Official Anatomy Thread

[Feron]

Hello and welcome to the official anatomy thread.  Many pieces posted in the pixel-art board seem to get repeated critique about flawed anatomy.  This thread is here to post your studies and progress in learning anatomy.

Learning anatomy can and should take years; you will become a better artist because of it.  After many anatomical failures with pixel-art I have taken to pencil sketching.  I recommend you do the same, as it is the most efficient and accurate way of practising.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Helm for his nagging to get me to begin this process , as well as his invaluable time helping me out.  Thanks Bro!

Now I would like to share with you the progress I have made in about a week.  Not only to get some more feedback, but also to inspire people.  I am by no means a good artist but I think there is definite progress in my work.  Study and practise are the keys.

URLs removed ("dead" links) -Crow

Of course all of these aren’t still there yet, but I am getting closer, and I can see where I’m going wrong.

I have gathered quite a lot of resources, mainly from Helm, Ptoing and Google images.

I think it is probably best to begin with the human skeleton: URL removed ("dead" link) -Crow

Followed by a few technical diagrams: URL removed ("dead" link) -Crow

And finally photo reference:  URL removed ("dead" link) -Crow


Hopefully this thread will help people improve their anatomy sketching, and will share with us their progress.

[Helm]

This thread is officially sanctioned and stickied 

help each other and help yourselves. I will be posting here regularily. Critique to come.

[Atnas]

A few weeks ago (okay last month) was the last time I did any anatomical, er, studies. I should be doing them a few hours a day now that it's summer, but I got caught up in programming. 

www.lolipopsicle.com/linky/anato.jpg

I know, I should have used references, but I didn't have my computer. That's something I really gotta fix, because I'll never learn what things actually are, only what I percieve them to be, without SCIENCE .

Anyway if you uh can't tell what they are it's a profile and an arm with WHAT I THINK TO BE ( ) forshortening but I'm 999% sure I did that wrong. I remember reading in Hogarth's Dynamic Anatomy (Which is back in the damn library) that a form emerging from the background towards the camera will lose length but not width. wee. Looking back on it now the upper arm should have been coming from the right or center, I broke that person's arm. 

[skw]

great! what about having some sort of exercises we could practise here? maybe you, Helm, would want to prepare something for us? I mean one or two simple drawing tasks that would help us to embrace the concept of anatomy better. not feeling competent enough, I couldn't come up with anything useful.

[Ryumaru]

I'll try and post more later. Maybe it will inspire me to continue on with my in depth studies : D

( This page mostly copied from Mentler at Ca.org)



Let me know if you want these as links instead of images.

[Cow]

Okay, I'll bite. No refs or anything. Also I can't draw hands. Also penisguidelines (tm) are off center. Halp would be appreciated mucho.

http://cow.lastchancemedia.com/doodles/tmp14.jpg

[Helm]

Original pieces were:

Salaryman

Sad girl

Critique received and heeded from posts:

Sherman

Arachne

Ben

Willows

huZba

For which I thank them greatly. Most points addressed to the best of my ability. Here are the newest pieces:



Only piece of critique I didn't go for is the gun crit, I really don't care to have super-realistic guns, it's a gun. Oh and salary dudes leg is still bent at an impossible angle, but I sorta like that bit so I keep it!

Now, here are some replies to the other posts in this thread:

Cow: not bad at all! Work with a more precise medium next time (or at a bigger size at least) so the grain doesn't cover up mistakes. The body anatomy is pretty much ok from my point of view, but you gotta draw hands, lots of them. Forget the hair on the head for an anatomy model, don't obstruct the facial features, draw as analytical as possible, these are SCIENCE!! drawings, not 'let's express a character' art pieces. Do not cut off such pieces at any point, draw it all, draw the legs, draw everything. Is this from reference, from life? Keep it up!

Ryumaru: ace stuff, very rigorous. Impressive that you're working the bones below the body. You'll certainly be going places, fast. I have no real critique for you, you know more about bones and arms and backs than I do. Please, please give critique and paintovers to other participants in the thread though. Giving back is wonderful.

Skurwy: yeah, perhaps some exercises later on, sure! When I have some free time.

Atnas: same here for my lack of SCIENCE. The thing is, I come from a comic-art background (uh, I think it shows) and not a fine-art background. In my field, copying reference is usually considered lifting, art-theft, exactly because in your finished comic you don't have at the end some sort of archive of used reference and pictures to be honest. So if there's a precious thing in my field (at least in most cases) is a strong inner eye for construction, characterization and storytelling. Anatomy is important as far as it communicates emotion and character. You'll notice that almost all of my character art is like this. I am no anatomy expert by any chance, since I literally have learnt anatomy 97% by memory and trying to find applicative construction of the human form in a story-telling medium. I need to bust out the SCIENCE much, much more too, and I hope this thread will help me. In the end I will always work from memory for my proper comic-art because it's an issue of ethos (plus I do not have delusions of being a fine artist. If it reads, if it is placed in its proper field, if it emotes, it works for me) but I'd rather learn the SCIENCE and then rest it aside than hide behind my finger. So yes, this thread will be very good for me too, especially since I'm going to be drawing a lot of comic pages the next few months and I'll need your help much more in those than in pixel art.

The arm you drew does not obey a reasonable foreshortening. The upper arm is really short compared to the fore. The actual construction of the fore is convincing enough as far as I'm concerned. The head is much more problematic. Start with a perfect circle when doing head construction, right now it's a bit misshapen. Avoid scribbling, every line should be intentful. Don't shade vague areas as much as define with your pencil, in straight lines (think like a low-poly 3d artist. Look at what ryu did with the shoulder-blade bone, first a triangle, then a polyhedron, then a full shape, then rendered) the different areas of overlapping shading. Think in volumes, not details. High contrast is the friend of the anatomy discipline because it forces you to deal in clean volumes, not implications of volumes, not promises of volumes. As a comic artist I am a bit biased here, but I say: if you can't render it in 3 values (black, mid-tone, white) then you cannot render it at all and more rendering can save it but it will just distract from your disability.

Study ears (also Helm: study ears), study eyes (same, Helm) don't scribble. If you want a paint-over, shout.

Feron: we've talked in private on these pieces, I think more ground-up arm studies will help, and never stop revising the full-body diagram until you feel confident enough to let it rest for a while, and work on heads then.

edit: because the sadgirl edits are pretty nitpicky, here's an anim that will override your eye memory



More substantial changes than they seemed at first, huh? 2 is newer, and hopefully better, btw

[Ryumaru]

Helm: Thankyou, and yes sir!

Cow: some things
- Odd angles might be messing things up
- head a bit too small
-chest( pectoralis major) too small, the standard is one head height, I myself have a measurement of about 3/4 of a head, but 1/2 is much to small
-ribcage a bit too small, should go down further
-crotch should be higher, one head- chest, two heads- naval, 3 heads- crotch
- arm a bit too long, although not an impossible length, just irregular. bottom of the ulna( makes up the end of the elbow) should be AT the navel when arms are completely down

- good job on the abs
- nice rendering
Hope this helps.

[Atnas]

Thank you for taking the time out to help, Helm. I'll pull out Hogarth and STUDY the masses of the head, as well as concentrating specifically the ears.

Silly me I forgot about digital. I saw "anatomy thread" and headed straight for my sketchbook, for some reason. (not like I can render well yet or anything)

These are rather old but I did do touch ups just last week to update them with anything I may have learned. If anything, the eyes are outdated and I will do a newer one.

http://www.lolipopsicle.com/linky/eye.jpg

http://www.lolipopsicle.com/linky/010308-3.jpg (very old, it needs tilt and a firmer foundation, and the hand should rest more on it's own without help of a muscle)

http://www.lolipopsicle.com/linky/032108.jpg

http://www.lolipopsicle.com/linky/anatarm.jpg (the top one was actually a thumbnail for a larger study in acrylic but my school stole the painting)

http://www.lolipopsicle.com/linky/anatsplish.jpg

http://www.lolipopsicle.com/linky/eyelitestud.jpg

These are all rather old in comparison to what I showed earlier, save for most of the digital.

Enough of old art! I'll start studying immediately and post it for analysis. 

[Ryumaru]

Atnas: Foreshortening is a bitch plain and simple,
im not even sure I got it completely right
(I rotated to to make it easier to understand)

[Helm]

Atnas, I suggest you post only your most recent stuff in such a thread so critique you may get is not redundant.

[Cow]

Thanks a lot Helm, Ryu, I'll post some more stuff here, with 65% more science!

EDIT: Almost forgot, no refs or anything Helm. From imagination. You know, the part of the imagination that depicts naked men.

[Helm]

The best part of the imagination.

[Mirre]

Hey guys. Been a while since I posted anything. Great topic here, so I'm going to throw in a sketch I did recently for some crits. Go all out if you feel like it. Helm brought my attention to the fact that there's probably something wrong with the right arm (from us seen). Don't know quite how to make it look right though so any C&C is appreciated.

Also throwing in a preliminary sketch (that is a bit wonky) of a tattoo I'm getting this autumn. No anathomy help needed on that one, but it's supposed to look slightly made out of bones, so if anyone knows how to make that shine through better - I'll love you long time!

[AlexHW]

looks like she has no wrist that connect to the arm.
as for the right arm i think the forearm is a bit short.. could be helped by adding a bit of a wrist.
try bringing your hand/wrist up to your shoulder and see where it reaches.

[Feron]

Hands are also too small.  something about the perspective of her boobs and her torso seems a bit wrong.

[Ryumaru]

I need to draw more chicks -_-
any and all crits would be very appreciated.

[Sherman Gill]

Top one, something seems odd about the left shoulder. I dunno, a bit manish I guess.

[Indigo]

some quick anatomy practice for the night.  couple hours. no reference, but I probably should have used some...

[Feron]

Indigo - that's a very nice piece but all his muscles seem very angular, whereas the real muscle structure of the body is very curved and fluid.

[Willows]

Is it possible to learn anything anatomy-wise without reference? I'm not being sarcastic (ironic?), that's a legitimate question!

And -his- left arm looks horribly, horribly broken, as the shoulder and arm point totally different directions.

[Indigo]

hmmm... you are right about his left arm... I'll look into that.

as for learning anatomy without reference - no you cannot.  But unless you apply what you've learned *without* reference, you are merely just replicating photos.  So as you cannot *learn* anatomy without reference, you can learn how to apply it without.  (as I'm doing here)

and the angular-ness of the image - obviously an artistic choice.  I'm going through an angular phase right now I think.  If we had to render everything exactly how it is then we wouldn't be much of artists would we?

[Ryumaru]

Willows: it's possible to learn anatomy without PHOTO reference, photos are actually quite unnecessary. but when you get to learning the bones I doubt you would want to dissect somebody and learn from life.... although that one guy has been getting on my nerves lately...

[Indigo]

UPDATE:  thanks for the crits

[Rosse]

about angular muscles
Curves abstracted to angles is not necessarily a stylistic choice but a great way of learning the essence of a form. Where curves can be fuzzy, angles are abstracted forms (of the original curve) and therefore more clear and much easier to read. This knowledge can be extended when it's solid enough (Going from rough to fine).

about practicing anatomy without studying the inner parts
Anatomy does not only contain bones, tendons and muscles. There are other parts (some maybe more important) like gesture and overall proportions. These can be learned and studied just by observing and imitating nature (through life (or photos)) without the knowledge of the inner structure (except for the rough skeletal maybe). Bengal is a (exceptional case?) artist which practice very believable anatomy without studying the fundamentals, but you need a good sense for aesthetic and shapes. So I say it's possible, but there's no need to skip this study. First it's just a shortcut and these are never a good way of going through life. Second you will always be limited on the poses you learned and the others will lack of believability. If you really master anatomy with all his fine details you can create every pose from every angle in a believable way.
One thing to mention at last. You should be an artist first and physician last. So learn as much that you can communicate your message but as less that you keep loose and not end in stiff, over rendered muscle men.

[Feron]

and the angular-ness of the image - obviously an artistic choice.  I'm going through an angular phase right now I think.  If we had to render everything exactly how it is then we wouldn't be much of artists would we?

Yes, artistic choice is fine, but if you are doing it to practise your anatomy skills then just stick to the basics leaving all artistic choice behind.  If your doing it to create a piece of art which features a naked man, knock yourself out.
 

[Indigo]

I disagree.  i think Rosse explains my point much better than I could. 

[Helm]

Indigo, you're treating the pecks like some sort of mutable film. While they are indeed flexible and will hold and support the arms in any position, they are still pivoted at specific points to the chest. A peck will not rise independent of the bone structure  below it and that's why it's a good idea to study what's underneath the muscles too. You have a deep shadow under that peck that you probably should smooth out, I'd say. Also go ahead and place the nipples in non-vague positions so that can be examined I'd say.

As a muscle study it's okay, but it's missing hands and two legs. I know it might sound pedantic that I write this, but really you should finish all the body in such sketches. If you had, you'd see that you need to give support for the pose in the end, and that the feet must propel the center of gravity in a meaningful way. Furthermore, hands and body language would further explain that your anatomy study, even as an anatomy study, must emote something. The body must be trying to tell some sort of story. Otherwise as it has been noted, it's just a drawing of some naked muscle. I'll take an anatomically faulty but emotive construction over a hundred muscle-impressive, dense and angular-cool looking figures that do not seem to serve a meaning.

The post by Rosse is one that finds me in agreement also. Bengal is good but you can see how his art evolves out of anime-cliche and as such the bodies he draws have that sort of effect about them, making their language somewhat stilted at times, I'd say.

One thing to mention at last. You should be an artist first and physician last. So learn as much that you can communicate your message but as less that you keep loose and not end in stiff, over rendered muscle men.

Quite.

Ryu:

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg310/Chriskhaos/IMG_2518.jpg

Facial characteristics all squatted at the bottom of the face. Time for face studies not just body studies! Furthermore I guess, short torso, very small legs and waist.

[Willows]

Figured I'd chuck some schoolwork out here. I'm still learning like a sonofabitch, but it's coming along.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y73/SaboteurGreg/2min_1.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y73/SaboteurGreg/5min_1.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y73/SaboteurGreg/5min_2.jpg




There's three links up above that massive image, if you're looking for more!

If you see any consistent failures, feel free to point 'em out. I'm always looking to improve

[Ryumaru]

Helm: thanks, you got me to look at some things I didnt even notice before. About the face, I drew it with only pen and I accidentally drew that nose and was like" shit" so I just squeezed the lips in there. The eyes are more or less in the right place though?

Willows: these all have very good gestures to them, which comes in later. They lack solid construction.

[Helm]

I don't think so. Let's look at this chart:



and apply the SCIENCE.



here's the psd if you need it

More critique soon.

[Ryumaru]

Oh ok, thanks alot Helm, the head was supposed to be tilted down a bit, but the neck is also messed up and doesn't reflect that but even so the eyes are much too low.

[Helm]

Oh sorry to misinterpreted that. Here's a big drawover with various points. Check it with lower opacity in the psd

Sorry for messy drawing, I am ON THE RUN!!!

[Helm]

[Ryumaru]

- girls left hand just doesn't work as its supposed to I think
- maybe do something with the new guys left pinky or really the part where it attaches to his hand. It makes it look like the palm of his hand is a centimeter thick
- all of these drawings are really nice. I want to have a comic by helm up in my shelf! or maybe id frame it :O

[Xion]

in addition to what  Ryu said, the chick's feet look as though she's standing on uneven ground.

in agreement with what Ryu said:
the knifehand looks real wierd and...bulky? compared to her other hand.
Maybe people have different proportions for their hands, but that little bunch of meat on the outside of my hand beneath my pinky is wider than my actual pinky by just a little bit. Of course it's not very defined either.

[Helm]

Thanks for all the crits! I will address them! The next character is hilarious.

Edit: productive day

Meet Bernard Chrome.



I feel dirty for having drawn this.

[Ryumaru]

If you're talking about the feeling you get after drawing muscly men- drawing a naked lady or two gets rid of it for me
Oh man his right arm is in trouble. Take your arm and fully straight out, put your palm outwards, and you will notice that your bicep and entire upper arm will look like how your guy's is right now. Then while keeping your arm out, put your palm facing it towards you, the way you have it in your drawing now, and you will notice that the upper arm completely changes.

[Helm]

hm depends how you're flexing it though!

[Sherman Gill]

I'm not sure if it's in spite of or because I can't read Greek, but those melting-guy comics are hilarious for no apparent reason.

[Indigo]

Helm, I especially like the new one with the girl and guy.  Very nice stuff - Though I think the way you render feet could be improved a bit across all your images.



the image on the left points out problem areas and things of the sort, while the image on the right shows an example of how the critique can be applied...

I'll go through one by one.

The thigh of (his) left leg currently doesn't support the flow of the figure.  It appears to by almost sagging despite his beefed/firm muscles.  The red arrow shows your current action-line, and the blue line shows a possible fix.

