Just picked this up, I thought itd be another one of those shitty "draw a dog with just 5 lines!" books but its actually gold and teaches a good ammount of fundamentals very well
>ITT: Gems you wish you knew earlier
This is the best perspective book I have ever read, unfortunately I only came across it when I already understood everything in it. Another great one is foundations in comic book art which is the best book on fundamentals Ive seen yet. If you could combine these with something on colour and something on anatomy on would have a hell of a curriculum.
>>2340515
That's the worst loomis book.
Anyways Michael Hampton is definitely the best at teaching construction
>>2340576
anyone have a pdf?
>>2340648
they are both on cgpeers
>>2340658
sweet thank you
>>2340693
I could upload them somewhere, where is the easiest place to upload to?
>>2340715
mega.nz is pretty good.
>>2340693
i got u nigga, google " framed-ink-vanishing-point-for-comics-cw- " and use the second link
>>2340764
Google track your browser history and thus changes the results of the search depending on who "you are"
>>2340724
here it is, I put a bunch of other stuff up too https://mega.nz/#F!yNtjULZR!PYYcsM1Cnx9fgiOJdhps7w
>>2340764
Google track your browser history and thus changes the results of the search depending on who "you are". So your results will be different than mine
>>2340769
Thanks man, I really appreciate it
>>2340642
>That's the worst loomis book.
really? I see it recommended for beginners all the time though
>>2341009
Don't listen to him he's just a butthurt contrarian. Hampton is good though and also worth a read.
>>2341009
Because that's the audience the book was made for, beginners, and it does a great job of getting their feet wet without intimidating them.
>>2340769
thank you!
>>2340769
Thanks, anon!
>>2340769
Fukken based
>>2341021
>>2341009
>>2341023
The book is the first book Andrew loomis did and it shows, a lot of the explanations in the book are poor compared
to the other books and there are way too big leaps in skill for beginners in the book with the realistic and cartoon constructions.
All the other loomis books are simply better they might look more "intimidating" but in the end are actually easier and more useful.
>>2340515
Absolutely hated this book. "Here, draw stupid caricature heads for fukken ages. Good luck son."
>>2341327
keked, is exactly what i feel right now, i can't imagine caricatures, my mind is shit. i just want to draw something that looks good.
>>2341345
Keys to drawing and Perspective made easy -> Head and hands, and figure drawing by loomis and Michael Hampton -> Other things
>>2340642
just read a couple if pages, and it explain gesture far better than loomis
thanks anon
Loomis is too wordy. Or maybe his writing style is just dated but it seems like a chore to read just to get to the information you need.
>>2340642
Literrally the only good book Loomis have is fun with a pencil, and is just good for beginners
man I just dont get loomis
>>2340515
blog?
>>2341571
>hasn't read the other books
>probably didn't even finish Fun with a Pencil as it builds in complexity towards the end
Nigga...please!
>>2342091
Its easy, just dump fun with pencil to the trashcan and pick up heads and hands instead.
Back when I was trying to get into the comic industry, my male anatomy wasn't consistent. Once I found this book, my anatomy improved tenfold. Enough to get interest from publishers.
>>2342616
Is this the same Bridgman I hear so much about?
>>2342616
Post your work
>>2342621
No. Yes. Well sorta...
There are several original Bridgman books that he wrote himself. This is one of them. Actually this was the book Frazetta famously claimed to have gone through and copied the drawings in one night as a teen.
Posthumously, there was a single book that compiled lessons from all of Bridgman's books into what is "Bridgman's complete guide to Drawing from Life", which is a good place to start, but somewhat overwhelming.
I recently finished going through that book, towards the end I was managing to draw through 5 pages in an hour because it was so knowledge dense, and the book was 350 pages long!
>>2343064
>Posthumously, there was a single book that compiled lessons from all of Bridgman's books into what is "Bridgman's complete guide to Drawing from Life"
I can't recommend that book enough. You can find it in the book thread, physical copies aren't outrageously expensive either and if you're anything like me I recommend getting an actual copy that'll incentivize you actually reading it.
