Ok guys, vote.
https://strawpoll.me/6700919
where's Christopher Hart and Mark Crilley
Love me some hamm
>>2377104
Well meme'd
>>2377100
Name a better anatomy book that isn't Micheal Hampton
>Pro tip: you can't
>>2377110
Paul Richer, I'd have included him but he doesn't talk about art or drawing at all, solely anatomy. Same reason Peck isn't in.
>Someone unironically chose Hamm
>No heads in 3/4
>No perspective
>No construction
>Bridgman
>Pictures don't read great majority of time
>No perspective
>abysmal, backwards head construction technique
>Vilppu
love him to death but
>no construction
>no perspective
>no anatomy outside of his video courses
>Hampton
>Only Anatomy
>Implied perspective
Loomis, no fucking contest. Hampton is only close because his book is in color which is very useful.
>>2377115
>Paul Richer
Woah, I didn't know about him, he's pretty cool, thanks.
>>2377100
Where's KJG tho?
what is the best portrait drawing method (where my end goal is sargent's style)
??
Vilppu's Drawing Manual helped me the most.
The only person who made me understand anatomy clearly was Scott Eaton but he uses Richer's plate tho
>>2377140
Maybe proko's
>>2377100
Img of Peck, no Peck.
No Bammes.
>who is the best author
>the only person on the list that covers a variety of artistic subjects is in second to a person that only does anatomy and gesture
Contrarian hipster meme thread. It would only make sense if the question was "Which author has the best book on the subject of anatomy".
>>2377128
>vilppu
>no construction
Haha, holy shit are you retarded you fucking nigger.
Vilppu is the based God of forms.
>>2377100
if it's to choose from OP pic I go with bridgman since I like the way he draws hands and I think I am starting to uncover a hand fetish
>>2377254
You caught me nappin'. (Ur still gay tho)
Loomis > Vilppu > Hampton > Bridgman > rest
>>2377389
Honestly Hampton's approach is probably the best to anatomy alone even though his heads and faces all look the same and all look like fucking neanderthals (I wish I was joking). If it's overall I give it to Loomis for covering EVERYTHING even if he's perhaps not the best at covering any individual thing. Vilppu is the living master so he's definitely worth taking a look at of course, too. Bridgman on the other hand is totally dated. He doesn't draw heads or faces well, and his drawings are essentially visual gibberish a good deal of the time.
Loomis > Vilppu > Hampton > Rest
Why none have included Steve Huston of NMA here? I watched some of his vids and I liked them.
>>2377453
He's included in with Michael Hampton because supposedly Hampton basically ripped him off.
>>2377491
Their drawing style does look similar, especially tied hair which they tend to draw during gesture.
>>2377115
peck concludes each section of his anatomy book with 2 or more pages of explanatory sketches on how to draw the anatomy.
Bridgman+Speed+Bammes is Elder god tier. Like steak, potatoes and broccoli.
/thread.
>>2377100
Bridgman isn't afraid to exaggerate and it makes his pieces so much more interesting to look at, while maintaining the realistic aspect. He's easily top tier in terms of teaching strategy and execution.
>>2377389
Vilppu>Loomis>Hampton>Bridgeman>rest
For me.
Vilppu has helped me the most, not taking anything away from the others.
>>2377610
>he likes broccoli
Opinion discarded
>>2377927
>he doesn't like broccoli
are you 12
>>2377930
Broccoli is actually pretty good. I still think Pea pods are goat though.
>>2377930
22. You see, I've refined my palate over the years and don't like broccoli anymore. Literally every other green vegetable is better than broccoli and thats a fact; even brussel sprouts. You aren't a grown up just because you pretend to like that awful vegetable. Eat some cauliflower its the same thing with actual taste
>>2377934
Cauliflower sucks nigga
>>2377453
Seconded. Huston should've made the list, voted for Hampton because he's my second favorite
>>2377937
I don't think Huston ever wrote a book, and if he did it would be pretty much identical to what his former student, Michael Hampton, wrote
>>2377100
What book is that loomis arm from?