Also on that same thigh, the frontmost muscle on the quads is just a tiny sliver in comparison to that of his right.   I think his right thigh is better rendered in this regard.

His right arm also has a number of problems.  with the palm of the hand facing away from the camera,  all the muscles should twist around to support it.  the forearm seems to do this pretty well, but the upper are doesn't at all. the bicept should wedge between the upper (extensors) and underside muscles of the forearms, but currently there is no such flow in it's connection (Ryumaru mentioned this as well)  Also, his deltoid is no where near it's relative size it should be in comparison to his left.

on his left arm I outlined the extensor muscle.  These muscles do not wrap underneath the wrists.  They stay on top.  You actually did this quite nicely on his right arm, but not his left.

lastly, I believe you've over-exaggerated his lat.  Even on the most extreme buff men, the contour of the lat should meet up somewhere where the shoulder joint is.  They way you have it drawn now suggests it connects somewhere to the underside of the tricept.

[edited a couple things]

[Helm]

I guess I should post these directly to the Anatomy thread 

Good points all around and I will address what I can tomorrow. Keep in mind though that whereas your rationales for the edits are sound most of the time, the proposed solutions you present suffer from Marvelitis. You sorta misconstrue my intention. It is worthwhile to remember that this sort of physique is not the result of nature and as such the 'perfect stylized uberman' that one learns to draw from studying American superhero comics is only one possible abstraction of how muscles would work (or say, stack) when pumped up to such grotesquery by overworking out and possibly chemicals. Dude is not supposed to look like he has an 'awesome', enviable body, he's supposed to look icky with his huge piles of pock-ridden meat. Your edit misinterprets the theme of the picture, and while it's really useful to get anatomy critique at any case, I hope you don't mind my critique your intention in critiquing. I am trying to communicate a small story much more than I am trying to be a physician here.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_6X0pq71c8Ng/R6gaaYdusGI/AAAAAAAAAOY/cTeE3FEe6EE/s1600-h/9804-BodyBuilding-2.jpg check this out
and http://www.lifeinthefastlane.ca/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/body_builder_10sfw.gif
and tell me if these are patented Marvel ubermen or if they're distinctively different.


What is my life. Where am I? How long have I been out-cold? If you drew this, would you expect to get anatomy critique for it?


Check out the legs here. Are they the same legs you envision every time you think of drawing a muscly human? (also, enjoy suprise ball!)

The left (ours) shoulder is an extremely valid one though. I will have to rework that arm from the top, it seems. Legs crits aren't really doing it for me for mentioned reasons.

Also, forgot:

The thigh of (his) left leg currently doesn't support the flow of the figure.  It appears to by almost sagging despite his beefed/firm muscles.  The red arrow shows your current action-line, and the blue line shows a possible fix.

Again, intention. I am not drawing a superhero comic book where a streamlined direction for everything and total eye-please are the point. Sagging is good! Ugly is beautiful! An emotional response is valued higher than a pleasing, familiar and shapely uberman. Christ, look at his face!

[Indigo]

None of my critique covered how to style the image (as you say Marvelitis).  All the critique I gave (with maybe the exception of the action-line on the thigh) is applicable to ALL styles as they are anatomy facts of positioning from life.  No matter how buff or exaggerated you're intending your muscleman to be, the positioning and general flow of the muscles remain the same

even in your picture examples you're showing here - they address all the issues that were mentioned in my critique.  their frontmost quad is not a sliver, their upperarm muscles flow naturally into the forearm, and the extensors dont wrap under the wrists but rather stay to the side as they should be.

[Helm]

More or less yes, no matter how you disfigure your body you probably won't misplace any discrete muscle groups, and an edit will be coming. What I wanted you to keep was that your proposed solutions, besides addressing soundly various errors I made prettied up the figure. "Duh, helm, if you fix muscles it'll look better!" yes, but I mean pretty as in some sort of beefcake ideal, which is the opposite of what I'm going for. It's a minor point for your interest (unlearn Marvelitis, Satan compels you!) and in no way meant to fight your critique, for which I thank you

[Indigo]

ah I understand.  To be more clear, my edit was not a proposed solution when it comes to the style of the image.  It was merely my way of showing the critique applied without regard to style - and it accomplishes this well.

Its a tangent point you make - and I do agree with it.  But as Ive said before, I've never read or studied american comic books before, and the style that is drawn by my hand is just how I interpret anatomy.  I am working on being a bit more dynamic with my renderings though.

[Helm]

no, be less dynamic!

fixes:

[Indigo]

the arm has been beautifully fixed.  I like it much more.  I'm still convinced that the saggy action-line of the leg is hurting the image quite a bit.

BTW, I tagged pixeljoint.  REPRESENT!!
http://pixeljoint.com/2008/07/06/2586/Indigos_Pixelation_Theme.htm

[Helm]

haha, awesome! Using!

Also, check out how lowering the right (ours) clavicle helped the balance and 'how long are these arms anyway?' effect.

Sag stays 

[Ryumaru]

The arm is much better now. You said that it depends on how you flex but im sure you've noticed that while that is true to an extent it's impossible to get the upper and forearm to be in those positions and be perceivably connected.
Your doing a GREAT job of portraying ugly muscles, It's hard not to open him up in painter and pretty him up with more ideal shapes!

[Helm]

Yeah I tried it and whereas it's mostly possible it's not really comfortable so I changed it. The lesson I must learn is to never draw the rotations of the muscles on the arm before settling on the exact position of the hand/palm.

[Willows]

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew.

I didn't notice the ball till you said it, helm, but compared to the muscles it's hardly an offence.

As for crits, his shirt is flattening the crap out of his chest. Make it follow the contours of his pecs... all his muscles, for that matter, so that you don't lose so much volume. Also, avoid the tangent lines you've got in places for the shirt, it's not helping the whole volume issues as it makes the shirt look tattooed on rather than worn.

I dislike how his neck is wrinkly and how his face kinda melts into it, but that might just be personal preference.

You also seem to be missing an entire muscle between the pec and shoulder. Look at the man with the exposed ball, he has some peculiar muscle located where the straps of your man's shirt are.

One last thing, you seem to have a set way of drawing elbows when they're anything close to 90 degree bends viewed from the side. I could be wrong, but I believe that's a pattern you might want to break out of!


@Ryumaru (or anyone, really)

Thanks ("Very good gestures" :O), and I agree that my drawings lack structure, but I'm having a bitch of a time figuring out where to get started on that problem. Any chance you've got any tips?

[Ryumaru]

Draw with basic forms- cubes and spheres. You will never have structure in anything when you draw with lines.( obviously not meant literally)
Bridgeman's anatomy books are wonderful because they show the body as interlocking " wedging" masses.

[Feron]

drawing an arm withdrawing a sword from the back is quite tough.

any suggestions?

also i think the rest of the anatomy is getting better

[huZba]

Your own body can be a very useful reference. Check out what happens when you lift your arm like that. Pay attention to your shoulder area. Just flexing around you can get a good feeling about the range of movement of the joints and so forth. Do what Ryumaru suggested. Use primitives to block out the character and see if it makes sense in a 3D space. Go ahead and draw more NAKED MEN and don't obscure or leave out areas like you did with the face and feet. Just draw them all in, you'll be later thankful that you did.

Proportions are better than before, but still a bit all over the place cause i can't eyeball a point of reference to determine the scale everything.
Try and re-iterate this picture by checking out what you like about this one and playing around with areas that don't seem so good. Draw in a bit of a hurry and don't be too specific about things, just doodle away and you'll end up with happy accidents when your eye picks up something that looks nice. Even if you can't remember everything about the human body, you still recognize one when you see it. Let the subconscious side do a bit of work for you.

[Ben2theEdge]

Feron, this drawing reveals 2-dimensional thinking. If your character were trapped in a petri dish then this is how he would reach behind his back. But in 3 dimensions his elbow would move forward towards us, instead of to the side.

[Feron]

well i found some of my grandfathers ink pens, so i thought i'd try them out on a new anatomy sketch.

[Helm]

reference charts again. Second head ends at where the nipples are, third head ends at navel, fourth head ends at genitals.

[Evil-Ville]

You should probably draw both sides of the body. Also don't bother with detail until you've got the whole thing sketched.



He's colossal!

[Opacus]

I'm not exactly good at anatomy. But, I have some basic knowledge of it. Made an edit. Also just for some practice for myself I guess .
I still think he looks quite large but w/e.

[miascugh]

The overpaint's getting there, though the shapes all around still seem improvised, knees are way too far down. I don't think there's much point to practicing anatomy without references. And if you have trouble eye-balling the proportions use aids like grids and guidelines.. and start out rough to block out the proportions



I counted 7 1/2 heads in the reference (not Tom Hanks) and used those as basic reference point.

[Conzeit]

that's so wrong it becomes right...somehow.

[ndchristie]

evil-vile - your edit has extended the shins too far, which are really quite short in life (a thing I always forget and so have been studying).  The proper size i think lies somewhere between the yellow you put down and the black you made. 

In general though these legs seem a bit short for me - perhaps a third of a head - you can't turn an eight headed figure into a seven and a half headed figure without raising the ass slighly, and it was already too low in the original.  Although the bottom of the bottom should never quite be as high as the midline, for it to be 4.25/7ths of the way down (about 60%) is a bit silly .

[miascugh]

If by evil-ville you mean miascugh, then let me say, that my overpaint is strongly referenced from an anatomy book and sticks very closely to the head grid (I made the head-count on paper first, then by eye-measure in ps, might not be 100%-ly accurate, but looks decent enough to me). Anyway, I didn't use the underlying old sketch at all, but made it all new according to the material I had, so one can pretty safely say, that this is how the guy I looked at was proportioned.

Please don't make me scan just to see how far off I am

[ndchristie]

sorry, that was my bad looking though the names.  I did mean your edit.

While it may be based solidly in anatomy books and charts, these vary greatly, many of them are poorly done, and in a studio full of say 30 people from 18 to 48, I don't need a ruler to see that, according to your head counts, the knee is too high in the black and the butt is too low in the yellow .

Interestingly enough, your sketch (when i fit it all on one screen, rather than scrolling by halves like I was), actually places the butt nicely, because you haven't measured the heads equally .  So the message here is to trust your eyes and hands more than your books, because the books here would have been off ^^.

[miascugh]

(Reference, while from a book on anatomy, was a photo of a - very well-trained - average guy, though, no chart involved)

[ndchristie]

Well, I don't have that photograph so I can't deny it, but most humans are equal from the top of the knee to the hip as they are the top of the knee to the heel.  Perspective and anomalies can change this, photo-references are actually trash for charts becuse there's so much to go wrong - so i'll tell you what i've been told several times here - if you're making a chart reference and selling it as a learning guide, best to make it properly measured and representative of the average man.

[TrevoriuS]

I'll post some of my own studies later perhaps, though I'd like this to be removed from the starting post:
Prehistoric anatomy: http://pixelheart.net/anatomy/diagrams/muscularsystem.jpg , there's a picture of the skeletal view from the same author - both don't match, and both are wrong ><).
Overdrivern anatomy: http://pixelheart.net/anatomy/diagrams/muscles.jpg (possibly good for some muscle names, and attachment points).
Made up spine: http://pixelheart.net/anatomy/skeletons/Skeleton-Side.jpg (9 Cervical, neck, vertebrae? devision in my book's still 5/12/7).
Cubic thorax: http://pixelheart.net/anatomy/skeletons/human_skeleton.jpg

And ndchristie -> 'hip' is a broad area. I assume you mean the top edge, no?

[chriskot]

Wow. I just realized how rarely I actually draw things from life. It's like I go months without actually drawing anything that exists in reality... Gotta change that.

Okay. So I tried doing a few quick pencil sketches of my left hand a little while ago, maybe about 5-15 minutes for each.

(apologies for terrible quality- my scanner wasn't working so I had to use my webcam)


I can tell just by looking at it that my palm is too small in the last one. Did I mess anything else up? I don't really know any of the anatomy rules for hands.

well i found some of my grandfathers ink pens, so i thought i'd try them out on a new anatomy sketch.

I'm not sure if anyone's pointed it out yet, but one thing that keeps catching my attention is that the feet on your people seem to consistently be a little on the small side. I think that the length of a foot is supposed to be roughly half of the distance from an ankle to the bottom of the knee, or something like that. Yours look to be closer to a third of the distance in most cases.

[Atnas]

Hogarth says the length of the foot is equivalent to the length of the forearm. It checks out alright on me. 

[TrevoriuS]

You'd have to remove the.. <insert correct word here> expanded masses at the end,the places where muscles attach and where you can recognize the bone from the outside of the body - such as the ankle, elbow and wrist.
Well back to my point, if you remove these, and keep only the piece of (more) constant thickness, you would have the length of the foot. Put your big toe against your wrist, you'll see your heel is far from your elbow. Note that my feet are average (at least out here in the Netherlands) So perhaps Hogarth's as well as your, feet are large

[big brother]

In case you haven't seen this already, I'd recommend checking this out:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/334333/Constructive-Anatomy

[ter-o]

In case you haven't seen this already, I'd recommend checking this out:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/334333/Constructive-Anatomy

I have that book and I gotta admit that it was too cumbersome for a newbie like myself. I first need to learn how to construct the basic proportions and masses of the hand (or any other anatomy) in different postures and after that I might be able to practise all the constructive anatomy beneath the surface.

Andrew Loomis said nicely that "If the artist looks for the big planes, the big lights and shadows, the big values and relationships, he will do a better job. One can easily get lost in a lot of little truths without seeing the big ones."

Thus I can't recommend that book for someone who's new to anatomy but it's worth while for more advanced artists.

[Krut]

Ah!, this is great, ill be sure to post here once im out of my tight schedule, i've been meaning to get out of my comfort zone, and go a bit more realistic anatomically speaking.

I know its a bit of a stretch here, but taking in account the recent changes here...is it possible that in a near future, a section dedicated to traditional drawing is created? Sure, there are other places already dedicated to that...but dunno, this feels like "home" in the art department, you kno?
I know, i know, pixelation is dedicated to pixels, heh, but... hell, if i can get out of my comfort zone (try to at least), why cant pixelation? 

Cheers! 

[Helm]

Krut, I was thinking about that too. Probably it would diffuse the focus of Pixelation a bit and that's not exactly good. We don't want separate cultures from the pixel art board and the 'traditional art' whatever theoretical board. This happens a lot to big forums, there's people there and people here and they don't mix too much. Everything must come down to pixel art for this place to survive. We have the OT creativity threads if you want to post non pixel art and if you explicitly ask for critique you will get it from the keen eyes we have around. I've used it a lot, it works!

[EyeCraft]

This is a great thread idea! Here's something I've been fiddling around with for an hour or so. It's a re-approach of an old piece I did in opencanvas a while ago;



I feel like I'm getting a lot closer to how a face is actually structured, but I'm sure it's still off   

[TomF]

Well it's miles better than the old piece, but something about the mouth really bothers me.

[Dokozai]

Not fleshed out, I'd like help with the basics.

Arm length, leg length, the works!
 

[Helm]

let's look at the chart:



Use your own judgment? Are the legs in good relative size to the torso? How about the head to the overal height? Look in relation, look good, make internal connections about ratios between lengths of body parts. Then draw again. Repeat every day. Eventually you'll get the hang of it.

[xdjkittiex]

The images are two assignments that I did for school last week.

Arm Skeletal & Muscle


Leg Skeletal & Muscle

[Atnas]

  The hand is backwards.

Also you're missing some of the bones in the palm in the skeleton view as well as the foot.

I mean, it looks nice so I'll have to nitpick. What grade did you get?

[Dusty]

The hand is backwards.

I don't think so. Looks like he has the hand turned thumb-out.

[EyeCraft]

The hand is backwards.

I don't think so. Looks like he has the hand turned thumb-out.

Aye, the hand looks correct to me.

[Atnas]

It looked like a tricep to me XD

But upon further research it is not. 

[xdjkittiex]

Atnas -

Like Dusty and Eyecraft said, the palms are facing the viewer with thumbs out.
I hadn't realized it but I did get a little lazy with the smaller bones in the foot and the wrist / palm in the skeletal examples. 
(I think I got away with that because we're doing foot and hand skeletal & muscle sketches this week)
I got an A on each.

[Atnas]

Yeah I knew about the hand's position, the direction the arm was facing just confused me. It's good work!

[Helm]

Center of gravity. She's leaning. Never draw an incomplete figure on a limited canvas. The actual anatomy doesn't suffer so much as body language and posture does, the fundamentals.

[Helm]

Definitely. I suggest this method: draw a series of thumbnails. Literally, as big as thumb little sketches. These are great for capturing vitality. Then blow up the best thumbnail to about a4 size and overdraw (just put another paper on top, or do it digitally,whatever you want) pulling together the thumbnail, getting good anatomy in there on that level. This is how most pro illustrators work.

