Anatomy practice

[Yoshi]

I saw this method used in on of the topics on this forum. I think the lower body is quite good, but i just can't get the upper body to look good.
C+C would be awesome. 

Edit:    Made a change wich finally looks good... right?

[Yoshi]

No replies.. is it that bad? =O

Well anyway, i made a front view of the same "guy". And it still looks awkward..

[FrostPumpkin]

I Don't know why nobody replies.
It's not bad, the anatomy is really good for the first, the front view looks like a marionette.

You have to work on the head for both of them.

[TrevoriuS]

The space between the legs is way too big in the front view, and in the angled view the (viewers) left leg should be a bit thicker on the upper part. Further you should search for some skull images to define the shape of the head better.

[baccaman21]

...it's all well and good trying to define mass - but without knowledge of the underlaying structure all your managing to achieve is undermining your own learning by just focusing on the muscle mass...

There's a number of layers you need to consider when creating figures, the first is the skeletal structure, then the muscle masses, then the fat masses, then the skin and hair, and finally the clothing.

Look deeper into what you've done here... and not only focus on the cranial mass, but also the spine, the clavicles, the thoracic cavity, sturnum and diaphragm, the pevlic girdle, the patellas, the femurs, tibia and fibia and of course - the feet and not forgetting the arms and hands and fingers... build the skeletal structure, or at very least to key components where the form (that you've nearly got right) hangs. Then and only then can you build on that with the muscle mass.

You'll discover immediate improvements if you understand from within and there's plenty of reference for anatomy knocking around the interweb.

Eventually once you get to know the underlying form you can deconstruct it to just a few flicks of the wrist and then you can jump straight to the masses... more experienced artists just 'know' what goes where and how to place mass instinctively... but even they had to learn from within first.

[TrevoriuS]

Regarding the above, get a Wacom or draw and scan - you need to learn anatomy and pixelart separated (in my opinion). Having small images look good, using little colours, will make you understand more about approximisation (note: all a computer displays is an approximisation, a 3D environment is not built of pixels, but in CG it is limited to these same pixels).

If you wish to gain good anatomy knowledge it is more important to define every shape into detail than to leave out the right things and create the right approximations to make it look right on a smaller scale.

The latter you can do while applying anatomy knowledge in pixelart, but the first thing to do that is aquire the knowledge yourself. In any anatomy study book its photographs and detailed drawings, not pixelart, that has a reason.

@ Baccaman, I've been drawing since young age and had pretty few to change after studying more than just shapes and shilouettes of the human body, but I do have a good grasp of how to subdivide the human body more simplistically than with all these bones. Thus it is possible to draw good anatomy without learning what is within the body you just drew as long as you know how to observe and trust your eyes well enough.

[ptoing]

knowing what's inside does help greatly tho. Elbows, knees, ribs and such, all place where bones can show.

[TrevoriuS]

I certainly don't deny that, yet I think you can find out quite some stuff about knees and hips already, yet everything above your waist (including skull and shoulders) as well as hands and feet definately are too complicated to define by just looking (especially if you wish to draw humans at positions or angles you dont usually see them, without having a model).

[ndchristie]

trev, you're really throwing me with your double negatives and appositive statements.  im not sure what you're trying to prove.

there are a few problem studying mostly from outer appearances and proportion charts:

in many places, the silhouette's landmarks are defined by bones - and don't make sense when imagined without heed to the skeleton.

studying the silhouette can fool the mind into thinking that the structure of the body is far more simple than it is.  This is particularly true of the placement of hips and the lengths of arms when bent (something i still have trouble with )

here, we have stretch armstrong, a man made entirely out of soft, yet formed material.  his structure is tensile and prone to move unnaturally.

i suggest drawing from life if you want to learn anatomy, as well as the study of anatomical drawings and even texts

[TrevoriuS]

Making the body more simple (to the mind) increases sketching speed
Being able to observe well allows you to acquire less detail about construction to be able to draw the product
But I certainly don't try to say its a bad idea to study bones and muscles while learning proportional anatomy, as that helped me perfectionize my human drawing, as well as thaught me to draw creatures.