Why does eveyone hate Burne Hogarth?

Join 500,000+ Artists

Its' free and it takes less than 10 seconds!

Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 48
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    136
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 77 Times in 26 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Why does eveyone hate Burne Hogarth?

    It seems like whenever his books are brought up they're dismissed. I think while there are better insrtuctors out there, he offers a uniuqe way of learning that can't hurt to take from. I don't see why this guy should be ignored.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    866
    Thanks
    450
    Thanked 337 Times in 227 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    they don't, lots of folks here love him.

    although I'm not one of em

    personally i think hes to "slick" and prefer other sources like Bridgman,Hale,Vanderpol ect. but if he works for ya and you like how he presents the material then use it.

    "Talent is a word found in the mouth of the lazy to dismiss the hard work of those who have achieved."
    Anatomy Thread
    Sketchbook
    Interested in learning more about color? Read this!
    Fletcher:Color Control
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  4. #3
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Hudson River valley, NY
    Posts
    16,212
    Thanks
    4,879
    Thanked 16,670 Times in 5,020 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    "Everybody" doesn't. Some people do, and are vocal about it. I think he's a mixed bag. Dynamic Figure Drawing is probably his best book, and has good info on inventing figures. On the other hand, some of his anatomical and proportional schemata are very... non-standard, shall we say.


    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  

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Elwell For This Useful Post:


  6. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    1,012
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked 181 Times in 158 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    i think he has good information to offer. I just get distracted by his "bubbly" musculature. He adds a very stylistic shading to his figures.. they seem almost metallic at times. Every muscle seems like a bulge. I think as long as you dont take it as the end all be all of figure drawing books.. there is some good info to take from him. Hey.. Marko Djurdjevic used his books and he turned out pretty good Its just a matter of knowing what to take and what to leave

    "We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of dreams."


    MY SKETCHBOOK!
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JParrilla For This Useful Post:


  8. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,542
    Thanks
    1,030
    Thanked 517 Times in 295 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Elwell View Post
    "Everybody" doesn't. Some people do, and are vocal about it. I think he's a mixed bag. Dynamic Figure Drawing is probably his best book, and has good info on inventing figures. On the other hand, some of his anatomical and proportional schemata are very... non-standard, shall we say.
    I don't guess this is the same book with dynamic anatomy... I might have to check this out.

    Personally, Hogarth's style distract me. His proportions are often strange, and his lines and shapes lack... rhythm? I think... I did find his book on fabric folds rather helpful though.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,774
    Thanks
    768
    Thanked 769 Times in 340 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by biggjoee5790 View Post
    Its just a matter of knowing what to take and what to leave
    Agreed. I wouldn't be surprised if the musculature is exaggerated on his figures to help you see where they all are. They sure helped me. I think a good idea if you're going to use his stuff is to do it but balance it out with the likes of Bridgman and Loomis mixed with photo studies. That way you get a broad spectrum of how different artists interpret the figure.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  10. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    6,802
    Thanks
    2,278
    Thanked 4,259 Times in 2,074 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Hogarth has good concepts on the figure in perspective and making it dynamic. Using him as a way to learn artist's anatomy hasn't been good for me. Using him as a way to understand foreshortening has been more helpful.

    I learned you never really rely on one book, get your hands on as many books as possible, you'll find that libraries will often have books no longer in print or a wealth of info you may not get with current books these days. Plus, you save money instead of trial and error with purchasing books.

    Even Jack Hamm's book on figure drawing covers some things other books don't or he makes something that "clicks" with me in understanding. One good example is Hamm's book covers clavicles and shoulder lines a little bit better than I've seen in other books. most usually go to a "default" shoulder and neck line while Hamm shows several different variations.

    As you progress you'll find books better or worse for you. Also keep in mind that people tend to have a fondness for Nostalgia in a sense. If someone got into drawing and that was their first book they used, there will be some fondness for it no matter what. I still have a distinct fondness for those "Draw 50 dogs" or other animal books as such.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  11. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Arshes Nei For This Useful Post:


  12. #8
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    900
    Thanks
    155
    Thanked 205 Times in 111 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Hogarth worked very well for me at one time... his stylizations helped me to understand many things better... if it sounds like I dismiss him nowadays, it's only because as I learn more I become more aware of the flaws in his approach.

    He's certainly not bad, he's just more specialized and less universal than he would like you to think. Using a variety of sources is still the best approach.

