finding the axis of a sphere, Loomis head drawing

View testimonialsView Artwork
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 33
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 49 Times in 49 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    finding the axis of a sphere, Loomis head drawing

    Hello all, So I finally got the Andrew Loomis book for drawing heads. At the beginning ( going right back to basics! ) you start off with a sphere and mark the axis ready for constructing the rest of the head. I am struggling though because I am not sure exactly how you accurately find the axis lines on the sphere. I know roughly where they would go and can do an alright job ( I think ) with guess work, but I would like to be more accurate with these measurements, but I am not sure how. Is there a method or a way of finding the axis / slicing the sphere accurately or is it down to guess work?

    I realise this seems like a novice question, but you have to ask to learn right?

    Just a quick image of the paper next to me, it's not the best example as they are just doodles/ not even accurate circles but hopefully it gives you an idea what I am talking about if the text above made no sense.
    Thanks
    Name:  20140426_095030_resized.jpg
Views: 781
Size:  315.3 KB

    I am not sure if it's actually marking the axis I am struggling with or more wrapping it around the sphere, knowing exactly the point it falls off at / you can see to. Am I making sense or talking gibberish?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    1,410
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 467 Times in 330 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The Loomis method gives you an approximation of the head structure, so I think he is just eyeballing his axis and slices. Don't try to be too precise...

    Grinnikend door het leven...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    1,609
    Thanks
    208
    Thanked 628 Times in 356 Posts
    Follows
    1
    Following
    0
    One thing you might do if you're having trouble visualizing how the sections across the spheres look is to
    a) get a real sphere of some sort and draw the lines on it, then draw it from life
    b) use a 3D application, draw a sphere and select the edges that correspond to the sections (see attachements)

    With practice you'll get a feeling for how they look and you'll be able to apply that knowledge to any sphere from any point of view.

    Name:  sphere.jpg
Views: 560
Size:  419.3 KB

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

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


  6. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 49 Times in 49 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Good advise thanks guys
    @Benedikt what program are you using there please?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  7. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    draw a sphere

    mark a spot on the sphere

    draw two lines tangent to the sphere that also pass through that point.

    and then draw from that point a line perpendicular to both lines

    that line intersects the center of the sphere = axis.

    The heights by great men reached and kept,
    Were not attained by sudden flight,
    For they, while they companions slept,
    Were toiling upwards in the night"

    (Henry Wadsworth)
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 49 Times in 49 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    @Amir0 not to sound extremely stupid.. but I don't fully understand

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Name:  2004-04-26-a.png
Views: 503
Size:  102.0 KB

    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by Amir0; April 26th, 2014 at 12:46 PM.
    The heights by great men reached and kept,
    Were not attained by sudden flight,
    For they, while they companions slept,
    Were toiling upwards in the night"

    (Henry Wadsworth)
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,922
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked 825 Times in 678 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen H View Post
    Good advise thanks guys
    @Benedikt what program are you using there please?
    Looks like he's using Modo, but you can easily do the same thing in any 3D program (i.e., Sketchup or Blender, both of which are free.)

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  11. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    1,609
    Thanks
    208
    Thanked 628 Times in 356 Posts
    Follows
    1
    Following
    0
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  12. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 49 Times in 49 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Yeah sorry Amir0, I am struggling to follow what you mean

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  13. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    if I understand your problem correctly, what you are struggling to do is to paint a (2d projection of a) sphere, and then plot an axis line on it.

    An axis of a sphere is a shorthand term denoting the sphere's axis of symmetry. obviously it has an infinite number of them. However all of them have the following properties:

    1. They all pass through the sphere's center
    2. They are all perpendicular to the sphere's surface.

    Using these 2 mathematical properties a sphere's axis can be plotted through numerous geometric methods. one of which i've tried to present... and apparently failed.

    The heights by great men reached and kept,
    Were not attained by sudden flight,
    For they, while they companions slept,
    Were toiling upwards in the night"

    (Henry Wadsworth)
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  14. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    130
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 20 Times in 18 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I have to admit I couldn't follow Amir0's explanation either, but the way I approach finding the axis is by using it's symmetry as well.
    First the axis will divide the sphere/circle into even halves. The entry point then is an equal distance away from the circle line as the exit point.

