who's anatomy to study?
 
View testimonialsView Artwork
Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    who's anatomy to study?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,432
    Thanks
    643
    Thanked 1,484 Times in 719 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    1)Wrong forum
    2)Welcome to CA, use the search
    3)Everyone will say Peck, Bridgman, Loomis
    4)Others will say Bammes, Richer but they're foreign and weird and they speak crazy moon languages.

    Ignore anyone who says "Grays Anatomy" unless you plan to draw many spleens.

    Also "anatomy for the artist" by Tom Flynt and Peter Stanyer is horrible. Not keen on Sarah Simblett either.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    12
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I also use the Riven Phoenix DVDs, but that is figure drawing from your mind and you have to keep up before you actually start drawng muscles etc

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    17
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    aye i have the riven pheonix dvd 2. but is it nesesary to learn all that muscle drawings?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,060
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 458 Times in 338 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    If you want to make people that look like people, you have to learn muscle structure.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,270
    Thanks
    142
    Thanked 450 Times in 416 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I recommend George Bridgman books, Andrew Loomis books, and some Burne Hogarth books. Constructive Anatomy looks like a good book

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    11
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Maybe try drawing force by mike matessi.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #8
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,907
    Thanks
    816
    Thanked 2,278 Times in 625 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #9
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    518
    Thanks
    113
    Thanked 114 Times in 65 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Albinus, Mentler and Da Vinci all have good things to say. Michaelangelo, Raphael and a ton of other old dead guys were masters of the human form.

    Masters abound. Copying them occasionally isn't a bad idea. There's some new fangled DVDs and books that are okay, but other than Mentler, the best books were done by people like Loomis and Bridgman, and you'll see their names mentioned a lot around the forum.

    Good luck.

    Do you Mentler?

    Booting up a new sketchbook.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    17
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Grief View Post
    i recommend from life
    how much is life drawing better than drawing from books?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  12. #11
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,907
    Thanks
    816
    Thanked 2,278 Times in 625 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by yuhMEE View Post
    how much is life drawing better than drawing from books?
    about the same as watching Food Network versus actually eating food.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  13. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Grief For This Useful Post:


  14. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    653
    Thanks
    124
    Thanked 230 Times in 117 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JookBoxer View Post
    Maybe try drawing force by mike matessi.
    That's not an anatomy book. It's a book about rythm and dynamics within figure drawing.


    Try books that focus on the construction of anatomy rather then simply giving muscle charts. Bridgman and Bammes are good in this area. I also really like the anatomy workshops by Ron Lemen in ImagineFX.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  15. #13
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    3,234
    Thanks
    860
    Thanked 847 Times in 457 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Grief View Post
    about the same as watching Food Network versus actually eating food.
    But I find life drawing knowledge sinks better after having poured over Bridgeman. It's like adding a structure to what I see.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Qitsune For This Useful Post:


  17. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    113
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by yuhMEE View Post
    how much is life drawing better than drawing from books?
    It's not.

    The only argument you can make in favor of life drawing is that the image is still warped because the image your eyes receive is parabolic, on a surface it's already flat.

    Every other argument is bullocks^^.

    Some people might prefer life drawing, but it's not "better", because your retina, with the exception of the parabolic quality, receives almost the same image from a high end photo camera. The attitude that it is better is usually one that is spread from art schools, of course they make money of their classes, so take their 'advice' to draw from life, with more than a grain of salt.

    It's the same argument language schools use by claiming you need to learn from professional speakers, without wanting to acknowledge that there are people who learned to write and speak perfectly through DVD's or movies without ever setting a foot in a language class.

    Last edited by Jem'ennuie; January 19th, 2009 at 08:46 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  18. #15
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,907
    Thanks
    816
    Thanked 2,278 Times in 625 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Qitsune View Post
    But I find life drawing knowledge sinks better after having poured over Bridgeman. It's like adding a structure to what I see.
    i completely agree.

    ive seen how to make hummus at home from scratch, but that doesn't make me a chef.

    until you apply it, the information is only entertainment, a curiosity of sorts not to be mistaken for experience.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  19. #16
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,907
    Thanks
    816
    Thanked 2,278 Times in 625 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jem'ennuie View Post
    It's not.

