Why is every beginner thread start with a stupid human face or body
Do any of the poster realise how overly difficult that is for a novice to draw that realistically
It should start from still life with simple shapes
So that they can slowly move into more complex
Geometric object
Anyone that is REALLY new to art in here hear my advice.
DO NOT START FROM DRAWING & SHADING FACES. If you are discouraged by lack of progress IT IS normal CAUSE YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO
If anyone on this website says you did't work hard enough they are unsympathetic faggots out of touch, simple as that
>>2601586
#StillLivesMatter
>>2601586
>Why is every beginner thread start with a stupid human face or body
Because its more fun than a still life.
However I agree that Still life teaches some important stuff. seeing shapes and shadows, linecontroll and how to measure to name some
>>2601586
>>2601589
This is pretty true ime, senpai. I fell for the Loomis meme and got real deep into Drawing the Heads and Hands well before I was ready, ended up giving up on it because I just couldn't make it work, and just started drawing simple objects around my house like chairs and fruit and shit, and came back to Loomis a few months later and was blown away with how much better I understood it. Loomis is good but shitposting him like people do on this board doesn't serve people very well.
>>2601586
Anyone that is REALLY REALLY new to art in here hear MY advice.
DO NOT START FROM DRAWING & SHADING STILL LIFES. YOU NEED TO START AT BASIC GEOMETRIC FORMS
>>2601595
Op here totally same as you
Go to ic and dowload all thier resources, then start drawing """"""loomis"""""""
But get too depress for lack of progress until I went to my art gallery teacher who told me I picked something to hard for my level
Wasted three years of my life doing something too hard, shouldve go to a teacher earlier instead. Of listening to some guy on the internet. Super regret about it
>>2601602
That is true
But pictures on the internet don't have natural lightning amd its waste of money to buy them when you got bottles or apples already
>>2601619
>Wasted three years of my life doing something too hard
The fuck, you sure its not just you?
le construction meme is enforced hard because if you use references you're pretty much a subhuman compared to superior animu and concept artists who can make their dragons fucking bears from imagination
>>2601586
Because beginners wont listen. Still life still gets recommended a lot, but mostly we've given up on getting the /beg/gars to do them.
>>2601664
Construction meme is enforced hard because using reference without understanding construction or the underlying anatomy teaches you NOTHING useful outside of technical bullshit. All it does is start you down the path of human phot copier, and that path is for fucktards.
>>2601811
>technical bullshit is not useful
>le if you use ref you become a facebook photocopier meme
If you're unable of copying what's right in front of you how can you expect to draw what's in your mind?
>>2601934
I don't think that's what that anon meant.
There's a difference between (blindly)copying a ref versus (analyze/observe)copying a ref.
Many artists would claim that they have 'studied' the ref. But only those who do it properly would gain knowledge from the study.
>>2601963
How does one do it properly?
>>2601589
Fucking KEK
>>2601586
>>2601593
Anyone that is REALLY REALLY REALLY new to art in here hear MY advice.
DO NOT START FROM DRAWING & SHADING STILL LIFES. YOU NEED TO START AT BASIC CIRCLES
who /straightlines/ here?
>>2601589
Legit kek'd.
>>2602065
But y trust u brah?
>>2602065
anyone that is REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY new to art here hear MR ROBERTSONS advice.
DO NOT START FROM DRAWING BASIC CIRLCES. YOU NEED TO START WITH LINES
this is all too hard can we go simpler??
>>2602297
pls, anyone that is REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY new to art here should begin not with line but a degree in philosophy and art history. only then can you understand why you'd ever want to draw a line in the first place.
DO NOT START FROM DRAWING LINES. YOU NEED TO START WITH PHILOSOPHY AND HISTORY.
>>2601586
>>beginner thread with a stupid human face or body... should start from still life with simple shapes
Damn! Op is right!
>>2602406
instructions weren't clear enough, now earning thousands on patreon, what to do?
>>2601622
>buy
Nigga just get a piece of paper and fold it.
This is not something that is just true with art, but with everything.
You want to constantly be going for something that is a little out of your reach. Hard enough to make your brain really work, but not so hard that you have no idea how to approach it and become overwhelmed.
Being a complete beginner and starting with complex human anatomy will indeed put you in the panic zone.
It's not impossible to make progress starting with something like that, but it will be incredibly slow and might actually cause you to form bad habits.
Someone who starts as a beginner and just studies human faces might not learn construction or form, and end up becoming a photocopier.
In the end it would have been better to just take on things at your level and move the goal posts as you start to understand more.
>>2602413
kek
>>2601595
It was similar for me. I started drawing awhile back and jumped into fun with a pencil and that went alright for awhile until beyond page 30 and I felt I was beyond what I could reasonably do. I find drawing random objects in my place more fun and easier to do.