    Name:  Axis.png
Views: 483
Size:  29.6 KB

    This disregards perspective though. To be more correct you'd have to construct a box around the sphere or use 3d software.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Schraverus For This Useful Post:


  16. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 49 Times in 49 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Amir0, I am going to have a read over all the info you have given and see if I can get my brain in gear.

    Schraverus, I am really liking your suggestion, definitely something easy to remember and use. You mentioned it might not be correct in terms of perspective, which is a bummer, but at the same time, this is just for getting the basics for building construction lines on a head showing the angle of the face etc, so hopefully this will be what I need for that!

    So that worked great for the horizon line, to get the vertical line is it just a case of starting with another straight line but diagonal in the opposing direction, or is it a little more complicated then that?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  17. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,682
    Thanks
    364
    Thanked 728 Times in 465 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I've never seen anyone use this process successfully, and I've never seen anyone make an interesting head design starting from it.
    I think you should lay off this process for a while, and instead do a lot of quick head studies from photos, toys, a mirror, and models.
    edit: I should be more specific. The problem is that the questions you are asking are irrelevant for the design of a head, a point on a sphere, a cut through a sphere, and it's Loomis's fault for making you ask these questions. That is the problem with this process, it tends to act as a distraction to more important questions, concentrating on an x on a ball floating around nowhere in space will distract you from the relation of the masses and also their expressive forms and shapes, and drama created by actions between characters.

    Last edited by armando; April 29th, 2014 at 06:08 PM.
    Sketchbook

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

  18. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 49 Times in 49 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    dammit took me ages to save up for that book!
    There anything in this process that is of use then or do you actually think I am just wasting my time with it?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  19. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,682
    Thanks
    364
    Thanked 728 Times in 465 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    A lot of people swear by Loomis, if you like the way they draw then stick with it. To make a short explanation of it being able to follow along with Loomis has a lot to do with cultural background, Loomis has a very photographic way of working. Slicing the sphere seems to be the only area where people get stuck on, and a lot of people never pass it, it threw me off for a long time. I haven't looked at Loomis in a long time, and I don't think I owe him anything.

    edit: "slicing the sphere" isn't the only spot people get stuck, they also get stuck on the generic proportions which serve as a similar distraction.

    Last edited by armando; April 29th, 2014 at 06:23 PM.
    Sketchbook

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

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to armando For This Useful Post:


  21. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 49 Times in 49 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    That's actually pretty helpful to know I am not the only one it's throwing off a little then, Cheers Armando. I was starting to think there was no hope for me in the art world if I couldn't even make the slicing a sphere work for me! I will maybe work through the book but take each bit of information given with a pinch of salt, I'm sure there will be some tips I can use within the book if nothing else, plus there's always the hands section at the back too.

    Would be interested in hearing if anyone else has had a similar experience/what everyone else thinks too

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  22. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    maybe I am a bit late in saying this, but my recollection from loomis's book is that this excercize is meant to be done to imperfection.

    meaning you're not supposed to "get it right". you're supposed to just do it quick and dirty and move on to the next step.

    The heights by great men reached and kept,
    Were not attained by sudden flight,
    For they, while they companions slept,
    Were toiling upwards in the night"

    (Henry Wadsworth)
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Amir0 For This Useful Post:


  24. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 49 Times in 49 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Haha that does help cheers Amir0

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  25. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    1,410
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 467 Times in 330 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by armando View Post
    I've never seen anyone use this process successfully, and I've never seen anyone make an interesting head design starting from it.
    That says more about you than about the process, I have seen quite a lot of professionals successfully using Loomis as a starting point. Just understand it is a guide for constructing proportions in space; it was never meant to crank out interesting head designs.

    Grinnikend door het leven...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

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


  27. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 49 Times in 49 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I just found this video which is pretty cool, summarises the method I think, although instead of getting the hairline and then finding the nose size from there, he finds the nose size first from the cut off of the sides of the sphere and then gets the hairline from there. He makes it look pretty easy. Think I just need to practise those basic bits like he says in his video