While I didn't gain a tremendous amount from the text, the drawings were incredibly educational to me. I copied a few and got a bit of a grasp of his method of expressing the figure and a lot of parts of the body I had trouble with (especially hips and calves) sort of just fell into place. I think Bridgman's great to just study drawings from, he's really good at simplifying the form into a few curves and angles that you can wrap your head around.
>>2343064
>>2343069
I'm gonna go ahead and say the opposite here: don't buy his "Complete Guide". As was pointed out, it was gathered posthumously and consists of pieces of his other books chosen at random and taken out of order and context. In fact contrary to the title it is far from complete. You are far better off buying individual books like Constructive Anatomy and The Human Machine and working your way through those as the text actually makes sense and the books are laid out so that it builds upon lessens earlier on it. Each of those books is smaller, more digestible, and better overall. And they are all cheap so you can pick up multiple different ones for barely any cost.
>>2343082
as >>2343069 I'm not going to disagree, but I will just say that it's a nice little treatise and handy to have laying around for quick reference. Though like I said, I didn't gather as much from the text as I did from just studying his drawings, so the guy is probably correct that the other books are laid out better as educational material.
>>2343064
>Actually this was the book Frazetta famously claimed to have gone through and copied the drawings in one night as a teen.
I'd love to hear that straight from the Frazetta's mouth. That sounds like a really good exercise; now that I can draw fairly quickly I might challenge myself to do that. Probably wouldn't be too hard.
>>2343110
Gonna be hard to hear it from his mouth at this point, I hear he doesn't talk much these days.
Also for the unaware, Frazetta would lie a ton about his process and learning in order to make himself sound more impressive (especially once he got older). It's a pretty obvious lie when he said he learned all he knows about anatomy in a single night.
>>2343122
I don't know the quote, but copying all the drawings of a book in a night and learning all you know about anatomy in a night are two very different things.
It's feasible - if time consuming - to copy all of the drawings in a book in a night if you were really determined. Can't say any drawing would be particularly good but it's definitely feasible, and you'd probably learn a thing or two from that sort of marathon.
>>2343137
After thumbing through Bridgman's CA I am hesitant to believe he did it in one night. I saw two claims, one being overnight and another over a weekend and that one is much more believable. However I can't seem to find a quote by Frazetta himself which is really unfortunate.
>>2342623
This is from my old portfolio. There are plenty of mistakes but it shows where Bridgeman's book took me in terms of beginning to understand musculature rather than faking it.
Newbie "artist" here. Getting into drawing and I was wondering, should I try this book and its counterparts>>2342616 ? What would I learn from them?
>>2343273
Not sure how newbie you are but if you are a complete beginner don't get that book yet, go to the artbook thread and get a book called keys to drawing by bert dodson.
>>2340515
> I thought itd be another one of those shitty "draw a dog with just 5 lines!"
kek
Your first drawing exercise shouldn't be something so complex like a face. That's what I hate about Dodson and Edwards too, they all just jump into the middle. Peter Han only rarely gets mentioned and yet he is the one who actually says, well, how about you start at the (actual) fucking basics? Draw lines. It's like the difference between starting to learn a language by first memorizing the grammatical rules or actually go from the alphabet and work your way up.
>>2345098
Him and Scotty Robertson's How to Draw book
>>2345906
https://mega.nz/#F!es1BSKQR!spODyd0iaQmMelGA2GscFw!f8cG3QAK
here you go ƒam
this has both the Scott Robertson How to Draw PDF and Peter Han's videos (only the 1st course)
>>2345906
scott robertson's how to draw is a pretty dense book. not sure i'd reccomend it for complete begginners. I have a physical copy and it goes far into perspective/design. techniques for copying curves in perspective/mirroring. it's a lot to wrap your head around to start.
i'd say peter han is a good starting point
I'll ask here :
Any books that focus on women's anatomy particularly? I honestly do not care about drawing males, I might never do. All the stuff I'm looking at features males.
