/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.6180927]

Why is Loomis always recommended to beginners?

Fun with a pencil is a particularly awful beginner book. There's no point drawing any of that stuff until you know how to draw basic volumes.

[Anonymous No.6180979]

stop complaining. you do not know more than Loomis. trust the process. stop procrastinating

[Anonymous No.6180983]

>>6180979
>you do not know more than Loomis
Maybe not in terms of drawing, but being a good artist does not mean you have the best understanding of what it means to be a beginner, or know the best methods to improve a beginner.

[Anonymous No.6180995]

>>6180983
quite often it does, though

[Anonymous No.6181001]

>>6180927
>Why is Loomis always recommended to beginners?
Because it's readily available, fairly comprehensive for what it is, and it focuses on trying to teach proficiency while trying not to crush the innate pleasure that comes from artistic creation.

FWAP isn't about teaching you to become super proficient, it's about giving you initial momentum without crushing your spirit.

[Anonymous No.6181034]

>>6180927
If you got filtered by something called Fun With a Pencil then in all likelihood art isn't for you and you should quit.

[Anonymous No.6181040]

Loomis is really still the best. Waste of time to convince you though, op. have fun being a ngmi

[Anonymous No.6181042]

>>6180927
with this you should start:
"Loomis figure drawing for all it's worth"

[Anonymous No.6181044]

>>6180995
almost never. there's very little actual beginner material as a huge chunk of important education is assumed or forgotten that it is actually there. because in art you quickly leave all the scaffolding and intellectual understanding behind when you master something. i guess it's also a problem of there being a huge range of 'scaffolding and intellectual understanding' that gets you there.

i have to scrounge through the internet to find answers to basic questions, or a starting point to think about something that was not even mentioned, that are necessarily for an absolute beginner to know to be able to progress and develop their own scaffolding. artists are dogshit teachers. i think maybe one or one practical teaching is where they wouldn't be.

[Anonymous No.6181051]

Because hardly anyone on this board actually draws and anons parrot each other, probably with good intentions actually, when giving advice. The real answer is that there's a reason other intro to art books exist. Everyone learns differently and you should move on to another book if you find yourself frustrated with or not understanding whatever you're currently using.

[Anonymous No.6181053]

>>6180927
Fun With a Pencil is pretty decent at teaching the basic concept of construction but for some reason it decides it wants to teach perspective in a bad way

but really its because begs are a needy bunch who need to be filtered

[Anonymous No.6181112]

>>6181001
>it's about giving you initial momentum without crushing your spirit.
It's literally notorious for crushing beginner spirit. Beginners go into it thinking it's a fun simple challenge then get filtered badly by the potato heads right off the bat because they can't draw volumes.

[Anonymous No.6181114]

>>6181034
No, you're a complete and utter idiot. Fun with a pencil is a terrible beginner book and there are far better options for getting started.

[Anonymous No.6181117]

>>6180995
Idiot.

[Hoboanon No.6181118]

>>6181114
Feddy Krueger

[Hoboanon No.6181123]

>>6181117
>>6181114
Oy, get the hell out of my dumpster!!!

[Anonymous No.6181131]

>>6181114
pyw?

[Anonymous No.6181193]

>>6181042
Any other recommendations aside from Loomis?

[Anonymous No.6181194]

>>6180927
I have absolutely no idea bro. To them a beginner is someone who was drawing since childhood but never bothered to learn the fundamentals and not the person who just grabbed a pencil for the first time.
The other problem is that beginners always want to draw complex stuff without understanding anything and fail miserably.
They need to understand simple things like perspective first.

[Anonymous No.6181212]

>>6181193
3P perspective -> Any construction method (Loomis/Hampton etc) -> Vilppu/Mattesi(Force) -> Bammes

[Anonymous No.6181218]

>>6181212
To add, the gestural component from Vilppu or Mattesi is the make-or-break threshold as an artist. Everything before and after you can grind, but this you must feel.

[Anonymous No.6181221]

>Why is Loomis always recommended to beginners?
probably because if one gets filtered by LOOMIS they should quit drawing.

[Anonymous No.6181261]

pyw anon. pyw.

[Anonymous No.6181291]

>>6181114
>n-no!! I got filtered by something a 10 year old can understand and that's okay!
Just quit.

[Anonymous No.6181362]

swallow the dodson pill, way better for noobs

[Anonymous No.6181364]

>>6181362
Bertfaggots should get the rope

[Anonymous No.6181400]

>>6180927
It's on purpose to crab and demotivate beginners so that they quit. Can't have the market be flooded with even more artists than it already is. How else are we going to make money if everyone's an artist? This can't happen.

[Anonymous No.6181433]

>>6181193
throw yourself into a well ngmi

[Anonymous No.6181434]

I still don't know how people on this board get filtered by shit like Fun with a pencil and DrawABox

[Anonymous No.6181452]

>>6181400
no need to demotivate beginners in an already demotivating skill. Drawing is 1000x harder than anything else you could learn

[Anonymous No.6181456]

>>6181193
yes, I recommend that you go to hell, you piece of useless asshole

[Anonymous No.6181466]

>>6180927
you would fail paint by number, so it doesnt matter if we recommend theoretical physics, loomis or fun with legos you fucking permabeg moron.

[Anonymous No.6181469]

>>6181114
>are far better options for getting started.
such as.....?

[Anonymous No.6181480]

>>6181452
Nothing wrong with demotivating schizo egomaniacs and clout chasers. It may even be the morally correct thing to do

[Anonymous No.6181484]

>>6181434
It specifically filters out the kind of retards who think these books are supposed to grant them mastery in their first reading. Even the lowliest/beg/ will get something out of Loomis, but they're either too impatient, or just plain stupid, so they just shit on the people who have gone through the same books half a dozen times and who have results to show for it.

[Anonymous No.6181516]

>>6181480
>It may even be the morally correct thing to do
This, it's why I always recommend Loomis and Marc Brunet to beginners.

I should not only succeed but others should fail as well.