[khorin]

I've been drawing from Sara Simblet's "Anatomy for the Artist". Here's one of them turned into a digital piece:

[Helm]

Try it and see. Just rough doodle. If a construction works, it will work at this size.

[Helm]

Yes this is a great first step. Now it depends on which one you choose to work more on.

[Helm]

well I can't parse the pointing at the skies body language, emotionally. What does it mean? Who does this? The pose is not connected with something actual for me and therefore I can't really suggest those poses. If you care to explain what you're going for perhaps I'll see it.

[Helm]

The backstory's all well and good but your concern is how much of this communicates - or can communicate - in a single picture. I couldn't tell she was pointing as a specific thing in the sky until you pointed it out to me just now so yes, definitely go with the difficult pose (the top left one) where we can at least see the Aurora. Make the hand point to IT with foreshortening and not directly above (where there is nothing) and if at anything attempt a more 3/4 look with the girl on the side of the image so we may see a bit more of her than her back while she points.

[Helm]

Well you can communicate that the character is surprised by an environmental effect that occurs and is pointing towards it in amazement. That's I think, pretty fair.



Does this help? The little graph next to the picture shows how the points of interest are placed in the plane, and bigger is more important. A pleasing construction on this level will help the picture later on much.

[Helm]

Well first of all this is much better than before as it is. Yes, pull the whole scene down and have more space than ground. Space is alright being empty because that's what... space... is. The pose is quite alright. It won't be an easy thing to draw, but you certainly can do it. Keep in mind this: When you're done with something and finally finished with it, it stands on its own merit and almost always that merit is something you could never believe would be there when you're doing an early sketch like this. Stuff... happens, when you draw a while thing like this and you'll be pleasantly surprised with yourself if you go along with it.

[Akira]

Do you point at things when you're alone? Pointing is used to convey information to another person. I'd suggest you change the gesture to one of surprise. Then emphasize the aurora to show that it is the cause of the surprise.

[JJ Naas]

IMO you can have trees, bushes and stuff on the edges of the picture to help frame the scene, but the problem with the tree on top of the highest point of the hill we can see is that it makes the pic unbalanced, too many heavy elements on the right side of the picture. I think you have too many elements here as well. This is clearly an atmosperic pic, so get rid of all the elements that are not necessary for the picture. If you want to have buildings in the pic, you don't need to show every detail of the buildings, just specs of light in the windows or the roof. The mountain in the distance wouldn't have any details visible either, just the outlines. The campfire may be too much as well.

Were you considering the golden ration when composing the picture?

[JJ Naas]

Well, here's my take on the scene. This one's not about the anatomy but the general composition of the image. The tree's still there, sort of framing the image on the right side plus there are some bushes on the left side for framing as well. I moved the tallest mountain to the left to counterbalance the heaviness of the right side. The attention is on the sky, so I brought the horizon down more. The buildings are only hinted.

[Jad]

I don't know what the golden ration is. I just threw things together that I thought might make sense or look good. I'm really only used to drawing figures/humans. Landscapes, wildlife, and buildings confuse me. I don't know where to begin or how to do them. I've even screwed around with point-based perspective and nothing's ever come out looking good. This is ending up like every other drawing idea I've gotten.. starts out cool and somewhat exciting, then as soon as my pencil or stylus hits the page/tablet it all goes to hell.

[edit] I am thankful for the help I've received.. I don't want anyone to think I'm being ungrateful. It's just a matter of personal disappointment. I guess I'll try my hand at it again later today.

Actually, with the amount of verbal disappointment of yourself that you often drench your posts in, I actually thought you were all enormous amounts of talk about stuffs and no skill. :O

So srsly, that's obviously not the case at all, since your skills are actually good. It's really that disappointment in yourself that hinders you from actually completing your images. Actually, if you just took the first sketch with the sitting girl and tried to flesh it out a bit, that'd be good enough. And now you're actually improving on that, that's even better! So just hang in there, guy

[tocky]

This is essentially the reason why JJ Naas's composition works, I think:

Big ol' swirly line.
Generally, people start from the top, find something that goes somewhere, and follow it. If that's a clear path that leads past all the focal points, and lands somewhere interesting, that's about the best you could hope for. There's more to the edit than just that, but this is a really useful trick, and it's dead simple, so I figure I should mention it.

[Argyle]

These are scans from a page of Richard Williams' The Animator's Survival Kit (by the director of animation of Who Framed Roger Rabbit), a book which I cannot recommend to enough people.  A while back I was ambitious about getting better in my drawings enough to go to the local college's life drawing sit-ins to draw nude models.  Although I only got a chance to go about 2 or 3 times, the studies drastically improved my knowledge of how a body should look and understanding what separates a drawing of a character from looking like a hunk of ridiculous ground meat shaped like a stick figure.

Drawing from picture references helps out a ton in the understanding of anatomy.  But drawing a model in person with time restrictions for poses ranging between 5 and 20 minutes is invaluably helpful in getting your mind trained to cut to the core of defining a body's truly defining shapes and restrictions without becoming overburdened with spending 20 minutes making sure the eyes look nice and pretty on your picture while the rest of the head looks like a melon.

Anyone seeking to pursue a study of drawing human anatomy should seriously consider looking up life drawing sessions that are hosted in your area.  I plan to look into going back and doing more of this regularly for a couple years in the future (after life settles down... moving in a week and our first baby due at the ending of October ).  This thread was just the driving inspiration that reminded me of this goal.


If the recent flood we had didn't destroy my old huge sketch pad I'll look into snapping some photos of the sketches from the sessions later on tonight.  I have not done much studying of anatomy in the 5 or so years since I did them so some critiques should still help me learn more 

[Helm]

You're showing steady improvement with setting this up. Is there a point to finish it? Absolutely.

[Jad]

That all sounds good, I guess, but I doubt I can pull it off. There's a lot I don't know.. how land forms near mountains, how to create a believable set of rooftops and trees, how to mimic the look of an aurora, the texture of the moon, etc.

Yeah, and if you ever want to learn how to do these, this is the time! It's not like you knew how to draw humans when you first held a pen anyway, but now you can -  this is obvious, but easy to forget.

So just keep going!

[Helm]

If the camera is close to the ground, we're metaphorically 'sitting there' with the girl, more engaged. If it's high it's as if we're a traveller that happened on her on a trail. If it's high in the air, we're an overlord god. Take your pick, emotionally.

[Helm]

I don't really have anything to offer in terms of which media, anything's good. Yes the newest version is the best. The campfire flame, lose it. Just have some embers, perhaps a liiitle flame. Let the night sky do the talking.

[Willows]

Willows chucks some phoenix down!

OneMinuteGestures:





Foot studies "The Burne Hogarth way":




http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y73/SaboteurGreg/Foots_008.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y73/SaboteurGreg/Foots_010.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y73/SaboteurGreg/Foots_003.jpg

Hands copied outta Dynamic Figure Drawing (Apparently copying is a good way to learn. News to me!)



I'm quite proud of those gestures. I still get yelled at (with reason) for not getting the hands in there sometimes, but on the whole I'm getting the pose rather well more often than not. Proportions take a severe beating at times, as seen very clearly in the spear one. Ahh well. More practice I guess.

Feet studies are an accumulation of work over the last two days. Kept some of the really crappy ones visible to show that I still get it wrong more often than not, but meh. I'm starting to wrap my fingers around how to put force into things, an' it feels gooood.

C&C is welcome, no matter how harsh.

[Dokozai]

Good Job!

I don't know if you'll be interested, but you should try this: http://www.posemaniacs.com/?pagename=thirtysecond
Work from 60 seconds, or just start at 30, 15, or 10!

I had much fun doing mine!
 

[Helm]

I'd also put the fireplace into sloped perspective

[Cow]

Okay, here's something awful. Help would be appreciated. I still need to work bigger (the face was a pain at such a tiny size, hence the awfulness (hopefully a legitimate excuse)). No references, I'm trying to end my complete reliance on references because I realised that I was very lacking in other aspects. Plus I want to make comics. :U

Also this thread is a goldmine, fantastic advice abound. I've learned some new things.

[TrevoriuS]

Arms are unrealistically tight with the body. Legs are too long. Shorten the upperleg so that the fingertips touch the top of the knee, and scale the lowerleg accordingly. Make sure your feet fit about 1.5 times into the lower leg. Note that knowing proportions won't do. Whatever you draw, I actually recommend to find some sort of reference to get your perspective right. I tend to be able to draw a pose from a certain angle from my mind only if I drew it from life once, I don't know how this is for other people, but basically I'd have to draw every possible limb from every possible angle at least once to be able to draw anything without reference correctly.

[Sherman Gill]

(our) left arm is too long. Head looks small, but I measured it and it's pretty on target...
Both arms might actually be too long, with how they're bent, actually.

[Ryumaru]

hey cow what you have is a good start- ladies are hard to draw and i'm not very good at them so take what you want from this
The torso is usually about 3 heads tall- from the pit of the neck to the end of the sternum- from the end of the sternum to the belly button- and from that to the pubilacularous ( making up words is fun : D) area. Your arms were close to being right for the most part- I haven't seen anybody's arms that don't follow this: that the forearm length ( bone) is 5/6 the size of the humerus, sometimes this can be hard to judge with all the muscular mass on the arm.
I also put her into what I thought to be a more graceful pose, the weight-bearing leg is under the center of gravity and the other one is just having fun.
I also gave her long dark hair because thats my type :3

hope this helps a bit :]

[Cow]

Thank you all for your crits.

Arms are unrealistically tight with the body. Legs are too long. Shorten the upperleg so that the fingertips touch the top of the knee, and scale the lowerleg accordingly. Make sure your feet fit about 1.5 times into the lower leg.

I agree with you on the arms. The legs seem fine to me, four heads to the crotch region... I'm not sure where the fingertips touching top of the knee comes from, my body and a few charts I posthumously consulted seem to contradict that. Feet are an issue with me, as I can't reference my own body because my feet are essentially as long as my forearm and I'm reluctant to believe that's the norm, thanks for the proportional guideline.

Note that knowing proportions won't do. Whatever you draw, I actually recommend to find some sort of reference to get your perspective right. I tend to be able to draw a pose from a certain angle from my mind only if I drew it from life once, I don't know how this is for other people, but basically I'd have to draw every possible limb from every possible angle at least once to be able to draw anything without reference correctly.

For the past couple months I've felt a sort of artistic stagnation which I believe has a direct correlation with my dependency on references. I can draw from life and from photos well enough for my purposes (for now) but when it comes to imagination/creation rather than reproduction/interpretation I feel my art is lagging significantly. So now is my attempt to remedy this by confronting my deficiencies as an artist, even if it means 'regressing', or rather, abandoning my comfort zone in order to learn new things.

Yeah, sorry for the little monologue. Once I have a firmer grasp of proportion and shapes and overall construction I think I'll be set...

Both arms might actually be too long, with how they're bent, actually.

Yes, I agree. My application of proportions in general is far two two-dimensional, I need to work on some foreshortening I think.

Ryu's post

Thank you very much for the edit. What you did with the arms and shoulders is very good. I will make some more things soon with your advice in mind. I'll be trying to make some more dynamic stuff soon also.

[Ryumaru]

It's funny that you say that- the proportion rule IS that your foot is essentially the length of your forearm :] Might be a tad smaller for ladies - or maybe not.

[Helm]

Cow, it's very good to see you do what you are doing. As it was said, the arms are too long, though not to say that there aren't women with as long arms, but they're certainly exceptions. Also, the shoulders are a bit invented in that you'll need to study how the muscles and tendons work a bit under the skin there to realize what you're doing wrong.

Ryu, have you been instructed to not count the neck in the first 'head' from chin to sternum? The graph I always reference from (taped on my wall) counts it in and it seems pretty accurate for what it is.

[Ryumaru]

Burne Hogarth teaches that the neck is about 3/4ths a head long- but i've found that to be a bit to long for anything other than his muscly creations. But mine( as in my very own physical neck ) is clearly about half a head and is separate from the first head of the torso- although that might just be me and/ or not apply to ladies that much.

[ndchristie]

Burne Hogarth is a blight on young artists everywhere, the sooner you abandon everything he says the better.

I draw long necks because ah likes 'em, but in "perfect" posture the crest of the shoulders is half a head and slopes up slightly to the neck.  Most people tend to hunch forwards with their head tilted up to correct, which means that from many angles the neck is a quarter or less to the chin.

Ryu's girl is very tall but somehow works.  that's another funny thing about proportions is that you can work it if you want to .

[Ryumaru]

Yeh yeh, and Schmid is a bad painter :3
I think you can learn a bit from anybody- while Hogarth generalizes things too much  and is bound to that almost super humanish look, the proportions he teaches are for the most part " correct" ( for lack of better term- there's no such thing as " correct" proportions kiddies) and his diagrams of putting the figure into space and perspective have helped me at least.

Yeah I think sometimes for me drawing a figure from imagination is a hit or a miss

[ndchristie]

Hogarth and Schmid both teach a lot of terrible practices to artists too young to know better.  Your studies I think are a prime example of a guy who has begun to see the world for himself but you're definitely still shaking off the taint of copy-studies and how-to-draw type practice.  Hogarth poses no threat to most twenty-year-olds, but most twelve-year-olds don't yet know how to study and they form habits that are hard to unlearn.  Schmidt teaches kitsch to old women using words like dilly-dally and is also not a threat unless he's taken too seriously.

The fact remains though that neither artist is a proper teacher for anyone with aspirations.  Few if any artists are.  They offer two of many points of view which should be considered as a terribly small part of a larger picture and both preach technique over philosophy which I can't stand.

But you knew that was coming the moment you wrote a post starting with "burne hogarth teaches..."

Another anecdote : I sat in on a class the other day on my lunch break where a professor was teaching kids to stretch from the corners in, because he thinks that it's easier and feels better.  Now, the case has been made before for this method in a lot of ways, the greatest majority of them concerning artists who white-knuckle the first pinnings (a major no-no!) but in general I tend to side with the conservators that I've met who all tell me that paintings stretched from the corners are far sooner lost to time.  Regardless, there are now twenty kids walking around parsons who, because they have never stretched canvas before, are now going to do it from the corners in who, if they are still doing so in fifty years, will probably find all their old paintings to have given out.  It's just another example of good guys giving bad advice.

[Willows]

I'm inclined to believe that there ain't no right way, and that every artist will think their current mindset is the only way to do things. Me, I've been brainwashed by my education to believe that art should be produced with the robot juice of a thousand factories, not the sparkling, imaginitive fairy dust of the casual painter. And I love it. I get "instructed" "Don't fail the mission!" and "Don't think, just DO" and other awesome things, and though I don't really agree with that kind of a mindset, when I'm not starving and sleep-deprived I'm laughing my ass off about how silly the whole thing is.

But hey, I'm learning, and at this stage there's so dang much for me to learn I'll worry about whether or not something doesn't suit my fancy later. Thinking that I might possibly be learning bad habits (undoubtedly true) just makes me afraid to learn, and according to someone practically everything is a bad habit.

Also I'm somewhat curious what 'zactly these bad habits are. I've done a bit of Hogarthing in the past, and if there's anything I learned that I probably should watch out for, it'd be coo to know. I do much 'ppreciate you voicing your opinion though, andchristariuse

[Ryumaru]

Well Nate anybody who stretches canvases corners in is just lamesauce :p Maybe Parsons should add stretching a canvas to their admissions requirement?
I know this is off topic from anatomy- we could call it canvas anatomy maybe?- but white knuckling the first pinnings is a no no? My teacher taught me to do centers of top, then bottom, left then right, and if my hands don't ache from the stretch I put on the canvas it always turns out too loose to be used for anything more than drapery.

[ndchristie]

Well Nate anybody who stretches canvases corners in is just lamesauce :p Maybe Parsons should add stretching a canvas to their admissions requirement?
I know this is off topic from anatomy- we could call it canvas anatomy maybe?- but white knuckling the first pinnings is a no no? My teacher taught me to do centers of top, then bottom, left then right, and if my hands don't ache from the stretch I put on the canvas it always turns out too loose to be used for anything more than drapery.

At risk of prescription, the first first set should be a hair shy of full-strength because, so I am told, because this gives just enough give to allow the rest to be pulled uniformally and not bow the center of the bars without sacrificing spring or tightness (which will come from the - at very first nonexistant - lateral pull across the bar rather than vertical pull across the gap.

Back to anatomy, there is comfort in robotness, but too much comfort leads to a person being fat and lazy and unaccomplished.  Living art by the rules is no more and no less valuable than being obese.  I would not suggest the other extreme either - to only do your own thing or worse  to not do anything leads to a person starving and dying.  The best artists are somewhere between lean and curvy .

For some general critique  willows your guys are going to have some bawlin feet.  for a selfproclaimed robot person, they are nicely personalized without going too far into abstraction.

[Zach]

[Atnas]

I figure if the muscles are big enough I'll learn what they are. 

