[dead] portrait

[ter-o]

I quote:

          Drawing fundamentals repeatedly over and over again is boring to only those who refuse to learn, interesting to those who are curious, and fascinating to those who need to know.
 

[ndchristie]

Pixel art can hurt your artistic growth exactly because it allows you to endlessly fiddle with something until it sorta by-accident falls into place. This isn't real knowledge, you should study so you know what you're trying to do from the beginning, without making many mistakes. If your pencil art is bad, be brave and take the plunge and study from the beginning. Your pixel art will only stand to gain. That book Turbo linked to is very good from what I can see.

I third this statement, and would go as far as to suggest sharpie/pen for learning exercises.  There's nothing more damaging than second guessing every stroke.

Pixel art allows people to draw from beginning to end a picture in relatively little time and the finish is very precise and oil-like. This is addictive for artists, to know they can get near-photorealistic results in such a small space, but what it also does is make people not study their fundamentals and care more about finishing rendering (what you're doing with aa and dither when you're nowhere near that stage yet).

I agree with everything but the idea that you can achieve oil-like qualities with anything but natural oils

Heed my warning Feron, you don't want to be Lazur. You don't want to be able to render very lushly in pixel art and yet still not be able to draw a human being comfortably with paper and pencil. Study your fundamentals.

Lazur still blows my mind for this very reason.

as for this piece i have two bits of advice -

1 - PAY ATTENTION TO ALL THE EDITS OF THE CHIN YOU ARE STILL MISSING THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT::



2 - Move on, this piece has been flogged to death

[Feron]

Thanks guys.  I think i'll probably do a lot of sketching this week, and reading more about faces.  I think one thing I can conclude is You can't really draw anything without using a large amount of knowledge and references, until its buried in your skull.

2 - Move on, this piece has been flogged to death

I think perhaps you are right.  I think I'll just render the rest of it, despite the anatomical flaws (i mean its not completely screwed and I wouldn't like this have all been for nothing), and start a fresh next week.

Thanks all for input.  This thread is quite the gem of advice and definitely shows community spirit.

[Helm]

Finish this since you want to get some closure, but it's never for nothing! If only I had gotten threads like these when I was your age, I'd be much more of a proper artist today. Methodology is key. If you're hungry and I give you fish you'll be satiated for the day. But if I teach you the method of fishing, you'll provide for yourself always. That's the same with art. If we help you fix this one image, then this image will be good. if we make you understand the proper methodology, then you'll be able to help yourself become as good as I know you can be.

[big brother]

If you're hungry and I give you fish you'll be satiated for the day. But if I teach you the method of fishing, you'll provide for yourself always.

Yes, but nobody ever drowned by staying at home and sitting on the couch.

I feel like every artist has their own version of a "generic" face, cliches usually related to their own visage. I've noticed that a generic face and one "drawn without reference" tend to go together. For instance, if I draw two portraits -- each depicting a person from a very different walk of life, there will be some remarkable similarities. Usually, it'll be things I don't consciously vary, like the appearance of a philtrum or the depth of a nose bridge where it meets the forehead. When drawing from life, the artist acts as an interpreter, so a portrait becomes less of a collection of design choices.

Reading this, it seems obvious (and an underwhelming observation), but maybe someone can glean something out of it.