    "Change is a virtue my friend... if you want to escape, all you have to do is make up your mind."
    John Cale / Bob Neuwirth


    Here be SKETCHIES...

    www.ccthrom.com
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  13. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,076
    Thanks
    1,516
    Thanked 5,159 Times in 1,706 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Dynamic Anatomy has some interesting information for appreciating form and some really strong artists like that book.

    I can sum up my issues with his teaching in this one supernaturally awkward image:

    Attached Images Attached Images  
    At least Icarus tried!


    My Process: Dead Rider Graphic Novel (Dark Horse Comics) plus oil paintings, pencils and other goodies:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...d.php?t=101106

    My "Smilechild" Music. Plus a medley of Commercial Music Cues and a Folksy Jingle!:
    http://www.myspace.com/kevferrara
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  14. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to kev ferrara For This Useful Post:

    + Show/Hide list of the thanked


  15. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    398
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 110 Times in 61 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kev ferrara View Post
    Dynamic Anatomy has some interesting information for appreciating form and some really strong artists like that book.

    I can sum up my issues with his teaching in this one supernaturally awkward image:
    What, hidden nazi imagery?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  16. The Following 19 Users Say Thank You to aefx For This Useful Post:

    + Show/Hide list of the thanked


  17. #11
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Gdansk, Poland
    Posts
    4,834
    Thanks
    887
    Thanked 1,567 Times in 753 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Maybe he was influenced by ancient egyptian art .

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  18. #12
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    2,256
    Thanks
    304
    Thanked 524 Times in 365 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Marko Djurdjevic View Post
    The reason I love and recommend Hogarth is not because of his ability to create realistic anatomy. Of course not. But what he does give you is a guideline that leaves room for your own imagination. Something that you can layer over and on top of the foundation that you're getting from studying him. Also, another thing that makes Hogarth special to me is his courage for daring poses and outrageous perspectives. I find that he gives you enough room to play with the human body as you like and wish and I think that it's detrimental to our own progression that we lose the fear of complicated stuff. That being said, realism can be easily plastered over a skillful foundational drawing. That part needs observational skills and not an anatomy book.


    Cheers

    M
    Quoted because I suck at anatomy, but Marko D. doesn't

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to ~Faust~ For This Useful Post:


  20. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    165
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 363 Times in 82 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Hogarth

    I remember being dazzled by Hogarth and copying his drawings. His teachings have their purpose, but it's important for anyone learning to draw the figure to use a cross reference of books and instructors.

    Recently I had a student that heavily used Hogarth's books and I could tell in class. I stood behind him and asked one word, "Hogarth?". He looked up bewildered and said,"yes". It took constant unlearning to get the student to move past what he recognized as 'right' and onto other ways of translating, and constructing the figure, so his drawings could be his and show his skill and learning.

    It takes many tools to build a house, Hogarth can be seen as one tool. A very small tool, maybe a mini wrench or one of those pointy pliers.

    -H

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

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


  22. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    191
    Thanks
    79
    Thanked 87 Times in 44 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I really like his work; however I don`t think his books are very good for LEARNING anatomy because he has a style that stylizes the figures a lot and are unrealistic, It`s a lot better to learn from other people that use a more realistic approach or even medical anatomy books.

    The Light and Dark Arts of Cristian Saksida
    Portfolio:http://www.chrissaksida.com
    Blog:http://cristiansaksidaarts.blogspot.com
    Twitter:http://twitter.com/crissaksida
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  23. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    228
    Thanks
    128
    Thanked 58 Times in 46 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I really think his books are good to get a grasp of the 3 dimensions and a better understanding of the shadow areas on the figure, if you don't have the possibility to have classes with a model.
    You just need to analyze it in the correct way. You'l be good if you don't study anatomy with him :p

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  24. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    360
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked 257 Times in 120 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I just bought his book Drawing Dynamic Hands and have browse through a few of his dynamic books.

    I think his books are really good if you want to come up with dynamic poses, giving figures more force and action.

    The exaggeration of the human form is just too much. For the book I have, every finger joint has muscles! I think people just want to draw a simple hand, which is why the many examples of his hand poses are very good.

    His books are alright but I'll definitely recommend a real anatomy reference book to go along with it.

    Parka Blogs <- Most dangerous blog for artists (and their wallets).
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  25. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    213
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 56 Times in 42 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Burne Hogarth books just have flaws regarding teaching style.

    He's a very advanced artist and all his drawing are very advanced. But the issue is he doesn't give the step in-between.