    Pretty good watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4gGEC5iCDE

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  28. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,682
    Thanks
    364
    Thanked 728 Times in 465 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by eezacque@xs4all.nl View Post
    That says more about you than about the process, I have seen quite a lot of professionals successfully using Loomis as a starting point. Just understand it is a guide for constructing proportions in space; it was never meant to crank out interesting head designs.
    All it says about me is that I've seen a lot of drawings. Your error is that you believe it is a starting point but on the contrary the starting point is to first have a lot of experience looking at and drawing heads from photos, life, sculptures, drawings and paintings. This head geometrization can be thought of as a summarization, it isn't possible to summarize something until you have acquired a lot of facts, therefore it actually occurs only after someone has a lot of experience. Whether or not someone chooses to use it for an analysis is arbitrary since any form can be geometrized a thousand different ways.
    Another thing is that the demos of this process aren't examples of the artist doing real work, they're examples of the artist being a teacher and demonstrating a teachable method that doesn't require any new analysis of the process of making art by the teacher. It's good for making videos on youtube and guaranteed to get hits by the key word "loomis" or "loomis head construction" etc.
    The only purpose of a construction is to carry an effect over into a finished drawing. It's not just something you do at the start then discard, the quality at the beginning remains at the end. So if someone starts with blocky forms the quality of blockiness remains in the final picture, start with round forms and the quality of roundness remains at the end, the geometry of the page is part of the construction, the types of symmetries etc. etc.
    Browsing through the sketchbook section will prove all this.

    Sketchbook

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

  29. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    1,410
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 467 Times in 330 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by armando View Post
    This head geometrization can be thought of as a summarization, it isn't possible to summarize something until you have acquired a lot of facts, therefore it actually occurs only after someone has a lot of experience.
    Excellent point! I decided to leave this summarization to someone who has acquired a wealth of knowledge, and wrote instruction manuals about it that have been valued by many professionals over the past decades. Yes, I am building upon the knowledge of Andrew Loomis, as I do not like to reinvent the wheel.

    For me, it is okay if you insist on telling others to build upon a different source.
    Just do not tell people to start at square 0, because they first need to acquire a lot of facts: ignoring the history of art education is worse than wasting just one life. You are wasting a full generation.

    Grinnikend door het leven...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  30. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,682
    Thanks
    364
    Thanked 728 Times in 465 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I'm not telling anyone to ignore art history or the history of art education, I actually believe in the opposite.
    It doesn't matter that Loomis was able to make a summary, that his use of that scheme was backed by years of practice, it simply isn't possible to transmit that kind of experience via a book. Something like a transmission is possible if you work with someone side by side in real life, if there is an artist who favors this scheme they can nudge you along and have you drill this over and over and correct your drawings with their own drawings right over yours, but this isn't possible from a book.
    I've seen this question come up dozens of times, and I can look at people's drawings and see what they are thinking because drawings are transcriptions of thoughts, they are searching in the wrong place. It's better to ignore this sphere problem for a while, get a bunch of experience, then come back to it.

    Sketchbook

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

  31. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I think overall it is much easier for people to think about and resolve ideas if they can strip the idea to it's bare, core concepts.

    When you make a scene in a painting if you can isolate the position and size of characters, their poses and interactions, their gestures, that helps you a great deal.

    which is why so many people draw manikins and "dress them" when they paint. This helps divide an otherwise mess of details into a small number of simpler problems.

    from what I've seen so farm there are a number of different manikin styles each with each own advantages. Even I with my crappy level of skill alternate between 2 of them (this helps solve different problems).

    I think it is incorrect to say that you cannot teach manikin making. It's a conceptually simple technique that doesn't have a high skill floor and just requires you to have the right frame of mind.

    Which is all you really have to learn as a first stage - how it is built, what the different objects represent, how to variate on it et cetera.

    The refinement of the manikin to perfection can be done at later stage or even as part of doing other things. because "getting used to it" and understanding its structure is more important than getting the angle of the axis just right.
    s

    The heights by great men reached and kept,
    Were not attained by sudden flight,
    For they, while they companions slept,
    Were toiling upwards in the night"

    (Henry Wadsworth)
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  32. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    http://blog.naver.com/hahoho09

    Hello!
    I solve this problem for six months and I Found it!
    I found the solution in [Perspective! for Comic Book Artists] by Chelsea, David
    Although this is all commented korean language(because of my nationality) you can guess What it mean.
    I hope you guys struggling with this problem solve the matter

    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  33. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    278
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 49 Times in 49 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Thanks for that It might take me a few looks to understand it fully
    Appreciate the help though!