I was hoping someone could do a paintover or verbal critique so I could focus on the areas I'm getting wrong? I've been bullshitting the chest for a while and because of my resolution to sketch every day I've noticed anything I ever knew about anatomy I've forgot. Sorry for the bad economy and symmetry (lolpenis)

[Jubatian]

Well, i know this thread focuses on human anatomy, but anyways, hope i can have some comments on this piece:

This is the background of the menu system on my experimental web page. I know the nose is a little long, but otherwise the front of the body finally looks properly built for me (this is the first time i say this on any of my work). The feet of him reach below the bottom end of the image by at about 50 pixels and he is sitting. No references used. Feel free to rip it apart, i think i need to learn from somewhere

[ptoing]

When I see Hogarth's stuff I always have to think of Silver Surver involuntarily. Dunno if that says anything about his art.

[NaCl]

Drawing the human figure is so hard it makes me sad...  The thing is, and maybe someone can clarify or help me here, but I see a divide between an accomplished artist, and myself. If I watch them work, the drawing kind of flows out, and when I draw it is like every line I draw is wrong, and I have to go back and erase, then redraw it again and again until it looks OK. Right now I am feeling that bridging this divide simply comes from drawing people over and over and over and memorizing how things look in different positions, and then just putting out something that you have much practice at. However, I also feel that there is some other element that I am missing, because it seems improbable to simply have every body part memorized for any position you decide to draw

Anyway, here is one attempt at a female body and a couple faces.



Thanks for any guidance!

[Atnas]

It looks like you have a very 2d thought process going on. You draw the outlines but do not shade. These artists that you see the work flow out of probably build their figure studies out of light and shadow rather than try and do a contour drawing every time. You don't need to memorize much if you visualize it in 3d. A lot of it is confidence, too. I remember earlier in this thread, Helm told me to stop scribbling, and it really helped. (at least in pencil drawings, I don't draw enough on my tablet to be used to the medium) If every line is a purposeful one time thing everything will flow. Don't worry if you get it wrong, there's always a next time. c:

It seems like you understand a great deal about anatomy itself, however the problem you are facing is the execution.

[deziresoft]

It looks like you have a very 2d thought process going on. You draw the outlines but do not shade. These artists that you see the work flow out of probably build their figure studies out of light and shadow rather than try and do a contour drawing every time. You don't need to memorize much if you visualize it in 3d. A lot of it is confidence, too. I remember earlier in this thread, Helm told me to stop scribbling, and it really helped. (at least in pencil drawings, I don't draw enough on my tablet to be used to the medium) If every line is a purposeful one time thing everything will flow. Don't worry if you get it wrong, there's always a next time. c:

It seems like you understand a great deal about anatomy itself, however the problem you are facing is the execution.

Amen to that.

I'm not exactly the best artist, but I do build off of light and shadow.  At last, I'm only 14, so, not much I can explain, since I've been only working with pixels for about 2 yrs, and hand drawings for at least 3, not caring where, or where not to start from, until quite recently.

[boojiboy]

I gotta start taking advantage of this thread.
Here's something I just did for about 20 minutes or so.

Problems that I have (at least ones that I know I have difficultydoing):
I'm completely lost when drawing legs. Joining the pelvis to the thighs I find extremely hard and I throw dimensions out the window when I go below the knees.
I also can't draw feet. I am terrible at foreshortening (probably why I can't draw feet) and I also have trouble joining hands to wrists.
Can anyone show me the volumes of the areas where I clearly don't have an idea about (eg. Legs, Forearms)?

[EyeCraft]

Here's a bit of play that sort of freaks me out:



Trying to work on clearer lines, confident strokes. Succeeded a very little bit. Primarily a head study, but see I need to review torso. The ear is a problem; alot of ambiguity around that area.

Fun though!

@boojiboy: collarbone looks too flat/straight to me, making trapezoidal muscle look GIGANTIC. Also throwing off connection area around scapula/trapezoidal/deltoids/clavicle. Basically feels like shoulders need to come up a little bit. Or chest down. Honestly I'm not 100% sure. Pelvis is big issue, as you mention, I would really go over study of that section of the skeleton and how/where the muscles attach.

EDIT: Some posemaniacs sketches. Much more confidence with these!

[Doppleganger]

Those are some nice poses Eyecraft. The head seems a bit off, maybe like it's missing bits from the top? Or the chin is possibly not large enough, or the lips are too low. I can't really say for sure.

I ordered Anatomy and Perspective for the artist (after hunting down an old thread of mine where it was mentioned), so I plan to be posting in here once I get. A steady dose of anatomy sketches is something I'm in need of.

[huZba]

I haven't finished anything in a long while, just sketching a bit of something before going to bed every day. Personally i think these are too constructed and i feel claustrophobic looking at them now, but I've been keeping my drawings to myself for too long now so better get some exposure.


@EyeCraft: It's a scary guy but it doesn't look constrained at all so i like it. To say something helpful uhh... well, just do more

[Helm]

Hm yes perhaps too constructed but well that's not something easy to shake off. If anything I see a lot of blank expressions and few 'open-mouth' ones. I would suggest every time you draw a face before you start, think of a nuanced emotion you'd like to convey. Even if it's impossible to coney to the viewer just by a portrait ("well of course she's irritated because her cat pooped on the sofa, what else could she be with that face?!") you'd know if you failed or not. You seem to have face construction down fine enough to start telling emotional stories so why bother doing a full page of disembodied blank faces, you know?

If you want morphological advice, you seem to draw one type of lips almost exclusively, with some variable upper lip size from men to women. I'd try a few different things there. Also why not attempt a few less 'pleasant' faces, you know? Draw ugly people, but try to hit that place where they're ugly but look real, not like some grotesque judgment.

[crab2selout.png]

huZba, you ever see this faces tutorial over at conceptart.org?
http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=84105

I haven't got the construction of heads seared into my subconscious just yet, so I'm not quite ready for it, but you look like you've got a pretty good grasp of things and might find it an interesting approach.

[tocky]

i'm not really sure what i've done, here:
newer <>older

I got the reductionist disease... I think she's closer to real proportions in the one on the left, but it looks wrong to me.

[EyeCraft]

Tocky, I'd suggest being more stringent with your construction. Your loose markers gradually get larger. Also consider curvature of spine; ribcage and pelvis are tilted at different angles:



Um, this is kind of a weird edit, and I don't have a tonne of confidence in it, but:



Mainly shoulder area (bit exaggerated). I also tried to give some example planes but they're not... fantastic...

[huZba]

Thanks for the push Helm and Crab2! I've really enjoyed drawing for the past few days.
This came out of a scribble like those in the conceptart.org thread.
Might not be that much better but at least I didn't feel like i was inserting facial features on a mr potato head like the previous ones.


I'll post some more once i pick them up from the messes 
-edit- indian joins the party

[EyeCraft]

Hmm, yeah. I would recommend having a look over some faces in profile, and especially skulls, and really look at the curves and protrusion of the mouth and nose. They stick RIGHT out. Importantly, the mouth is like a kind of hemisphere sitting on the face, it really curves.

Looking at both of those, I would say the common element is extremely flat faces, with the nose and mouth too much in the centre of the drawn face.

[NaCl]

Hey HuZba, great characters. I think the cowboy looks a little Asian... I like that. Never seen an asian cowboy before. I messed with the indian man a little bit, mostly for my own benefit. Feel free to ignore this:

[Mike]

I need some help in anatomy as well plus i don't draw nearly enough as I should.  I used to draw everyday but with school and game making my priorities are not set for drawing.  However I do have a picture I drew some time ago(this was my latest non pixeled drawing)  I wish I had something more to show but since this is the latest I'll be assured of not getting redundant critique.  Please please ignore the stupid thing she is doing with the wrench...I don't know what I was thinking.



Also I am at home a lot(my schooling is online) and I rarely get out of the house(I'm a bit of a hermit I guess)  Sucks not having a car.  Anyway I was wondering what is the best substitute for not having a live model?  Is pose maniacs really that good of a anatomy drawing aid?  I want to draw a lot more but I want to make sure if I start again that I will be on a linear track to getting better.  I'm willing to put in the work and the time but I don't want my soul crushed when I find out I've been doing everything wrong(that has happened a few times before)

Another question I have for you guys/girls is, "Is drawing fun for you?  Do you enjoy drawing?  Also where do you draw, is it at a desk, your bed(someone elses bed?) the floor, a chair, standing up, etc? 

Finally my last most important question.  Does anyone here draw in photoshop?  If so isn't it hard to get really crisp lines like you would with a pen or a pencil?  Whenever I try drawing in photoshop all of my lines are blurry.  I drew the picture above exclusively in photoshop and the only way to get the lines looking nice was to carve them using the eraser tool.  However doing that takes a large amount of extra time.  Which in turn just rips out whatever vitality the drawing used to have in it.  Anyway to sum this up "Whats the best program to do line art digitally?"

[crab2selout.png]

look up some andrew loomis books(there available on the web in PDF form). I've been going through his books and there's a lot of good practical info about breaking hte body down into more managable shapes and volumes that will help with the posemaniacs stuff.

[tocky]

also: photos. posemaniacs is cool in that it lets you see stuff from a bunch of different angles, but if you want to draw natural-looking people you will learn best by comparing your stuff against real people. (I hear there are photos of naked women on the internet somewhere.) with photo reference it's pretty tempting to just copy the reference exactly, though, rather than deconstruct it.

[EyeCraft]

Another question I have for you guys/girls is, "Is drawing fun for you?  Do you enjoy drawing?  Also where do you draw, is it at a desk, your bed(someone elses bed?) the floor, a chair, standing up, etc?

Drawing is great fun for me, provided I'm not getting frustrated/hitting walls. But I find that only happens when the direction I'm taking the piece doesn't really make sense when I think about it. I usually draw at the computer, sitting, with my tablet on my lap. If I draw on paper, it's basically the same position.

Finally my last most important question.  Does anyone here draw in photoshop?  If so isn't it hard to get really crisp lines like you would with a pen or a pencil?  Whenever I try drawing in photoshop all of my lines are blurry.  I drew the picture above exclusively in photoshop and the only way to get the lines looking nice was to carve them using the eraser tool.  However doing that takes a large amount of extra time.  Which in turn just rips out whatever vitality the drawing used to have in it.  Anyway to sum this up "Whats the best program to do line art digitally?"

I draw in photoshop. I haven't really looked at it much, but there's a tonne of options for modifying the brush's behaviour. Try playing around with the Hardness property. Also try using a very small diameter brush. I use diameter 4, but usually work pretty lightly with the tablet, so the brush is often a lot smaller. Of course, my stuff is scratchy as hell, though. Just throwing the idea out to you. You might want to check out Manga Studio. (EDIT: Oh can't believe I forgot this, but you can achieve sharper lines in photoshop if you work with a larger than intended canvas size (say double size), then shrink the final image down to intended size)

Your drawing kind of disturbs me, since the girl seems to have the proportions of someone aged 10, or maybe even a little younger... except she has voluptuous breasts. I can't really nail down specific issues that lead to this impression, but I think it's to do with the body being very narrow, especially the shoulders and hips, making the head look alot bigger and nudging the proportions into the direction of `child'. I dunno, it's just the impression I get. Neck is very thin, back muscles might need a little more presence in the area between the ribcage and the arm.

also: photos. posemaniacs is cool in that it lets you see stuff from a bunch of different angles, but if you want to draw natural-looking people you will learn best by comparing your stuff against real people. (I hear there are photos of naked women on the internet somewhere.) with photo reference it's pretty tempting to just copy the reference exactly, though, rather than deconstruct it.

I followed your suggestions here and deviated away from pose maniacs. Very rewarding; here's something I just did:



Unforunately I did a lot of contour-following rather than analysis, but I still think the analysis that I did do paid off.

[tocky]

Eyecraft: awesome. for crit: I think maybe her knees and wrists are a bit wobbly.

I've been meaning to thank you for the edit, earlier. I haven't had much chance to revisit that picture, but I've gotten some use from your edit.

and Mike's questions:

I don't know if I draw for fun. I draw idly when I've got something I need to draw, or when I'm trying to figure something out, or when I'm avoiding doing some other kind of work. The only reason I'm any good at all is I used to draw in class all the time, when I was supposed to be doing maths or whatever. (I do not recommend this.) It is fun, kind of relaxing - but also taxing, kind of like exercise - for leisure I'd rather play a game or read a book or something.

When I draw in Photoshop, I use the pencil tool, always full opacity, have aa turned off on all the tools. If it's a larger painting sort of thing, I'll still work that way, I feel like I need a fair idea of what the brushes are doing. I don't work with more complex brushes or applied textures. If I need to adjust the opacity of stuff, I'll stick it on its own layer and set the opacity for the whole layer.

This whole setup is kind of limiting, though. I keep meaning to mess with opacity and texture and soft brushes, though I haven't had much luck with that stuff in the past.

[Accident]

I always start with a sketch on paint before I go to photoshop. O:
Halp halp? o3o -lols, DK64 reference-

Yes, I used Pose Maniacs for reference, but they don't have a female pose like that. >: So. I'm afraid it may be too manly still.

[Mike]

Your drawing kind of disturbs me, since the girl seems to have the proportions of someone aged 10, or maybe even a little younger... except she has voluptuous breasts. I can't really nail down specific issues that lead to this impression, but I think it's to do with the body being very narrow, especially the shoulders and hips, making the head look alot bigger and nudging the proportions into the direction of `child'. I dunno, it's just the impression I get. Neck is very thin, back muscles might need a little more presence in the area between the ribcage and the arm.

Eyecraft it was not my intent to draw a young girl.  She is supposed to be at least 18 but thanks to my heavy anime influence things kinda got skewed towards a younger character.  This is why I need anatomy help.  Also thanks for your other tips, I'll try those out!

[dead_pool]

Hey, I'm kind of new to this forum. I've been viewing it for quite some time but haven't registered. Well I spotted this thread, and I am pursuing anatomy. Any tips on how to better one's anatomy skills would be very helpful. I also am posting a sketch I did, requesting critique. I haven't finished the rest yet, but am wondering if I'm off to a good start. This is my first attempt to actually try and draw anatomically.

[SirBilly]

For me it feels right, but I'm not an expert. Is the anatomy "correct"

[willfaulds]

Difficult say on such a stylized piece BUT I think I have 2 slight issues.

His legs don't appear to connect to the torso in the same place and they don't bend in the same place.

The arms don't suffer from either of these crits in my opinion as the upper torso appears rotated and the placement of the arm's attachments fits this. Also they are both equally bendy (His left leg has a slightly too sharp bend in my mind)

[KuroRyuzaki]

1st try ever =] iv started drawing a bit but this is like the biggest thing iv ever done. any info

[Dr D]

I'm no expert on anatomy, but I do see some issues. Some of the proportions and appearances of body parts don't resemble the same part on the opposite side of the body. The shoulder, for instance is a good example. I don't think you should mirror the sides completely, as things tend to be slightly different, even with such a static pose with a full frontal view. But, if you can draw one side of the body decently, you should probably be able to draw the other side similarly, and decently as well.

Also, not sure what's going on in the stomach/abs area.

[crab2selout.png]

Really check out the pectoral muscles and see how they connect. Your pecs are kind of bubbly and overflowing, where they should be firmer and defined. For example, the top of hte pecs connect to the clavicle and in the centers join to the sternum. You have a line near the top of your pecs which seems like it could be hinting at the clavicle, but it looks sort of randomly placed. Andrew Loomis book are a great  and free reference if you are interested. I've found them a wonderful resource. Start with Fun with a pencil and don't just skip through the first part about circles looking for the detailed reference pics.

[EyeCraft]

@KuroRyuzaki: I think you need to undergo a study of the skeleton. Knowledge of the skeleton and where/how muscles connect to it is important in understanding the form of the muscles. The pectorals, as mentioned, need to connect with the clavicle, ribcage (at specific points, for instance yours are going over the sternum) and humerus. Deltoids attach to scapula, clavicle and humerus at specific points, etc. Common element is muscles extending over their points of attachment at bones. Abdomen area seem pretty much invented.

@dead_pool: I'd be very careful considering the forms you're trying to lay down. To me it seems like you're focusing a lot on the lines/contours and not as much on the 3D volume of the various areas of the body, and thats leading to some warped/wonky perspective on the form. For instance, the (our) left arm has a bulge that I guess is the pectorals sticking out, but little to suggest the arm that the muscle should be attaching to; seems like a mix of perspectives or a misunderstanding of the anatomy. The line between the breasts I guess is conveying the sternum seems very conflicted with the form suggested by the breasts and the area at the pit of the neck. Once again an apparent mix of perspectives. My suggestion is: work on the whole body at once, iterating detail, construct contours by considering form (not the other way around). Aside from that I think you're going pretty well.

@accident: hard to pin down the form; the lines are very loose. As such, difficult to critique your anatomy. Things I pick up are the chest looking somewhat concave/crushed, neck at an unnatural angle compared to shoulders (looks like its snapped backwards). Aside from that I'd just suggest working on refining your studies to make sure you properly confront areas you find difficult, and simply do more! 

