite, assuming it wasn't made up for (You)s
> For example
Go on r/askreddit and you will find people telling crazier stories than that every day. Probably many of them made up for attention, but the same goes for 4chan.

[Anonymous No.5101200]

>>5101127
He wanted to eliminate competition.

[Anonymous No.5101223]

>>5100635
Deer had CWD lmao

[Anonymous No.5101226]

>>5101223
Still terrifying.

[Anonymous No.5101268]

>>5100866
>>5100973
holy shit

[Anonymous No.5101275]

>>5101268
What?

[Anonymous No.5101281]

just start drawing what you want to draw, when youre having trouble then study that thing
whats the point of these all-in-one books? i never found the appeal to them

[Anonymous No.5101283]

>>5100817
based

[Anonymous No.5101293]

>>5101275
redpilled indeed

[Anonymous No.5101338]

>>5101281
that's a very slow way to draw that will quickly make every drawing more of a struggle than it needs to be

[Anonymous No.5101341]

>>5101281
>whats the point of these all-in-one books? i never found the appeal to them
don't learn from a single book, learn the same subject several times from different places
you don't have a direct mentor there to scaffold you

[Anonymous No.5101343]

>>5100653
what should i do after?

[Anonymous No.5101347]

>>5100889
>If a child has many toys, it will get tired of them and break them; if a boy has many prints he will merely dawdle and scrawl over them; it is by the limitation of the number of his possessions that his pleasure in them is perfected, and his attention concentrated.
>[...] but they must not praise it for being clever, any more than they would praise it for being stout. They should praise it only for what costs it self-denial, namely attention and hard work; otherwise they will make it work for vanity's sake, and always badly.
this nigga knows why i gave up on everything and dropped out of college

[Anonymous No.5101364]

>>5100866
>>5100889
> In the first place, the book is not calculated for the use of children under the age of twelve or fourteen
Half of the ips ITT can't read it apparently.

[Anonymous No.5101497]

>>5100889
>iii. In later years, the indulgence of using the color should only be granted as a reward, after it has shown care and progress in its drawings with pencil.
Holy fucking shit, turd polishers forever B T F O

[Anonymous No.5101544]

>>5101497
It’s unfortunate /ic/ follows nothing that he talks about. I’m pleased he endorses Harding because I found his book is the most sane in approaching drawing, but as always the crab will never sit down long enough to actually get through any book anyway.

[Anonymous No.5101581]

>>5101544
>because I found his book is the most sane in approaching drawing
Whose? Harding's or Ruskin's?

[Anonymous No.5101617]

>>5100631
A high /beg/ should get even more out of the book than a low /beg/.

The focus is on drawing what you see and the underlying fundies. So it goes over measurement, light, depth cues, suggesting texture, composition and it's organized so that it's good both for introduction or quick review if you're already familiar with a topic.
Doesn't cover proper construction.
The main selling point is the first couple chapters and last chapter. It give things to think about and help organize your thoughts while drawing from observation or imagination, which help make the whole drawing process more consistent and less painful. But those topics aren't as useful for a low /beg/ who needs all his mental bandwidth to keep from chewing on his pencil and drooling all over his paper, which is why I think high /beg/ would get more out of it.

[Anonymous No.5103028]

>>5100889
Thanks anon.

[Anonymous No.5103044]

>>5100889
http://ruskin.ashmolean.org/

[Anonymous No.5103059]

>>5103044
really cool site, thanks for sharing

[Anonymous No.5103187]

So I'm thinking of buying a book on learning to draw but I would also like something on how to be creative and some theory, I'm high beg so what would you recommend?

[Anonymous No.5103190]

>>5103187
I would also like something on composition

[Anonymous No.5103317]

>>5103187
>>5100817

[Anonymous No.5103373]

>>5101617
What would a low /beg/ use? I almost feel like nearly everyone would benefit from having an actual drawing teacher or a working artist who is proficient in drawing telling them what they should be doing from the get-go, so as to avoid wasting time on stupidity.

[Anonymous No.5103379]

>>5103190
Framed Ink, Landscapes and Seascapes by Jack Hamm, Composition by Arthur Dow.

