actually i dont see your points... whats the purpose of defending something thats quite obviously subpar to other options, that take the same effort to aquire and process?
yes, reading it (i actually did) didnt cripple me... but where the fuck is the relation to producing art and its learning process in that statement?
i dont distrust you its been a stepping stone to where you are at... and a totally justified, beneficial, starting everything off... one at that. but now you know better... why dont you say something else would be better, but rather say "it didnt bite the fingers of my drawing hand off when i tried to open it".
It's kinda bullshit you know?
As I said it's the easiest to recommend because it's the easiest book for someone to pick up and amazingly without legal problems or most of the time doesn't even cost a dime.
Avoiding or not avoiding a book is not going to stop all the other work it takes anyways. So in the end someone doing something out of Betty Edwards book is not so bad - they could be spending money on shit like Christopher Hart books ... though I think those have also flooded the libraries now due to people just giving up on them
The process of making mistakes is also being able to pick up what book helps you click. Just because now you see it as subpar doesn't mean you stopping someone from reading it is going to "Save their life" or even fucking save time on "Drawing better".
Everyone starts somewhere. I'm sure no one has not picked up a bad book they enjoyed learning to draw from, Hart included.
Last edited by Arshes Nei; July 27th, 2012 at 05:12 PM.
your point is?
its not [as bad as the christopher hart books?
it didnt harm me on the long run?
c'mon this is redicilious ... the question generally is... what should i do/read to aquire that or that knowledge... i just dont see any reason to advise or advocate books that are proven to be weaker than other available options.
all this betty edwards argument just started when daj22602 attacked arenhaus for saying its crap... and i think noone would deny, that compared to other books, it is.
noone is ment to be attacked personally and if you got some spare time ... read it ... why not.
but if youre out for instruction... forget it and read other (better) books.
looking back at your progession... would you say betty edwards had a major impact? that helped you more than other books?
and if no... why advocating it?
if yes... i got a list full of book recommendations for you.
I think something helping someone to start no matter how bad it is, is fine. Most people can access the book and start. I've seen more people feel less intimidated with that book than more with other GREAT books to start with.
If Christopher Hart got people to start drawing and enjoy it, more power to that - however, if they want to get better. What matters more is the progress and the fact people will then seek alternatives.
I still don't understand "how dare you defend this book" to someone when
1. I was a kid. I understood the exercises tried it and went... "oh never thought of that"
2. No matter how great you think a book is, if it doesn't click with the person there will be no progress.
That's why even though people complain about Bridgman for example, I can only offer them suggestions in the order of which to approach the books and avoiding the "Complete" version because it has some bad editing. If they still want to use it, fine. If they want to try another book, that's also fine.
I can say why I don't like Hogarth or X number of books...but in the end if it works for other people then that's great.
So yeah, if people find that Betty Edwards helps them off with beginner work, I'm not gonna knock it. Because they have a long journey ahead anyways.
meh, this is moot...
i hereby admit betty edwards' book most likely aint going to hurt you physically, without it dropping, cutting, or pinching (on) your feet/hands/face/anyother part of your body.
and that the likelyness for you to suffer any mental harm, is as minimal as reading any other book, without considering individual dispositions.
youre fine now?
it still is bad instruction built upon a flawed foundation.
You want me to lock this Sone, you just give the word...
Can't we just leave it open and lay off the Betty Edwards bashing/fanboying? Pretty sure everything that can be said has been on that subject... >.<
Don't worry Mark, I was just playing silly buggers.
Not really going to close it...yet...
Got no problem if people want to bash Betty, so
long as they state a reason for doing so. It looks
like opinion is pretty divided on the forums regarding
But I agree that the topic has veered far away from
your initial question, which was:
In my limited experience with this, I believe things develop over time, you basically need to "rewrite" your programing imho.
It's like someone telling you the fundamental ideas of the integral and differential calculus. If you don't invest the time learning the basics, plus study and solving some examples, you're not going to be any wiser.
You can read or listen to some tutor all you want, but nothing is ever learned without practice, study smart and spend what time you can grinding the shit out of it, and I do call it a grind, because most of the time it will probably will feel stupid and frustrating as fuck.
If you're having problems with faces then there’s no way around it, you need to draw more faces.
Faces are great imo, you got details all over, proportions can't be slacked and they are heavy on values, it can be fairly easy to spot your own mistakes as well, you may not have a clue on how to fix them, but after you have been trying to draw that "fucking nose" over NINE-THOUSAND times pieces will fall in place slowly, it's a constant chase of those small "A-HA!" moments tbh
My two cents on Betty… (gotta comment it.. I'm a retard "woop woop") I was 31 and hadn't been drawing since elementary school and my first step into drawing was with Betty Edwards and well it was great for me at least, I had some fast positive experiences which I think was very important. It is what it is a good introduction, that's my belief at least.
It feels a bit like discussing exercise routines, who gives a fuck if you're using a friend's routines, some professional trainer or P90XXXL extreme. If you feel like you're getting results and you can stick to the grind, then who gives a shit about names. Everyone learns differently the figuring out how you work is "fucking money" (in a Randy Marsh voice).
I apologize for my English or lack thereof
Looks like I am late to the feast. I've missed a direct question, too, but better answer it late than never.
The real trick to this is thinking of the volume, not the image. Sometimes this principle is called "drawing the invisible ear" - as in, when you are drawing a head, you don't just mark what you see, you must also think of what you do not see but what is important for the structure and form.
There is a quick sample of a structure tracked like this here: http://conceptart.org/forums/showthr...=228670&page=2
As for Edwards, I agree that the book can persuade someone that they can learn to draw, too. I just wish it actually went beyond breaking the ice and provided some real drawing method, instead of a few tricks that can seem like improvement during Ms Edwards' three-day course.
So what would be the best books for the beginners to learn how to draw?
Anything apart from Loomis?
Would be great to hear which book is helpful apart from everyday practice of course