Is Loomis really THAT good?
He's pretty good and is good at articulating his ideas to help you get better and have an understanding of the face, figure drawing, etc.
As always, trying to use just Loomis to improve will end badly.
>>2460731
It's a good place to start for beginners, it teaches construction and basics of the head very well.
In the end you won't be constructing heads like this, you might skip a few steps or even block in to your own whim if you want. But for beginners yeah it's pretty good, it's not just a meme.
yep
Loomis was a good illustrator and painter for his time, certainly, he was most importantly however the first author to really compile much of the theory of the illustrative art into a single series of books. Before him the best was probably Bridgman, but Bridgman's gestural style is suitable perhaps only to students whom were already drawing from life constantly. I can't imagine decrypting his sketches would come naturally to anyone whom wasn't.
>>2460731
Loomis books are good and Fun With a Pencil is great for beginners, but as a learning resource they're IMO way too wordy and the style is outdated.
He was a genuine illustrator, and was good at teaching how to be one.
He's good, but not the end all be all by any means.
But the construction info is very good for beginners to at least get a foot in and start learning.
he can't teach worth shit through his books.
I want to learn how to draw faces or bodys but everywhere the people says loomis, there exist another good sauce?
>>2460731
is OP allowed under global rule 3?
>>2460899
if that was the case half of /ic/ would be nuked
>>2460919
>>2460731
so, can lolis be posted on /ic/? why was i under the impression that it was a bannable offense worst than murder or something?
>>2460933
Being banned for posting that is a given for all boards.
>>2460737
agree and disagree.
eh i honestly don't know anymore, it doesn't help much for me. but when my teacher brought it up in my graduating class. Meaning I found out about loomis 4 years later after attending artschool. Either way it opened my eyes for future improvement and study. I say it helped in that way.
>>2460933
pull your head in
>>2460888
I think that his teaching style can be a little heavy to get through and isn't for everyone, Personally I prefer recommending Famous Artist Course because it's far less technical and written a little more plainly than Loomis' work.
Loomis is a solid technical artist. Was he the most imaginative/creative? Nah. But that's not where his value lies.
Loomis would have fell into obscurity if it wasn't for a handful of hipsters and geeks. As for Loomis himself--meh.
Seriously, his books went out of print years ago and he didnt become trendy until sites like boingboing and reddit or artists like alex ross or gurney started to mention him. Before then Loomis was just some obscure tabloid artist from the 50's. From his art, the style he represented, you can tell why hipsters and geek artists adored him. They thought they had a gold-mine with his books. He is virtually unknown by the general public. His art reeks of irony. And the books were all free. Hipsters and geeks love being the pruveyors of trends, especially obsure ones.
The problem with Loomis isnt so much his art or his books, it's the people recommending him. Most people who reccomend him have no idea about the history of illustration. It's usually after they are introduced to Loomis they get curious. And then they learn that he wasnt all that great to begin with. He was generic. Pic related another aritst of that era. Loomis was mediocre. He wasnt as creative or expressive as a few others. He didnt experiment and he could never give an expressive impact that was memorable.
Another problem with the people who recommend loomis is that they know very little about art. They have very little formal training and havent been exposed to various approaches to drawing or painting. And they mostly stick to niche genre of art. These people are ignorant about the history of drawing approaches found in Loomis. Most of them think his books are the definitive resource on them. They arent familiar with other resources and so they cling to Loomis out of ignorance. Because they do very little research they get hung up on reccomending him.
>>2461364
But do people recommend his books to learn how to make expressive illustrations? because I was always under the impression it was because of how technical his books were.
>>2461364
>Another problem with the people who recommend loomis is that they know very little about art.
This si bait
>>2461364
But your assumptions of the people who recommend his books has nothing to do with the content of the books themselves. Not to mention they're gross generalizations; just because you see it in reddit all the time it doesn't mean he's also not recommended by professionals. Unless you think people like Jeff Watts have no experience or training in art.
>>2461369
People recommend his books because they *seem* technical.
I remember how a few anons would post his perspective diagram of these people sking and sleding on a snow-topped hillside and anons would go nuts trying to figure out what certain guidlines lines represented.
That's when I learned that Loomis provides footnotes and is not really a deep resource. I learned later that most of what he teaches came from school like Pratt and the Art Student's League.
Loomis's books, in my opinion, are basically footnotes. They have lots of tips but nothing indepth and there is very little to point in way for further research. You sort of have to know already what he is explaining in order to follow along.
>>2461380
Proffessional artists who reccomend Loomis take for granted the basic stuff that is in his books. They treat the books like textbooks BUT only after the fact that you learned the stuff already. And if you know the stuff well enough you would know that Loomis has a lot of gaps. He is vague and skips around a bit.
I say this after reading nearly all his books and watching anons fight over his text for several years.
If someone finds his books useful/helpful, who cares?
Loomis a shit
I learn from Sakimicahn