[Anonymous No.5103402]

>>5101581
Harding's book. His book isn't exceptional. It's actually very bland and to the point.

I chased a curious thing one day, I asked "What kind of learning material did artists like Alex Ross and others have while they were growing up?" Now, while Ross did use Loomis, not everyone did. So I went looking into what other drawing books were available a few decades ago, and earlier. All of those books, eventually, discuss construction. But none of them start off that way. They all begin with taking very basic objects around you and trying to draw them. And then they start talking about paying attention to ellipses, and angles of foreshortening, and what is the most basic form that a thing can be reduced down to. But not a single one tells you to draw boxes in perspective aimlessly like an idiot. There is no point to doing that.

Ruskin liked Harding because 1) Harding was his teacher, and 2) Harding was an artist with aesthetic know-how when it came to certain subjects. So him recommending Harding isn't a surprise from that perspective, but I didn't know this early on so I found it curious he singled Harding out.

On /ic/ I come across very harshly with regards to construction. IRL I would almost always tell students to learn perspective and construction because that's the one aspect that is usually missing. But on /ic/ the lacking thing is more fundamental, like not drawing the things as-you-see-them and instead trying to grind perspective and boxes, and drawing really, really bad figures "from imagination."

[Anonymous No.5103413]

>>5103373
you could still work your way through Dodson. As a beginner, almost any drawing will make you improve, it gets harder to improve as you get more advanced. In fact, just pull up anime stillframes and just copy. No theory, nothing. Just draw and you'll be surprised at how much you improve from day to day

[Anonymous No.5103427]

>>5103402
the reason why construction is widely hated here because it requires actual concentrated effort and it has an objectivity to it. just merely copying shapes and lines and negative spaces is easy but is ultimately a dead end

[Anonymous No.5103677]

>>5100973
Before faggots go "OMG BASED I DON'T HAVE TO LEARN HOW TO DRAW BOXES!!1!", keep in mind that in the time that this was written there probably wasn't a good base of study in perspective or instruction on how to use it in a way that was applicable to anything but simple forms, as he himself says.
I also get the impression that he was talking about setting up hugely complicated, mathematically correct perspective shit to draw things, which is true- you don't need to do that. HOWEVER, you do need to understand how the laws of perspective works so that you can learn to do it INTUITIVELY. Just like how you don't need to construct an anatomically perfect skeleton and on top of that draw every layer of muscle for every figure you draw, but you still need to learn the parts of the body and how they fit and work together to be able to draw an expressive, solid figure from memory.
If you can't draw a simple box or cylinder in perspective, you won't be able to draw more complex shit.

[Anonymous No.5103836]

>>5103402
>on /ic/ the lacking thing is more fundamental, like not drawing the things as-you-see-them and instead trying to grind perspective and boxes, and drawing really, really bad figures "from imagination."
That's pretty true. For whatever reason people tend to fall into two (equally retarded) camps- box grinders, and those who don't think that learning to draw a box or learn construction drawing is worth it because you can't use boxes or Loomis to draw muh anime. It's rooted in the same autistic desire to draw purely from imagination.
I will be honest here and say that I kind of fall in that category because I have spent most of my time book learning and "just drawing", practically none of it drawing from life. I have done some drawing from photos on sites like Quickposes but that's basically it.
I'm just some autist that scribbles shit for fun, I wish I would put more dedicated practice in.

[Anonymous No.5103900]

>>5103836
>I wish I would put more dedicated practice in.
I think making a distinction between "drawing for fun" and "drawing for practice" is what cripples most people from making progress. Ideally you wouldn't need to make a polar-opposite distinction between the two otherwise one will always be enjoyable and rewarding and the other will feel like work. It would be ideal if you would find the fun parts in practice and let them come out throughout your drawing session, rather than feeling like you have to labor over it.

Just my 2c. I do too many master copies and I'm currently one third through Hampton, doing majority of the drawings in the book, so I may be on the spectrum as well.

[Anonymous No.5103982]

>>5103900
I mean, it's not that I don't enjoy practice, I unironically do just like drawing boxes and blobs and shit, experimenting with perspective, and I've spent stupid amounts of time just drawing figures from imagination. The problem is that I'm not going outside of my comfort zone enough and actually learning new things, specifically drawing from life.