[Anonymous No.6181619]

>>6181484
>It specifically filters out the kind of retards who think these books are supposed to grant them mastery in their first reading


People with that mindset will never get better. They'll just hop to the next drawing book author or video course creator and have the same experience because it takes doing something multiple times to get it right.

Is why people end up just hoarding resources and never using them.

[Anonymous No.6181633]

>>6180927
because it isn't overly technical and explains fundamental measurement via counting heads.
at the very very beginning what's important is that you pick up the pencil and draw. in the same way you don't make fun of a literal toddler for not drawing within the lines, you don't make fun of the results of what the book provides by following it.
you need to get a feel of using a pencil for drawing, not writing. you learn things like not pressing too hard, not erasing too much and basic construction to save yourself both time and to prevent headaches.
are there better books? probably.
but this one is free, easily accessible and can be understood by even the most braindead of retards.
no wall of text, no stupid terms, no expectations, no required materials beyond the most fundamental of tools — pigment and something to put the pigment on.
the first pitfall is simply not drawing. you can make all sorts of wild claims about bad habits but if you already don't draw then all that's important is that you start. I the book can do that then it has succeeded.

i get the feeling you're just being a weeb and don't like the style which... yeah, it's ugly. but if you're already absolute trash then it'll still look better than what you already draw.

[Anonymous No.6181642]

*blocks your path*

[Anonymous No.6181650]

>>6181642
book is too wordy for someone who just wants to doodle on some printer paper at their desk.
that's why it and other books like it fail. it's a book that should be suggested to beginners looking to get serious rather than just literal beginners wanting to doodle on post-it notes and birthday cards to make their friends laugh.
books like this are what scare people off before they learn that they enjoy drawing.

[Anonymous No.6181662]

Japanese pure beginner books are literally just loomis. If little fucking kids in Japan can understand how 3D forms work then so should you. Your stupid mistake is thinking you are ever going to be good.

Chances are you are always going to suck no matter how many books you read especially with a shitty attitude like OPs. Im doing you a favor now, just fucking quit. Give up. We don't need more artists. Get a real skill that earns you a profession.

[Anonymous No.6181666]

>>6181291
Thank you for doubling down on your stupidity, idiot.

[Anonymous No.6181668]

>>6181662
You are such a comically stupid idiot it's funny.

[Anonymous No.6181671]

>>6181666
>>6181668
Look at this triggered NGMI beg. Just fucking give up. The minute you made this thread with a retarded reddit frog is proof enough that you will never be good. Just fucking quit. Maybe you should focus on getting job and moving out of moms basement before bitching about Loomis a resource literally every good artist says is a good book.

[Anonymous No.6181677]

>>6181671
You don't need to keep doubling down on your stupidity, idiot. I already know you're a moron, you're wasting your time putting this much effort into your posts.

[Anonymous No.6181681]

>>6181671
>about Loomis a resource literally every good artist says is a good book
loomis is not a book, moron.

[Anonymous No.6181690]

>>6181677
Just give up drawing and never come back here

>>6181681
Dumb fuck it's obvious im referring to the fucking book the OP is referencing, when people say "do loomis" this mean fun with a pencil.

[Anonymous No.6181695]

>>6181690
You just keep further exposing your stupidity, ESL idiot. I mean damn, you are so stupid it's hilarious.

[Anonymous No.6181702]

>>6181671
>a resource literally every good artist says is a good book.
Except they don't. Fun with a pencil is notorious for filtering beginners because it asks them to draw heads without understanding 3D form yet.

keep being a schizo retard though.

[Anonymous No.6181717]

>>6181702

yeah you fucking learn 3d forms by practicing and practicing whats in the book until the lessons make sense in new ways you didn't think of before. This is how people got good back then. They didnt go on the internet and whine about whats the best beginners resource and whats a "trap" and all this bullshit.

If Loomis filters you, you are never going to be good. You are going to get stuck and complain whenever you hit a wall that you can't understand how to get past.

[Anonymous No.6181722]

>>6181717
>yeah you fucking learn 3d forms by practicing and practicing whats in the book
No you don't you stupid idiot. There's no point in learning how to draw a head when you cannot even draw a cube yet. Even Loomis himself says you should learn perspective as a minimum requirement before trying his book, and his own attempt at teaching perspective is terrible.

I mean damn, you're REALLY dumb.

[Anonymous No.6181731]

>>6180927
loomis pdfs were the only books available for free in the 00s and were popularized by the conceptart forum. no one who recommends some of them like FWAP has actually drawn through them, blind leading the blind.

[Anonymous No.6181745]

>>6181722
Then the mods need to fucking update the sticky or just fucking delete it once and for all so we stop getting threads with fucking Pepes complaining about Loomis every fucking time.

Loomis bitching has even leaked its way into /v/.

And yeah you dont start Fwap expecting to be immediately drawing amazing academic heads. Its an introductory course for kids and people who literally have never done construction in their entire life. Its to get people to think about their art in a 3d space.

If you want boxes go do draw a box but chances are OP is going to make a fucking thread bitching about that too.

[Anonymous No.6181764]

I learned about form when I was 11 years old, when I found pic related in the school library (compared to FWAP this shit is like rocket science). It took me a week to learn how to draw volumes that weren't distorted, and another few weeks to get a feel for forms in space. That's literally all you need; a stupidly basic understanding of form and perspective. And this is what you're bitching about OP. Just quit.

[Anonymous No.6181765]

>>6181745
>Its to get people to think about their art in a 3d space.
Which it's terrible at. Pic related is literally the first exercise. Where is the construction? It's literally a case of "draw the rest of the fucking owl".

[Anonymous No.6181769]

>>6181764
does this have an English name that I can type into libgen?

[Anonymous No.6181773]

>>6181769
Fundamentals by Mogilevtsev

[Anonymous No.6181774]

>>6181765
>this is supposedly "rest of the fucking owl"
... anon that's actually just sad. we had books as a kid on how to draw pokemon and the Simpsons that were more complicated than this at the school library and they always had a wait list of dozens of kids.
there is no way that is too complicated. get over yourself.

[Anonymous No.6181776]

>>6181764
Ukraine deserves independence.
Russian pigs need to fuck off.

