/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.6442876]

Can you just skip all the books and become a good artist by just drawing and practicing by yourself? no reading books or any tutorials. Just drawing and painting from reference. Think about it, the old masters didn't have these books and YouTube, and they're literally masters? Sometimes I think it's a waste of time to read dozens of art books instead of just.. Drawing, like they did. Plus, I just can't be bothered to read a 250 page art book, half of which is filler and padding out the actual useful tips. Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.6442888]

"just draw" only works if you have natural talent.

[Anonymous No.6442890]

for me the key to improving has been studying other artists and their work. Not alot of reading, just looking at pictures and understanding what makes the great

[Anonymous No.6442891]

>>6442888
>he thinks that’s just “just draw”
s-should we tell him

[Anonymous No.6442892]

>>6442876
>the old masters didn't have these books and YouTube, and they're literally masters

The earliest art textbook dates from the middle ages, they had art teachers even back then, and before that all they did was draw from life, and do master copies.

[Anonymous No.6442906]

old masters didn't surround themselves with low standard shit like you find in deviant art and twitter. they didn't have to be nice and inoffensive to friends with shit art and standards. i can feel some of my skills being robbed away just looking at shit like OP pic. i wonder how many hours i have to spend looking at actual master works to oppose such a misfortune that has afflicted my eyes? everyday my sensibility is assaulted by bad works.

[Anonymous No.6442908]

>>6442906
>they didn't have to be nice and inoffensive to friends with shit art and standards
>american education

[Anonymous No.6442911]

>>6442876
You don't technically need it but it can be a helpful starting point. Do a little a both, study from your own life & inspirations and also pick up a book every once in a while.

[Anonymous No.6442914]

>>6442892
A lot had teachers. Mentorship, apprenticeship etc was 1000x more common back then.
You could get good if you just draw from life every day though. just observe. learn to see. draw what you see not what you think you see.

[Anonymous No.6442919]

>>6442906
Relax dude turn your brain off nerdington lmao

[Anonymous No.6442922]

>>6442876
>the old masters didn't have these books
Books were better back then because the shelves weren't flooded with infotainment

[Anonymous No.6442940]

I read literally hundreds of books related to art throughout the years, be it drawing, painting, philosophy, visual perception, colour, anatomy, botany, visual storytelling, architecture, etc.

But after some years I still had nothing to show for it. Sure I can draw more or less convincingly what I see but the problem is I have no desire to do it. I have nothing to express. I also don't draw porn and random mindless stuff because they are just that, mindless stuff that belongs in the trash.

With that said, a couple of months with a proper teacher taught me more than years of self-study and was significantly cheaper (Just in anatomy books alone I must have spent almost 1k).

Bottom line is, once you have the PRACTICAL experience you absorb theory naturally. If you start with books without experience it will be mostly worthless.

My advice for wannabe artists is to study under a master's (school or classes) that you like.

Don't waste years grinding on your own as I did. What's gonna happen is that you will grow old and you'll have no time due to work, marriage, bills to play etc, and, most importantly, you'll realize that there's no point to do art if not professionally.

Because to be good you must give your all and treat art as your craft and become a craftsman of utmost responsibility in whatever you decide to do.

Give up now and save yourself the wasted time and heartaches or get totally serious with it.

[Anonymous No.6442980]

>>6442908
>>6442919
they didn't have discord filled with zoomers who just want to do meme artworks and quick 20-150 dollar commission bucks. they didn't have calarts making simple works or women artists or pinoys and malays. they were aiming for grand art so they can get paid with bags of ducats or florins by nobility, not low life fans of anime.
they didn't have various little insignificant styles pulling them every which way like a a yoyo played by some glasses asian. they had actual direction.

[Anonymous No.6443020]

>>6442980
Nigger, who cares?

[Anonymous No.6443032]

>>6442980
literally the only way you can have those issues is if you’re a burger zoomer who wants to be an artist rather than actually draw/paint, so who gives a shit

[Anonymous No.6443040]

>>6442876
go to /asg/ with the rest of the ngmi losers and never leave your containment

[Anonymous No.6443055]

>>6442876
>I just can't be bothered to read a 250 page art book, half of which is filler and padding out the actual useful tips. Thoughts?
it's not a fucking novel, you don't have to study them cover to cover.