Been a while, but I did another sketch from photo:

[Helm]

Good work. Try to make assured strokes for the contours of the body. Line width should represent curve and the light hitting it, don't let forms get represented just by where the scribbly shading hits a wall, assured strokes!

[EyeCraft]

Thanks. Actually I have a lot of trouble controlling my line work with the tablet. I had a small practice session with basic primitive volumes this morning, and I found it's something I'll need to devote more attention to in order to become confident with it.

Aside from that, I tried doing a construction, and I have woeful knowledge of appendages:



 

[Helm]

The second biggest problem is overlong arms. The constipated pose is puzzling, but not wrong. The biggest problem is the places where the pectorial meets the arm in the armpit, that whole place although not exactly invented is represented pretty sloppily. Those neck muscles on the back of the neck do not show the same way when the hand is low and when the hand is extended, look up some reference.

[dead_pool]

My second attempt at human anatomy. Critique please. If you can, please try to ignore the bad looking hands.

[EyeCraft]

General proportions incorrect, a lot of stuff around pelvis off (crotch too low, pelvis too narrow); Look up Loomis or something similar for a guide on landmarks on the body and proportions.



Not a great edit; I'm pretty tired and my memory is shot, but that's the best I can make at the moment 

[dead_pool]

Thanks ,Eyecraft, for the great edit, criticism, and guidance. I think i have a severe problem with drawing legs  . I get so frustrated I want to be able to draw correct anatomy, but everything I draw is so bad. I practice all the time, but I can't see my progress. Does everyone feel like this at some point or am I alone in this? 
EDIT: Also, can anyone suggest any books for noobies in anatomy. I tried some pretty complex stuff I saw on a blog, and it was way to complicated for me. It was on a much more advanced level, for someone who already has a pretty solid understanding of anatomy.

[Dr D]

Your anatomy is horrible? Anything I'd draw would look like garbage compared to yours. You've been doing pretty darn good. Your legs are pretty close, I'd say your arms and stomach/abs area are a bigger problem.

It's going to be hard to get things perfect, but just keep studying and practicing and you'll get there. I know there are a few books referred by the members here, but I can't find them or remember at the moment.

[dead_pool]

Thanks for your comment Dr D. I can understand your idea on my arms and torso. I think I went for too much detail and not the basic structure. I have a bad habit of that, since I've never tried to learn anatomy in my life...until now. I'm used to drawing what "feels good" which is a terrible habit I must break. I'm practicing now the "8 heads method" for proportioning things correctly and not just drawing what my horrible habits institute.

[EyeCraft]

Thanks ,Eyecraft, for the great edit, criticism, and guidance.

You're welcome.

I think i have a severe problem with drawing legs  . I get so frustrated I want to be able to draw correct anatomy, but everything I draw is so bad. I practice all the time, but I can't see my progress. Does everyone feel like this at some point or am I alone in this? 

You've just described exactly how I feel  . Well not exactly, but I understand frustration brought on by the inability to nail down some area of the figure.

EDIT: Also, can anyone suggest any books for noobies in anatomy. I tried some pretty complex stuff I saw on a blog, and it was way to complicated for me. It was on a much more advanced level, for someone who already has a pretty solid understanding of anatomy.

http://www.alexhays.com/loomis/Loomis%20Figure%20Draw.pdf

from page:
http://www.alexhays.com/loomis/

[dead_pool]

Thanks for reference to the Andrew Loomis book. I actually already found it though, and have been reading. I've retried at constructing a male again, I think I've done better after reading some of Andrew Loomis' work. Critique once more please.

[dead_pool]

I hope double posting is ok...  . Anyways, this is another anatomy try. This time no reference used. Critique please.

[Ai]

Anyway I was wondering what is the best substitute for not having a live model?  Is pose maniacs really that good of a anatomy drawing aid?

Go draw 10 of their figures a day and then tell me Seriously.. it has helped me a lot. It's definitely true that real people have all sorts of proportional variations -- for instance I'm a tall man, but my proportions -- eg hip to shoulder measurement -- are relatively feminine.
A lot of the fun in drawing people is in these little (and sometimes big) quirks. So I recommend Posemaniacs for polishing your really rough points anatomy-wise.. and to also do some other drawing from photos of real people, and play with the proportion between these two according to how sorely you feel your basic anatomy skills to be lacking.
BTW, Posemaniacs doesn't only provide overall body refs -- they have eg. 3d scans of actual hands in various poses which can also be quite helpful.

One strong point of Posemaniacs is of course its 3d-ness. It's helped me far more in 3d construction than drawing from photos ever could (since they are 2d regardless of how a skilled photographer might mislead us to perceive otherwise.)

  I want to draw a lot more but I want to make sure if I start again that I will be on a linear track to getting better.

Oh well, start anyway. Nobody's track to getting better can ever be linear, as far as I've observed; You can only keep giving things a good try and periodically discarding things that aren't working. And it follows from this that you can only know what things are really worthwhile after getting back into the game.

  I'm willing to put in the work and the time but I don't want my soul crushed when I find out I've been doing everything wrong(that has happened a few times before)

It happens. Your current approach is quite incorrect, though it is instructive; I've found this is a very reliable truth that can be applied no matter where you are (and presumably, no matter who you are or when you are.). It's just the way life works. It's uncomfortable only in direct proportion to the magnitude of your misplaced arrogance.

Another question I have for you guys/girls is, "Is drawing fun for you?  Do you enjoy drawing?  Also where do you draw, is it at a desk, your bed(someone elses bed?) the floor, a chair, standing up, etc? 

Even when I feel burned out drawing-wise, drawing is fun for me. At such times I just push on through the frustration to find the fun,  and use a Lojban based concept generator I wrote to decide on subjects and perhaps find a spark of inspiration.
I mainly draw sitting down, but suspect standing up would be better. I prefer it when circumstances permit.

Finally my last most important question.  Does anyone here draw in photoshop?  If so isn't it hard to get really crisp lines like you would with a pen or a pencil?  Whenever I try drawing in photoshop all of my lines are blurry.  I drew the picture above exclusively in photoshop and the only way to get the lines looking nice was to carve them using the eraser tool.  However doing that takes a large amount of extra time.  Which in turn just rips out whatever vitality the drawing used to have in it.  Anyway to sum this up "Whats the best program to do line art digitally?"

I don't use photoshop, I do use GIMP... IMO the tip about the pencil tool is good and I imagine it operates pretty much identical to GIMP's pencil tool, which I also prefer over Paintbrush.
I've done plenty of sketching in GIMP and find it is not too soft, if anything too hard sometimes. It all depends on your brush settings really, like someone else said.
However, if you really want pencily-ness, consider something like MyPaint [1] or Opencanvas which actually tries to mimic real drawing media.
Both MyPaint and OC provide a pseudo-'infinite' canvas, which is great for just reeling off multiple quick sketches (as you might with PoseManiacs)


[1] I luuuuuuv this <3 Both for sketching and painting, it is powerful, approachable, and simple. (
http://mypaint.intilinux.com/)

[dead_pool]

A problem I am having is emulating a good paint like effect. I use Corel Painter X and I know its a suitable choice for this, but I think I am lacking in the necessary skills for creating this desired effect. Everything I usually render has a very paint bucket look to it, or for lack of a better explanation, MS Paint look. It doesn't have that pizazz that paintings look like. I don't want my art to have a totally "digital" look about it, but instead like an artist actually painted it. If anyone has any advice, please give it.

EDIT: I just tried Mypaint and I seem to have a problem with the brush tool. It doesn't pick up every stroke with either my pad or mouse. It has random chops throughout a stroke. Any way to fix this?

[Ai]

EDIT: I just tried Mypaint and I seem to have a problem with the brush tool. It doesn't pick up every stroke with either my pad or mouse. It has random chops throughout a stroke. Any way to fix this?

mm, it's probably a bug in GTK+ on Windows, for some tablet setups on Windows, GTK+ has problems.
OTOH it could be a MyPaint bug that only shows up on Windows -- the main development platform is Linux, naturally.
possibly relevant:

https://gna.org/bugs/?12018
"This is a GTK bug. To fix this someone has to build a new Windows version of MyPaint using a fixed gtk+ version."
^^ the above sounds the most likely to me.. do the described symptoms match?

[Atnas]

A problem I am having is emulating a good paint like effect. I use Corel Painter X and I know its a suitable choice for this, but I think I am lacking in the necessary skills for creating this desired effect. Everything I usually render has a very paint bucket look to it, or for lack of a better explanation, MS Paint look. It doesn't have that pizazz that paintings look like. I don't want my art to have a totally "digital" look about it, but instead like an artist actually painted it. If anyone has any advice, please give it.

It looks like whatever you're using isn't set to track opacity based on tablet pressure. If you're using painter, try out the other brushes and play around with the settings. When I used it I liked one of the pastel brushes that I modified. But you shouldn't worry about this too much, just try for the opacity, because completely opaque strokes aren't for everyone.

[dead_pool]

It looks like whatever you're using isn't set to track opacity based on tablet pressure. If you're using painter, try out the other brushes and play around with the settings. When I used it I liked one of the pastel brushes that I modified. But you shouldn't worry about this too much, just try for the opacity, because completely opaque strokes aren't for everyone.

Sorry for not being familiar with this term "opaque strokes." I've been messing around with with Painter's brush settings, but can't find anything I'm really satisfied with. I think part of my problem, as I said before, is I'm not really skilled in the painting area. But for now, I'm not as concerned about the painting issues, because I'm just trying to get anatomy down first.

mm, it's probably a bug in GTK+ on Windows, for some tablet setups on Windows, GTK+ has problems.
OTOH it could be a MyPaint bug that only shows up on Windows -- the main development platform is Linux, naturally.
possibly relevant:

https://gna.org/bugs/?12018
"This is a GTK bug. To fix this someone has to build a new Windows version of MyPaint using a fixed gtk+ version."
^^ the above sounds the most likely to me.. do the described symptoms match?

As far as the Mypaint issue, symptoms are the same, but no fix has been figured out for it yet.

[Atnas]

Your brush is set to be opaque like the one on the left, while a lot of artists use ones with varying opacity like the one on the right because they simulate natural media in that the intensity is based on pressure.

Though that's based on if you have a tablet... I couldn't tell based on "It doesn't pick up every stroke with either my pad or mouse." but I assumed you had one because the lines aren't uniform in width in your last image.

[dead_pool]

Yes I do have a tablet, and I see what you mean with opaque thing. Simply lowering the opacity will give it a more "artist's brush look"?

[Atnas]

It's not setting the brush to a lower opacity, it's turning on a setting to dynamically change the opacity based on pressure. Probably your problem is you're using an ink brush in painter, one that by default doesn't vary in its opacity. I don't have painter anymore so I can't help you...

Yes, generally even a simple round brush with opacity detection on will look more painterly, but there's also textured brushes and more abnormally shaped brushes.

On the topic of your anatomy study, the outline is well enough but a silhouette isn't everything. You'll probably find that your last one is a little cramped and serves more as a diagram rather than how a human would actually be found standing. You should try to break out of drawing that same man over and over as early as possible, because there's hardly ever a time when a figure is seen from that direct a viewpoint, and it's best not to form bad habits.

You might want to try www.posemaniacs.com for some more in depth poses. c:  if you do, don't forget to shade, as the lines aren't important, the volumes are.

[dead_pool]

Ok, I understand. About my anatomy; as since this is my very first try at every drawing a "correctly proportioned" figure, I am learning the body layout from a frontal view first, to know where key points lie on the figure. I'm following Andrew Loomis' book and by doing so, I'm drawing the male from front, and side views. Once I'm familiar with the skeleton and muscle structures, I'll draw more realistic poses. Thanks for the advice though.

EDIT: As for shading, this is probably my worst area. I need some real practice in shading. Any advice? I don't have a good knowledge of shading at all.

[Atnas]

Well, the general thought to keep with you is that outlines simply convey boundaries of masses and shade defines the masses. Studies are usually more successful, I've found, when I disregard using lines and instead just shade the masses, any lines that result are borders from contrast and/or edge shadows, which is realistic. When drawing the human body, you have to be careful to not just draw the outline but also use light and shadow because otherwise you won't be learning the true form of the body, and the manner you perform your studies will not permit you to reach your goal in the fullest.

There's not much advice, I simply see shading as, when monochrome, marking areas of varying intensity... You just draw what you see, and that's really all there is to it. There's no rule on how much gradation or harsh shifts should be used, you simply draw what's there. Understanding it is another thing, and requires you to observe from a multitude of perspectives and go underneath what you see on the outside, understand how it influences the end product. The goal then becomes understanding the human enough to invent and modify with ease as to not to depend on reference out of necessity, otherwise one becomes nothing more than a faulty camera...

[dead_pool]

Well I was reading Andrew Loomis' book on drawing head and hands and I decided to practice drawing heads for a while. Do these look alright?

[Joe]

Hey have any of you heard of The Structure of Man? http://thestructureofmandvd.blogspot.com/ 

It just seems to fit in perfectly with this topic, and I couldn't just not tell you guys.  I'm halfway through the core lessons, and it's ridiculously comprehensive.  It's 8GB of lessons.  It doesn't go through the body at all of the angles, but it teaches you the proportions of everything.  I highly recommend it.  It's not worth $45.00, though.  Here is the torrent for it, if you find it interesting (let's not - mod)  Oh, and if when you download it, make sure you follow the lessons consecutively.  You will learn so much, so fast. 

Enjoy.

[crab2selout.png]

I really don't think you should be posting a torrent for those videos. $45 really isn't that much, especially for something you say is "ridiculously comprehensive" that you "highly recommend." I've spent many times that on some good art books and considering how much Vilppu or other artists charge for their instructional videos, $45 is even less in comparison.

If people are trying to improve their art and cost is a concern, here are some links to free art ebooks over at conceptart.org
http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=131117

[Joe]

I really don't think you should be posting a torrent for those videos. $45 really isn't that much, especially for something you say is "ridiculously comprehensive" that you "highly recommend."

I guess it's not, I'm just not in the habit of spending that much over the internet.  But either way, I just hope you check it out.  It's incredible.

[robotacon]

I've got those DVDs and they are pretty amazing and almost too much to comprehend!
I think the guy is actually distributing them himself because the packaging and the labels were very DIY.
It felt good paying for them too because I felt like I was paying directly to Riven.

[ndchristie]

the leg i drew for Scribblette, occured to me that i should probably put my own advice up for critique if i'm going to stand by it and this is a pretty good place for that

[Scribblette]

I figured I should be taking a proper look through here too. Whole buncha saves to desktop for sorting already. That Loomis link is super (hey, the lass there has her legs together!  )

[Helm]

the leg i drew for Scribblette, occured to me that i should probably put my own advice up for critique if i'm going to stand by it and this is a pretty good place for that

I'm no expert but this seems pretty solid. Both realistic and dynamic. Perhaps the knee needs even a bit more disambiguation, but that's a matter of pixel level finish, not bad anatomy.

[Scribblette]

the leg i drew for Scribblette, occured to me that i should probably put my own advice up for critique if i'm going to stand by it and this is a pretty good place for that

*grins stupidly*

Aha! I have something! This anatomy book here states that there are TWO bones in the lower leg there, not one. Aren't I clever!

 

Okay, so he knew that already. For anyone who doesn't, from what I can see it's a combination of the two bones that has the fibula (a thinner bone on the outside of the leg) creating the bowing effect, which I think was what ND was demonstrating. The tibia itself curves only very, very slightly.

According to a text here on "congenital unilateral bowing of the tibia and fibula":
Bowing of tibia refers to bending of diaphysis with apex of curve directed anterolaterally, anteromedially or posteromedially. Posteromedial bowing
of tibia is a congenital condition often associated with calcaneovalgus deformity of ipsilateral foot. This condition undergoes spontaneous resolution to a major extent, often leaving only leg length inequality.The latter may result in abnormal gait and backache..."

Phtooie! i.e. if the fat bone is curvy instead of the skinny bone, you go owies and walk funny.

As far as planning out the body goes for miniature sprites, I doubt you'd need to focus on two bones instead of the combination...

[ndchristie]

you're mostly right, but don't neglect the shape of the tibia, is has a built-in ridge even in the most pefect examples which does bow out and the profile of which can easily be felt.  the strong devision there in the sketch between light and shade is not an illustration of the fibula, but of that ridge.

in the end what it comes down to is being able to observe the way contour and light changes over the form and figuring out how it will change when the form moves.  for the shin, the important part is not necessarily whether the bowing is due to the tibia or fibula, but that the bow is a constant because it is defined by a bone.  the calf on the other hand will change size and position based on the movement of the leg. the adductors are quite visible when the figure stands with the leg closed, but open they smooth out almost completely.  under the hip, your gluteus medius (occasionally called the hip adductor) along with the tensor wrap around the hip and create a soft form between the hard crest of the hip and the hard top-point of the femur.  the sartorius, the only function of which is to assist all other functions, wraps around and adds a predictable irregularity to the vastus muscles (favoring the inner bottom and the upper middle for form.  the kneecap in a standing position sticks out from the lower point of the femur, but in a bent-knee position is more or less a smooth extension in the direction of the upper leg while the tibia and fibula drop.

my point - it's not really helpful to learn what a leg looks like because it changes so much.  what's best is to learn why it looks like that so that you can construct the basic forms of it without reference and, more frequently in a game-oriented world, in stylization and abstraction (things i still struggle with).