>>2377140
sight/size Bargue method
>>2377128
>Muh god loomis
Had to be a nigger.
>>2377237
Nobody likes Mario.
And you shouldn't either, go get the best anatomy from Richer, construction from Hampton, form from Vilppu, perspective from Norling, plus composition and storytelling from McCloud.
Or you could get a washed out version of everything stuffed with shitty esoteric rethoric from Loomis.
You're just a bunch of lazy niggers who would rather "study" one bad book than five awesome sources. Loomis is shit as a teacher and the fact that nobody has gotten gud in all the years /ic/ has been a thing should be enough proof as literally nobody ele puts Loomis in such a pedestal.
>no Huston
>no Watts
shit thread
>>2377974
Figure drawing - For all its worth
>>2378015
>>2378026
We all know you haven't read any of the books by any of these authors and that you don't know dick about anything; stop trying force your "anyone but Loomis" meme because it isn't going to work on anyone that doesn't suffer from Microcephaly.
>>2378057
Again, neither of them are authors. You're right about the thread, though. You can almost guarantee that 90% or more of the people that responded to the poll haven't worked through a single art book even close to all the way through by any of these authors, and Bridgman's 100 year old scribbly mess of a book being anywhere near the top tier is proof enough of this.
>>2377100
>No Bammes
fuck off
>>2378601
>Bammes
overrated nazi
>>2378613
>>2378614
stay mad :^
>>2378601
If you included foreign language shit there'd be no end.
How about Burne Hogarth
Anyway I read Vilppu and I think it's very great, Loomis is a bit too constrained in its own rules
>>2378767
Glen Keane is a notable artist who studied Hogarth's book, same with Marko D. How people can give him shit for his "exaggerated" style but go on to praise Bridgman I'll never know. A lot of the pages are, in my opinion, unintentionally hilarious though because of the flamboyantly posed muscle men everywhere.
![erectusspinaeanatomy[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/bXAPh50.jpg "erectusspinaeanatomy[1].jpg")
Eliot Goldfinger?
>>2377109
>draw the rest of the fucking owl
O-okay...
>>2379107
What? That step-by-step shows literally everything. The only changes from 7 to 8 are that the lines were cleaned up, the construction shapes were erased and a tiny bit of detail was added.
>>2379115
The people who coplain about Hamm need an excuse not to think for themselves.
He's extremely barebones and that's good for begginers because it gets you drawing instead of reading irrelevant anecdote.
>But he doesn't teach 3/4th view
If you cannot rotate his construction you're a retard and don't desserve instruction.
1 month of Hamm, 9 months of Vilppu, 2 months of Richer is how you get someone from zero to comissionable in a year.
>>2379646
>If you cannot rotate his construction you're a retard and don't desserve instruction.
This is what Hammtards actually believe
>>2377128
>muh loomis
Fucking die in a fire
Hampton's one book shits on every book that Loomis ever did
Prove me wrong
You fucking can't
As if anatomy was the only important thing when drawing/painting
Loomis is indeed very good but he's not a good teacher. His books only confuse beginners. I remember starting out with Fun With a Pencil because it was in the sticky and had no fucking idea what I was doing. That first sphere exercise was some mindfuckery retarded.
When I read Hampton and watches his videos, everything just clicked for me. Vilppu also has some good videos.
>>2379646
That's all well and good for figure DRAWING but what if you want to be great at painting?
Seems there aren't so many definitive books we've settled on being worth reading.
>>2377128
Im currently watching hamptons video series, and it covers perspective well enough for people who know what it is.
I mean i honestly dont feel like you should have everything bundled in 1 book. If you want to learn perspective, you have books that handle that alone.
>>2379659
'Duh I'm Michael Hampton I stole everything I know about drawing the figure from Steve Huston and made a book about it; I hope nobody notices all of my heads and faces look like the same retarded cro magnon whether I'm drawing a male or female duurr'
'Ugga bugga, you buy Michael Hampton book "Figure Drawing Desifn and Invention". Him teach you draw head in right way just like he do! Blog!'