    It's like looking at a finished painting and trying to find out how someone did it, it's not gonna help you a lot, lol. Someone explaining the steps would have.

    From his 4 major books, I don't think he once explained his process, or gave schematic sketches explaining muscle by muscle, no he just gives you the finished piece and denotes the muscles on that, I'm sorry but that doesn't help a lot. If you want me to learn how to change the oil of a car, explain that to me, stop trying to explain the whole car each time in a general sense...that's where his books go wrong imo.

    Another thing is his book where he explains drapery, although his models are awesome, his drapery is just plain weird and the different categories he gives them are very confusing and don't seem to be based on any structure.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  26. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    213
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 56 Times in 42 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kev ferrara View Post
    Dynamic Anatomy has some interesting information for appreciating form and some really strong artists like that book.

    I can sum up my issues with his teaching in this one supernaturally awkward image:
    lol, that book is the one I mean when I talked about his drapery book not being structured

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  27. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Manhattan, NY
    Posts
    737
    Thanks
    347
    Thanked 288 Times in 256 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaycy is tanning View Post
    Burne Hogarth books just have flaws regarding teaching style.

    He's a very advanced artist and all his drawing are very advanced. But the issue is he doesn't give the step in-between.

    It's like looking at a finished painting and trying to find out how someone did it, it's not gonna help you a lot, lol. Someone explaining the steps would have.

    From his 4 major books, I don't think he once explained his process, or gave schematic sketches explaining muscle by muscle, no he just gives you the finished piece and denotes the muscles on that, I'm sorry but that doesn't help a lot. If you want me to learn how to change the oil of a car, explain that to me, stop trying to explain the whole car each time in a general sense...that's where his books go wrong imo.

    Another thing is his book where he explains drapery, although his models are awesome, his drapery is just plain weird and the different categories he gives them are very confusing and don't seem to be based on any structure.
    Maybe it doesn't work for you, but it works for me very well, as it does for many other artists. I've never read his drapery book, so I cannot comment on it. The different categories of folds I believe you are referring to are in fact structured and real; you can find these categories in many other books including Bridgman, Vilppu, etc.

    I don't believe anyone should look down upon any method of learning the human body. People work differently and understand things differently; if Hogarth teaches you how to build figures from your head, then use him. If you prefer to use Bridgman, use him. If you prefer Peck, use him. If you prefer copying photos, do that. If you prefer a varying mix of methods, then do that. There is absolutely no point to discourage any method of learning, if the end product is the same: a well-built figure from the mind.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  28. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    213
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 56 Times in 42 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by cdejong View Post
    Maybe it doesn't work for you, but it works for me very well, as it does for many other artists. I've never read his drapery book, so I cannot comment on it. The different categories of folds I believe you are referring to are in fact structured and real; you can find these categories in many other books including Bridgman, Vilppu, etc.

    I don't believe anyone should look down upon any method of learning the human body. People work differently and understand things differently; if Hogarth teaches you how to build figures from your head, then use him. If you prefer to use Bridgman, use him. If you prefer Peck, use him. If you prefer copying photos, do that. If you prefer a varying mix of methods, then do that. There is absolutely no point to discourage any method of learning, if the end product is the same: a well-built figure from the mind.
    True, I'm sure some like the books and find useful info in there.

    I still believe his teaching style is flawed. I went back and looked at his Dynamic Anatomy and next to it is Bridgman's Human Machine:

    Hogarth does not show where the muscles insert, he doesn't show the skeleton on any page, not a single bone / muscle insertion or origin to be found. His text is overly advanced and his terminology can be quite advanced.

    Although I understand his book now, at the time that I needed it the most, it was completely useless. I have a little bit of use for it now, but that is only because I read other books which made me understand Hogarth, so the book missed it's goal, namely teaching me in a comprehensive style about anatomy.

    The major issue is that once you understand what Hogarth means, you are often past needing the book.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  29. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    80
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 32 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaycy is tanning View Post
    ... so the book missed it's goal, namely teaching me in a comprehensive style about anatomy.
    Well, I don't think his goal is to teach anatomy as such.
    It is rather about constructing a figure in space, how to create foreshortening without relying on a model and stuff like that. In this way it is really great. You can create a convincing flying superhero without having to suspend your little brother in a wire hanging from the ceiling. Many younger brothers have a lot to thank Hogarth for ...