    The only argument you can make in favor of life drawing is that the image is still warped because the image your eyes receive is parabolic, on a surface it's already flat.

    Every other argument is bullocks^^.

    Some people might prefer life drawing, but it's not "better", because your retina, with the exception of the parabolic quality, receives almost the same image from a high end photo camera. The attitude that it is better is usually one that is spread from art schools, of course they make money of their classes, so take their 'advice' to draw from life, with more than a grain of salt.

    It's the same argument language schools use by claiming you need to learn from professional speakers, without wanting to acknowledge that there are people who learned to write and speak perfectly through DVD's or movies without ever setting a foot in a language class.

    who's anatomy to study?

    if our brain was unable to process the third dimension, and could flatten color i suppose you might be correct.

    Last edited by Grief; January 19th, 2009 at 10:32 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Grief For This Useful Post:


  21. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Outside Toronto
    Posts
    542
    Thanks
    276
    Thanked 349 Times in 125 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jem'ennuie View Post
    It's not.

    The only argument you can make in favor of life drawing is that the image is still warped because the image your eyes receive is parabolic, on a surface it's already flat.

    Every other argument is bullocks^^.

    Some people might prefer life drawing, but it's not "better", because your retina, with the exception of the parabolic quality, receives almost the same image from a high end photo camera. The attitude that it is better is usually one that is spread from art schools, of course they make money of their classes, so take their 'advice' to draw from life, with more than a grain of salt.
    Wow -- that's a pretty bold statement and a weird comparison with that language class bit.

    Now, my gut reaction is to just dismiss you as possibly stupid or young, since both are prone to such bold, sweeping and wrong declarations, but I always try and think a bit about them before responding since sometimes real truth can come from the weirdest sources.

    So, after thinking for a bit, I've decided that you're still possibly stupid or young.

    They say that the first step toward wisdom is realizing how little you really know, so I'm going to help you along and tell you you don't know shit. The ignorance over how the eye interprets space and colour is pretty telling, as well.

    If you want to draw well you have to be able to understand how the body moves, how it exists in space, how skin stretches and moves across flexing and relaxing muscles, how gravity pulls at all of it.

    Photos can only tell you so much of that -- and how did photos come up in talking about learning from books, which are often and rightly made up mostly of drawings -- and those sometimes backed-up with photographs as examples.

    And all those guys who make the books people keep mentioning learned all they know from drawing from life.

    Aside from that, here's the most obvious shortcoming of your claim that life drawing is essentially no better than drawing from photos.

    Take one of your high-def photos of a person standing 10 feet away from you, print it out at a size so that the figure in the photo is the same size as the person posing when it's held at arm's length in front of you standing at the same spot you took the photo. Step to the right; you now have a completely different set of information to draw upon to draw that figure while the photo is still flat and tells you no more. Return to the starting point and then step to the left; again, you gain far more information about what you're looking at while the photo remains unchanged and no more helpful. To the uninformed, being able to move around while drawing may not seem like the boon it is, but understanding those shapes in 3D space is essential to becoming better at drawing and capturing the illusion on paper.

    Drawing from life is better. It's how all this started.

    Couple that with a well-structured course and strong instructor and the student will learn faster with fewer false starts or mis-steps.

    ~R

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  22. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to rpace For This Useful Post:


  23. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    113
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by rpace View Post
    Made it shorter.

    ~R
    Ok, all your points are valid, including the one where you said I'm young and that might qualify as inexperienced.

    The point you made about being able to perceive your subject from more than one angle is valid.

    That you can watch body language and force on your subject is valid too.

    All of this however, is still possible with digital or negative means on film or with a printed medium. I don't see how learning how to draw needs to include learning how to draw from life and why this is a requirement to be able to draw succesfully. What one learns from printed media, one can use in life drawing and visa versa.