'You still no convinced? Buy book today and see what you missing! Blog!'
>>2377100
i just noticed there's no gurney here
where tf is gurney?
>>2380030
Shake my head; can't you see I'm trying to meme over here nigga? Goddamn.
>>2380027
>build models to draw from imagination :^)
Hacks not welcome.
LOOMIS
O
O
M
I
S
>>2380030
Looks like a lot teachers don't like Hampton. Watts for example said he's just bad Huston rip-off who steal from other artists without any credit
Andrew.
>>2380082
what? do drawing/painting techniques belong to the people who came up with them now? the entire foundation of art education is learning and sharing techniques other people have come up with along with your own ideas or permutations
>>2380042
but color and light is a great book anon ):
>>2380122
I've read parts of his blog and he comes off such a faggot, he's technically proficient of course, just really dull and calculated.
>>2380129
He also tries to get SJW for no reason at all.
>>2380129
what
From reading his blogposts, Gurney seems like a total bro to me
>>2380129
He is pretty faggy. And the way he talks is pretty cringey.
>>2380160
yeah totally. he talks like a fag and his shit's all retarded. shit tier no homo
>>2380178
It's pretty important if you're teaching anything to be engaging, Gurney just isn't, compare his blog to David Apatoff's which is basically doing the same thing but way more interesting.
>>2377100
Bridgam prove that he can do better with less
>>2377100
> Dat Bridgman wrist
>>2380082
He does give credit to Loomis, Vilppu, Hogarth etc on the last page of the book.
>>2380839
less information considering this is an anatomy guide?
>>2381174
Everyone but the person he took everything he knows from. That's ice cold. Michael Memeton really is a dick.
Favourite anatomy book by far. Hasn't been translated yet though.
>>2381177
Was Hampton taught by Huston? Because Huston doesn't have any anatomy books written to my knowledge and Hampton only credits artists who have books written about these subjects, so his students can check them out.
>>2380082
source on that?
>not a single mention of Scott Robertson in this thread
lol
>>2381372
This thread is about artists who teach the human figure.
>>2381369
funkymonkey1945
Or you can ask Watts himself
>>2381373
scott robertson teaches you how to draw literally anything through mastery of perspective
pair this with drawing from life under your own direction and you can draw figures with the best of them
the reason so many artists here are stunted is because they think they'll get better at drawing people if they study the human figure to a doctor's level of medical accuracy, while it's important to know what's connected to what, this doesn't teach you shit about actually drawing a figure
So I should continue reading Loomis or all of the people in the vote?
>>2381378
>blah-blah-blah I'm captain obvious and this is my secret knowledge about perspective
Yes we know who is Scott Robertson here. He doesn't teach how to draw human figure. That's all
>>2381382
nice counterargument
good luck with your education
>>2381385
Counterargument for what, retard?
>>2381378
>pair this with drawing from life under your own direction and you can draw figures with the best of them
Not really. I mean, you obviously seem to have studied Robertson's book and done life drawing under your own direction and you can't draw figures with the best of them.
>>2381400
>you obviously seem to have studied Robertson's book and done life drawing under your own direction and you can't draw figures with the best of them.
this statement based on nothing
>>2381405
Because you posted nothing. You're a /b/-tier retard beginner trying to force a meme based on your own inexperience. If your own art was any good you wouldn't be posting art by KJG to promote Robertson as if they're somehow related; you will never share your 'Loomis-free' mastery because it isn't there.
>>2377100
betty edwards plz
>>2381378
>the reason so many artists here are stunted is because they think they'll get better at drawing people if they study the human figure to a doctor's level of medical accuracy, while it's important to know what's connected to what, this doesn't teach you shit about actually drawing a figure
They'll never admit it.
/ic/ can't draw, not because they don't know the human figure, but because that's all they know.
But no, keep on Loomis, all you need is more Loomis and you'll be Ruan Jia someday.
>>2382655
Post your work
>>2381678
>kim jung gi and Robertson arent related
Confirmed for knowing nothing about either artist
>>2382660
>against all odds he's still shitposting
Okay, go read Scott Robertson's book exclusively and try and draw a human being afterwards like KJG does autismo.