[Scribblette]

Ow. Comprehensive. Have to pull book out again and see which muscles are which. Bones looked easy to learn. Muscles look ... mad... so much practice required!

Oh well, not like there's any other option.

Unless... unless, that is, I stick to designing worlds where the only residents are giant spheres that roll by ejecting streams of gas through holes about their body. I suppose that'd make for some interesting armour/weapon upgrades...

Ach, muscles it is.

Edit - I don't know how close this is to what I SHOULD be reading, but I did find it handy whem stumbled across via google a few days ago, when looking up just how mild the difference between human skeletons was. Goes through all sorts of anatomy, human and animal.

[Atnas]

Oh that's a really nice link.

I burst out laughing when I got to the end, realizing that all the attention spent on learning both human and animal anatomies was SO YOU CAN DRAW FURRIES.

[Scribblette]

I struggled so hard not to give that punch line away. XD

Edit: I didn't want to hijack this thread too much so all the chatter re pixel anatomy studies are in the other thread, but since it's under-the-skin maybe this is appropriate. I doubt I'll do a muscle version this size, but will probably sketch that up to pixel better. And yes, they're missing something like 3 ribs on either side and extra forearm and lower leg bones. 
 

[eckered]

just thought id pop in and say thank you for this,
seeing the breakdown of a leg's anatomy in a simplified, color coded form really helped me to understand the way legs work.  ive been drawing from this sketch ever since i first saw it in scribblettes thread

edit:  these were the first leg sketches i did based on that drawing. 
http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/7083/img3727.jpg

and a sketch of my own that i wouldnt mind being critiqued
http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/281/img3728.jpg

[Jakten]

Spent a good amount of time drawing some feet today, I need to get back into drawing from life. I feel as though my skills are waning. Still having trouble understanding foreshortening and the way hands and feet are constructed.



Also a hand.

[CrazyMLC]

Wow, after reading through this thread I'm really amazed at some of the quality, I am really just stumped at finding a better word than amazed.
Flabbergasted?
Awed?
Well, I need a thesaurus if I want more right now but I have some art I'd just like to pin up on the fridge here.
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k42/crazyMLC/drawing.png
Probably my best human drawing. >_<
I think that's kinda pitiful now, so I'm just going to study all of these pictures...

[Atnas]

personally if that was mine the crit I think would help me the most was to work on line quality. It's not really making progress learning if you consistently tweak and carve lines, or rather HUGE MASSES OF SPIKY GRAPHITE. If you have nice lines I believe you learn and solidify the shapes and forms in your head. Like reciting a poem, the more you do it the more effortless and flowing it becomes, the poem becoming second nature to you. metaphors oh ho ho . _ .

[Doppleganger]

First attempt at some concept art styled photoshop work. That sentence reads pretty horribly.

I had some issues with her chest, breasts, and collar bone region. I think that it ended up alright, but the hands kind of make it difficult to actually know cohesively. I can still see some minor flaws where the areas are exposed, and I think the problem is that the area is too flat and masculine. The neck, too, looks a little problematic. Then, there's her right forearm being much too long. That was more of an oversight than actual error though. And with those poofy sleeves it's hardly the biggest concern. Overall there is a note of fantasy in the features (notably the ears), but, for the most part, I was going for realism.

All the edges are meant to line up with other things, as this was a "quilt" activity.

[0xDB]

Recently, I'm trying to force myself to draw more, draw lots and then some more, trying to become good at drawing/figure drawing.
This thread has been very helpful so far to me and next to other things played a big role both inspiration and motivationwise.

So here's about two weeks of fast studies, free doodles and also some slow studies(where I try to copy everything by eyeballing).

For the studies, I used the posemaniacs page that had been linked to earlier somewhere in this thread.
(Reduced all images to 50% and 8bit to save bandwidth.)


































I'm struggling with the constructional approach a lot (as you can tell for example by the image where I tried to envision how to tie a woman to a pole(don't ask)) and I've already grabbed all those Loomis books that were also linked to somewhere in here, so thanks again everyone for this thread, it's pure gold.

[CodeGeorge]

I don't draw.  I stopped when I was a kid.  That said sadly I'm in graphic design lol.  I sprite too.  Sometimes I need to draw!  So I decided to take it up again.  Before I'd just heavily rely on proportion charts and stuff and spend way too much time on my work that had to do with realistic anatomy.  Instead of taking all day on drawing a hand I've decided to actually do this stuff again.

So again, I don't draw...  not with a pencil.

Here's my first (unfinished) attempt at female anatomy:




I was keeping the pose simple since it's my first time.  It's done in photoshop entirely.  No tracing, just like 10 references.  I've still got to memorize proportions and stuff...  I actually drew a lot as a kid and drew stupidly well for my age at the time.  I kind of wish I didn't ditch it. 

What's the best way to learn this stuff? 

[0xDB]

I'm still not sure what I'm going to achieve by all this line by line eye to hand to pen translation process but if my eyes don't fool me, I think I'm making progress, getting better at eyeballing at least.

[Helm]

Yes, yes you are making a LOT of progress like this. The idea is to eventually start to do more work without the reference and then checking with the reference to see where you went wrong. I suggest you look at a pose for 5 minutes and then not look at it while you draw it. Then check where you're off. I guarantee that if you do this for a few weeks you won't believe how much better you've gotten at working without reference.

[0xDB]

Thanks for the suggestion Helm, sounds like a good plan, I'll start doing those "5 min. peek - hide - draw - check" exercises soon, after a couple of more days of copying.

Here's todays results (some 30 second sketches and another slow copy):

[Dex]

Ahh! Pracitcing and studying anatomy has been the biggest thing I've been doing these past few months.

You can see my full journey from start to now http://www.punaji.com/topic/adams-art here.

Here's some of the most recent.












I'll throw up some bone structure drawings and some underlying muscle ones up later, hopefully

[crab2selout.png]

Some of those are using Bridgman's as a base, right? I like that you aren't just trying to copy line for line, but you're adding and interpreting as well. It seems to flow with the advice given by this guy on what he thinks you should be doing when copying Bridgmans
http://deadoftheday.blogspot.com/2009/07/perspiration-anatomy.html

I really like the curving lines of the female seated figure on the 4th drawing. It's a nice, relaxed pose.

The yellow/orangey lighting is kinda harsh on your pics, though. Isn't there a photshop filter for fixing that sort of thing?


I think I'm going to try out that 5 minute thing Helm suggested. I kinda feel like my short term memory has gone to hell since I started using the Internet. Like I'm not exercising it as much anymore.

[Jakten]

During school we had some life drawing classes but they were fairly basic, they basically just told us to draw the person in front of is with various exercises never teaching us how to understand what's really going on. Lately I've been watching some videos on how to draw anatomy. I figure I need to get back into trying to understand the body in this way as I know it's a lot more important than my reluctant, lazy mind keeps telling me.

I drew two heads and some noses with some reference previous to watching the video. This is mostly just my notes but I'm quite proud of how much more I understand the human skull now after only about an hour. The lower skull I drew as notes along with the video, the upper skull was one I did about 20 minutes afterward on my own.


One of my new years resolutions is to study and practice drawing every day, so good start to the new year so far!

[Gil]

Which video did you use Jakten?

[Jakten]

I've been using these DVDs by Glenn Vilppu. I had never heard of him before and someone randomly suggested him to me. Quite helpful so far though.

Edit:
I decided to try and use this method to draw a face and this is what I came up with, I pasted the head reference over top of it to show how close I was in terms of proportion. I almost got it, some areas are off a good amount and it doesn't really look like her but I think it turned out well. Her eyes are too far apart, the ridge on her nose isn't high enough and her jaw isn't wide enough.


Much better proportions than I usually draw though.

[Gil]

Ah yes, I have a book by Vilppu lying around, I should try to look into it.

I'm still doing Loomis exercises right now and I plan on reading Hogarth and Bridgman next.

In terms of animation I've gone over most of the disney material for study (Robin Hood and Sleeping Beauty are very simple and good to study) and some of the flexing tubes era. I also found it nice to study how anatomy and muscle deformation is handled by more recent cartoons, such as the pretty decent "Spectacular Spider-man".

I'm making progress, but I still have trouble putting it all together. I might search for some new life drawing classes in '10 to apply the newly learned techniques on live models. When I was doing life figure drawing, I was still in my contour drawing stage.

What you describe about your life drawings class seems to be contour oriented too. It's good to learn how to interpret masses to contours before starting the theory. That's why the beginner classes in life drawin tend to leave you to your own devices, so you can get acquainted with contours. It's not advisable to do volume study before you know most of the theory, so shading should be left out of those exercises.


As for the drawing you posted, have a look at the mouth area. You oversimplify the way the mouth connects the chin. You can draw a triangle from the mouth corner to the middle bottom of the lips to the chin. That part forms a plane that is not represented in your drawing. Here's an wireframe construction of the nose and chin areas that might be interesting. The nose area I did is not really correct, but still, look at the indent in the middle. There's a fat mass there that needs attention, which runs into the mouth area (represented in green).

[Phones]

There's some amazing stuff in here.

[Xamllew]

Some CnC on this would be great, I'm sort of new to this anatomy dealy but I've done several pages of sketches on paper through the months. I know the feet are horrendous.

I saved it as JPEG...first time I've ever made such a mistake.

Second attempt

[Opacus]

I didn't think that this would be worth making a topic about, so I'm just gonna ask this here.

How do you go about learning anatomy? What's the best way?

Do you start with learning the skeleton? The muscles?

And what is a good reference for this kinda thing? I've used Andrew Loomis a few times but I always hear mixed things about it.

I've heard it's the best and that it's not that good at all.

It's just that I'd love to start studying anatomy, but I have no idea where to start. Any suggestions would be really helpful.

[Presley]

I didn't think that this would be worth making a topic about, so I'm just gonna ask this here.

How do you go about learning anatomy? What's the best way?

Do you start with learning the skeleton? The muscles?

Live study or photographic reference of nudes is where I would start.

I don't want to dissuade you from studying the underlying anatomy because it is definately worthy, but getting confident with more general concepts like form, proportion and foreshortening are most important for the beginner.

[Stab]

General consensus is probably going to be something like WHO KNOWS MEN JUST DO IT!

But I started by attending some local lifedrawing classes (DO ITTTTTTTTTTTTT) and acquiring many helpful books that gave me things to think about and focus upon whilst attending said lifedrawing classes.

I reccomend the Force book (http://www.drawingforce.com/) because it doesn't immediately vault into flexors and extensors and the latin names of finicky little bones, but starts with much, much broader concepts of anatomy, such as how to "see" where the force or weight is, how to see the forceful shapes, and how to actually start drawing. It's not necessarily an anatomy book in the technical sense, but I found it to be a lot of fun and improvement inducing.

Experience and failing a lot is always the best teacher, though. I'm extremely hypocritical on that front. I should go draw. RIGHT NOW.

[Tourist]

I found a really nifty thread on conceptart.org titled 'Realism vs Construction' that discusses two different approaches to figure drawing.

Thread is here: http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=160487

The difference is between precisely copying the light values (realism) vs building from 3d forms (construction).  Two large images from the thread that show the difference visually, linked for size:

Construction
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3174/3068048269_570ea2b402_o.jpg

Realism
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3014/3068914058_d21fa2ab40_o.jpg

I'm only on about page 4 of that thread as I post this but there is a lot of discussion about different art schools and how they approach the subject. 

Tourist

[Joe]

I found a really nifty thread on conceptart.org titled 'Realism vs Construction' that discusses two different approaches to figure drawing.

Thread is here: http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=160487

The difference is between precisely copying the light values (realism) vs building from 3d forms (construction).  Two large images from the thread that show the difference visually, linked for size:

Construction
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3174/3068048269_570ea2b402_o.jpg

Realism
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3014/3068914058_d21fa2ab40_o.jpg

I'm only on about page 4 of that thread as I post this but there is a lot of discussion about different art schools and how they approach the subject. 

Tourist

Wow, man.  That is literally a goldmine of information.  Thanks for sharing!

[Gil]

Pay attention to the section with the free online PDFs. I know some of you haven't got copies of Loomis, Bridgman and Hogarth yet. Vilppu is interesting too, especially for the gestural approach.

Loomis and Vilppu are the best to get started with in my opinion. Bridgman and Hogarth can be a bit daunting at first. Don't neglect the early exercises. Getting convincing gestural stickmen on paper can be a much better exercise than jumping right into anatomically correct, constructed drawings.

[Indigo]

started a female piece.  Its definitely more of an "exaggerated" anatomy style than realistic, but crits would still help here none the less...

[Helm]

Pretty great. I'd accentuate the chest bones and top muscle and fath through the flesh much, much more though, feels like a solid tube from groin to tits right now.

[Beelketh]

I have begun a little piece and I undergo serious problems with anatomy, so I thought I could ask here for advice 



C&C (and edits) very much appreciated 


   

[Helm]

Hi. Here's some help. Keep in mind my overview is really not very good in itself, as in, I should be hitting the books on anatomy again too. But it might serve as a useful 'middle step' between where you are and where you need to go.

[Mathias]

It's time.

The time has finally arrived for me to practice anatomy, methodically. Due in part to the constant reminders of importance around here,
but mainly because I've finally hit my irritation threshold. Irritation with possibly my worst off yet most desired artistic skill - anatomy,
or the ability to render the human figure as I will. For so long I've skated by ducking the need for improvement, knowing it would take great effort. So . . .

I bring you the:

The Anatomy Guild practice regimen:

- 8 sketches per day (just a general goal, do however many you please. Digital, traditional, doesn't matter.)
--- 4 with reference (practice copying various reference, get a feel for the human figure, learn to understand it, etc)
--- 4 with NO reference. (test your knowledge, see what you can do with NO reference. Even attempt positions you've never drawn before. Use what you've learned)

Ultimate Goal
Ability to render the human figure, male and female, old and young, in any position during any action with accuracy.


Many here have recently expressed a desire to improve their own anatomy skills.
I'm posting this all publicly here so those motivated enough can participate and we can all perhaps improve, as a group, helping and encouraging one another along. I could certainly use the help. And I can probably help others.

Having been planning this for over a week, I jokingly called it the anatomy club talking to EyeCraft, from down under, the other day.
He said "Anatomy Guild", so that's what it is. I hope this to be a significant effort so even an official logo was even made hehe.



As a guy with intermediate drawing skills I find that anatomy drawing, like nothing else, greatly challenges the skill-set of drawing. I'm feel pressed just to copy images of humans. Symmetry adds another layer of difficulty.

I dug my anatomy books out of my closet once I thought of this initiative. Got a few decent ones. But it doesn't take great reference material to do this. Most important is the drive to Just Do It®, with a view to improving.

I find myself falling back into the ruts of my own ancient drawing practices from years ago when trying to render humans even now - Making the same mistakes, taking the same shortcuts, based on the same incorrect anatomical knowledge. Frustrating, but I know I'll replace those tendencies with better and more correct ones as my studies continue.


As it turns out, I can't follow my own system of 8 drawings a day, 4 with and 4 without ref. I'm not even good enough to do that - I need to procure some basic skills before that's a realistic and useful goal for me to have.
Primarily at this point, I've determined I need to focus on proportions. I cannot satisfactorily draw a correctly proportioned human male simply standing normally facing the camera. 7 heads length, etc, are rules I need to memorize and be able to apply to my work automatically.

Looking through my books, and drawing drawings I've also determined that a basic to intermediate knowledge of major muscle groups is necessary - how they fold into each other, how they contract/retract due to movement, etc. Also the skeleton. Notice how Helm in the post before this included the pelvis. Though all we really draw the is skin, it's the bones and muscles underneath that give it structure to stretch over. You might say skin doesn't matter at all, you must know what's going on underneath.
Fortunately, I've got a nicely thorough anat book with plenty of muscular and skeletal diagrams, even some on transparent pages laid over full color photos of models.

I have all I need to progress. Switching mindsets in order to sit down and have a productive drawing session can be a challenge. So too can just be finding the time to do it. Amazingly though, the one thing I've always lacked - ambition, I have in full supply. Afterall I've meant to do this for years.




Let's begin. Here are some sketches done getting into my own anat drawing regimen.



