[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

View post   
File: 672 KB, 1116x1280, Andrew-Loomis-Book-Fun-With-A-Pencil.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6473732 No.6473732 [Reply] [Original]

Is he actually that good for people starting out, or is it a noob trap?

>> No.6473738

Both.

If he's what can get you drawing, then it's being successful. But there's better start points than fun with a pencil.

>> No.6473741

You should go through his books to learn what you need to learn then go to books completely dedicated on those things, Loomis is kind of an all-around guide that you refer back to, not something you should 100% rely on, that's actually true of most instruction books.

>> No.6473883

>>6473732
Only works if you have average or above intelligence.

>> No.6473891

>>6473732
He has completed works as a professional artist instead of being a full time art instructor. I'd take him over the others anytime of the day.

>> No.6473909

I prefer Preston Blair's books for cartoony construction as opposed to FWAPencil. Preston Blair's cartoony style is a bit more applicable to modern cartoons than Loomis's. The fundamental concept are the same, but I honestly find Loomis's cartoon heads to be hideous.

>> No.6473919

>>6473732
A lot of what makes instruction work is your faith and enthusiasm in the instruction. This makes Loomis far above average because he is both competent and starts by teaching construction from imagination, which most beginners will find more fun than grinding studies all day.

Really, you need to stop looking for permission and get to work. All the most popular book recommendations are basically okay. The Russian Drawing Method is okay .Most Atelier's are okay. Construction and cartooning adjacent methods like Loomis are okay. All of them require a bunch of work.

>> No.6473943

I liked fwap and it helped me improve, mostly because it didn't feel like a chore drawing dozens of faces. The cartoony faces themselves are dated but it's not that big a deal.

>> No.6473953

>>6473909
>animators

>> No.6473984

>>6473732
Loomis is very good. So is Jack Hamm, who is maybe a little more beginner friendly.

>> No.6473993

>>6473732
loomis is perfectly fine but you need to treat his drawings as examples rather than formulas