bonedog, thanks. good points. my next drawing wont have lazy feet.
with yours, i'd say his left arm appears to be too short. if it's intended to be forshortened, it's not working.
bonedog, thanks. good points. my next drawing wont have lazy feet.
with yours, i'd say his left arm appears to be too short. if it's intended to be forshortened, it's not working.
Joachim: I glad you decided to particapate! You posted some very cool figures, especially that first one. Great stuff.
Joachim wrote:Hey man, your right. I was thinking that I should get back to drawing more male characters myself. Females used to be my weakness, but after drawing them so much, I had forgotten my flow for drawing male figures. ANd your also right about how I usually use curved lines when I should use a combination of curved and hard lines. I used to use hard lines all the time, but at some point I got overly accostumed to using cuvred lines too much.Chris, I think you've done some very nice attempts. I don't want to start nitpicking minor anatomically things, as I'm no anatomy expert...But, when I look at your characters as a whole I see you work a lot with curved lines. Personally I think you can focus more on mixing hard and curved lines to bring out joints more. Also, I think it could be a good thing for you to draw more male figures, as they have less curves and then probably for you are more of a challenge...dunno if you agree ?
Here are some male figure sketches I did today. Each one took about 15 or 20 minutes, well accecpt for the fat guy, which was a little longer. Dude, when I first started sketching the male figures, I was LOST! These are the few that I liked the most out of the sketches.
I know this ones ruff. I just liked the way the build up stage was looking.
Joachim: It's quit a challenge working with simple poses like you say. I was thinking that myself. To me, it's because sometimes it's difficult to draw a simple pose, especially a straight on pose, without the character looking like it;s gonna tip over, or looking lop-sided. Also, dynamic poses can be very difficult too if the mind doesn't know the different angles of the body. Dynamic poses used to be very difficult for me a long time ago. I just didn't understand how to make anything dynamic. Now that I do, it's time for a little change of pace.
Ozan: I thought you weren't gonna make it, I'm glad you here. Thats a cool pose you posted. I agree with bonedog about the anatomy. Post more stuff man!
Bonedog: Nice sketches. Good correction with the blue guy, you fixed that left leg. I think that his right arm and shoulder seems off. It looks great by itself, but attached to the body, theirs something about it. I'll try to show you what I mean in a sketch, unless someone else does first.
Kasap: Great sketches. Especially the "You talkin to me" one. I agree with Mentler, great foot.
Mentler: Thanks for the imput on the 'Forearm Wrist'. I'm gonna try to do more studies on that to make sure it's correct. I see you caught my laziness in that sketch, haha. Also, I like your figure style and it's loosness. I saw your sketch thread, very cool style. I also agree with what Joachim and Krispee said about trying to clearify your figures a bit more, and simplify the poses a bit, so we can see everything very clearly.
Nortenyo: I'm glad your liking this thread. I feel I've learned so much in just the short time it's been here. I was always hoping for an art atmoshpere like this.
StudioPC: Yeah, you can cloth the figures if you want. I think it would be good to study how clothes fit on the figure properly, like delicate skirts, or baggy pants, etc.
Tetsuo: "must post more...must do this again...must...." Post more stuff!
Krispee: Yeah, I always believed the human body is very flexible too, it's difficult thought to know when it is, and is not, depending on the pose.
Lynchpin: Can't wait to see your sketches.
Ah, getting late,...I gotta go eat dinner.
yes I know I have been slacking this week
Hopefully tonight and this weekend I will get something up. I will even sneak one in at work
shhh...no one needs to know that
I got inspired by Beet's sketches in his figure sketch thread. His works reminded me of the technique of drawing with very few lines to create the figure. I thought this would be a challenge to try to build up shapes with fewer, more accurate lines. And using more thick and thin lines to define edges the best way you can from your mind. This approach forces you make your mind to try to know the shape and the form more because their is no erasing mistakes (at least try not too), and their is no under sketch or anything, just straight up drawing the right lines the best you can.
Mentler: Hey, it's be interesting to see you do this approach, it would be a little different than your usual style, but it, may be fun.
