The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
My newest drawing!
FunnyMan
Registered User new member
Registered User new member
So hey guys, this is my first time putting up one of my drawings on this site.
Well, it was a class assignment in my drawing class.
The objective was to draw a face, but with messed up facial features.
I put it in the spoiler because its kind of big (800x600) and I didn't want it to be out.
Tell me what you think I can improve on!
Besides the ears... Yes I know.
Well, it was a class assignment in my drawing class.
The objective was to draw a face, but with messed up facial features.
I put it in the spoiler because its kind of big (800x600) and I didn't want it to be out.
Tell me what you think I can improve on!
Besides the ears... Yes I know.
"Oh shit, shake that ass ma, move it like a gypsy.
Stop, whoah, back it up, now let me see your hips SWING!"
Stop, whoah, back it up, now let me see your hips SWING!"
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
FunnyMan on
0
Posts
But what's buggin me is the ears and the nose on the forehead, they look very flat, almost as if tattooed onto there, maybe some harsher shadows under them instead just an outline
you still need to use the basics of good picture making even when making abstract/surrealist images.
my favorite example is picasso. He was an absolutely incredible designer of images.
His compositions were perfect, his color theory was rock solid. The average joe looks at his work and sees the giant football eyes and the wonky figures but when you study what makes an image look good and then go back and look the abstract/cubist/surrealist work, you suddenly see how absolutely ingenious it is.
the difference between your abstract work and picasso is believability.
when i look at a picasso i believe that everything is intentional. even though it's all wonky and abstract, i know he intended it to look that way and isn't just bad at drawing.
your work doesn't look intentional, and it's because of the design decisions you made or didn't realize you weren't making.
the position of the figure in the page, the size relationship of the various elements, the values you have used, the quality of the line. all of these things in your image point to not fully understanding the basics of good picture making.
you're trying to put the cart before the horse.
many young artists turn to abstraction because they feel it's an easy way out. they don't want to learn how to draw the figure because it's hard so they stylize.
well here's the thing, look up picasso's earliest work and you'll see that he was very very good at drawing the human figure.
the abstraction came later in his career which is true of many of the great abstract artists.
he took his knowledge of the human form and bent it to his will, selectively reworking it, something he could not have done effectively without first knowing how to draw well.
i'm not telling you to not experiment with abstraction at this point
what i'm saying is, you need to at the same time be studying what makes a good abstract drawing good, and work on bringing your drawing skills up a bit before you jump headfirst into something like this.
keep at it, and maybe try posting some studies you've done of figures or still life or some other work so we can give you a bit better advice toward pushing you in the right direction
Was "messed up" the actual term applied or was there something in addition to that, as it is really hard to judge your work in context without it, so it becomes difficult to judge your work in relation to the guidelines given.
Beavs commentary seems sound (you can read that as "way above my head")
So this is just my observation reaction and skipping over things already said, so what I see is an abstract head and a "normal" head grafted together looking at each other.
What strikes me first is the hair, or really the lack of it, I think the dualing abstract transition to "normal" looking at each other could really be an interesting area for contrast.
Second the expressions, well the lack of expressions. Some sort of story other than 2 people looking at each other. They are looking at each other but nothing seems to register with the other.
Why is there still attempts at symmetry with the abstract face, it seems that rather than going fully abstract you just relocated facial features, the lips on the top of the head seem more of an afterthought (erase out here and add lips for zaniness) if it was constructed as such, why not give those lips a kick ass abstract moustache to go with it?
Without seeing the original criteria it seems you drew a face, were unsure how to "make messed up features" and just moved stuff. I would have interepted messed up as deformed and asymmetrical myself.
(yes i am way too bound by structure, so i might be focusing way too much on composition)