Magazine covers as reference

[OmenSpirits]

I was looking at a mag with a woman on its cover while waiting for my dinner to finish in the microwave. For Shits 'n' giggles I decided to map out the skeletal form over it.

Illustrators should NEVER use a CS3 (because you nkow they used it) manipulated magazine cover to get reference. The length of her stomach was really hyper exaggerated from the ribcage to pelvis. I could tell it was PS'd by the edges of the figure, mostly at the waist.

I see a lot of newer illustrators do point for point from ref like that and it's almost like learning the wrong habits of another artist and thinking its correct.

Anyone else think it's a mistake to copy a mag for a pose, point for point mind you, not for general pose ref.

[J Wilson]

Yeah magazines suck. If you need to work from photos try to take your own, or at use ones that aren't likely to be heavily manipulated. Sadly the bigger the magazine and bigger the star, the more likely they'll retouch it until it's a weird distorted mess.

[riceface]

maybe the models are models for a reason.. they have 9 heads high count... i think like victoria secret models

i think average girls look ugly in illustrations

i like to buy fashion mags and victoria secret catalots just to draw them.. so i see nothing wrong with them

[Mirana]

Using magazines for anatomy reference is the absolute worst idea ever (http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/search/label/baroque%20anatomy).

[Opilione]

i think average girls look ugly in illustrations
And I think misogynists are ugly no matter what their physical characteristics, but you still somehow think you're entitled to be that way, so why shouldn't "ugly" girls be entitled to feature in illustrations and on magazine covers? They're less likely to fuck people up the way you are, so they're double entitled.

[Mirana]

Beyond the point that most models are exceptionally strange looking. Alien facial features, gangly, and often too skinny. Don't get me wrong, I'm tiny myself, but girls that are 6' tall should NOT have arms and legs smaller than me, with bony legs and sternums poking through. D: Models outside of Photoshop and good lighting are usually pretty terrifying to look at. ;)

[DavePalumbo]

yeah...

I think at this point we should all probably just assume that all riceface's posts will be in some way offensive and let it go at that

[riceface]

aren't most comic book girls, inspired by models? I always thought all super hero girls are based of swimsuit models...


and micheal turners girls all look like dennis richards

[Mirana]

Bad comic book girl designs, sure. What do they base their male super heroes on...Mr. Universe? :P Michael Turner...yeesh. Not a fan at all--especially when an artist draws the same chick for every character he (or she) draws.

Comic book super heroes (of the traditional type, anyway) are usually "ideals." They are definitely exaggerated, but you should learn from real bodies, not someone else's silicone and photoshop version of a "body." Any pro can tell when you've studied from nothing but magazines--there's an obvious, bad difference. :/

[OmenSpirits]

And covers don't show skeletal markers for the person viewing it. If said person has no prior training in anatomy, they'll learn bad habits from the gitty-up.

And runway models..........................ew. built like very tall boys. *shivers*