[Anonymous No.5104008]

>>5100772
>it's the only one not in the 2TB mega
can I get a link to the mega?

[Anonymous No.5104142]

>>5103373
I'm honestly not sure. I spent low /beg/ flailing around so I get what you're saying, tons of time spent foraging for resources, only a few felt like they gave anything useful, and even those have issues.

>loomis
mediocre overall, but doodling blooks every couple days let me build up a drawing habit, unlike previous attempts where I did some line grinding and lost interest.
>rudy de reyna 'how to draw what you see'
decent intro to fundies book, but it's outright wrong about perspective in few cases which fucked with me pretty badly.
>bargue
measure-draw-check-repeat inexorably creates a drawing that looks "Ok" given enough hours, which is a pretty big deal early on. But it's extremely bitter medicine, and probably fatal in large doses.
>ching design drawing
basics for STEM autists. betty edwards exercises without the bullshit, and perspective for architecture students and some related info. but it's built as a textbook, so it's hard to absorb without teacher to provide guidance and whip cracking.

Keys is probably better than any of those even at low /beg/, but that's just speculation. I didn't get to it till a year in and it filled in a ton of gaps for me which is why I think it's great later on.

[Anonymous No.5104493]

>>5104008
>>5075147

[Anonymous No.5104524]

>>5100575
its not beginner friendly. the first excersises are too hard already

[Anonymous No.5106624]

>>5104524
Stop being a bitch and just draw your shoe.

[Anonymous No.5106674]

>>5104524
How are they too hard? You're just supposed to make an attempt

[Anonymous No.5106684]

>>5104142
>ching design drawing
First time I hear about it. Looks like there are three books? Can you provide a more wholesome review of it?

[Anonymous No.5106697]

>>5106684
Nevermind - this guy teaches full blown architectural drafting. Holy fuck.

[Anonymous No.5106796]

>>5106697
Yeah, it's an actual textbook. I didn't try to delve deeply into it, I just stuck to the "You're drawing symbols and need to stop" stuff at the beginning which is geared towards absolute beginners and the basics of perspective.

[Anonymous No.5108469]

>>5101281
What's the downside to combining basic shit everybody needs into one book? It makes your """method""" more convenient too.

[Anonymous No.5108815]

Essential book. Great lead in to the basic concepts of drawing. Requires patience so it'll filter 99% of /ic/

[Anonymous No.5108863]

>>5100575
Reading this rn, I'm so slow at progressing through this book. Mainly because I'm intimidated by starting the projects,

[Anonymous No.5109050]

>>5100575
I'm working through this right now (on the 2nd chapter). I was thinking about going through Michael Hampton's figure drawing book and videos afterwards. Is that a good/acceptable idea? Should I go to something else? I'm open to suggestions.

[Anonymous No.5109078]

>>5100575
Good ascencion material for mega-begs

[Anonymous No.5109340]

It's a really solid first book for drawing, since it inducts you into the "just draw it dummy" tradition. It's good for getting the idea out of your head that you need to be "prepared" to draw things, or need to know any complex anatomy or construction methods, and that you can just draw from observation and make gains like that. The actual technical skill it teaches is pretty streamlined, basically just measuring and some tone stuff, but the mindset instruction is really significant.

[Anonymous No.5110055]

>>5109050
No, you need to be comfortable with construction for Hampton. Do Huston or Dynamic sketching instead.

[Anonymous No.5110090]

>>5109050
>>5110055
Hampton and vilppu are highly overrated.

[Anonymous No.5110126]

>>5110090
How so?

[Anonymous No.5110168]

>>5100575
Cannot draw without a crutch of reference: the book

[Anonymous No.5110990]

>>5110055
>No, you need to be comfortable with construction for Hampton.
Why's that exactly?

>>5110090
What >>5110126 said.

[Anonymous No.5111190]

>>5110055
I would rephrase that and say "you need to be comfortable drawing things around you using draw-through/construction method."