[Anonymous No.6181778]

>>6181774
You're missing the point you stupid idiot.
There is no point in learning how to draw cartoon heads when you don't understand basic perspective and volumes yet. It achieves nothing, aside from giving small-brained people like yourself a childish sense of accomplishment, all the while you still can't actually draw anything.

[Anonymous No.6181779]

>>6181776
Ukraine is full of Americanized gays who are getting their just desserts

[Anonymous No.6181780]

>>6181779
>Ukraine is full of Americanized gays who are getting their just desserts

[Anonymous No.6181783]

>>6181778
no.
you're missing the point.
which is that if you are a person who doesn't ever draw then you just need to pick up a pencil and get a feel for it.
its weight, how hard you press. simple things like erasers and the types of paper. pencils, different types of lead...
you want something for beginners with a goal. this book is meant to just encourage you to take the first step.
it's for casual doodling and to encourage drawing as a habit.

[Anonymous No.6181784]

>>6181779
Back to the front lines, Igor. Your mummy wants her new Lada.

[Anonymous No.6181786]

>>6181778
>There is no point in learning how to draw cartoon heads when you don't understand basic perspective and volumes yet
Why not? What's wrong with using shape-based construction before moving on to form?

[Anonymous No.6181787]

>>6181783
>>which is that if you are a person who doesn't ever draw then you just need to pick up a pencil and get a feel for it.
Which can be done in plenty of other ways, rather than trying to draw volumes when you don't even know how to draw a box yet.

Fun With a Pencil is trash, and discourages beginners. Cope.

[Anonymous No.6181795]

>>6181786
>What's wrong with using shape-based construction before moving on to form?
Nothing if you're drawing from reference.

Fun with a pencil is drawing from imagination. He expects the reader to just "add in the eyes, the nose, the cheeks and the ears" like it's a piece of cake. It's honestly a trash book.

[Anonymous No.6181797]

>>6181778
this, the first exercises are completely demoralizing to beginners who have no idea how to place features on spheres. something like dodson's keys to drawing is what i always recommend first, then huston's figure book and how to draw by robertson if the pupil isn't a retard

[Anonymous No.6181802]

>>6181787
no.
it is what it is.
pick up a pencil and make funny little doodles.
there is no other point to it. there is no other reason.
you are looking at it as if this was a textbook meant for artists. its not.
this would be like getting angry at a picture book meant for kindergarteners because it calls cyan "blue" and magenta "pink", or at a grade 2 science book for saying nuclear power is made by splitting atoms and not elaborating further.
it isn't meant for actual study nor is it meant for literal learning. it's meant to just be a non-intimidating way to introduce pencils as a drawing implement rather than a writing utencil.

[Anonymous No.6181804]

>>6181802
No one wants to draw outdated garbage doodles like in FWAP. They don't appeal to any modern sensibilities and are thus a terrible instructional resource.

[Anonymous No.6181807]

>bro, just add the nose, the hair, the ears, the eyes and the mouth to a sphere or a potato at all kinds of different orientations, it's totally easy!

[Anonymous No.6181832]

>>6181804
It isn't meant to be attractive although thanks for revealing that you got filtered because you're a weeb.
The book is there to prove that you don't need expensive training, expensive pencils, paper, 80 dollar sketchbooks.
The point is that you can take a pencil you found on the ground and some paper from the trash and just doodle on that. The type of thing you would grab at a book store while on vacation and doodle with at night or to shut up a child.
There is no plan, the book doesn't care if you skip a page or a chapter. It simply /is/.
The book also encourages you to actually learn from other, proper guides.
Is the art style out of date? Yes.
But the reason it's suggested nowadays is because it's free. You may be able to pirate whatever you want but the average person who just wants to make their co-workers chortle when you draw a funny little joke on the white board during a boring meeting? They don't pirate.
Imagine: You scribble on scraps all the time and decide you wanna see where this goes but you don't want to spend too much money on supplies or books. You type "free drawing books" and the Loomis archive is one of the first results. The firstand least intimidating PDF is this book and it works for them.

It would not be suggested all the time both in and outside of this board by hobbyists and professionals alike if it did not serve some purpose. So when it comes to believing them or believing you? I believe them. You sound like a bitter crab who can't stop being a weeb for five seconds.

[Anonymous No.6181854]

>>6181765
>being filtered this hard
You are taking it way way WAY too seriously anon.

It proves that you can draw anything no matter what shape you make. It introduces the line of action (down the middle), to block out the larger shapes (nose, eyes, eyebrows, chin, ears) before adding details and shows you how to use plumb lines for the eyes so that you don't need to worry about keeping things equal/even by sight alone.
This is a perfect page for the type of person who says "I can't draw a circle" or "I can't draw a straight line".
It introduces you to concepts that other books scare the shit out of you with. You MUST gesture you MUST sight measure the space between the eyes is ALWAYS the same width of a single eye. They go into details and statistics, they beat you down, chew you up and spit you out.
This book is just like... bro whatever. Your circles look like fucking eggs laid by a zombie chicken? That's cool, look how you can still make that look like a drawing.

[Anonymous No.6181858]

>>6181854
>coping this hard
It's a trash learning book, retard. Nobody is reading your walls of text.

[Anonymous No.6181901]

>>6181854
Did you reply to the right post?

[Anonymous No.6181905]

Speaking of Fun with a Pencil
Pre/beg/ here, i'll be getting into expressions now. Should i try to replicate that guy's face again? I know i fucked up the glasses and the tip of the nose the most

[Anonymous No.6181907]

>>6181905
you fucked up more than that. you copied symbols you saw, it doesn't actually look like a spherical volume. you can clearly see the features wrap around the ball in loomis but begs have no hope of copying that at the start

[Anonymous No.6181920]

>>6181907
what the hell are you talking about

[Anonymous No.6181933]

>>6181920
features should wrap around the head like an orange peel

[Anonymous No.6181941]

>>6181920
Feel the form, /beg/tard. That's the whole point of that stupid book.