    I think his books have been very, very useful in this regard. His drawing style is stylized, yes, but this exaggeration helps to prove his points, I think.
    Detailed anatomy you can get elsewhere.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  30. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Camilla For This Useful Post:


  31. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    39.7,-86.1
    Posts
    1,218
    Thanks
    451
    Thanked 408 Times in 256 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    And he tells people to draw women's breasts like teacups. I really think that his books are only meant to teach basics of form. If you look at his Tarzan comics (google for them) artwork, they look nothing like his extremely stylized, robotic figures.

    -Mike Cross


    Sculpting Thread|My Website| DeviantArt |My Blog
    -Also on FB and Twitter
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  32. #23
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    oakland
    Posts
    1,197
    Thanks
    279
    Thanked 200 Times in 122 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kev ferrara View Post
    Dynamic Anatomy has some interesting information for appreciating form and some really strong artists like that book.

    I can sum up my issues with his teaching in this one supernaturally awkward image:
    what most people miss about this image is that it is a bird's eye view, and depicts a figure that has fallen out of a window.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  33. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Istanbul, Turkey
    Posts
    35
    Thanks
    79
    Thanked 11 Times in 8 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    He has a very unique take on dynamic anatomy. I studied his book "Dynamic Anatomy" thoroughly and it helped in displaying a more loose and basic look at the human figure in movement. Not every anatomy book out there shows the movement underneath the skin, so it's a very interesting take on drawing the human figure.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  34. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,202
    Thanks
    1,192
    Thanked 1,233 Times in 794 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I haven't personally found Hogarth very helpful for me, but I feel like that's because my understanding of basic anatomy needs to be better. I think "Dynamic Anatomy" is more about learning to construct the figure without a reference by relying on basic shapes with an emphasis on foreshortening and movement.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  35. #26
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    10,296
    Thanks
    3,549
    Thanked 5,488 Times in 3,694 Posts
    Follows
    1
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Camilla View Post
    You can create a convincing flying superhero without having to suspend your little brother in a wire hanging from the ceiling. Many younger brothers have a lot to thank Hogarth for ...
    I think I might have to get this for my middle son.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to Black Spot For This Useful Post:


  37. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Posts
    551
    Thanks
    72
    Thanked 228 Times in 148 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    You never really learn from one source. You have to consider that perhaps Hogarth had a different 'market' than Bridgeman for example. It's pretty much the same with those 'Draw the Marvel way' books, you can't expect to learn how to paint or learn great anatomy from them.

    Also, a book is never ever enough. It is only the finger pointing to the moon as Bruce Lee put it, you ultimately HAVE to study from the model. Let's not forget the example of the great Hal Foster who learned anatomy by sketching himself using a mirror! No books, no nothing!

    Hogarth has his place in art, and he always will, he's offered alot. You just, as has been mentioned, have to understand and know what to use, and when.

    By the way I loved the hidden nazi imagery joke.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  38. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,273 Times in 887 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Really now! "Hatred" is perhaps an emotion best reserved for those things that deserve it, such as injustice, genocide, rape, etc!

    "Resentment" perhaps best expresses my feelings toward Mr. Hogarth.

    Why? Because he's a piss-poor writer!

    In "Dynamic Figure Drawing" he never really gets around to telling you HOW to draw a friggin head. It's all narrative about the appearance of the "ball and wedge"-- not a clue on how to construct said structures.

    Better question: did Hogarth rip off Loomis' "ball and plane" treatment of the head, then proceed to do a crappy job of explaining it?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  39. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 75 Times in 54 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    What I would say is that it's good for adding certain skills to your repertoire. I wouldn't recommend it as the first book for anyone, but he does have something to offer. In particular, I'm drawn to it because I'm looking to get more elasticity and exaggeration in my drawings. So I'd say that it's probably better for drawing exaggerated cartoons where they do squash and stretch, but less useful than others for trying to learn a foundation anatomy.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  40. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Birth Place of the World, NYC
    Posts
    2,830
    Thanks
    2,629
    Thanked 1,044 Times in 681 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnneeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeccccccccc ccccccccrrrrrrrrrrrrrrooooooooooooooooooooo

    "Everything must serve the idea. The means used to convey the idea should be the simplest and clear. Just what is required. No extra images. To me this is a universal principle of art. Saying as much as possible with a minimum of means."
    -John Huston, Director
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  41. The Following User Says Thank You to OmenSpirits For This Useful Post:


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 8

Tags for this Thread

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