>>2346185
Do both. Drawing girls is fun, but you gotta draw a guy or two sometimes.
>>2345098
My problem is I've been doodling and cartooning like a peasant with bad techniques for years. Now that I want to draw, it's hard not to emulate Loomis exercises, sort of accomplish them and then feel like an idiot when we go from silly cartoons to actual anatomy or perspective.
>>2346185
This one is pretty good. But I do recommend what this guy says>>2346197
>>2343273
I haven't seen any other Bridgman books other than Constructive Anatomy and I'm new enough here that I don't know how well known he is.
This was an intermediate book for me after 3 years of life drawing courses. Its what I went to for accurate portrayal of male muscles and mass. I also really like his take on hands. He's the reference I would go to once you learn figures in perspective and want to understand what the muscles should be doing. It allowed me realism for males short of drawing the tiny dongs.
Copy his references over and over again. You will gain a strong fundamental of the male mass and musculature. It worked for me, except for faces and females.
>read fun with a pencil
eh, its okay I guess, kinda lame though and I learned most this by browsing /ic/
>start reading figure drawing
>people walking behind me look at me with disgust as if I'm looking at porn
>I'm not even badly drawing yet
I hate people.
>>2348490
>people walking behind me look at me with disgust as if I'm looking at porn
they sound like prudes. it's not like they don't see themselves naked every time they get out of the shower.
I have troubles with first part of the book. I draw a ball as Loomis asks. Then Andy demands me to sketch in features - i sketch in front side but then i have a problem - how do i sketch in receding features? They sure are foreshortened in his illustrations but he doesnt say how to calculate this foreshortening!
Further in his book there will be a :projection: method where you draw parallel lines from features on front view to profile view. However, such parallel lines do not answer the question about :depth: )how much between two eyes when you are moving from profile to front for example).
So how do i sketch receding part of face in the ball?
>>2346285
I got pretty butthurt when the translator admitted to cutting out all the things Richer said about ethnic variations because muh raycismz.
>>2348879
"Fun with pencil" was his first book and it shows, he doesn't explain stuff there. I ditched it for his drawing heads book and then I ditched it again to see Proko on YouTube. Proko helped me and I recommend him as a complete beginner.
>>2348875
Figure drawing in public is a bad idea. It shouldn't be but it is. As an artist you learn so much by drawing the human form in the nude but too many people think that drawing is some magic that you just conjure up and draw something pretty. Not to mention I've heard too many nightmare stories of guys being chased out of public areas because some cunt thinks the guy is drawing her or drawing kids.
>>2341504
I'm glad someone else feels this way. I don't like the way Loomis writes. I find it really boring. I get that maybe in his time the way he was writing was fun and engaging but to me I find myself skimming though to get to the shit I need.
>>2340576
I have herd anons say it's a good book but the perspective on the cover looks bad.
does anyone have free photoshop? I had it on my other laptop and i cant reget it or tranfer it. Am I being a retard or what?
Halp anons
>>2350836
yes
> what is called a "crack"
>>2350845
can you sort me out?
Last time i just had codes?
>>2350862
Well, I downloaded mine a while ago and deleted all the initial files, after I had installed the program.
I found the torrent searching torrentz.eu
Hope it's still there, otherwise I can't help, Anon.
>>2350881
Thanks anon ill check it out
>>2350736
As long as you aren't drawings nudes people are usually fine with being drawn in public, assuming you aren't shit.
I've had a woman actually ask me if she could keep a quick drawing I was doing of her once she noticed and we got it all sorted out.
>>2350949
>we got it all sorted out.
You guys went behind a dumpster and had a quickie or are you a classy bloke and took her in the men's room?
>>2351322
I'm a gentleman, I took her out to dinner and we fucked while she did my laundry.
My face features appear flat. What are exact tools to create an illusion of volume when doing face features?