[Hoboanon No.6181943]

>>6181920
Its flat- 2D.
Feel the form- follow the form.
Head volumes- head planes.

[Hoboanon No.6181944]

>>6181943
There is no depth in your forms.

[Anonymous No.6181956]

>>6181112
they could just use a compass lmao

[Anonymous No.6181989]

>>6181907
>>6181933
>>6181941
>>6181943
Well shit, >>6181920 isn't me, but is it really THAT bad?
I might be retarded, but the original seems "flat" as well if you remove the blue lines
>you can clearly see the features wrap around the ball in loomis but begs have no hope of copying that at the start
Should i try to copy it untill i get it right before i move on onto the expressions then?
Anyhow, i'm not giving up

[Hoboanon No.6182010]

>>6181989
Its not that bad, its average for a beg, its all slight angles, proportions and line weight. Continue forward, each new try MUST be better than the previous one, that way you know that you learned something, analyze it. Good luck. Also you can overlay both pics (change color of one to red) to see whats wrong. To get better linework you must know fundies and purpose/characteristics of strokes- where and why to put them.

[Anonymous No.6182014]

>>6181989
No. You shouldnt be copying. You need to make your own art using the concepts in the book.

Basically: You need to learn how to graft basic 3d shapes on to each other using soft pencil lines and construction until you create the final product.

The point isnt to copy his faces and call it day. He wants you to see how the nose, cheecks, eyes, ears, are "welded" on to a ball.

This involves "drawing through" your other lines so every shape is completely transparent and then erasing the lines you dont need. This helps you understand how the shape is attached to the other shape.

[Hoboanon No.6182015]

>>6181989
So, finish the book, (Loomis doesn't expect you to be a pro or anything at all) other stuff (fundies) doesnt matter right now.

[Hoboanon No.6182021]

>>6181989
Also this
>You shouldnt be copying. You need to make your own art using the concepts in the book.
As i remember tho he says to practise your own stuff somwhere at the end of book in late chapters. Do both, copy his work, take that angle and do your own stuff while changing facial features and proportions.

[Anonymous No.6182025]

>>6182010
>>6182014
>>6182015
>>6182021
Thank you friends, good luck to you too, ill go back to study now

[Anonymous No.6182061]

>>6180927
agree

it's a shit first book

most of it is just "look at all these cool cartoons I can draw" and the reader can't draw shit so it's pointless

also it's so dated and illegible in places, at least the copy I got from here

[Anonymous No.6182186]

Tbh I went through loomis up until the last bit after clothing/hands/etc. and skipped all the examples to instead apply it to examples of work I actually wanted to draw. Did the same with heads and bodies previously (though I also went through the loomis examples there). I think it should be recommended to beginners to only do a few examples before trying to apply it on their own in studies of works or life. This will better keep them interested as well as just be more useful to them.

[Anonymous No.6182205]

>>6181745
Go to reddit if you want more censorship and overbearing mods u fag

[Anonymous No.6182245]

Just started 2-3 weeks ago, Loomis makes the most sense to me honestly, this is my growth over the few weeks I've been using FWAP

Granted I'm asian but I feel like it makes more sense than anything else I've tried to learn

[Anonymous No.6182366]

>>6181776
Imagine shilling for a jewish country that became another degenerate American puppet lol

[Anonymous No.6182374]

>>6182366
but he's not talking about Russia?

[Anonymous No.6182392]

>>6181662
what book is this?

[Anonymous No.6182433]

>>6182014
>The point isnt to copy his faces and call it day. He wants you to see how the nose, cheecks, eyes, ears, are "welded" on to a ball.
the fact that you think this is appropriate for an absolute beginner tells me you're retarded

[Anonymous No.6182898]

>>6182433
Ngmi larper

[Anonymous No.6182910]

>>6182392
Hampton

[Anonymous No.6183008]

>>6182245
>Granted I'm asian
unironically kys

[Anonymous No.6183230]

>>6181776
Either stay on topic or go back to twitter sucking the cocks of no-name foreign policy correspondents,

[Anonymous No.6183244]

>>6181765
holy shit is this really too hard for you ?

[Anonymous No.6183259]

>>6181832
>>6181832

You talk a lot but say very little. It's a shitty book.

[Anonymous No.6183283]

fun with a pencil is easy enough, but my problem was it was that its not like you can move onto successful drawing or figure drawing for what its worth after it

[Anonymous No.6183298]

>>6183244
t. idiot

[Anonymous No.6183687]

Honestly, I enjoyed Loomis.
>>6181212
and hated villpu.
>>6181776
Kill yourself. >>6181784
Just after 2 months of war I changed from supporting Ukrainians to hate you guys.

Almost all Ukrainian are literally worst version of niggers.

[Anonymous No.6183691]

>>6182374
He's talking about trashkraine.
>>6182366
Main problem of Ukraine is not jews, but Ukrainians.

Fuck russia and putin. But Ukrainians are worst people ever.

[Anonymous No.6183870]

>>6182392
It's an excerpt from online course book for Watts Artier that an anon gave me who actually paid to do it. It's one of the very first things they teach you to do as a beginner.

I don't have the entire thing, just one page. It doesn't show up in some of the Watts torrents I have either.

[Anonymous No.6183874]

>>6183691
>>6183687
Yeah, your fat mom was definitely anally fucked by a ukrainian dude lol.

[Anonymous No.6183876]

>>6183870
you're still a retard though.

[Anonymous No.6184221]

>>6180927
there is no good books for begginers because people with actual talent don't need to learn how to draw to begin with
this "anyone can make art" is just a lie so companies can sell paint and pencils to retards

[Anonymous No.6184705]

It's honestly embarrassing to see so many idiots here recommend Poomis to beginners. Poomis himself says you must learn perspective before attempting his books. Vilpuu says this too in his drawing manual.

You have to learn PERSPECTIVE before anything else, retards. Start with basic shapes: squares, circles and ellipses. Then move onto volumes. Once you can draw them consistently, THEN you can move onto stuff like figure drawing.

As for Fun with a pencil, who cares about that trash. It's not going to improve you as an artist because it's just a dumb kids book.

