I really can't read Loomis. Fun with a pencil is fucking bullshit for 8 year old kids. And the eye of the painter is a fucking long rant about shit that isn't teaching me how to draw.
Did i get the wrong books? What the fuck do you mean "practice loomis" the guy isnt teaching art at all.
Yes im mad
>>2324195
>>2324197
I wish I was b8ing but I really want advice on which Loomis book to read or what to do. I'm desperate for some good instruction.
>>2324199
It's a meme, you fell for it
>>2324199
Creative illustration is his only relevant book
>>2324202
If you're actually serious, try Bargue Drawing Course (pdf is online).
Its basically a no bullshit book for learning how to see. Basically there are a bunch of drawings in the book and you have to copy them. Each drawing builds on the previous ones.
Actually I'm surprised its not recommended here more often since it actually gives beginners something to do.
>>2324195
Maybe if you got through more than the first page and was slightly patient you'd get to the actual content
>>2324195
http://www.ctrlpaint.com
>>2324195
If you are too stupid to figure out the books that are relevant for your goal, you will never make it as an artist. Just quit now before wasting any more time with it. Art requires analytical, critical thinking, self-initiative and autonomous learning skills, all things you clearly don't have considering the Loomis books have the subjects they cover in their fucking title.
I mean, honestly, how dumb does one have to be to look at a list of books called "fun with a pencil", "figure drawing for all its worth", "drawing the head and hands", "creative illustration" then picking the one called "fun with a pencil" and then complaining about a lack of serious art instructions?
YOU HAVE BEEN DECEIVED BY THE DEMIURGE LOOMIS, FREE YOUR SOUL AND SEEK UNION WITH THE ONE TRUE GOD
>>2324698
Vilppu is pretty bad for beginners to be honest. I have never seen anyone on /ic/ who studies Vilppu who is remotely decent at drawing the human body. Their figures always look like marshmallow men with completely fucked up proportions and giant tumors where the muscles are supposed to be.
Loomis has a far cleaner approach, no feely gestures and a thousand wrapping lines and shit, just straight forward figure drawing with a mannequin, proper perspective and proportions. That's what beginners need to learn. Vilppu is something you can study when you are already a professional and want to push your figure drawing skills to the next level.
>>2324195
>eye of the painter is a fucking long rant about shit that isn't teaching me how to draw.
>painter
It sure as fuck isn't teaching you how to draw. It's teaching you the most important prerequisite: how to see.
>>2324707
I have never seen anybody on /ic/ who is remotely good at drawing period. Save for a few exceptions but you get the point.
/ic/ should not be used as a grading tool for the success of a particular system, ever.
Loomis used the sight size method to draw his stuff, and couldn't draw from imagination.
So his weird skeleton mannequin is some kind of weird system that he himself didn't even use.
Figure drawing for all it's worth is also 75% just random pencil drawings of naked people.
Vilppu has an high focus and basic forms, and explains them well and systemically in his book.
He also teaches how to combine all of that knowledge into the actual drawing process.\
But whatever, to each his own I guess.
>>2324798
Vilppu's teachings only come in video form? That's all I can find. I prefer books but I'll watch the videos if it is the only thing available.
>>2324707
loomis was a magpie. he used Lutz's books to design his own, took Lohte's and Hatton's notes on painting to supplement his vapid presentations on perspective and composition. He borrowed heavily from Bridgman and Perad for anatomy. And for what? For stiff shit that has no life.
Loomis is basically the sparkchart of illustration teachings during his time.
>>2324563
but im not trying to learn digital
>>2324200
wait really? lol
i fell for it too if you're being honest
>>2324843
Vilppu's Drawing Manual might be helpful for ya. You can find it here: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B8VO-JQCy3HgZ0U3QkVvVm4wREE&usp=sharing
Some stuff in eye of the painter is actually really important if you're trying to draw things that aren't people from life at all.
Wish I read it earlier.
>>2324195
Loomis is pretty decent, but he just does not work for everyone. Op, what do you want to work on tough?
First you need to know what you want to draw, and how bad you are. Posting an image you drew is ussually a good start (here or any other critique forum.
Basics? Shapes, lines, colours, then onwards to constucting 3d things in perspective. Perspective itself is a huge part of drawing. And the grind to get proportions right.
Not everything needs to be from a book, look up tutorials online. And not just one per problem, but once you get stuck somewhere find like 4 different or more tutorials, and go trough them, and find what works for you best.
>>2324845
It's funny how Loomis really is /ic/.
All the faggots here tell you to do is read the sticky and do whatever with it.
All Loomis did was read the sticky of his times and make a bunch of shit manuals from the pieces.
Jack Hamm is much better for begginers, then Bridgman for anatomy and construction, then Vilppu for movement, gesture and advanced construction and Scott McCloud for learning to compose a picture worth looking at.
>>2324563
>check the store
>those fucking prices
Are you fucking kidding me?
>>2327515
I don't know if that's good but i use this site, it's a decent alternative to ctrlpaint I suppose? I like drawing the human body and there are more related choices there, that's for sure
https://cubebrush.com/
>>2327193
If only the sticky explicitly told beginners to work with more than just Loomis
Oh wait it fucking does you shitbrain
>>2328823
It shouldn't recommend Loomis at all.
>>2329552
Ok then what should it recommend?
Could you provide a forward suggestion rather than discourse?
>>2324195
> Fun with a pencil is fucking bullshit for 8 year old kids.
HHAHAH
>>2332680
It kinda is desu
>Read FWaP because I want to learn to draw human beings
>instead get a hundred pages of how to draw fat Rockwell toons from the 1940s
>>2332693
This. Loomis is great if you wanna get into comics, but for something more realistic try Bridgman instead. And for quick reference "Atlas of Human Anatomy for the Artist" (by Rogers) is also pretty neat.
>>2332693
FWAP is a deceptively advanced drawing book that teaches you how to draw anything by reverse engineering caricatures of middle aged men
>>2332693
did you get to DOOHINKUS ? yea i admit it's pretty weird but when you really get into it it'll teach you how to draw a human body and face , he has other serious books as well