    There's not much that a photo or picture doesn't show. If I hold a picture in front of someone of a piece of scenery which is a copy of what's behind it, you will not be able to tell the difference unless you come up really really close and see the edges. This somewhat shows where this "theory" that drawing from life is so much better is one without much proof.

    There's the parabolic difference, eyes see things in a distorted parabole on the back of our eye and then the brain makes a correct projection out of that. It's different when looking at a flat surface, but there's never been proven that this somehow helps you draw better.

    Last edited by Jem'ennuie; January 19th, 2009 at 10:49 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  24. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Outside Toronto
    Posts
    542
    Thanks
    276
    Thanked 349 Times in 125 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    All things are possible.

    It's quite possible for a man to produce breast-milk, but it requires a great deal more effort and it isn't what I'd call particularly efficient.

    There's a great deal that a photo does not show or show well, primarily movement, depth, and eye-accurate colour and value.

    Only in a Warner Bros. cartoon does a 2D image become interchangeable from an environment. I understand people who wear glasses sometimes have problems with that aspect of depth, but I certainly don't.

    ~R

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  25. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rpace For This Useful Post:


  26. #20
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,907
    Thanks
    816
    Thanked 2,278 Times in 625 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jem'ennuie View Post
    There's not much that a photo or picture doesn't show. If I hold a picture in front of someone of a piece of scenery which is a copy of what's behind it, you will not be able to tell the difference unless you come up really really close and see the edges. This somewhat shows where this "theory" that drawing from life is so much better is one without much proof.
    ....what?

    reality has depth, volume, form, physics, an environment, an atmosphere, light, objects existing within a space, i could go on...

    photographs at best make a depiction of reality which suggest these things, but in no way can contain them. working form photographs or any 2D image onto another 2D surface eliminates a great deal of factors which an artist should have a good grasp of. to avoid these aspects entirely will drastically limit your ability to find solution to problems which are not already presented in a two dimensional form.

    ask a sculptor how easy it is to undersand volume if you only get to see one angle. i mean if photos can capture volume flawlessly then why do sculptors need multiple views of an object? something about a third dimension... hmm, weird can't put my finger on it, maybe you can figure it out.

    this is not some "conspiracy" by academia to brainwash art students into believing a false mantra. drawing from life offers the artist the ability to translate reality firsthand. learning to see is a crucial step... a lot of liberties are taken care of when you merely work from photos and you are not seeing volume. you are seeing a depiction of volume.

    please do not toss about multisyllable words in falsely describing the functions of the eye and expect that they will defend you from getting called out on your erroneous claims.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  27. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Grief For This Useful Post:


  28. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    528
    Thanks
    409
    Thanked 215 Times in 141 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Photos flatten everything. Your shadows go flat, your depth perception is changed, and the camera distorts especially when it comes to foreshortening. Drawing from life enables you to grasp the relationship between forms and shadows a whole lot easier. It's the whole reason why if I need to draw hands, I use mine instead of referring to a picture. A picture hides the overlap and the shadows of that interlocking. As said, you can see the model from multiple angles - you can't do that to a photo, so you automatically lose sense of depth.

    Also, particularly when drawing people, a real human model with the right lighting helps way more than a photo. Photos have a tendency to wash out their values. You can't perceive as much from them. With a live model, you have 3D forms to evaluate. There are no edges. That immediately makes drawing from life valuable. Anybody can draw decently from a photo but not everyone is going to "get" life drawing without a good instructor and multiple hourly sessions.

    Not to mention, you also lose the little details in a photo. Real life comes with all of the nuances that are hard to miss in person when closely observed.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  29. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    17
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I see now why life drawing is better.
    but i ddint look at it on how you see it.
    But how u draw it. If you learn from books, You'll only learn how to clone his
    drawings. But with life drawing, You'll do your own style and you teach yourself instead of another teaching you.
    No matter what, i guess life will be better, i guess books will only go as far as facts about the human anatomy.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • 424,149 Artists
  • 3,599,276 Artist Posts
  • 32,941 Sketchbooks
  • 54 New Art Jobs
Art Workshop Discount Inside
Register

Developed Actively by vBSocial.com
The Art Department
SpringOfSea's Sketchbook