[Anonymous No.6184975]

>>6184705
pyw

[Anonymous No.6185026]

Loomis is recommended because this board does not draw

[Anonymous No.6185031]

>>6180927
Nobody who "recommends" Loomis actually reads it. They're just trying to sound smart and authoritative without actually doing anything.

[Anonymous No.6185036]

>>6184705
Do you know a good perspective tutorial online? When I try to look up, I get shitty youtube artists with garbage-tier tutorials or I'm not looking well enough.

Just want a straight-forward, good perspective tutorial.

[Anonymous No.6185217]

>>6185036
someone pls

[Anonymous No.6185453]

>>6184705
>Vilpuu says this too in his drawing manual.
No, he says if you can't draw a box convincingly you should look at a perspective book. Learning to draw volumes is the whole point of the preceding spherical form section and it makes no mention of perspective. He at no point forbids you from trying anything in the book, because trying things is the whole point of it.

[Anonymous No.6185457]

>>6185036
Vandruff

[Anonymous No.6185458]

>>6185453
>No, he says if you can't draw a box convincingly you should look at a perspective book
In other words, don't bother continuing until you have a strong grasp on perspective, because he says being able to draw cubes at any angle in perspective is a necessary skill to draw humans.

[Anonymous No.6185479]

>>6185036
"The Art of Perspective" and "Perspective Made Easy"

Are my personal favourites. Mainly because they're the only ones I've read.

[Anonymous No.6185721]

>>6180927
then what am I supposed to use in order to learn forms. like drawing tilted cubes, ovals and spheres. connecting them together in a 3d perspective?

[Anonymous No.6185722]

>>6185721
scott robertson's how to draw

[Anonymous No.6185737]

maybe you need some Loomis

[Anonymous No.6185757]

>>6185458
>he says being able to draw cubes at any angle in perspective is a necessary skill to draw humans.
You are already drawing humans in the first two sections (that he calls the most crucial), which, again, assume no prior knowledge of perspective. This is a far cry from him coming out of the gate with "don't even THINK about reading this until you've learned perspective!" I'm not even sure if Loomis has said anything like this, though you claim he has.

[Anonymous No.6185774]

>>6185757
>You are already drawing humans
No you spastic, a gesture drawing is not a real drawing of a human.

[Anonymous No.6185821]

>>6185774
Ogey. The other section is still about spheres and drawing humans using those. Are those "real" enough for you?

[Anonymous No.6185888]

>>6185821
No, idiot, because it's still just construction at a basic level.

[Anonymous No.6185946]

>>6185888
Ah, my mistake. But before you can use this "basic construction," you need to learn perspective first, which Vilppu will be sure to remind you in section three after you already started the book.

[Anonymous No.6186279]

>>6181943
source of pic related?

[Anonymous No.6186434]

>>6181832
I'm a weeb and think the doodles are pretty cool actually

[Anonymous No.6187764]

>>6185737
Why doesn't this book get talked about more? What's it's deal?

Why is Fun with a pencil always recommended to beginners but not this?

[Anonymous No.6187838]

>>6187764
it's a legitimately good book, probably his best, but it's not for beginners at all

[Anonymous No.6188443]

>>6182245
According to that filipino comic guy, you're supposed to feel depressed about only drawing middle aged white guys.
Are you?

[Anonymous No.6189828]

>>6181114
based

[Anonymous No.6189849]

loomis is so fucking unappealing

[Anonymous No.6189852]

Crab thread. I will read and finish FWAP and I will have fun doing it

[Anonymous No.6189856]

>>6180927
The fact that so many are just resorting to using "filtered" memes proves your point.

[Anonymous No.6189857]

>>6180927
Fun with a Pencil is essentially an inside joke to filter people who are not intelligent enough to figure out the joke. It is meant to trick newfags into looking at the dumbest thing imaginable, in a similar vain to how /a/ always recommends Boku no Pico.
You are supposed to crack open Fun with a Pencil and figure out that you have been tricked, laugh at your foolishness for trusting 4chan, then crack open Successful Drawing and begin learning.
Or any of the real beginner books, for that matter.

[Anonymous No.6190497]

>>6189857
>then crack open Successful Drawing and begin learning.
Not for beginners.

[Anonymous No.6190531]

Why does Loomis get so much hate here?

Why is he a bad /beg/ choice exactly? And what does /ic/ recommend instead?

Serious questions, I wanna improve my art so no bully plz.

[Anonymous No.6190575]

>>6190531
hes not a bad choice at all.
The problem is permabegs want their hand held and want to skip reading the sticky and go straight into asking stupid questions that would already be answered if they did their DD. Hence why most of /ic/ will tell you to just draw. I said this once and i'll say it again:
For retards that don't want to do their due diligence, "Just draw" is the advice you DESERVE.

> And what does /ic/ recommend instead?
You should know this

[Anonymous No.6190603]

>>6190575
>You should know this

Draw daily. I'll try I guess but I'm a "boomer" so I'll do hobby drawing instead.

[Anonymous No.6190647]

>>6190575
Loomis is certainly a decent book but pretending he's the only possible option is bizarre.
Both the fervent loomis worshipppers and haters seem to vastly overestimate the importance of a particular book.

[Anonymous No.6190674]

>>6190647
and yet you offer no alternative

[Anonymous No.6190694]

>>6190674
Draw what you want
Does it look good?
If yes draw something else
If no find out why, lack of construction fucked perspective etc., correct that issue and try again
Repeat until you can draw anything you want
Basically just draw but use your brain

[Anonymous No.6190696]

>>6190531
keys to drawing is a better first book

[Anonymous No.6190738]

>>6190696

Thanks

[Anonymous No.6190793]

>>6190694
0/10

[Anonymous No.6190800]

>>6190531
How to Draw by Scott Robertson is the superior choice

[Anonymous No.6191372]

>>6190800
Nah

[Anonymous No.6191708]

>>6191372
uh yah

[Anonymous No.6191782]

>>6181114
>and there are far better options for getting started.
then name 37 better options right now

[Anonymous No.6191798]

>>6191782
37 clones of your mom

[Anonymous No.6191821]

>>6190531
Loomis isn't a bad choice. He's not the only choice but his stuff is far from a bad one. /ic/ is full of people that want a "End all be all" book or video that will teach them how to draw and at the end of it they'll be masters and get mad when it doesn't, and people that think the Loomis method only teaches you how to draw everything in his style. Lastly you have the anons that just collect resources and never use them.

