/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

Previously on ALT: >>3537606

>What is /ALT/?

If you're looking for a place to post your cartooning then you've found the right general.

>Rules & Guidelines
(1) Any form of cartooning is welcome; so submit and receive feedback from others. (2) Please resize your images (1000px on either side) before posting. (3) Share your knowledge and (4) Remember to not be afraid of asking for critique.
------
>Community Resources

FellowBro's Book Collection
http://mediafire.com/?i44dwzkf9j9n8

Tutorial & Reference Collection
http://pinterest.com/characterdesigh/

Japanese Tutorials & Documentary
http://www.pixiv.net/member_illust.php?id=59317 (0033)
http://iradukai.com/References
http://www.onairvideo.com/croquis-cafe-photos2.html
http://www.eggazyoutatsu.net/eng/atarichan.html
http://senshistock.com/sketch/

>>2649241
ganbatte senpai!

>>2595610
I'm sorry I can't help it.

My pure imagination work still looks very silly.

pic related

I think I'm still symbol drawing just with slightly more symbols than when I began. Very slightly.

I will never achieve my dream of being a highly mediocre independent animator at this rate; I'm not sure if I don't draw the things I'm weakest at relentlessly like I know I'm supposed to out of sloth or fear or both. Either way I guess I need to stop being a pussy and be a real nigga like Duke Nukem or Merc_Wip. Anyone else hung up?

>>1794913
You're over-thinking it you obstinate fuck. Period.

FWAP is a fun little mostly informal book that happens to extrapolate into more depth including your fucking precious 2point perspective and cubes later on. For fuck's sake, man.

>>1794919
>Loomis is shit

Whatever you say, anonymous internet contrarian fag. Your dismissive comments don't overrule the endorsement of someone like Alex Ross and neither does your Tehmeh jock-sniffing.

>Tehmeh
>believes himself to be intimately familiar with the process and workflow used in each individual piece by an artist that died 20 years or more before he was born

I don't even.

>>1795042
>What do? I can't improve like this ;_;

Apparently you can, because "Tehmeh"® said you can! Just keep drawing shitty forever and as long as you know it's shit and are "critical of it" you'll get just as good as he did when he was grinding studies for 12 hours a day. LOL

>>1794869
>When it comes to perspective the absolute beginner will:
>step1: Fuck up the horizon line
>step2: Apply the ground plane wrong
>step3: Apply crooked veins for "orthogonal lines"
>step4: Fail miserably as they try and follow Hampton's crosshatching

It looks like you missed a step, though. Don't worry I'll cover for you.

>step5: They keep trying until they fucking get it right, nigga

>>1794874
>just look at hampton's sketches there is so much information in them on how he drew the heads. you can see it's build up of cylinders, cuboids, spheres, etc. you can see how he keeps describing the form and therefore reinforcing how important it is to have an understanding of said forms. his drawings make sense and in his book he not only tells you to draw a ball and then add features, he tells you how to build the head and talks about each feature individually.

Are we still comparing Hampton's pure anatomy book for intermediate artists to a beginner's book that covers the basics of multiple rudimentary drawing subjects in a completely light-hearted way?

>>1794869
>When it comes to perspective the absolute beginner will:
>step1: Fuck up the horizon line
>step2: Apply the ground plane wrong
>step3: Apply crooked veins for "orthogonal lines"
>step4: Fail miserably as they try and follow Hampton's crosshatching

It looks like you missed a step, though. Don't worry I'll cover for you.

>step5: THEY KEEP TRYING UNTIL THEY FUCKING GET IT RIGHT

>>1794874
>just look at hampton's sketches: >>1794853
there is so much information in them on how he drew the heads. you can see it's build up of cylinders, cuboids, spheres, etc. you can see how he keeps describing the form and therefore reinforcing how important it is to have an understanding of said forms. his drawings make sense and in his book he not only tells you to draw a ball and then add features, he tells you how to build the head and talks about each feature individually.

Are we still comparing Hampton's pure anatomy book for intermediate artists to a beginner's resource book that covers the basics of multiple rudimentary drawing subjects in a completely light-hearted way?

>>1794849
So what you mean to tell me is it would be far simpler and more effective for a complete beginning artist, i.e. the audience of FWAP, if Loomis drew all of his simplified characters perfectly ensconced in a cube drawn to perspective?

>>1794850
Nice false dichotomy you insecure little queer, the fact is you can finish a Loomis book in a few short weeks if you push yourself you dumbass (In far less time if you're a NEET who isn't a directionless, lazy piece of shit). Keep sniffing Tehmeh's jockstrap though I'm sure it'll do wonders for your improvement.

>>1794834
I just KNEW somebody was going to give me shit for using the word "circle".

>If you want that line to go across it accurately itll be much harder then just doing a simple cube with 2 point perspective.

How could one line across a sphere conceivably be "much harder" than 12 lines lined up to a vanishing point?