>>5110090
Not the poster, but I agree 3/4 of the way. Hampton is excessive in construction for no good reason. He presents a design system that is a solution in search of a problem. Literally nobody fucking asking for his book, and it doesn't add anything to the knowledge base. The gesture section and the basic block ins are fine. The more anatomical/planar stuff is garbage. But here's the kicker: the gesture section and basic block ins are exactly what Vilppu teaches anyway. Except he doesn't go into this esoteric design system. His drawings are looser, more suggestive and he's more about capturing to a large degree what you want to express from what you see in front of you. His short, quick sketches look better than Hampton's long pose work. If you don't believe me, go to Hampton's site and see his work. It's all on there. And it's revulsive. You want that guy to be your teacher?

Vilppu, god bless his heart I hope he lives another year, is slightly overrated because people jump to his stuff before they even develop an enjoyment for drawing. They think they like it, they see some good art work out there and think "yeah I like the way this looks I think I can do it", but when push comes to shove, they come on /ic/ and shitpost instead. Vilppu should be a high-/beg/ to medium-/int/ tier sort of resource. You reach out when you want to sample excellent taste. But you can't really grasp that when you're first drawing. Just putting down three even strokes is bloody difficult.

[Anonymous No.5111278]

>>5111190
So what resource(s) would you recommend a low/mid-tier /beg/ go through after finishing Dodson? I want to start learning anatomy (even if it’s somewhat simplified) at some point this year, but if it’s in my best interest to study other fundies beforehand I would do it and put anatomy on hold.

[Anonymous No.5111312]

>>5111278
You have books dedicated to artistic anatomy like the one by Dr. Paul Richer, or if you want something more approachable there is Classic Human Anatomy by Valerie Winslow. But these are secondary. The answer that you might be disappointed to hear is that no book will replace mileage and genuine enjoyment of drawing. If you haven't developed the "taste" for drawing yet, to the point where you are comfortable drawing in a public setting, then that is something you have to work on first. So rather than going into anatomy as a /beg/, I'd go into drawing the figure for the fun of it, and from there you can get into serious stuff. By "drawing the figure" I don't just mean things like Croquis Cafe, but I also mean trying to memorize people's mannerisms as they are walking on the street, the faces and bodily gestures they make, and try to capture them as soon as you can.

The continuum of things you learn from high /beg/ to high /int/, and onwards, is many parallels that aren't drawing or painting. You will more than likely develop a few fetishes and a queer eye along the way somewhere. But this is very easily developed through drawing and observing, both yourself and the world around you.

Read books that artists wrote, alive and dead. See what inspired them. Read "Confessions of a Starving Artist" by Harley Brown. Read "The Artist's Reality" by Rothko. Get into it.

This whole "lets just draw weeb shit all day" is so myopic I don't even know where to begin.

Even Vilppu in his old age is discovering books he hasn't read from the centuries before, and he sits down and copies the works in them. You would think this is an odd thing to do for someone who can draw fluently from imagination. Yet here we are. His concern for going pro or whatever is nonexistent. He doesn't even do a straight copy. He just likes the work he sees and he likes to draw them in his own way. /ic/ hounds people who copy calling them "xerox machines."

Yet here we are.

[Anonymous No.5111343]

>>5111312
Thanks for your reply anon, I really appreciate it.

>The answer that you might be disappointed to hear is that no book will replace mileage and genuine enjoyment of drawing.
I needed to hear this. I've wanted to get into drawing for a few years now, though I was extremely inconsistent with it for the longest time. Finally around May or June of last year did I actually start drawing more or less consistently. I'm 23, so not *that* old, but I've started drawing much later than a lot of people. Part of me has wanted to progress as fast as possible because of that fact, but for a little while now in the back of my mind I've had a faint idea that I should really be developing my interest in drawing and my love of art in general at this stage, taking the progression of my technical skills more slowly. Hearing you talk about that finally brought that idea into the forefront of my mind, and I agree with it.

I'll be sure to check out those recs. Thanks again, really.

[Anonymous No.5113634]

>>5100653
Anyone have experience with this course?

[Anonymous No.5113643]

>>5111312
so if i just want to oil paint cool warhammer battles i should start copying from wh40k art books?

[Anonymous No.5113659]

>>5110126
Vilppu is overrated because he gets deified despite being merely mortal.