Bridgman's method for the head...

Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop
Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    92
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Bridgman's method for the head...

    Hi!
    Recently i have bought this book (the reprint of Constructive Anatomy), and since i'm already learning anatomy and memory drawing from this site, i have decided to use this book as a "completion".

    I have read the part about the head because that's where i am at, and frankly i don't get it why Mr. Bridgman uses a box/cube to start drawing the head in his approach..
    I am used to start things by drawing a slight oval shape.
    Overall i just think(from the few pages i have read so far) that this book is a little vague. I find it hard to believe that when an artist needs to draw the human head he will start his construction with boxes etc.
    What do you think?

    Corel.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    In my own thoughts.
    Posts
    1,345
    Thanks
    433
    Thanked 551 Times in 248 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    A box, a circle, oval and a sphere are all used in several books(loomis, bridgeman,...) to start constructing the face.
    Just see what works for you and run with it.
    Some people just prefer to see the head in boxlike forms from which they carve away the excess, some people prefer to see the head as a circle and add the facial features onto it.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    298
    Thanks
    41
    Thanked 186 Times in 109 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The head isn't really round or oval. Having people draw it in a box will prevent people from drawing a head like children draw them. To draw the head properly in perspective it's also easier to use a box.
    The construction/understanding of the planes of the head and their influence on light and shadow is also easier when working with flat surfaces instead of curves and round surfaces.
    Both circle and box are methods to help you understand certain aspects.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    28
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Box is alot easier for me so I can see the planes easier, I'm just a noob however, it has made it easier to distinguish.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,008
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked 697 Times in 292 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    With a box, you get the direction the mass is facing defined clearly in three dimensions as well as the major planes. It's also very conducive to thinking about symmetry. You can get all this using a sphere or an egg, but without care it won't be as clear as with a box (i.e. a lot of people misplace the centerlines on a sphere turning in space, and then all the subsequent features are skewed).

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  7. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to dose For This Useful Post:


  8. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    92
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    hmm anyway for me starting with an oval and then carving and sculpting the features and overall shape makes it more intuitive, its a lot easier to handle various angles of the head, this is just my opinion. I will try to give the box method a chance though.. :-)

    Corel.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  9. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,641
    Thanks
    363
    Thanked 713 Times in 454 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    This is the answer:
    Quote Originally Posted by dose View Post
    With a box, you get the direction the mass is facing defined clearly in three dimensions as well as the major planes. It's also very conducive to thinking about symmetry. You can get all this using a sphere or an egg, but without care it won't be as clear as with a box (i.e. a lot of people misplace the centerlines on a sphere turning in space, and then all the subsequent features are skewed).
    "Some people just prefer to see the head in boxlike forms from which they carve away the excess, some people prefer to see the head as a circle and add the facial features onto it."

    Carving and modelling can be accomplished with either approach. Just like boxes, spheres can be constructed using planes: by rotating a circular plane. Sketchup is an easy way to see this.


    "Having people draw it in a box will prevent people from drawing a head like children draw them."

    Loomis gives a genius approach in "Fun With A Pencil" that is derived from the way kids draw heads. The circle that kids use is an abstract way of representing an object. The circle could be anything: man, machine, animal, plant, and so on.


    "Both circle and box are methods to help you understand certain aspects."
    "Box is alot easier for me so I can see the planes easier"

    The understanding of surfaces, and the direction of the masses, is inate. Boxes and ovals are just shorthand ways of jotting down pose ideas. Without that inate understanding they're useless.

    Sketchbook

    "Beliefs are rules for action"
    "Knowledge is proven in action."
    "It's use is it's meaning."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  10. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,972
    Thanks
    1,331
    Thanked 1,923 Times in 757 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by armando View Post

    The understanding of surfaces, and the direction of the masses, is inate. Boxes and ovals are just shorthand ways of jotting down pose ideas. Without that inate understanding they're useless.
    This is a very important point, and thanks for making it. The only thing I would add to this is that the use of box or oval or any combination of both is to do with temperement. The right way is the way that feels the less awkward - later to become 'more fluent' as you gain experience. Thus, when starting out, try both and give each a good shot for a couple of weeks, then you will know, one way will feel a little 'closer' to you over the other.