The simplified sphere is given depth and mass by the center line drawn through it and that is the means that Loomis teaches form intuitively throughout the book. Perspective is an unnecessary abstraction for the type of beginner that the beginning of FWAP is meant for and is a subject he reserves for the latter portion of the book.

>>1794802
They mean what they sounds like they mean, Loomis never once suggests that you practice drawing a ellipses or lines; he doesn't teach you how to hold your pencil properly etc., these are very important manual skills.

>>1794806
Blooks rock fag, take that shit back or I'm going to slap you in the dick with my butthole you piece of shit

>cubes are much better and easier abstractions that you can build on.

I disagree. That's such bullshit bro, a cube is a far more complex shape than a circle with a line going across it, obviously.

>loomis whole "start with a sphere and them build spheres on another sphere" thing really isn't helpful if you are a beginner that needs to understand form.

I'd think that the plurality of the book is teaching form should be self evident to anyone that's even read the first few pages.

>>1794807
It's through repetition and DOING that we come to this understanding. You can't just hoard learning materials and speed read every third paragraph and think that you're doing shit to advance yourself, you have to be an active participant in the learning process.

>>1794769
People really should take that book more seriously. Loomis' only real failures in this book are teaching the reader to make marks (like Scott Robertson does) and "drawing what they see" (like Betty Edwards does) to begin with which are so key to getting started. Otherwise the book itself is damn good for learning construction. I'm actually trying to trudge through it myself as well. One of the most important things is at this stage I feel is to try and separate yourself from your ego. Of course you probably don't want to draw a lot of the shit Loomis does because it's not an elf chick with rockin' tits or a wizard-warrior with over the top proportions, but if you go through with it and draw every retarded fucking thing he draws you will definitely be that much better by the time you reach the back cover real talk.

>>1780917
M-...muh dick

>>1778690
Are you me?

I'm getting really turned on

Haven't been able to draw for a while so I tried to do a figure strictly from imagination.

I don't know what natural poses or hand movements are like so I sort of made shit up as I went along. Not to mention the legs. I feel there's a tangible posemaniacs influence and I kind of think like this is just an amalgam of one or more poses I'd seen therein, just more off-balance and drawn poorly.

>>1776976
My thoughts exactly

I can see how being able to craft a literal narrative could help one 'conceptualize' a piece but this nigga right here...

>When I think of great drawings (and i usually think of the impressionists and renaissance artists) they look almost as if they are written instead of drawn.

>mfw

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia

>>1776274

I like Harry, he puts a lot of work into his stuff. He's one of the best independent animators I'm aware of. Maybe not as good as Adam Phillips (that's a big maybe, too) but he's still really dedicated to churning out near-tv quality animation (actually considering what can pass for tv quality animation these days he surpasses that easily http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrxlJN-3pEU)) fairly regularly.

>consistently broke

How broke are we saying? When you consider that he's doing what he wants with his life I'd say lack of material wealth isn't too big of a deal; he's sitting there with one hand firmly planted on his nuts doing what he loves while the rest of us non-NEETs are spending hours in some brutal drudgery. He may be working as hard or harder than any of us are at our 9-5, but he works as hard as he does because he's in love with what he can do. He's a total bro in my opinion even if I don't think he's "super hilarious" by any stretch of the imagination 100% of the time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAYf9YJSKXc

>>1770199
As a beginner and someone that works almost exclusively in tablet I feel that mark making is nonetheless faster and far more accurate with pencil and paper, and because of that I feel that you'll get more practicing done in the same amount of time. It's not necessarily that starting with a tablet is bad per se, but I feel that pencil and paper is far better for studying with and I don't think I'm alone on that. If tablet is all you have and all you're willing to work with don't feel like you're completely gimping yourself, though. Most of what admittedly little progress I've made thus far was tablet exclusive, it's just that having picked up pencil recently I've just noticed how much more I can get done when I have such intimate control of the media and how that fit the testimony I'd heard from others on the "digital vs physical" discussion.

>>1767585
Yeah nigga

http://www.quickposes.com/pages/random

>merged the sketch layer into the painting layer

fug

ayy lmao

le bump

The ease of use of pencils has kind of spoiled practicing in digital for me. Lines and rendering is pretty much effortless in comparison despite the fact I've probably drawn 10 times as much on my tablet. I suppose with regards to the lines at least it probably has more to do with the easy availability of being able to rotate the physical media and approach it from comfortable angles without even thinking about it. Maybe I should work on getting used to using the canvas rotation tool in photoshop.

>>1766963
>I'm not getting the hang of this tablet thing.

It looks like you have pretty good control over your strokes. The only thing I'd say looks "wrong" per se about that image is that the nigga's like 5 heads tall.

>I think I chipped my nib.

Until I got a surface cover from "POSR.US" for my Intuos 5 my nibs were getting ground to dust after each individual drawing, it seems. How'd the huh did you end up "chipping" yours?