Ozan: Yeah, drawing with just line to make correct shapes can be difficult. After being in this thread, I've learned how to draw a few more shapes of anatomy a little more clear. In these fast sketches below I learned a bit more. Try doing some of these, it may or may not work for you.
Each of these took 5 or 10 minutes. As always, crits would be extremely helpful.
had a go at your last one tetsuo...hope you don`t mind.....
as you can see i did a paintover and you`re not a million miles away from the basic shape......i confess i had to look up the left hand and the right shoulder, where the muscle compresses and bunches up.......hands are a problem for me to do without any ref at all.....
Here's a couple drawings in pencil. The chest/torso on the guy looks weird. Feel free to point out what's wrong with it!!
Tetsuo: This is a tough pose... and my first attempt from my imagination wasn't very good, so I did a breakdown of it to hopefully teach myself and some others a better way of thinking about it.
Anyway, anyone else have comments? Anything I'm not thinking about?
did my own version of Tesuo's washing lady, one of the problems i faced were the feet i think they should go under the buttocks were the weight is resting in your feet. another problem was the ribcage and the shoulder blades still doesnt look ok, need to look up on the legs,knees and hip too.
bonedog- its interesting to see how you work, i like the way you boxed the head ,torso and hip maybe you should connect them together in your mind or on paper because they affect each other constanly, i did a small draw over of your drawing with some suggestions of how i would do it maybe you would agree or maybe not.
ah ok. Some interesting things here. I should have another go at the bather in a bit. The mental inspiration came from Degas and his plethora of bathing studies...the man was amazing at creating the female form! Gonna break out the painter again and hit up some more.
i`ve had a go at kasap`s version of tetsuo`s bather......
tricky one this......
i still am not happy with the arm and did look in the mirror to check thiings but still doesn`t work for me i don`t think.....
anyway....kasap, like that 'need a ride' chappie....nice scribbly way you`ve done him.....
Hey everyone, there's some great things going on in these new batch of sketches, great stuff, glad to see more! I'll comment on them tomorrow. In the mean time, here's something I did today. Trying to loosen up more, be more precise, and I know their are mistakes here and there.
chris: i know what you mean about loosening up, but still being precise.....when i loosen up it seems to go pear-shaped lol.....anyway, like the new stuff....actually forgot to say how much i liked your 5-10 minute sketches you did earlier on.....they`re quite dynamic.....nice work
Tedsuo, Bonedog, Kasap, and Krispee: I redrew the sketch Tedsuo started of the sitting chick.
Tedsuo: Glad you got some time to draw some more stuff.
Bonedog: Yeah, this is a tough pose. I was a little afraid to try to draw it. That is a nice block analysis, and the spherical form analysis and how you can use that to figure out where shpes over lap opened my eyes to different way of finding overlapping shapes. The second sketch you did with reference is great.
Kasap: Your version is also instresting, I like the foot sketch, and the looseness overall.
Krispee: Good stuff. I decided to draw over your version, since it;s the last version drawn.
This took about an hour. Sorry for the huge size, I gotta stop doing that.
ok, pretty fair that, got that all wrong......i did look in a mirror but its different when you`re standing up than when your trying to mimic the pose exactly....your is a much better torso.....and she would lean forward a little if her arm was reaching back to compensate for balance(i think i got that right)....
i won`t mention the leg, you already know about that anyway.....and the feet i was having trouble with....so that`s not a surprise
i`d disagree about the right hand....it wouldn`t necessarily be resting or covering(as mine is more like) both would be anatomically possibly....in my opinion...
well, better have another go then......
Been working on the shoulder area since it's been so messed up in my drawings.
I used to do really long, really detailed anatomy sketches. That just teaches you how to draw, but not how to draw from your head. I think these sketches are a better approach.
Good work everybody. I spent some time on the first critique and it really pays off... you learn what you're trying to teach, essentially.
Anyway.. here's a couple things I thought might help. As far as the whole thing about convexities/concavities, I once had a teacher who taught me that. I kinda argued at first, but then I realized it always looked better if you thought of what's causing the various dips on the body, which are always convex masses.
Last edited by bonedog; September 29th, 2004 at 10:28 PM.