    From Gegarin's point of view
    http://www.chrisbennettartist.co.uk/
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  11. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,270
    Thanks
    142
    Thanked 450 Times in 416 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I think that it is best to try both the oval and the box method in order to understand different points and to see what works best for you. I have been using ovals, though I'm going to be starting Bridgman studies soon, so I don't really have a preference yet.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  12. #10
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Hudson River valley, NY
    Posts
    16,212
    Thanks
    4,879
    Thanked 16,675 Times in 5,021 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    It's not either/or. The different approaches are only different in emphasis, not in the underlying concept, which is to get you to think in terms of three-dimensional construction.


    Tristan Elwell
    **Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial

    Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!

    "Work is more fun than fun."
    -John Cale

    "Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."
    -Marc Maron
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  13. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,972
    Thanks
    1,331
    Thanked 1,923 Times in 757 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Elwell View Post
    It's not either/or. The different approaches are only different in emphasis, not in the underlying concept, which is to get you to think in terms of three-dimensional construction.
    Another good point, and one I should have made clearer; the emphasis an individual places on on one or the other will be the product of temperement. Some will go the whole hog one way, some the other, but most will use them in varying degrees of combination depending on how it suits their needs and feel for the world objects.

    From Gegarin's point of view
    http://www.chrisbennettartist.co.uk/
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  14. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    So-Cal
    Posts
    3,427
    Thanks
    2,994
    Thanked 1,780 Times in 849 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Bridgman is very vague, but in a good way. His books helped me allot with general shapes, but when he gets specific with faces things fall apart. What he does well is explaining the mechanics of human anatomy. Don't bother with his book on heads though. He is only good for one chapter on that subject (boxes). I also wouldn't recommend his "book of a hundred hands" because 100 poses of the hand doesn't cut it. You just have to learn to draw your own hands (total pain in the ass)

    I wouldn't spend $70 on a dvd. I actually bought a bridgeman book for under a buck on amazon, but the s&h was like $6.

    If you don't like bridgeman try Hogarth.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Raoul Duke For This Useful Post:


  16. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    5
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 10 Times in 3 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Bridgman's cubes

    I recently picked up Loomis's construction method and it really helped me. Without construction geometry, you are drawing a head like you would draw a landscape or a potato, but a human head has so much internal structure and symmetry that it makes sense to me to use it.

    I would like to add my complaint here about Bridgman's construction method in Heads, Features and Faces. If you already knew where to put the nose, ear, cheekbone and chin and still don't know where to put the eyes, I suppose this is useful. I am unimpressed.

    from page 58:
    1. Number one line is drawn down the face touching the root and base of the nose.
    2. Number two line from the base of the ear at a right angle to number one, with no relation to the face as to where the line crosses.
    3. Number three line is drawn from the cheekbone at its greatest width to the outer border of the chin.
    4. Where two and three intersect, start the fourth line and carry it to the base of the nose.

    -john b
    [-]r

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  17. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,273 Times in 887 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    johnb:

    I've never been able to make heads or tails out of Bridgman's "draw the head in 4 lines" thing.

    LOL! If you've got something with a cheekbone and a chin, you've pretty much got your head drawn already!

    As far as drawing line 2 at a right angle: does this mean always at an actual right angle? Or, does it mean the way that a right angle would appear in perspective?

    It's always been a mystery to me.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  18. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    165
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 365 Times in 83 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Over the years I've learned both ways of approaching a head drawing or painting. I find that, for me, I use a blend. I start with a circle or oval for the cranium and I drop a wedge for the chin according to where the head is looking. I then find the mid-line of the face and locate the corners of the eyes and the thirds (in perspective usually). From there I carve the brow ridge and carve the sides of the head from the front - I then place the nose, eyes, muzzle, and pull the chin in last.

    That's my basic approach. I'm careful to build everything off the mid-line of the face and to think about continuity and wrapping of forms around the face. I carve all the major planes into the face like the eye wedge, the sides of the cranium, the sides of face, the back of the cranium. The face will usually sit above or below eye level, so it's important to take perspective into consideration when applying the thirds and placing the corners of the eyes.