>>2602741
What books or resources did you use to learn how to draw objects? I'm assuming you do comparative measurement and I'm struggling with proper technique on that
>>2602769
Unfortunately I don't have many books. Aside from Keys to drawing and Perspective made easy. I'm having difficulty getting the right perspective when i draw things. They still look too flat. I'll have to read those books some more. I still have a lot to learn
>>2601586
I guess most people did still lives at school. There is only so much you can learn from drawing apples and bottles. Now of course if you're starting from square 0 you won't learn 3D concept from faces, you'll just copy the shapes and stagnate.
>>2602488
>mfw my entire circle is a panic zone
>mfw i may never be freed from this anxiety
I'm a beginner and I'm currently going through Fun With a Pencil and Keys To Drawing. I feel like I'm getting a lot out of both. Is it a bad idea to go through two books at once? Should I even continue with loomis?
It's all a bit intimidating. It feels like I have a lot of options, but lack the focus.
>>2603409
Stick with KtD imo
>>2601589
lmfao
>>2601589
Unexpected chuckle
>>2601586
you stupid fucking nigger. you read the sticky, do line and forms THEN go to loomis.
>>2601664
>implying one can draw from reference without construction
Spot the tracer.
>>2602977
You could in theory achieve mastery by just drawing and painting still lives.
>>2601589
Bravo!
>>2602413
>magritte.jpg
>>2603409
KtD >>>>>>>> Fun with a pencil.
>>2603572
>impressionism doesn't exist
Go back to your filthy loomis, peasant
>>2604076
>Doesn't understand that the artist is still doing construction in their mind's eye, even with impressionism
Who's the peasant again?
>>2604111
They just copied color shapes as they saw them. That's why they discovered that black almost didn't exist in the real world, and that shadows were colored.
Why are you even coming up with this 'constructing from the mind's eye' bullshit? It doesn't have anything to do with what impressionists tried to achieve.
>>2604134
Yep, no knowledge of anatomy or construction whatsoever, just drawing the shapes that they see.
>>2604146
They were painters, of course they had mild knowledge of anatomy. The job of a painter is to observe and draw, and with this comes understanding.
But their goal wasn't perfect anatomy or construction (as you can clearly see in this painting), but to capture color shapes as they saw.
There is no argument to be made here. Impressionists didn't learn to paint through Loomis or Hampton.
>>2604156
>you can't paint from reference without construction!
>you need to get fun with a pencil and draw prisms anon!
>>2602769
>>2602795
Those are both great books, and a much better place to start than jumping into Loomis' method for constructing the head (though Fun with a Pencil is interesting for beginning to draw in 3d but it's better to do it from life), but you really don't need a book. Just draw from life a ton and you'll slowly see yourself starting to understand 3d and drawing objects in perspective.
>you must learn to draw lines, correct perspective and 3d objects before still lifes!
>>2604178
>somehow thinking this picture contradicts that advice
>>2604178
The only issue with your posts is that no one here is an artistic genius that can get to the points you've posted just by drawing.
No one is telling you to not draw still lives. Even beginning beginners need to try those.
>>2604156
>Impressionists didn't learn to paint through Loomis or Hampton.
Yeah most skilled painters at one point had a personal mentor, which is much better.
>>2604184
How many lines, objects or planes can you see in that painting?
Drawing is just a measuring exercise, imagining that things have 3D shapes is a way of solving what you see as valid as just imagining a plain image with shapes of color
>>2604190
>How many lines, objects or planes can you see in that painting?
More than you, clearly.
Practicing line is not about working towards good lineart, it's to build mechanical skill and confidence. So that when you put your instrument down and move it in a direction, you will get the results you intend to, clearly and concisely.
Every 3D object has planes, and they can be differentiated by different values. The lotus in the image have several obvious planes,if they did not the image would be flat.
Finally, the person who painted this did not start out painting this way. Clearly they had to practice the fundamentals of art to be able to produce something of such quality. (Though that quality is actually pretty mediocre)
You cannot understand how to swing a bat before you know how to hold it.
>>2604198
>Monet is mediocre
>>2604203
Every great artist used to be.
And some, as they age, can deteriorate just due to the human body all around failing.
His paintings from 1873–1879 were his best, and he himself was not mediocre. But that painting in particular pales in comparison to the bulk of his work.
>>2604205
That's not a mediocre painting, it's one of his most emblematic of the impressionistic movement and for a reason that clearly is elusive to you.
Besides that, saying that the painter learned to paint the way you think is the best (3D shapes, lines, planes), instead of the way he explicitly said he and his movement developed (capturing shapes of color and placing them correctly), makes me think you really don't have the slightest idea about what you're talking about.
You can learn to paint through both ways. The second one won't make you a tracer. Instead it's very popular and used by the likes of Lipking or Schmid
>>2604217
There are multiple ways to learn the same things, anon. I didn't say he drew 100 lines and 1000 circles every day. I'm saying He still studied the basics. Every famous artist went down their own road, but a lot of historical ones had actual tutors and people very knowledgeable working with them consistently to help them improve.