>>2382655
Post your work
2
>>2382663
None of these "authorities" on what /ic/ "should be reading" have any work to show. Take it from me, underwater-gate-guardian-wip-guy
>>2382662
>shitposting
But you're objectively wrong
Kim draws using perspective heavily, read any interview of his, watch any demo. He thinks using boxes in correct perspective. Combined with the fact he draws constantly from life (like I said) is what makes his work.
Keep being narrow minded though, im sure if you religiously study every tendon in the body you'll become a master figure drawing, like every doctor in the world
>>2382670
Okay, go read Scott Robertson's book exclusively and try and draw a human being afterwards like KJG does autismo.
>>2382676
childish and you can't read. amazing
good luck with your education
>Scott Robertson shill ruined this thread
Like /pol/ fanatic who can to turn even discussion about cats into /pol/ shit.
>>2383080
>one person mentions scott robertson and another poster gets mad about it
the thread is hardly ruined
>>2383080
But cats are cucked bluepill shit because sjw bitches worship them, you retard.
>There are people who don't like Vilppu
The dude straight up teaches you form and to see everything as shapes.
READ A BOOK NIGGA CAUSE WE GON LEARN SHAPES.
>>2383522
He's kind of beginner core, and only teaching you about figure drawings, nothing wrong with that of course, but I only want more advanced teaching material.
Not surprising the more advanced books are barely mentioned on /ic/.
>>2383527
That's why he's good, he gives artists a jump-start to understanding what they're drawing and to make sketching easier.
No one on /ic/ mentions them because one can simple go into an Artbook thread and download a book and do advance steps from there.
>>2383527
>Not surprising the more advanced books are barely mentioned on /ic/.
Because we watch videos, autismo
>>2377100
Who is the best at x?
I have vilppu for gestures and humans in general
loomis is great at prespective
Who else should I be digging into?
>>2377100
I hope you know that all those three arms are completely in different rotation and angle
>>2377109
Digging the method. I need this book. How it's called?
>>2381369
He said Hampton is a good, user friendly place to start with anatomy.
>>2383920
Drawing the head and figure.
>>2381305
>Hasn't been translated yet though.
no, NO!
>>2377174
This desu
>>2377100
The first one is organized and depicts the subject clearly without cluttering it with emotion or style, the second one has those things. They are different drawings.
Personally I prefer Loomis because I'm an edge whore.
>>2383959
It's mostly just drawings though. With very little explanations so that shouldn't be a problem.
Here's a high quality picture to show you what I mean.
>>2384353
>Michel Lauricella
Is there a scan/pdf please?
>>2377100
>Loomis
Good for composition and learning to draw
>Bridgman
Good for construction and simplifying forms. If you can't read his drawings, get better eyes.
>Peck
Good for anatomy and thats it.
>Hampton
Decent for gesture, recognizing the 3 main forms and their relationships. Anatomy construction a bit pf perspective. Good for head drawing.
>Hampton
Good for drawing ayy lmaos and JoJos
It's not about one being the best. It's about reading everything and coming up with your conclusions.
>>2386605
>Hogarth
Good for drawing ayy lmaos and JoJos*
>>2386605
>>2386609
Bridgman isn't great for construction. Loomis and Vilppu emphasize those things a great deal more than he does.
Hampton is among the best when it comes to learning anatomy (he has the benefit of color printing on his side which literally no other aforementioned author has), but his heads are hella weak, son.
Loomis by far has the best, and most varied, face and head drawings out of all of the aforementioned authors by a large margin, and that's not even just counting his silly Blooks. Loomis goes into esoteric stuff like composition, line etc. that none of those other authors do as well. His only real stand out flaw is that he doesn't really teach the physical "act" of drawing in the way that the first chapter of Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, Keys to Drawing or Peter Han's youtube videos do.
Hogarth is underrated in my opinion too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JhRCWUtUV4
>>2377100
wheres wolfy-nail