    Hope this helps
    -h

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Raileyh For This Useful Post:


  20. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,273 Times in 887 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Hey Raileyh,

    Just rediscovered your thread in Fine Arts.

    Haven't asked anyone this in awhile.

    How fast can you draw a decent solidly rendered head with your method?

    And, just for continuity, do you have any idea how that 4 line Bridgman head drawing thing is supposed to work?

    [I'm beginning to think it doesn't work! Why? It appears to be based on an isometric cube like draftsmen would use to draw machine parts. It's not demonstrated by Bridgman with a cube that is in proper perspective!]

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  21. #17
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 119 Times in 94 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The four line thing has always seemed loony to me. I find most of bridgeman's writing completely incomprehensible. I just look at the pictures.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to papervampire For This Useful Post:


  23. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,273 Times in 887 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    papervampire:

    Here's a scan of the 4 line method from the Bridgman "Complete Guide."

    1. The block he predicates this head upon does not have lines that converge into the distance. Rather, they splay outward when extended. For the way things appear in nature this is wrong.

    2. Looking at the next head based on this block, we see that the far side of the figure's forehead is too tall. Being that it is farther away from the "picture plane," it should appear shorter/smaller than the closer side of the forehead. This carries through the perspective error from the block.

    Further, if a head proportion block is drawn in correct perspective, and the standard 3.5 units is used to measure the heads height, it is a simple matter to construct a line that passes under the figure's nose level without the need to draw several other construction lines.

    There're a lot of great things in Bridgman's various works. And, using the simple Asaro-type planes to block in a head is a valuable tool.

    But, this diagram is seriously in error!

    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to Kamber Parrk For This Useful Post:


  25. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    165
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 365 Times in 83 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    Hey Raileyh,

    Just rediscovered your thread in Fine Arts.

    Haven't asked anyone this in awhile.

    How fast can you draw a decent solidly rendered head with your method?

    And, just for continuity, do you have any idea how that 4 line Bridgman head drawing thing is supposed to work?]
    Hi Kamber Parrk,

    To answer your question, I can tackle a head in 20 minutes or so. I've seen 5 minute drawings by Fred Fixler that are insane, the amount of information he was able to fit into 5 minutes is remarkable. I keep at the 5-10 minute poses, but they are crazy hard.

    I think I'm still trying to figure out the 4 line thing. It doesn't seem to make much sense in it's limited amount of information.

    -h

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to Raileyh For This Useful Post:


  27. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    5
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 10 Times in 3 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Kamber Parrk: Thanks for posting a picture of the 4 lines. It was a curious choice for Bridgman to build from an Isometric cube. Oh well, I've vented.

    I appreciate your mention of the Asaro planes of the head, too -- I hadn't seen that before.

    Last edited by johnb; September 16th, 2010 at 02:56 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  28. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    218
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 83 Times in 60 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I believe the cube thing is just for simply understanding perspective's effect on the head.

    My sketchbook:

    http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=191977

    My page on Facebook, which I update much more often.

    https://www.facebook.com/MarkGrimArt
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  29. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    1,390
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 462 Times in 327 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    As far as drawing line 2 at a right angle: does this mean always at an actual right angle? Or, does it mean the way that a right angle would appear in perspective?
    That is an actual right angle. Otherwise, the two lines will not necessarily intersect...

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  30. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 33 Times in 8 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    a quick note from my experience: the third line in the Bridgeman method is the most important line when drawing different types of characters. By placing that line, you'll see how easy it is to define a certain type of face. Imagine an ant moving between from the cheekbone to the chin, following the relief of the face and lay down that line.

    i never draw the 4th line, i just go free-flow from the third. As far as i understood Bridgeman, first line is line the symmetry axis of the face, second is a right-angle line to the first connecting it to the lobe of the ear, the third is seemingly unconnected to the others, i think it's supposed to be placed instinctually. As for the 4th, i didn't get it.

    what's important is that you can define character very well by drawing the third line (highlighted in blue), even if you don't follow Bridgeman's method fully.

    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to blackfingers For This Useful Post:


Members who have read this thread: 7

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