[Anonymous No.6443536]

>>6442876
If you want to reinvent the wheel because reading a book is too hard, sure. Knock yourself out. Maybe if you study hard enough you'll rediscover the concept of "perspective projection" before you die. Actually, no, you won't, that took... I dunno... a few hundred years of compounded human effort and study? Ah, whatever, just draw, you'll do fine :)

[Anonymous No.6443577]

>>6442876
youre willing to put in several hours a day for years to become a good artist but you dont have the time to read a damn book?

[Anonymous No.6443632]

>>6443032
what a bunch of random nonsense.
everything i said pertains to the op topic, retard. it doesn't matter if you care or not. even if we suppose that some old masters learned learned solely from copying, we don't have the same environment. you cannot deny that stylefags who jump from one style to another trying to look for their "own" style are going to have to waste more time than someone from centuries ago who had less choice. nor that the kind of art and artists you surround yourself with have influence on your own art, and for most artists today, it is easier to be surrounded by shit art. it's easy for begs to be impressed by lackluster int works. not about me.
it's possible to learn from just copying, but you need a clear goal more than ever, and to detach yourself from bad artists, which means the journey is even more alone.

[Anonymous No.6443655]

>>6442888
There is no such thing as natural talent.
>>6442876
As long as your working from actual references or from life I don’t see why not. It gets problematic when your only working from your mind but as long as you’ve got something to compare your work to and know if it’s getting good you should be able to avoid all sorts of teaching.

[Anonymous No.6443826]

>>6442888
Never 100k

[Anonymous No.6444118]

>>6443632
didn’t read lol

[Anonymous No.6444156]

>>6442876
I think you can do that to some degree. i mean, started drawing when i was like 12 with only a "how to draw chibis" book from the mall to help me, and i did eventually get moderately good, better than my peers at least.

But when i finally did start using art books, i realized that a lot of the knowledge it had taken years for me to acquire couldve been easily learned in like 30 minutes of reading. So you can, itll just take way longer and be unnecessarily hard, and im not sure why you would ever do it.

[Anonymous No.6444167]

I read some perspective which I never use, went through gesture part of hampton, but everything I learned was from videos, art forums, critiques, & reference.

[Anonymous No.6444173]

>>6442876
Yeah ofc. But U have to do at least 8 hrs a day like the Old Masters because they treated like it was their job while being mentored.

[Anonymous No.6445941]

>>6442940
>Sure I can draw more or less convincingly what I see
If you can do this you're practically an outlier compared to the average person. Even people who draw regularly just draw fun doodles and don't take it that seriously.

[Anonymous No.6448543]

>>6442876
>just draw
doesn't work and the fact that people on here try to imply that it means more than what it is saying is coping for their ignorance and inability to properly define or explain a process in which one could partake with great reliablity
>250 page art book, half of which is filler and padding
artists have a particular sense of dunning kruger when it comes to writing which is also reinforced by their bloated sense of worth solely on the fact that they can draw well
99% of artbooks are going to be filler and this is something you're going to have to live deal with to find the information that is actually useful
>Robert Beverly Hale: Drawing Lessons from the Masters
use this book as a template for what an artbook should look like when it comes to the information and artwork therein
however, you will still need to pirate and download hundreds of artbooks, flip through them, and develop discernment for which books are trash (anything by meme crilley), which have some useful information (most animator books), which are for copying and ignoring all the text (Bridgman), and which to treasure (mentioned above)
>old masters
anon, you're talking about the less than 1% that we know about who were prodigies and are not conclusive to the majority of artists at that time which is not a good way to look at this objectively
some people have an innate ability to improve quicker, and without instruction, than others which is where this "talent" comes into play
it is not the skill they are born with but the aptitude to pursue it with intelligence which most of us non-talented people lack--which means we require intricate instruction and deliberate practice

or, just draw and see where that gets you
if you don't have talent, good luck getting out of /beg/