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  34. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    4
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    0
    I hope its okay to reopen this topic for a very short discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by armando View Post
    I've never seen anyone use this process successfully, and I've never seen anyone make an interesting head design starting from it.
    I think you should lay off this process for a while, and instead do a lot of quick head studies from photos, toys, a mirror, and models.
    edit: I should be more specific. The problem is that the questions you are asking are irrelevant for the design of a head, a point on a sphere, a cut through a sphere, and it's Loomis's fault for making you ask these questions. That is the problem with this process, it tends to act as a distraction to more important questions, concentrating on an x on a ball floating around nowhere in space will distract you from the relation of the masses and also their expressive forms and shapes, and drama created by actions between characters.
    If you are not into Loomis method thats fine, just because something isnt working for you doesnt mean it doesnt work at all. Your posts on this topic is very misleading, I mean no disrespect at you but you are misguiding a few. My humble opinion is Loomis books are priceless altleast to me as I have no option for life drawing and art education, I find the Loomis book on the head is very clear and practical.

    Below are some of my sketches, all of them based on Loomis method and I know my sketches are mediocre, so dont blame Loomis for my mediocrity.
    I'm not picking up a fight with you or anyone who disagrees, just want to point out that Loomis method (one of the many methods for drawing the head) can work if one wants to.

    Name:  DSC00004.JPG
Views: 168
Size:  314.7 KBName:  DSC00009.JPG
Views: 166
Size:  324.3 KBName:  DSC00027.JPG
Views: 171
Size:  358.5 KBName:  unnamed.jpg
Views: 166
Size:  45.7 KB
    Name:  DSC00358.JPG
Views: 165
Size:  752.1 KB Name:  DSC00015.JPG
Views: 164
Size:  362.3 KBName:  DSC00001.JPG
Views: 165
Size:  337.0 KBName:  DSC00003.JPG
Views: 162
Size:  357.6 KBName:  unnamed1.jpg
Views: 162
Size:  15.3 KBName:  DSC0002.JPG
Views: 164
Size:  350.8 KBName:  unnamed2.jpg
Views: 158
Size:  26.3 KBName:  DSC00012.JPG
Views: 158
Size:  426.8 KB

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  35. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Haifa, Israel
    Posts
    4,245
    Thanks
    2,406
    Thanked 2,370 Times in 1,464 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Asura777 View Post
    Below are some of my sketches, all of them based on Loomis method and I know my sketches are mediocre, so dont blame Loomis for my mediocrity.
    I'm not picking up a fight with you or anyone who disagrees, just want to point out that Loomis method (one of the many methods for drawing the head) can work if one wants to.
    The problem with these sketches is that once you have some reference, you seem to toss Loomis' structure out of the window and switch to copying the lines and blots. Which is a wrong method.

    The head structure Loomis shows in his books is, first of all, for giving you a way of thinking about a head that you are seeing in front of you. If you just copy the structure and then just copy the reference without thinking of its underlying structure, you are not using Loomis' method.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  36. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    4
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by arenhaus View Post
    The problem with these sketches is that once you have some reference, you seem to toss Loomis' structure out of the window and switch to copying the lines and blots. Which is a wrong method.

    The head structure Loomis shows in his books is, first of all, for giving you a way of thinking about a head that you are seeing in front of you. If you just copy the structure and then just copy the reference without thinking of its underlying structure, you are not using Loomis' method.
    Just because the structure is not visible doesn't mean the structure doesn't exist, then again like the other person the discussion isnt about the sketches of the person using the method, its about the method. I dont know how else to say but all of the sketches are based on Loomis method, the head turning image was done without any reference, some(3) of the heads of children from the first 3 pages of the sketches were not drawn from reference rest are from thumbnail images of children from a magazine.

    You can critique my sketches, I'd be very happy, but the purpose here is whether Loomis method is helpful? to me it definitely is, here are a few sketches without reference (after study) just to show that I try to understand structure and use the method when I draw, instead of just copying lines.

    Name:  1.jpg
Views: 146
Size:  197.8 KBName:  2.jpg
Views: 145
Size:  174.8 KBName:  3.jpg
Views: 146
Size:  183.5 KBName:  4.jpg
Views: 143
Size:  135.0 KBName:  5.jpg
Views: 147
Size:  155.5 KB

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 44

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