Searched google but I am not finding anything and on the forums i get unrelated threads.
I stopped using loomis's FDFAIW and honestly its just not going well with me right now.
Now I am using Michael Hampton book and man its made a huge difference in how I see things. But are there any other book/s that solely concentrate on Gesture and Gesture drawing?
With tons of examples and gives little nuggets of info on the side?
~ Hard work beats wasted talent.
Doing a little soul searching ^^
Anything by george bridgman, completely changed the way I view 3d objects.
Hampton's book is fucking awesome, too. IMO, just go draw the entire thing first then come back.
Also found this one pretty fascinating (It's rather exaggerated though)
You already have examples in your sketchbook you have copied from Loomis so you don't need another book.
Just do plenty of copies of the Hampton Gesture drawings then get yourself off to a few figure drawing classes or maybe here http://www.posemaniacs.com/ or some other similar place.
Gesture drawing = Glorified stickman or woman.
Last edited by Charlie D; February 29th, 2012 at 07:57 PM.
If you think gesture drawings are only glorified stick-figures, you're missing the point. It isn't to draw a stick figure - it's to lay down what the person is doing in (usually) a minimalistic fashion, then build the figure on top of it.
Interestingly enough, in animation 'gesture' refers to not just a lay-in, but the story/emotion/attitude/what is that person doing!? drawing. They do tend to be pretty darn quick, and many artists use a figurative shorthand. (They are often also exaggerated for appeal and clarity)
to the OP:
This might be along your lines of interest if you want to draw gestures in terms of story: http://www.amazon.com/Drawn-Life-Cla...0567745&sr=8-1
(Keep in mind that Stanchfield's books are an organized collection of his class handouts put together after his death, so it doesn't quite read like a book.)
Here's a link to a video review, which I think are great because they flip through the book: http://parkablogs.com/node/1310
Maybe refined stick figure would have been a better term considering you are using C and S curves along with straight lines.
I have no doubt that Loomis book is good its just not clicking with me like Hampton's book does.
Another site says that Atlas of Human anatomy for the artist is a good book to complement Hamptons book so i will be getting that as well.
I was looking at Master class in figure drawing but its bit expensive and looks advanced.
Also looking at Harold speed dynamic wrinkles and drapery.
I think these books will be a good guide for me right now ^^
~ Hard work beats wasted talent.
Doing a little soul searching ^^
Mmm, interestingly, the better half agreed these looked like glorified stick figures when asked.
Charlie D, please stop giving people advice. Your future self will thank you.
**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."
I've actually found Micheal Hampton's 'Figure Drawing: Design and Invention' to be the best book on gesture I've found. The simple diagrams explaining how to get dynamic relationships using line and form completely changed how I approached the figure. The later chapters are a bit iffy but up until the torso I found it very helpful as a beginner.
Mind you, it's just a starting point, Loomis and Hogarth go far more into detail but this was the book that made the entry simple and cleared my confusion so that I could learn more.
ETA I totally missed that you had already read this one,I admit I had to look up the author before posting and that's why XD I'm sorry I don't have any more constructive suggestions.
Last edited by Stormslegacy; March 1st, 2012 at 07:39 PM.
I heard drawing and painting were just glorified lines and colors.
Actually, I don't have a problem with CharlieD's term "glorified/refined stick figures. BUT, then you have to define "glorified". If by glorified you mean "captures the essence of the pose or action" I don't see a problem with it. On the other hand if the implication is "fancy stick figure" then yeah, misses the point entirely. Just my devil's advocate two cents.
Edit: Of course... "glorified stick figure" does leave out any of the incredible artists working in mass and volume that capture gesture such as Henry Yan.
The bigger problem is gesture doesn't just apply to humans or figures, but...well everything that you're drawing?
So gesture or essence here?: Or does it matter/same thing?
Daniel Sprick - "Pencil Sharpener"
But yeah, I was just kind of lightly poking fun at the notion of having to define "glorified stick figure".
. . . . .
Well from my understanding, gesture is of course the start of the drawing. It's also what the item is doing.
Is it a tree in the ground...?
Is it a tree firmly planted in the ground?
It may be that I just interpret what gesture means differently.
1. Plot the points out trying to make careful geometric shapes?
2. Get the gist/gesture of it so you can work out our idea of what you want to draw from that later?
Kamber...use your words Bro! Not sure what you're trying to get across...that the pencil sharpener also has gesture?
And sorry, didn't mean to open up a big debate, though I do think it is interesting to consider whether inanimate/inorganic things can have gesture.
I'm interpreting gesture as Nicolaides defined it-- given that HE is the jumping off point for EVERYONE's bastardization of the term.
*This is important because the contemporary atelier types beat the hell outta the gesture and work, mainly, by brute force measuring as you are describing rather than responding intuitively to the subject matter.
I suppose it depends what you mean by "gesture"... At the beginning of most drawings, and especially if you're trying to compose a whole drawing and not just an object floating in space, then most people will do some kind of rough skeleton/gesture of sorts just to figure out where things go in the drawing, how big they are, approximate form, etc...
I guess you could call that "gesture". Seems like the debate could devolve into petty semantics, really...
Heck, you could say the whole picture has a "gesture" (i.e., the essence of the entire composition...)
I know I often have something like a whole-picture-gesture when I'm thumbnailing something.
Granted, I don't think of sketching (even quick sketching) and gesture as the same thing.