[Anonymous No.6191824]

>>6181044
>that are necessarily for an absolute beginner to know to be able to progress and develop their own scaffolding
Examples?

[Anonymous No.6191836]

>>6181194
>They need to understand simple things like perspective first.
But then artists always, without fail, tell them to "have fun drawing".
What if their idea of having fun is drawing something incredibly complex?
Sometimes people need a firmer guiding hand and most artists are afraid of doing that even if it's a simple suggestion.

[Anonymous No.6191844]

>>6181212
>3P perspective
Three point perspective? What would you recommend?
>Any construction method (Loomis/Hampton etc)
Which books of theirs? Fun with a pencil/keys to drawing?
>Mattesi(Force)
FORCE drawing?
>Bammes
Book?
>>6181218
Does it matter if you feel it with a pencil or a tablet?

[Anonymous No.6191948]

>>6181633
>yeah, it's ugly. but if you're already absolute trash then it'll still look better than what you already draw.
Plus, it'll give you experience in drawing ugly bastards.

[Anonymous No.6191949]

>>6181702
>Fun with a pencil is notorious for filtering beginners because it asks them to draw heads without understanding 3D form yet.
Where outside of 4chan?

[Anonymous No.6191952]

>>6181662
That doesn't look like Loomis' first exercise to me. Those heads are hideous and mine are even worse.

[Anonymous No.6192197]

>>6191836
>Sometimes people need a firmer guiding hand
here you go bro
>>1579290

[Anonymous No.6192199]

>>6191844
Do I use a pencil or a pen!? Paper or tablet!!?!?! 2B or HB???? BOOK OR VID??! NIG OR NOG??!?! AAAAAA

[Anonymous No.6192210]

>>6192199
>2b
Toobie...

[Anonymous No.6192314]

>>6181034
I just hate drawing faces. I don't know how to use a pencil and drawing faces is hard. I just want easier material to start off with

[Anonymous No.6192324]

>>6181745
>Its to get people to think about their art in a 3d space.
How am I supposed to tell if I'm doing good and if I'm shit? Cause everytime I draw with FWAP I keep fucking up, but I cannot tell if I'm improving or not. Should I approach it like weightlifting, and just keep practicing, or should I read another book after Loomis? Should I do a page or two of an exercise and move on?
I would post my work but I lost it, just have faith I did read through it and practice the heads. Sorry I'm just really salty after drawing a bunch of bad faces and rag dolls.
>inb4 just do it for fun
I want something achievable. It feels with drawing humans I'm lifting a bunch of weight at once: I wanna start drawing small things that can actually be drawn by a beginner, if that makes sense

[Anonymous No.6192354]

>>6192324
>I wanna start drawing small things that can actually be drawn by a beginner, if that makes sense
OooOooooOoooo
Something that can be done by a beginner, you say?
Would you say... a cube is within your abilities? A box, shall we say?

[Anonymous No.6192364]

>>6192354
Remember anon I'm not with him at all, I actually want to draw. I just feel extremely discouraged
It's been a long time, so bear with my example, but let's say I draw this face. If I draw a bunch of faces like this that are shit like this, how can I tell if I improved? Should I make a drawing regiment that is the loomis exercises of the heads, poses, etc, or should I do a page/two for each exercise, then move on to the next book? Or should I after reading FWAP make my own work? I have no clue, but I just don't have fun when I start making shit art like picrel.
And honestly, yes cubes are within my abilities. I doodle by drawing cubes or shading (I got real good with shading)

[Anonymous No.6192369]

>>6192364
Yea that's pretty shit and symbol tastic. Thanks for showing me work within my own skill level, /ic/ usually intimidates me.

[Anonymous No.6192373]

>>6192369
Kek. Oh well. If there's anything I learned with music is after 6/8 months you should be out of the intro/noob stage and make something decent. I wanna start now while I'm in school and have free time.
My goal is ultimately to make shitposts and paint/draw albums/landscapes. I learned blender rigging by making bunch of touhou memes. Now I want to make some original memes make Touhou models (because I cannot find a pack that has lip syncing, and I don't want to get from a bunch of packs together cause the art style would be wonky. )

[Anonymous No.6192404]

Permabeg here that keeps constantly giving up and haven't really improved in years. One thing I've realized lately is that I get too caught up in the idea of drawing well, rather than actually drawing the things I enjoy. And I find practicing extremely boring, so for me it quickly turn into drawing = pratice = boring = procrastinate. But I keep returning, so there must be something I enjoy about drawing. So I took a look at my older drawings, and I was surprised by how well I had drawn (compared to my shitty practice drawings) when I had actually taken my time and drawn what I wanted to instead of what I should have. So maybe rather than a book, for some, it might be better to just draw what you enjoy, and then build upon the things you want to improve. I think what I should be working on even before the fundamentals, is a good mindset and a true enjoyment of the process rather than focusing on a finished product I can't create.
This was a bit off topic. But I just think that maybe the material you learn from is less important than a willingness to actually draw despite being bad.

[Anonymous No.6192412]

>>6192404
This is exactly how you get better. You learn the skills from theory to apply them to what you want. Cause being skilled is just avoiding mistakes

[Anonymous No.6192413]

>>6192404
that's a good mindest, keep trying and draw for fun, eventually you will notice some underwhelming things, "hands could be way better", and will practice that thing anyway.

[Anonymous No.6192422]

Fun with a pencil is only fun if you want to draw hideously squashed old man cartoon heads straight out of the 1940s

[Anonymous No.6192424]

>>6192404
I wish I had your experience. All I have is a bunch of shitty practice doodles.