Proportional confusion abounds. I'll get it, though. Didn't break much from doing simple straight-ons. Not happy with that yet. Will start doing more muscle and bone-based studies.
I think my focus at this point should be quick numerous sketches. More quantity than quality. With each stroke I'm teaching my mind how to render a human. The more I do the better. No sense in trying to copy botticelli plates just yet.
Just winding up. Much more to come. Otherwise I'll never improve.

[Ryumaru]

Very nice ambition. Perhaps you could do 2 non ref studies when you begin, then do your 4 reffed studies, and see what you absorbed in the last 2 non refs. Also, if you're looking for a challenge( obviously doesn't work for symetrical references) draw your reference in reverse. It makes it necessary to know the construction and anatomy of the image before you can translate it properly.

[Helm]

I endorse this although I don't have time for the exact regiment. I'll contribute as time allows, I mainly want to draw skeletons and muscle groups, the stuff under the skin. At least for some time. And gosh, I need to work on hands and faces again.

[Cow]

I'm going to participate but I won't be able to post my drawings very often. Ryumaru's variation sounds good and I'm probably going to do it that way.

[Jakten]

I'm going to do my best to join in with this as well. Lately I've been trying to keep up with my anatomy drawings but I keep falling behind, hopefully if I work along I'll be able to keep my focus.

By the way Mathias, what is the anatomy book you own? I've been looking into getting one but I'm not sure which I should get.

[Cow]

Day 1

http://a.imageshack.us/img687/4166/picture174e.jpg two unreffed
http://a.imageshack.us/img704/7430/picture175bf.jpg one reffed
http://a.imageshack.us/img704/6942/picture176jj.jpg one reffed

http://a.imageshack.us/img199/3060/picture178bp.jpg a couple unreffed from a few days ago
http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/5806/picture179dc.jpg same

Sorry for terrible quality and my face all up in your grills, just showing that I'm actually doing stuff.

[EyeCraft]

Nice Cow. Legs look long/crotch too high in the unreffed stuff.

Here are my meager offerings thus far:

What I could remember of the pelvis:



What I could decipher from reference:





Ref: http://browse.deviantart.com/?qh=&section=&global=1&q=andrea+deveaux#/d2ttfz0

I want to do more... but I'm... so lazy 

Shall continue drawing bones.

[Cow]

perfect squat form, unreffed (e: he's sitting on an invisible box, that's what I was intending. otherwise it would be all HOLYSHITBALANCEISSUES)

I need to just keep doing what I'm doing right now.

e2:

I think I just need to learn the volumes of the bodyparts more
 because the shading and stuff is bad right now
 but I pretty much know where everything fits I think
 so, volume and perspective/foreshortening

agree?

[0xDB]

Jumping on the bandwagon but I can't make enough time to do as many sketches as prescribed, so I'll just post every now and then, when I found an hour or two in which my neck and arm don't hurt as hell, so I can draw a bit.   (hehe, actually it's gotten a lot better already since I'm doing regular swimming and other physical excercises, hope to be pain-free within the next six months).

So so, resuming where I last stopped... posemaniacs eyeballings:





append, another day (first one eyeballed, second one half constructed, half eyeballed):

[EyeCraft]

Yes, Dennis, more like the last one! That is by far the most productive of them, since it addresses the figure as a collection of solids.

Approach the figures with construction. I don't recommend using posemaniacs for learning the anatomy of the figures. Learn the bones and muscles from a more comprehensive text, learn where they connect, when they bulge/stretch, etc. Learn how to construct the figure by building up the muscle shapes from an initial construction of simpler shapes, like your last sketch.

Just some advice

[0xDB]

Thanks for the advice EyeCraft.

I did look at bones and skeletal structure before (few years ago(2002) at my first failed attempt at figure drawing (even started writing a book about how to construct the human body from scratch but somehow (as always) life and the need to make a living(or to quit slacking and do something serious (blah yadda noone wants to read me whining for thirtysomething pages ..) got in the way), tried to skip that this time around but I guess you're right, I should get back into that and while I was looking for references online, I found this hilarious (nonetheless highly educational) introduction to the skeleton system (a must see!)) and an online version of the 1918 edition (copyright ran out) of "Anatomy Of The Human Body" by Henry Gray.

Ok, no drawings in this post, but a couple of links to make it worthwhile:
that funny video mentioned above
Grays Anatomy (1918 online edition)
my unfinished old book from 2002 (sorry it's all in German but it has detailed pictures.. just looked at it again though and I must say my approach/thoughts back then was/were way too technical (especially obvious in the appendix))

Now, back to the drawing tablet..

append
I didn't want to go sleeping without having laid down a single line all day, so after skimming over my old writings, this ten minute scribbled abomination came into existence.

I hope to find more time tomorrow for some reading and better construction practice.

append, a day later..
Well today, I collected some facts..

..broke them down to the bare necessities..

..and practiced that a bit.


I really feel that this bone approach is way too tedious for a full construction. I believe it would be more efficient to break down the whole body as seen from outside into simple volumes and then only use bones to determine where certain features show. I can't imagine getting a dynamic and interesting pose done by constructing everything from the bone level up. Ah well, still need to study the skeleton.

[bengo]

I got nothing to post at the moment but just some recommendations for peeps out there struggling, drawing lots of still life and doing blind contours helps lots. Also got a new book recently thats really good, Figure Drawing - Design and Invention by Michael Hampton, you guys might wanna check it out.

[0xDB]

Not sure if this has been linked to already, but from a first quick browse over it, it seems to be a very interesting (old) thread, following Arran J Lewis, creating 3D models of the various systems of human anatomy.
Probably not the best source for reference images on the skeletal system but I'm having difficulties finding good pictures of bones from all angles, as most images are only secondary sources (drawings or models created by someone else).

[Manjaman]

Here are the latest studies I've made :

[0xDB]

Returned from Headbangers Open Air yesterday... the silence is still feeling weird.

Struggling with construction (I didn't think it would be that much harder than drawing from reference), need more practice, much more, one drawing every few days is just not enough. How is everyone else motivating themselves? How do you deal with distractions? (friends, family, games..)

[0xDB]

Quick, no ref doodley-"construction"(just kept improvising everything after the initial circle), right after coming home from Wacken Open Air this morning (probably with some blood left in my alcohol-system):

[Mathias]

By the way Mathias, what is the anatomy book you own? I've been looking into getting one but I'm not sure which I should get.

So sorry Jakten. A little late! I got a couple mediocre books laying around but then I have one that really shines: Anatomy for the Artist by Sarah Simblet. My next anatomy quest reference will be one of those ridiculous muscle mags, just for fun.


Nice work so far, everyone.

Dennis, I wouldn't get too caught up in skeletal minutia. I'm sure we're all busy people so we must choose our battles wisely - time is short. Myself, when it comes to bones, I'm concerned mainly with the basic construction and then how certain bones affect a figure's appearance -  for instance how the ileum of the pelvis causes those lateral bulges where the torso connects to upper thighs, scapula cause the protrusions on the upper back, etc. It's great to know what underlying factors are affecting a figure's topography.
I want to memorize all marot bones, be able to draw a proportional skeleton with all major bones in place, and then move on. Same for muscles I guess.
I may try some posemaniacs ref.



I think the key to gaining an understanding of how to draw something is numerous, rapid, exploratory sketches. Repetition makes your brain learn. Brain research tells us that every time the same action causing the same neuron path to be blazed in the brain by electricity, the "memory impression" deepens, solidifying memory - the more you do it, the more you know it.








I'll toss another practice sheet from me into the pile. As you can see, I'm favoring quick sketches. Not trying to create any fine detailed works of art, just trying to gain a grip on the human figure.

Still battling correct proportioning, but in while doing so am slowly gaining a leg up on how everything comes together.

The body is a complex sum of numerous volumes all working together. It's 3D and twists and turns as it wills. I'm trying to get away from 2D flatness. I tend to practice orthographically stale straight-on frontal or profile views.




One area of art that compels me in my goal of anatomical domination is renaissance era paintings. I've always loved them. The wonderful human bodies painted by the oldies back then are inspiring to me. Why not scope out a few neat examples:

[0xDB]

Tried a digital painting in Art-Rage, using the virtual crayons, turned out ok I think with a few errors in proportions and placement of some of the bone features. Reference was the front skull view from Grays Anatomy book.

[Cure]

been hittin' up open model night at the drawing studio, here are a few 30 min. sketches:

[Smash]

Bump

Construccions. Im probably blind to the mistakes, didn't use any significant refs.. These are rendered already.

[Smash]

New one, to be shaded w/ colored pencils in a few moments, some critique would help now 

[miascugh]

Heya, for those of you who can make use of a german reference book, I thought I'd drop the somewhat poorly scanned but still handy Der nackte Mensch by Gottfried Bammes into my public folder. Feel free:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/18393415/Gottfried%20Bammes%20-%20Der%20Nackte%20Mensch.pdf

edit: uploaded another great reference work. not so much about anatomy, or the human anatomy anyway. all kinds of natural pattern work presented in a somewhat graphic fashion. no german skills required:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/18393415/Haeckel_Kunstformen%20der%20natur.zip

[Mush]

[Thanks ptoing for the merge]

I want to get serious about art and so I've started a sketchbook to document my journey. Hopefully I will update this everyday.

I've decided to start with Loomis' books for anatomy studies.
















Goals:

-Less strokes
-More confidence in strokes
-Work on stiffness
-More conscious of proportions


Critique is welcomed.

[Stefano]

Do you know Google Body? I've just discovered it today and found it to be extremely useful (and also extremely free).
http://bodybrowser.googlelabs.com/

I had to update my browser/video drivers in order to see it, though.

[pistachio]

Tiny... bump?

Did some Posemaniacs a few days ago. Was going to upload this, but decided to hold it until I recovered from exhaustion. I'm not sure if it goes here, but I suppose. 

I've always had problems remembering which muscle goes where, and I've always had to pretend by smothering every figure with random circles. Not a very effective way of masquerading if I may say so myself. Starting back at the beginning, with the basics. So far I think I learned a bit, but I still have a fairly long way to go. Maybe... Daily? I still want to leave room for my precious pixels.

Here's about a hundred 45 seconds gesture drawings, not necessarily in any order (but I think the oldest ones are in the middle?), drawn in MyPaint. This thing was so huge (or rather, the drawings so widely spaced) I had to resize it and piece it together like Tetris with the help of my trusty, probably now only partially functional, Print Screen key. Some drawings may be missing or repeated. Maybe I shouldn't have done this all at once...

Large pic is large.
Comments are appreciated.

@Mathias, does this mean I... automatically joined?

[EyeCraft]

@pistachio: Really loving those sketches! I highly recommend doing daily sets of 30 second sketches.

@Mush: very nice! Try doing gesture sketches to fix stiffness. Gesture before structure. 

@Stefano: amazingly useful tool!!



Well I have been SLACK and not studied for a long time. Here are the beginnings of my penance:





EHHH nevermind the scratchy lines, I'm working on improving that 

Been really loving backs lately (kind of a weird thing to say??), so have done a couple of studies on that. Have learned a tonne just with these two drawings. Will probably make the second drawing a daily task until I really have it locked in my mind.

Enjoying anatomy quite a bit! Shall post more in the immediate future.

Long live the anatomy guild. 

[0xDB]

I was going to post this to the creativity thread but as this one doesn't explicitly say "human" anatomy I figured it would go here.

Struggling to construct believable and functional anatomy for Panzerwurm:

link to video, as embedding does not seem to work here

results so far:

[EyeCraft]

I was going to post this to the creativity thread but as this one doesn't explicitly say "human" anatomy I figured it would go here.

Oh yes, learning animal anatomy is EXTREMELY helpful.

Regarding the Panzerwurm, try to remember that mother nature is obsessed with efficiency. If the animal can get away with not having something, evolution will direct its resources to something else. Consider the roles of the following: the rib cage is a flexible shield around the organs, the plates a kind of inflexible extremely heavy armour, the spikes a repellent defense. Does the animal need all three? Think about how much bone that is, bone is kind of costly to grow. If you remove the most expensive and redundant element, the heavy plates, it seems much, much more realistic, in my mind.

A similar question could be asked of the legs; does it really need 6? Could it get away with 4? Dinosaurs got away with 4, even 2, despite their immense size.

I don't know if the bone structure of the fore-legs really fits their role. The animal is basically going to be walking around on them at all times; their role is as a structural support. The arrangement you have now is more for accomodating a lot of twisting, something more appropriate for manipulators like arms. Look at how much stronger the back leg is, how much better it serves its role as a support.

That's all I've got for that. Definitely check out some dinosaur stuff.


I've been doing a whole bunch of sketching, I'll share some;

Drawing from reference, about 15 minutes at it before I had to leave home and go to work 



Just some general practice with hands, from ref. I was kind of more focused on my line work than the anatomy though 



Trying to recall all the back anatomy stuff without reference. Stuff in red are MISTAKES. 



These are two half-hour classes I did from this website (really awesome site, do recommend!). Uber large images, so I'll just link them:

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z212/gastrop0d/sketches/00.jpg

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z212/gastrop0d/sketches/01.jpg

I've also been doing at least an A2 page of 30 second gesture drawings per day on traditional media. Really helping me with lines and speed. Still a loooong way to go, though. 

[0xDB]

Regarding the Panzerwurm, try to remember that mother nature is obsessed with efficiency. If the animal can get away with not having something, evolution will direct its resources to something else. Consider the roles of the following: the rib cage is a flexible shield around the organs, the plates a kind of inflexible extremely heavy armour, the spikes a repellent defense. Does the animal need all three? Think about how much bone that is, bone is kind of costly to grow. If you remove the most expensive and redundant element, the heavy plates, it seems much, much more realistic, in my mind.

A similar question could be asked of the legs; does it really need 6? Could it get away with 4? Dinosaurs got away with 4, even 2, despite their immense size.

I don't know if the bone structure of the fore-legs really fits their role. The animal is basically going to be walking around on them at all times; their role is as a structural support. The arrangement you have now is more for accomodating a lot of twisting, something more appropriate for manipulators like arms. Look at how much stronger the back leg is, how much better it serves its role as a support.

That's all I've got for that. Definitely check out some dinosaur stuff.

Thank you for taking the time for those hints. Those are all valid questions and observations and I thought about it:

As for too much bone structure: I might be able to get rid of the ribcages and the horns on the back but I can't give up the bone plates because they are basically the one thing which make Panzerwurm Panzerwurm (Panzer == tank/armor, wurm == worm). To accomodate for the loss of the spikes on the back I think I'll change the tail and put something along the lines of Stegosaurus or Dyoplosaurs at its end.

As far as twisting and flexibility is concerned: I want that! Panzerwurm is supposed to be agile and flexible while still being armored.

On the legs: Technically he has only two legs in the back, the four other things are arms and I even thought about giving him an opposable thumb on each hand so he could get some real work done and maybe even learn to draw and code someday or make guns to kill off his fellow Panzerwürmer.
Imagine the possibilities, he could shoot four pistols at once... how cool would that look in slow-motion?

On the strength of the legs/supporting role for walking around: I'll look into moving the two arm pairs further to the front and raising the legs and making them even stronger (think Stegosaurus) and then the two arm pairs should be support enough in the front.

I'll have to trade a little of the anatomical believability for possibilities (what he can/can't do/how he survives/etc.) and to keep the creatures main identifying features intact.

Summary: many changes will be made

[pistachio]

EyeCraft, those hands are looking pretty good, and you seem to be using crosshatching pretty well in terms of conveying shades of light (something seems a bit off about the pinky though). The figure drawing's torso seems a bit stretched though, and her right arm seems to be placed in a rather odd position considering it's the arm that's holding up her weight. Also keep in mind the curve of the spine. It's unnaturally straight right now even in the position it's in.

Now on to me; just finished two pages of gestures for the ConceptArt Spartan Camp, the 190th to be precise. No, I haven't been doing this 190 times, of course. But have you heard of it? Basically a group-centered thing where people gather round and submit pages of gesture drawings before a deadline. I've been stalking them since about #170 but only started doing it now.

Anyhow, I feel I've improved quite a bit since the last time, having taken up studying Bridgman and Loomis (mostly Bridgman). I've become particularly interested in this book, essentially taking the route of traditional construction, but finally brought down to a level where I find it easier.

The drawings are under links. This one's imagined, a few from memory. This one's referenced, from that pixelovely gesture thingy of course.

@EyeCraft, well yeh, there is a limit on them in a way. I set the gesture tool to "30 seconds" and then just drew away. I found they often took less time than that, about 15 - 20 seconds (as opposed to the last one I posted, where most of them, I feel, remain "unfinished" because I was having a hard time with the limit--no longer!), so I just skipped to the next image when I was done; I suppose the limit's not actually that strict. Occasionally I would cheat and pause, then resume to the next image when finished. This was usually when my hand needed a rest, so I could draw slowly and not have to worry about rushing. As for the line weights, I agree, I probably got a little too carried away with pen pressure especially on the imagined ones. The brush I was using also exaggerated it a bit, but I shouldn't blame most of my problems on it.

