Join 500,000+ artists on ConceptArt.Org.
Its' free and it takes less than 10 seconds!
Ok, so I have a problem, in my city there are no places where I can attend nude figure drawing sessions, I already know the importance of doing studies from life and all, I do draw from life, for example people in the street or public places, but I cant practice with nude figure drawing study sessions, because there are not in my city.
I'm wondering if it could be possible to do "life" studies from stereoscopic 3d pictures. since the model is in 3d and not a flat 2d picture. like this one.
if not a good idea then
can u give some advice in other options to study anatomy and figure drawing?
Isn't better than a model. But beats photos, that's for sure.
Another method would be getting the Virtual Pose books and "rocking" the Quicktime turnarounds back and forth a little. That also gives you a fair idea of the volume.
this thread. Here's my take:
**Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial
Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!
"Work is more fun than fun."
"Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."
There's been lots of talk about drawing from photos and how to use them correctly in here, definitely suggest you to read this through: http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...d.php?t=221546
Also here's an option for you, a large mirror. Or hit the beach if possible. If you have friends who understand, ask them to pose in swimsuits etc.
EDIT: GODDAMN ELWELL! Stealing my link thunder...
Think of it this way:
Stereoscopic images are a gimmicky illusion which garners reactions varying from "Nifty" to "Headaches".
Classical paintings are a painfully handcrafted illusion tempered by a lifetime of training and are in every way successful examples of what you are attempting yourself.
Which do you think would be a more fruitful resource? A photo with a gimmicky filter or a Velasquez?
-My work can be found at my local directory thread.