I hope these prove helpful ~ again I apologize for posting a little behind, I need to respond quicker before everyone moves on!
I noticed that the leg did not appear quiet right ~ I did not see how the calf could insert into the knee the way it was drawn. It seemed to me the calf would be tucked under the upper leg more and the knee would be resting on the ground plane ~ also it appeared the leg could have been slightly longer ~ I think the feet would not be tucked under the gluts quiet so much ~ the arm on the other hand appears a little long.
As for the hand, I would have probably have eliminated it all together.
If it is going to be in the drawing you need to show enough of it to make it interesting and read as a hand and not just fingers (which always look a little claw like if you do not see the palm or back of hand.)
If you look at the works of old masters or current day master draughtsmen, you will very seldom find just fingers or finger tips curling over a form.
I think they probably either eliminate them from the pose or like I said show more of the hand.
The other thing that was a little out of place were the dimples created by the superior posterior iliac spines.
(some of these things may involve personal prefs!!!)
Bonedog the comment about concave shapes in the fleshed out figure is right on. There are only a couple of exceptions that I can think of, the fulcrum, which is a concave form both vertically and horizontally and the achilles tendon where it attaches to the soleus.
Good thread, keep up the great work Chris!
Sorry about the bad hand drawing ~ I am not very good with a tablet!!
I love this thread!
Don't we all?
Great stuff everybody!
My first comment is to Bonedog.
Hey, after what you said about covexities and concavities in the human form, my brain kept thinking about it, and thinkin and thinkin, until I had to study the details of this myself. I had to find out the truth about convex's and concave shapes, if there really concave shapes at all. Check this out, a posted a few images below. This is what I figured, and tell me your thoughts.
Here's a photo of a nude chick showing concave curves.
How far apart, or how close, or how much of an over lap, determines the quality of line, and it's thicks and thins, as it describes the edge of the skin orgin.
What are your thoughts?
That's an interesting discussion you are having there Chris & Bonedog.
Here are my thoughts about it. I think what you are saying Chris, that you can find both concaves and convex shapes on a body is correct though as a basic theory with the ballons as Bonedog tells is a nice way to think.
But, for me these types of theories that generalises things and create such rules can be good and bad. Because, I believe such theories appear because people want to find a "recipe" on how to solve the human body or how to draw things "well" based on rules. BUT, even though rules like these can be helpful at a certain degree it's important to understand that they are not the answer. I mean, it's the same with composition, I've heard teachers talking about composition to a deepness I can guarantee that the artist they are refferring to have not done intentionally, but have rather done it out of his/hers automated ability to make good composition. A lot of this is just as much the artists ability to see what is correct, and see beauty (I mean what other see as beauty) in lines and strokes and shapes. A great artist with the ability to play with shapes and forms can draw the body pretty much how he/she likes with only concave or convex shapes and still make it look convincing and interessting -and it really don't need to be by-the-book correct. There are so many ways you can exaggerate or draw lines great, it's just important that the artist has got an eye for what is working or not - and this is really the challenging part, to self see what is working and be able to evaluate your own lines/shapes.
I know this may sound like a bunch of bollocks (they are just a couple of my own point of views about the topic), and that is probably the reason why we need to put down such concrete theories about everything as well...-just think if a teacher would say: "don't care about theories, learn to see what works" - that would of course not work either, so we need the theories.
And, of course I don't have these opinions about every theory, some of them are totally nescessary, but many are just meant as a starting point or guideline to learn how to see and think, the rest is up to you
Now I guess I've started a big discussion
Last edited by Joachim; September 30th, 2004 at 05:23 PM.
please scribble all over it dudes.....complete pants i`m sure....
really annoyed at this moment with my computer so i`m stopping there....