Well great, look forward to seeing you there sometime! At the camp. You'll probably know me when you see me, I have the same gestures posted over there.

[EyeCraft]

pistachio: Yes, I highly recommend that book, I have found it to be excellent. Very logical and adaptable.

Is there a time restriction on your gestures (like 30 or 60 seconds), or are they unbounded?

I find them to be quite good. I have a problem of being too concerned with contours, proportions and specific structures when working with gesture. I think I'm slowly weeding that out though, but you seem to have a great level of abstraction. The line weights seem a little odd though, they get super fat in some places without really communicating anything (to me, anyway).

As for you critiques, I shall do a detailed double check against the reference. To be clear, the dark line running up her back is not her spine, but a muscle (that I don't know the name of!!! ). The spine is only slightly indicated by the couple of very slight shadow lines to the right of that straight line (she has a very pronounced bumpiness to her spine).

Spartan Camp sounds cool, SHALL CHECK OUT. 

[pistachio]

Thanks, EyeCraft. Will take that into account.

Her spine, the "shadow" lines you were talking about, does seem a bit straight still. But I suppose it's just my nitpicking. Either way, I'm sure you probably knew about the curve of the spine by then.

After a long hiatus, cranked out another set of gestures (posemaniacs):

Link

Extra large to make up for lost time. It's over at the Spartan Camp too.

[jams0988]

Heh, cool thread. I need to practice drawing more often...anyway, some quick gestures:

10-30 seconds each (no ref)

~five minutes (referenced)

~ten minutes (ref'd)


Gotta start practicing every day...I'll post some actual anatomy studies here soon, as opposed to these messy gesture drawings. I'm too tired tonight to concentrate too hard, hahah. X3
Some great work in here, guys. =D

[blumunkee]

http://snigom.deviantart.com/art/Female-Anatomy-Patterns-43675502?q=favby%3Ajayspadey%2F39249109&qo=0

Nice overview of female anatomy.

[Stab]

HWUUURRRRR....


BLUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[Xamllew]

HWUUURRRRR....


BLUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Very impressive studies. That last figure, bloody lines are beautiful.

[0xDB]

blergh...

[Mathias]

Hah, I like how you randomly gave people more ears, in order to practice.

[0xDB]

Heh, it was the other way around. I first practiced ears and then added the people to random ears (and as can be seen I screwed up proportions along the way, because out of sheer laziness I winged stuff instead of making proper constructions).

[0xDB]

   

skulls on 29th referenced from 3D models found over there -> http://www.oucom.ohiou.edu/dbms-witmer/3D_human.htm

[0xDB]

The frustrating thing is, as soon as I put the references away, everything ends up weird and wonky and my head seems unable to just improvise an arbitrary rotation/perspective.

[0xDB]

referenced from the same 3D model as before (must work on defeating my impatience so I'll take more time to get angles right):

[0xDB]

Still struggling with angles, proportions and well... anatomy of noses, ears, eyes, mouths... everything I draw comes out ugly and distorted.

[0xDB]

Making progress on construction of eyes. I first draw a sphere and then wrap the lids around it. Seems to work much better than my previous approach where I always drew the lids first.



edit, and then I started making some crude reference models:

[Ryumaru]

Sculpture is a great way to learn anatomy, in some ways superior as you have to be aware of the 3rd dimension. if you can I would shave off a bit from the top of the guys cranium, its a tad too big. Also bring the nasal bone out on the skull.

Keep this work up. Mileage put into understanding anatomy is what separates the men from the boys as far as art goes.

[0xDB]

Thanks Ryumaru, I already tried to change the skull before but the molding dough is too soft so trying to make adjustments at this scale always end up distorting everything next to the detail being changed. The skull isn't very accurate anyway so I think I'll crush and redo it, perhaps a bit bigger in size. The cranium on the guy I will try to carefully shave off using some yarn.

Continued with some quick no-refs doodles. It appears I still have problems with some angles and proportions and I haven't found a good way to construct the noses yet.

[0xDB]

Made some adjustments to the male model (which oddly reminded me of the XO on Battlestar Galactica (before the changes)), resized the big mass on the top and tried to add ears. The ears didn't even end up symmetrical, have bogus details and I think the back of the head is sticking out too far but despite the various imperfections, I still think the model will help me getting the angles and positions of stuff more accurate in my drawings:

[Ryumaru]

http://youtu.be/nWZZ3SFmDS8

This guy has done some amazing videos, explaining both the structures, and giving step by step renderings of the human head and features. Should be right up your ally and help you push your work to the next level.

[0xDB]

That video certainly made it sound and look easy. Then I tried it myself without looking at the images from the video at first. Problems encountered: Unless I'm missing something, he does not explain how to arrive (how to construct) at the volumes for the planes he shows so I was still unable to construct an arbitrary nose from that (have to practice drawing random planes in arbitrary rotations first, heh).

So I tried to copy the planes he showed with mixed success. So well... some of the information he gave in that video is very valuable indeed, especially the bits about the underlying anatomy. I wish he would provide construction instructions as well, building up the nose from really simple volumes until it arrives at the detailed planes shown in the end.

Or maybe I expected too much, some sort of magical shortcut but there does not seem to be a way around detailed studies and maybe it will only start making sense after drawing a lot of different noses from real life references...

So, the following image shows me struggling to find an easy way to construct the nose, still not quite there yet but with the information from that video, already an improvement over my previous nose attempts:

[0xDB]

Watched his video again. Tried building the nose from the anatomy he shows. Setting up the nasal bone first and then attaching those blue things and then the red things last seems to work well for the construction:

[Ryumaru]

These are all very good studies; he also has a video where he draws a nose from reference with the knowledge from the video I showed you;  it may help some as he still goes through simplified steps.

In the 3/4 nose in the latest image the bone is slightly caved in and the tip flattened and flared out, really try to imagine the 3-D structures moving ins space

Keep working. I admire your dedication.

[0xDB]

Trying. Really trying. I have trouble imagining how everything appears from different angles. I think I need to build me a nose model as well, so I can study it.

[0xDB]

Just wasted 2h making this odd looking nose model:

[0xDB]

Started recording stuff so I can watch it afterwards to better note where I go wrong.

Screwed up the hair on the first one (looks like viewed a bit from the top while the rest ist from below). Second one got a weird mouth which doesn't follow the volume of the head. Third one has nose, mouth, ear, neck and chin troubles. Feels like instead of making progress, I'm getting worse. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lDBWnGGYvc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtNmqFiu4NY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-e-GjuNuA0

[32]

I think you could stand to construct a little more Dennis, you move into detail a bit too fast, a problem I also struggle with. Placing the cheek bones earlier would help immensely, once you get those in you can go through and define the side and front planes of the head easily, then move onto the brow and cheek planes. You seem to be just guessing where the mouth goes, remember that the mouth sits over the teeth, which are easily defined as a cylinder. And when you construct eyes consider that the eyeball is a sphere that sits inside the skull, and what you see is the part of that sphere that is uncovered by the skull, and then once again by the eye lids. Hopefully there is something in there that might help, you're definitely on the right track.

Been a while since I've posted here, started an animation course which I've just finished the first year of. Figured I would post some stuff from my life drawing sketchbook, most were done during semester break in July, the last two were a couple of weeks ago.
20 min, 10 min

10 min, 20 min

5 min, 15 min


I have some done over longer periods on a1 but no camera to get a picture with unfortunately.

[0xDB]

Those life studies are looking good, except maybe that the first one has quite childlike proportions and the third ones' arm/hand look a tad too long/big.


Yes, I really need to force myself to go more slowly and to overcome my impatience while drawing.

So today, I tried to extend the construction phase and to correct more errors while drawing (still missed some I think, the far eye placement seems a bit odd and there's definitely something wrong with the chin region and the neck):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elj5xUgAmV0

[0xDB]

I'm starting to feel a bit like a spammer again, posting almost every day. 

Still practicing construction and trying to improve my patience by going slower.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoSgnxARaoQ

[NaCl]

I'm a lefty too. You should really try loosening up, using a soft pencil, and going slow. I have the same tendency to over-construct with this absurd precision, and a mechanical pencil really lets you give in to that temptation. Loomis and them give good guides on constructing the head, but I feel you're following it too rigidly.

I also believe that you're focusing too much on the details, and losing sight of the image as a whole. Don't use these construction techniques as a crutch in place of seeing the whole of the thing you're drawing. I find it best to work top down, getting the whole of the thing right, and then working in the details. Because when you go from detail to detail, they don't come together right (which is what seems to be happening in your drawings).

[0xDB]

Hm... but if I try to loosen up and not pay proper attention to the construction, everything ends up oddly distorted and out of proportion again:


After that I fired up Blender to make a small model which shall aid me in constructing the basic ball and jaw. I can use this to peek how circles wrap around the flattened ball in 3D and how the basic jawline appears from different angles:

[0xDB]

Acquired some new pencils today, ranging from 5H to 5B. It's a lot easier to draw the soft construction lines (almost invisible and easy to remove) with a hard pencil.



edit (some sloppy fixes, addressing feature placement issues, utilizing the 3D model)

[Helm]

It's really inspiring how much work you're putting into this. Not often are people this for real when they say 'I'm going to study'.

Here's a token of my support for the inspiration you've given.



The work you've done with noses shows. The thing I had to edit less was the nose. The volumes are there. You probably understand noses better than I do now, the rest is just draftsmanship.

But do you see what you have to do next? You have to learn how to de-symbolize eyes, lips, ears, eyebrows, hair etc all of that next. Step by step, get to a more solid understanding of a face. The way you do lips specifically look like mr. potato lips because you haven't gotten the hang of lips being part of the skin. You append them on the face. But they're just folds. Blood-red folds with lots of nerve endings. By far the most difficult part of the face after the eye to de-symbolize and draw "as it really is". I am not even halfway there either, but it's a useful middle step to look at.

I am awful at necks, just completely invented, but again, perhaps it's an encouraging middle step between where you are and where someone who really knows how to draw would do it.

Please carry on with your studies.

[0xDB]

Thanks a lot Helm for your encouraging words and for that edit. It may or may not be interesting to note here that in the head you'd chosen to edit, I drew the nose first right into the empty space and then bogus'd the rest of that head around it, trying to skip most of the construction.

It is true that I must concentrate on beating wrong habits and symbols out of my head. Your description (and edit) of the mouth as folds of flesh is very helpful (along with the video Ryumaro linked to earlier). I tried to pay special attention to that in today's practice drawing and it seems like a huge improvement over how I drew the mouths before.

I also tried to vary line width and line darkness a bit here. Before I went back to drawing today however, I created another 3D model in Blender which is supposed to help me getting the angles of the construction lines for "Loomis Ball And Plane"-method right. I added some simplified ears, nose and lower jaw and teeth guidelines on top of the basic ball and middle line construction.

Today's drawing was done by first eyeballing the construction lines from pose E9 in the chart below and then adding the features on top of that. I left most construction lines intact and the neck is made up as well since I haven't started taking a close look at necks yet.

[Ryumaru]

The model is shaping up, and is a great tool to use and process to go through.

The latest drawing has an issue with the length of the nose in perspective. You will see that the length of the brow to bottom of the nose is about the same as the bottom of the nose to the chin. Usually, these measurements are roughly the same front on, but in this foreshortened view, the former should be much smaller.

You are doing a good job of thinking of the eye socket in 3 dimensions. Immediate improvement in that regard.

[0xDB]

The foreshortening works different in an orthographic projection though as opposed to a perspective projection where objects of equal depths which are closer to the camera appear bigger than those which are further away. As can be observed on the 3D model (rendered with an orthographic projection) the distances between brow-line <-> nose-bottom and nose-bottom <-> jawline are always exactly the same.

Placement of the features was still somewhat off as the following overlay edit reveals. The result after replacing and aligning the features still looks odd. I wonder if that's because of the orthographic projection or if there are other major flaws.

[Ashbad]

I hate to drop in with no studies to post (yet), but I've started doing quite a bit of drawing practice, including many portraits from life (friends at school).  The likeness with many of their subjects is usually somewhat decent (they look alike when put next to the subject, but away from the subject you can still tell who it is), and usually gets that "wow" factor from everyone watching nearby (they aren't very great in my opinion, but I guess when one draws realistically and is actually somewhat successful, people see it as black magic).

Anyways, to my point: I'd love to start anatomical studies -- after doing these portraits, I'm extremely interested in the human face/head in particular, which would probably be my first subject of study.  This might have been asked before, but since many people have seemingly found many great new resources over time... what would you suggest I study from that has worked best for the majority here?  Thanks in advance!  I'll be sure to eventually contribute some of my beginning study results soon.  I'm willing to work as hard as needed, so don't hold back if you're thinking of suggesting "the hard way" to begin studying.

[0xDB]

Ashbad, the hard way would be to be a creeper and draw people from life outside (Public transportation works well for that but be prepared to get some angry looks when you stare at people analyzing their features. If you wear headphones and listen to loud music you can at least prevent them from actually starting to talk to you. After some time you can move on to sketching them in your head, still being a creeper staring at them but without the additional awkwardness which arises from them seeing you scribbling down lines into your sketchbook while you keep looking up and down.)

Other than that, others have suggested studying Loomis which is what I'm currently doing, reading "Drawing The Head And Hands". I'm still at the beginning of the book but already learned a couple of things which helped improve my head drawings. Of course, posting your drawing on the web and receiving critique is also a good way to learn. Avoid family and friends for critique for they tend to be mild on you and dishonest in that they won't point out your flaws because they're too afraid to hurt your feelings.

----
Today I tried to make an arbitrary construction without looking at the 3D model. This time I started with the ellipses which form from the sliced off sides of the main ball of the head and then constructed the head around them. Afterwards I looked at the 3D model and picked the orientation which seemed to match it most accurately (which turned out to be D3). Based on that I found too many flaws and after a bit of trying gave up on correcting all of them which leaves me with the abandoned version on the far right:


(this proves once more that if the construction is flawed, no amount of tweaking and screwing around on the individual parts afterwards will be sufficient to make it look right as a whole)

My mind seems to be controlled by some strong force of habit which always wants to go back to rendering the face from a straight symbolic front view and it also refuses to accept that some things are hidden underneath others and thus should not appear in the drawing at all, it's like the mind does not like leaving out anything and wants to spread out and draw even the things that lie covered around and behind an edge. This becomes most obvious whenever I get towards drawing the mouth and chin region.

[Ryumaru]

Dennis, if you are not aware of it, you should know that our brains are wired to see symbolically just as you are describing, which is why it is natural to you. Trying to draw un-symbolically is actually a very unnatural thing for one to do, and is compounded when we are working from imagination and do not have a solid model infront of us to tell us something is "wrong".  I would actually recommend taking the time to work from life or photographs right now, as I think you need to build up a mental library of how different features look in different angles so that you can inject that information into your imaginative studies. It's very easy for things to look " fake" or plastic or otherwise off when you are only going based on the knowledge of construction and not the knowledge of how fleshy faces look like.

[jengy]

I would actually recommend taking the time to work from life or photographs right now, as I think you need to build up a mental library of how different features look in different angles so that you can inject that information into your imaginative studies

I would definitely agree with Ryumaru on this idea. Drawing something that exists in real life from the imagination is extremely hard, and there are plenty of online resources available to draw from. Most professional artists, if they are seeking realism, draw from resource. And if you are just practicing, then there is no reason to draw from imagination if you can get better faster drawing from life or photographs first.

This not only instills confidence in yourself, but it also teaches you to see something as it is--abstract, 2D shapes that represent 3D forms.

From what I'm seeing, you're trying to do battle with 1) perspective 2) proportion 3) imagination drawing 4) identifying enclosed shapes. Reducing these problem solving exercises to one challenge will may help you grow faster in that area and understand it more.

The main thing I would recommend trying to get better at is seeing abstract, 2D shapes that every drawing is made of. The book "Drawing On The Right Side of the Brain" has a lot of techniques for this, such as flipping the canvas and using a grid system to determine placement. I made a short gif with tips on how to draw from an image.

Here's a short gif with some tips (here's the png if you prefer: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oC4DXkd3uSo/ULqps1TrPvI/AAAAAAAAE0M/WTqmTMmjYJw/s1600/fordennis.png):


And good luck! Art is hard, but if you are open to trying new things, you can really grow your talents and technical skills. Try everything until something works for you!

[Cyangmou]

The main thing I would recommend trying to get better at is seeing abstract, 2D shapes that every drawing is made of. The book "Drawing On The Right Side of the Brain" has a lot of techniques for this, such as flipping the canvas and using a grid system to determine placement. I made a short gif with tips on how to draw from an image.

Working wih a 2D grid is quite a nice crutch as long as you are doing photorealism. It definitely sets the placement for stuff and for "copying" from photos or even "copying" from live, although it only works with one perspective and it's also quite easy to mess things up with a grid if you are just copying tonal values and don't understand the underlying structure a