[Anonymous No.6192503]

>>6192424
A thought I find comforting is when I compare making a drawing to writing a book. For some, it comes easier than for others. But if someone was still learning the alphabet, it would be retarded to think they could write a novel, much less a decent one, no matter how talented they are. Because that's pretty much what learning the fundies is. It's learning the alphabet of drawing. So rather than focusing on the letters and words you don't yet understand, try writing using the ones you do know, and slowly fill in the gaps.

[Anonymous No.6192569]

>>6180927
none of that stuff matters. you learn from trying to draw stuff you think is cool

[Anonymous No.6192583]

>>6181434
Drawabox literally says it's going to filter most people because by design it's not enjoyable at all

[Anonymous No.6192593]

>>6180927
Because Loomis is a fucking ngmi filter.

[Anonymous No.6192603]

As a total beginner myself I got this from a family member and I've been enjoying it. I can't speak to its scientific accuracy but the examples it conveys are certainly encouraging.

[Anonymous No.6192612]

>>6192583
Actually drawabox is fun. I like doing it, I got bored but drawing lines and cubes was much, much easier for me than faces. At least if you fuck up on a line, you can fix it: with faces it's hard to even explain how you fucked up
Yes I'm autistic

[Anonymous No.6193228]

Fun With a Pencil is boring, perhaps it was novel for its time but today its boring. Why draw if its boring? Defeats the whole purpose.

[Anonymous No.6193243]

>>6192603
people on ic don't have a brain to use

[Anonymous No.6193286]

Fun With a Pencil is the equivalent of a "how to make memes" tutorial for its time. It's for people who have no real interest in art but picked up the book at a bookstore for the hell of it. It's not actually part of any serious art education, not any more than a slime making kit is part of chemistry education or a Newton's cradle is part of physics education. It just repackages a few concepts into casual form for the sake of mass marketability.
>it's too hard for a beginner text
SICP is also an introductionary text for people who have never even seen a computer before. People today are stupid and can't read, they can't comprehend a children's manual from a few generations ago. Other art instruction texts are much more explicit about everything anyways if Fun With a Pencil is too vague for you.

[Anonymous No.6193299]

>>6192612
>At least if you fuck up on a line, you can fix it
I thought the entire point of DrawBox was to do it in fineliner, and not to "fix" mistakes you make.

[Anonymous No.6193356]

>>6193299
What I mean is that if you fuck up drawing a face, you're not sure how to fix the next line. With drawabox, you know what went wrong (too fast, too slow, not enough shoulder movement, etc)

[Anonymous No.6193368]

>>6193286
>Other art instruction texts are much more explicit
Could you name some?

[Anonymous No.6193402]

So if Loomis sucks so much and is so outdated where are the modern, superior alternatives?

[Anonymous No.6194448]

>>6193402

[Anonymous No.6195555]

>>6193402
The Art and Science of Drawing

[Anonymous No.6195615]

>>6180927
>until you know how to draw basic volumes.
its for beginners to figure drawing not special ed remedial retards

its like asking whats a good song for beginner pianist to learn when you don't even know how to sit down with proper posture.

[Anonymous No.6195641]

>>6195615
You are a complete and utter idiot.

It's one thing to draw volumes, it's another to draw it properly taking perspective into account. I'm willing to bet your art is absolute trash.

[Anonymous No.6197274]

>>6181484
>>6181619
there's a meme that affluent asian parents make their kids do all the stereotypical shit like play piano/violin, do some sort of martial arts, or go do additional afterschool learning

it's obviously not about the individual activity but as long as it teaches them that you get incrementally better over time and persevering with something

it's just like what both anons said, people who haven't been exposed to learning a craft that takes a long-time just get discouraged when they confront the reality this is going to take 1000s of hours and trial and error sometimes

[Anonymous No.6197287]

Do your Loomis, do your Loomis

Do your Loomis, do your Loomis

Do your Loomis, do your Loomis

Ooooh, do your Loomis

[Anonymous No.6197930]

fwap = trash

[Anonymous No.6197980]

>>6180927
OP you are literally so fucking lazy, if the book isn't working for you move to something else.

people who want to start learning art usually did draw quite a bit when they were kids, this book wouldn't be as intimidating to them, just encouraging.
the objective of the book is to give you an overview of the basics you will need in the future. it's not the first step, nor the last.


if you NEVER picked up a pencil (looks like it's your case) and you want to start with a book I would recommend "Betty Edwards - Drawing on the right side of the brain". even a grandma could start with this one, literally.
just be careful not to take the pseudoscience as actual facts, it's just a way the author uses to keep it easy to explain for beginners.

If you don't like that one or you finish it, move on to Keys to Drawing (similar but good info), a good figure drawing book or anything you are actually interested in.


you have the advantage of getting every decent book as PDF here, so don't focus so much on what doesn't work and move on, try stuff, copy drawings you like, fix errors, ...
you absolutely need to get rid of symbol drawing, learn some proportion techniques and things will go steady from there.

[Anonymous No.6198513]

>>6197980
>If you don't like that one or you finish it, move on to Keys to Drawing (similar but good info), a good figure drawing book or anything you are actually interested in.
Are you serious? Keys to Drawing throws you into deep fucking water as pre/beg/. Or at least that's the case for me anyway, it's way easier to draw shapes on top of eachother in FWaP compared to doing realistc drawings straight away with Keys to Drawing

[Anonymous No.6198519]

>>6198513
>Keys to Drawing throws you into deep fucking water as pre/beg/
It's a book, not an ocean, you won't drown. And stop rating yourself, it's fucking retarded even when you do it ironically.

[Anonymous No.6198659]

>>6198519
Why so?
I know im just a /beg/ but i feel FWaP is easier comapred to Keys to Drawing for a newbie

[Anonymous No.6198667]

>>6198659
For people who aren't autistic or otherwise so broken they can't see any good in anything, Keys shows them that they can draw better than they thought they could by ignoring what they think they see and focusing on what is measurably there. The exercises are supposed to be difficult and the results are supposed to be amusing, it's a confidence builder but you have to have confidence in the first place. Otherwise I agree, FWaP is a much better book for learning constructive methods.