Joachim: You saidDude! I love this shite!...-just think if a teacher would say: "don't care about theories, learn to see what works" - that would of course not work either, so we need the theories. And, of course I don't have these opinions about every theory, most of them are totally nescessary, but many are just meant as a starting point or guideline to learn how to see and think the rest is up to you
I completely agree. Many theories are just a starting point or guideline to learn how to see, and the rest IS up to you. Well said. Thats one of the reasons that drove me to create this thread. Because there was an artist who challenged my knowledge about the art rules that many teachers will teach. I learned a great deal about art and figure drawing, painting, etc, in school, and afterwards, I decided to stylize things in the figure the way I wanted, picking and choosing what I thought worked for me and didn't, making the figure look more interesting in my eyes, but by keeping a degree of realism. But the last two years, after a few debates about figure drawing, I started to think that maybe I've moved too far away from the rules with my stylization of the figure when creating characters. Just this past year I realize that I just have my own way of stylizing things, that others may not agree with in terms of, the "look" of the figure. And some styles are accepted as 'good' by some people, and some styles are not as accecpted. I think that as long as the art work is acceptable by the artist themselves, it works for the artist. So I'm happier about my figure characters now than before, because I like them, not because critics like them. Before, I was starting to follow other peoples rules, rules that I like to bend. I've reverted back to myself lately. And this thread, talking about a few rules that can work for your benefit, is a good excercise, and actually remeinds me about a few art approaches that I forgot about, that I could use. A few people on here have shown rules that benefit well in my favor, so I can add to the rules, creating more stylized ways of creating a character/figure.
With all that said, I agree. The rules are their to set structure, and knowledge, but they aren't the end all be all of knowledge. Rules are meant to be broken. Like with the whole convex, concave idea...that idea is just some good ways to think about the figure. There are also straight lines that happen depending on the angle of the body, the pose, the muscle tension, what parts of the body, etc. Their are harsh 90 degree edges. Etc. Concave and convex isn't everything, just a few things to keep in mind. If anything, it reminds me that skin looks the way it does because of what is happening underneath. Which, that is a truth that will always be. Then it;s up to the artist to do what ever they want with that knowledge.
I'd like to say this is the way I build up my drawings but it isn't. I usually just draw whatever comes to mind and it ends up half-assed.
Anyway, I was inspired by this thread - very very helpful! - so I tried my hand at building the forms from lines, forms, and a skeleton. hope this is useful for someone else. done with Painter 8 trial (should i save up for 9 or buy 8 now?). separate layers for each.
There are some screwy things that are definitely off, so please rip it apart! Edit the drawings or whatever. I really want your feedback!
It's an apeman so the proportions aren't accurate to humans. Note the supraorbital ridges, the long arms, short legs. The rest should be human-like. (rounder pelvis and aligned big toe, etc...). I only have a very limited understanding of anatomy so without a ref, this is the best I could do. Crit me up! I'll be away for a bit but thanks in advance!
The basic forms:
The skeleton added:
Outer layer only:
Everything together (a mess!):
wow there is so much to learn in drawing human body, I did these sketches without reference to see what I remember from the nude classes, I think the most important and obvious is that bones are always straight and they define and limit everything even that some people seem to be so flexible andgo into any curves the bones dont bend for them either lol ! another thing that i remember vividly is that no matter how complicated position how to make sure that there is a gravity balance is to divide the mass into to two the point where the center of gravity is the largest, but othervice Im not too happy about my anatomy drawings they really suck I quess its just something you need to constantly be in touch with or you loose it, its not like riding bicicle one you learn then you never forget
look I dont know why I love you I just do
to be honest i`m not sure i can really help in the anatomy discussion......although i can see with the whole concavity, convexity thing that it may be of help when drawing without ref, i`m not sure it is of particular help when drawing with ref, as you are actually viewing the figure itself, so you can see the way the body undulates, you don`t need to necessarily know....i guess after a while that knowledge would be 'known' anyway.....but still....
mentler: i`m with you on the tablet thing, it feels so foreign to my hand....don`t think i`ll ever get used to it....
This thread really inspired me. Thank you guys! I've been in a figure-invention rut.My anatomy knowlege is primarily from observing figures, meaning it's surface-only. So, I feel a bit inadequate to critique some of the more technical points, but I'll try to help where my intuition tells me something's off.
good lord... just looking and reading this thread from the begining i think has already made me a better artist!
im going to spend some serious time practicing all this and hopefully get my scanner working and post some pictures in hopes that you help me.