Do I copy the images from the book, or just read and apply it to my art? How is it used?
>>2561870
>read text
>copy image
>redraw image from memory
>check and correct it
>read next section
>copy image
>redraw from memory
>check and correct it
Repeat
>>2561870
tracer over all the images inside of it. Kronz proved that he can make it if you do that, so you can, too!
>>2561873
basically this.
Also remember to look for anatomy everytime you see a person, and on yourself.
>>2561887
tracing helps you get the muscle memory down, don't meme yourself out of learning
>>2561870
Disregard fags above me, they are never going to make it.
0. Learn basic construction and placement of key landmarks on the body (usually seen in places where skeleton pops-up), start with skeleton. Really what you need to know is drawing skeleton well, even simplified. Pelvis, spine, clavicle, acromion process, scapula, iliac crest.
1. Copy joints and sections of them using construction. Break the bones and later muscles into simple shapes that make organic ones. Can be somewhat simplified, don't need full render.
2. Draw back view of what you just copied using construction.
3. Rotate the thing some more in various positions. Few different drawings from different angles. Can even experiment with lens if you feel ambitious.
4. For muscles draw various stages of flexing them. Also remember - back view and rotations in perspective.
5. Find references other than the book, see how different muscles look in different people - some are more pronounced, some fucked up a bit etc.
Draw variants. See for example how pecks differ in people.
6. You are done, can move on to other sections.
7. Repeat 1-5
8. Draw bigger section of what you previously learned with what you learned now.
9. Remember to always stress on pelvis, chest and spine.
Now you UNDERSTAND everything. You don't need references to draw dat gluteus maximus in any perspective you want. You officially surpassed 90% of /ic/, enjoy a flood of "blog?" requests.
>>2562003
whats your blog?
>>2563807
urnotgoingtomakeit.tumblr.com
>>2563879
That a blog exists with such a stupid name is a monument to the bitterness of some of you guys.
>>2563971
>He didn't click the link
You're the bitterness you speak about
>>2562003
thanks anon I'm going to do this you're the best... you just said it so confidently I'm convinced that this is the way to go.
>>2561870
http://deadoftheday.blogspot.com.es/2009/07/perspiration-anatomy.html?m=1
You are welcome
how important is it to actually know all the (surfaced) muscles? I've been learning them for a while, but don't feel like i'm actually using what I've learned so far. Since most people don't really show that many of the muscles.
>>2567408
It's not about showing them, it's about knowing they're there to fill up space.
>>2561870
Hogarth anatomy book is awful, seriously, dont use it for learning, Bridgeman or Bammes is way to go
>>2564604
This
>>2561870
>Hogarth
No. He might be good at drawing, but he never was good at teaching it.
You can flip through that book, but look for artists that actually show structure in their drawings, plane changes etc and not just blobs of mass. Bridgman and Hampton are what you need.
>>2569878
Hogarth > Bridgman
Meme-man is antiquated as fuck, Hogarth may be exaggerated but it's far better having too much information than too little.
>>2569878
Hogarth books approved by Bammes. And Bammes was one of those intellectual shitters with big ego about real anatomy and art. He said Bridgman books are meh because of heavy stylization and messy drawings. And even Watts himeslef said that you should be careful when study Bridgman. He literally has video about "how to study Bridgman in right way", because you can learn bad habits from him and waste tons of time.
>>2569883
This
Is Anatomy for Sculptures good though? I'm planning to learn from that.
>>2570396
Yes, but it's not really what you expect when you open it up. I use it along with other resources.
>>2569889
>>2569883
What if I work on Bridgman in conjunction with Atlas of Human Anatomy and use Erik's method
>>2570453
Also vilppu lectures and vilppu in general
>>2561870
I just use them as reference when I'm drawing an actual pose I need
you could sell it and use the money for a life class
>>2562003
skimmed through the book and there are no bones/skeletons, it's actually mostly text and some muscles
>>2575480
>Burne Hogarth
That's your problem. See even a figure on the front page - unnatural balloon muscles and shitawful heavily stylized look.
Grab "Anatomy for Sculptors" from artbook thread, download Vilppu and Hampton from torrents + supply it with Proko youtube videos and it will be more than enough.
Actually "Anatomy for Sculptors" and Proko can suffice at the beginning.
So I read an interview of a professional artist who also happens to be my inspiration and he said that copying pictures from anatomy books is a waste of time. Is he right?
>>2575507
You can always go softer on the muscle if you know the structure. Hogharth geometrizes the body as to make spatial releshonships more clear, but yeah, you should integrate with a more rigorous book like anatomy for sculpture
>>2578351
Do not copy, study.
>>2578351
depends on his art.
>>2578351
How is it a waste of time? It's like studying a reference and professionals like vilppu highly recommend copying old master drawings for anatomical purposes and for a better understanding of knowing how to stylised and deciding on which muscle are worth showing on said piece you're working on. Copying also gives you a better understanding of how the muscles are shaped.
>>2578373
>study
And how would one go about on doing that?