[Anonymous No.6198943]

>>6198667
That's reasonable, thanks for the explanation

[Anonymous No.6198970]

Because Loomis wrote his books back when fundamentals were still taught in schools. So he expected his readers to have some basic skills. He never could have anticipated that the baseline would fall so far. Most art teachers overestimate what their students know and then get all triggered when they draw like retards. Instead they should treat them like retards. That's why Eviston is become so popular. Because his initial lessons involve drawing basic shapes over and over again like a mental patient (or a child who was being taught to draw back in the day) would. Now days they just give kids a bunch of colourful shit and tell them to "express" themselves without teaching them how. Thank God humans can sort of pick up language on their own or we'd all be screeching and grunting at each other now. Oh wait, a lot of people are doing that.

[Anonymous No.6199682]

I don't mean to change the topic, but what do you anons think about Keys to Drawing as a beginner book to learn from?

Personally I'm getting filtered hard by the second practice lesson about drawing your had pointed towards you. Ive been practicing for a month on just the first two lessons, but I keep fucking up. Nothing looks good.

[Anonymous No.6199947]

>>6180927
Some people just repeat memes and dogma. Some people don't realize that you're a literal beginner. Some people don't understand that a beginner doesn't know anything. Some people have been drawing since they were children and don't actually remember anything about learning to draw, so they can't give good advice.

You definitely want to start with something that starts you off drawing cubes and spheres.

[Anonymous No.6199950]

>>6199682
move on to another thing or book if it's too hard for your current skill level (check the chart)
you should try to go close to flow and add progressive overload to learn without stressing too much.

don't aim for perfection, just try your best. or just skip the exercises for a bit and keep reading, then come back to it. find your own way.

[Anonymous No.6199965]

>>6199947
>You definitely want to start with something that starts you off drawing cubes and spheres.
best way to kill your spirit, starting the grind too early


literally just draw stuff you are interested in. when you see it looks like shit start looking for answers or use books/videos to help you fix and improve on your main weakness. why grind circles when you can draw... idk, a simple cartoon you like for example. if you add stuff you like into your "deliberate practice" things will be easier.

this is why the kids that started early and enjoyed it kept drawing, cause it was not a grind for them.


>get rid of symbol drawing, learn some proportion techniques and things will go steady from there.

[Anonymous No.6199982]

>>6199965
I'm not saying to grind fucking circles. I'm saying that if you're going to learn to draw, you should start by learning how to draw. You can learn the gist of drawing a cube in 5 minutes. You can learn to shade a sphere in another 5. You have basic shapes and you can start making things with them and acquiring more tools. This is great for beginners because you'll look at the stuff you draw and feel in disbelief that you drew something so good.

[Anonymous No.6199992]

>>6199982
sure, different people different methods. that can work if you don't spend too much time with it.
just getting a feel of the pencil, shading basic shapes, then move on and come back to it when you need it.

[Anonymous No.6200037]

It this another persona of esdeath schizo or is it just another mentally impaired retard?

[Anonymous No.6202359]

>>6180927
what do you recommend then

[Anonymous No.6202369]

>>6180927
Dont use Loomis, use DALLE2

[Anonymous No.6202408]

>>6199682
>Nothing looks good.
That's the point. Draw what's in front of you.
Try that hand lesson today.

[Anonymous No.6202501]

i'm starting digital design classes on college next month and they have both a character design class and an illustration fundamentals one too
fuck my life i hope i cram everything properly during the 1st term and free my hard drive of the countless GB of /beg/ "tutorials" i've been hoarding without much thought

[Anonymous No.6202600]

>>6181764
>pic
Is that really worth $60? What's so special about the Russian method?

[Anonymous No.6202603]

>>6202600
It's free online, I have it somewhere. The rigor and adherence to doing everything to completion properly, the first time, is what you want to glean from it.

[Anonymous No.6202620]

>>6202603
>It's free online, I have it somewhere
I know, I've already found a pdf of it (unfortunately just Drawing; not his books on Composition and Painting), but I like to own physical copies whenever possible.
>The rigor and adherence to doing everything to completion properly, the first time, is what you want to glean from it.
How is that any different from what you can glean from the French academics? Hell, even studying John Singer Sargent or Thomas Eakins would amount to that.

[Anonymous No.6203214]

>>6199965
You are definitely a trash artist.

[Anonymous No.6203838]

>>6180927
The whole book is about basic volumes you fucking colossal retarded faggot

[Anonymous No.6204334]

>>6203838
No they aren't you stupid idiot. A cartoon head is not a simple volume.

[Anonymous No.6205259]

>>6203214
i know it's bait, but care to explain?

[Anonymous No.6209289]

>>6180927

[Anonymous No.6209311]

>>6205259
New to this conversation, but idk if it's a bait.
I'm always drawing much more and better when it's fun, tho I'm grinding 8h per day.

[Anonymous No.6209434]

anons how do you grind basic forms? i want grind drawing these in different angles,
https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/hollow-or-not-cf17215538e24232bf8e2d47a0254e11
i dont know if there are better resources or better methods.

[Anonymous No.6209446]

>>6180927
I did loomis, but after 1 or 2 years my progress stopped suddenly. After that, I only were able to draw blocky looking faces and bodies. Loomis is a good thing for training your eye, seeing in three dimensions. Seeing, where a hole or bump on an object is, what a lot of artist are not able to do. But that's all, Loomis teaches you.

[Anonymous No.6209595]

>>6180927
The book is as good as it's effects and every fucking /beg/ that posts his fun with le pencil drawings makes me want to hurl because it looks so shit
the book sucks and it's the #1 crab tool
nobody who recommends this shit actually started with it

[Anonymous No.6209605]

>>6191836
/ic/ is unironically way better in this regard than usual social media shit.
You can get tons of reeeee replies if you critique someone. And by critique I mean addressing actual problems and suggesting solutions. The modern internet is a shitty hugbox that does not allow anything that is not overwhelmingly positive.

[Anonymous No.6209717]

Simple, good instructions anyone could follow.