I think you're relying on lines too much in everything else. The squared figure-blocking style probably isn't productive for the issues you have, which seem to have less to do with anatomy and more to do with your understanding of three-dimensional space. Things started falling into place more for me when I was forced to just think about light and shadow on the body, and while the anatomy will take time, it might help you get a better grasp of these as bodies in space rather than lines which signify bodies in space.
You're ending up with a lot of limbs that are too big or too short or not the right shapes. What I think the problem is is that you're thinking about these bodies like "anatomy you need to learn" instead of as objects in space, which is ultimately what a body is. I might be wrong about what you're thinking, but using lines as an approach isn't going to get you all the way there when it comes to getting a grasp of shape.
srsizzy on
BRO LET ME GET REAL WITH YOU AND SAY THAT MY FINGERS ARE PREPPED AND HOT LIKE THE SURFACE OF THE SUN TO BRING RADICAL BEATS SO SMOOTH THE SHIT WILL BE MEDICINAL-GRADE TRIPNASTY MAKING ALL BRAINWAVES ROLL ON THE SURFACE OF A BALLS-FEISTY NEURAL RAINBOW CRACKA-LACKIN' YOUR PERCEPTION OF THE HERE-NOW SPACE-TIME SITUATION THAT ALL OF LIFE BE JAMMED UP IN THROUGH THE UNIVERSAL FLOW BEATS
I think you're relying on lines too much in everything else. The squared figure-blocking style probably isn't productive for the issues you have, I think they have less to do with anatomy and more to do with your understanding of three-dimensional space. Things started falling into place more for me when I was forced to just think about light and shadow on the body, and while the anatomy will take time, it might help you get a better grasp of these as bodies in space rather than lines which signify bodies in space.
What would you think is more beneficial for my learning at the moment? Working from photo reference, studying the lighting/shape of the figure, or studying from anatomy books (e.g loomis,bridgeman)?
Well, figure drawing, but I'm assuming you don't have easy access to it, or you'd be doing it.
I don't know, I'm not an authority on it, I don't have a powerful grasp of anatomy, but I think figure drawing helped me see the body in space rather than just the outline. When you look at something which you can get multiple perspectives on, your brain has to form pathways that basically put together a model of the object you're observing in your mind, whereas a photo is completely two-dimensional, even if it's of a three-dimensional subject.
But I don't know, it's probably possible to get a grasp of anatomy without having to do only figure drawing. However, you still should draw from life more, as the fundamental issue is connecting anatomy to three-dimensional form. I'd say things like (I can't remember the name) those drawings where you use lines over a three-dimensional shape to define the dimensions, kind of like a topographic map, and then just working on value in still lives. I say this because the recurring speed-bump you hit in drawing (faces especially) is relying on lines and forgetting the dimension.
If you're restricted to photos for people references, I'd use ones with dramatic light sources that are coming from one direction. Like I said in the doodle thread, a front-lit or surround-lit model is just going to give you an idea of where the lines go more than of the body as a three-dimensional object.
srsizzy on
BRO LET ME GET REAL WITH YOU AND SAY THAT MY FINGERS ARE PREPPED AND HOT LIKE THE SURFACE OF THE SUN TO BRING RADICAL BEATS SO SMOOTH THE SHIT WILL BE MEDICINAL-GRADE TRIPNASTY MAKING ALL BRAINWAVES ROLL ON THE SURFACE OF A BALLS-FEISTY NEURAL RAINBOW CRACKA-LACKIN' YOUR PERCEPTION OF THE HERE-NOW SPACE-TIME SITUATION THAT ALL OF LIFE BE JAMMED UP IN THROUGH THE UNIVERSAL FLOW BEATS
I may have to do some research into life drawing classes in my area. Ive looked at ones through education institutes (TAFE SA) and they offer small courses for $380. But they only run for 6 weeks, on saturdays. I have nothing to compare the price to, but thats a little too expensive for me.
Anyway, spent some time on this tonight, just for a bit of fun. Started referencing and took a photo of myself in the pose i want.
WCK, just keep drawing everything. You've still got heaps to learn in all areas, so everything you do - so long as you're looking at it critically and figuring out where you've gone wrong and trying to fix it up next time - will help enormously.
...Break that guy down into very simple shapes. a Box for his head, clynder for his neck.. and the render. You seem to lose sense of where the light is coming from when youve got more things going on. I dont think you are at a point where rendering from your mind is a useful exercise. Do some greyscale still lifes and study value and form.
Also, the face on this last guy is a dramatic improvement on just about every face I've seen you put on a character ever. Did you base it on a photo reference or something?
The body is another matter. His gesture is stiff and his musculature looks like a G.I. Joe toy. The lighting is confused as ken said.
.. I dont think you are at a point where rendering from your mind is a useful exercise. Do some greyscale still lifes and study value and form.
Ive been using references in areas like the muscles. ive never done muscle studies, so i'll definately have to do some more male drawings this coming week.
Also, the face on this last guy is a dramatic improvement on just about every face I've seen you put on a character ever. Did you base it on a photo reference or something?
Thats good to hear! Most pictures i do use photo reference, but i think my understanding of structure has improved since doing those bernini faces. For this I used a reference of paul newman (though, not trying to make it look like him)
heres an update, with my main ref for the body pose.
winter_combat_knight on
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
So you have come from the OP, to where you are now
The torso isn't just one little thing being nudged a little off or placed wrong. The whole thing is made up.
The muscles are treated far, far too harshly. It's almost like you're taking some rudimentary muscular diagrams and turning them into full figures and totally not realizing that there is skin and fat and tendons that sit on top of them. This happens because you have not studied actual figures enough. There are also some spots that are simply shaped wrong or the muscle insertion is wrong (where the pectoralis attaches to the arm, for example).
This is a bit more of an advanced consideration but its also important to consider what sort of physique you want your character to have. If you want your character to have super ultra developed abs and be totally ripped with no body fat, that's fine, but understand that in the real world the only people who look like that are models and bodybuilders, and furthermore those types of physiques aren't even necessarily very strong (look at what the guys who enter "strongman" competitions look like. Hint: Not king leonidas from 300). If your character is some rugged wastelander mad max gladiator then what the fuck does he need to do crunches for. Think more
and less
I think it will help to focus on more natural bodies while learning anatomy rather than the extremes of "fitness". This will also mean you will be less tempted to draw a snake rattle and call it abdominal muscles. You're focusing too much on the fiddly little details of the hyper-cut chest and not understanding the basic anatomy. I think looking at classical sculpture is a good place to find physiques that are athletic without getting to the point where the person lives in a bowflex commercial.
Anyway, I also did a little sloppy paintover to simplify and correct some of the anatomy here. Don't scrutinize it too much since I didn't use reference and if I were to do a super cut torso I would definitely need some myself, but, just to give you an idea how I would simplify. Simpler forms also make it easier to execute your lightning model.
Heya fellas. Had a few days break from drawing studies, but now back into it. Im practicing doing character turn arounds (suitable for game/film design). Never really done them before so thought id give em a crack. Heres a WIP so far of the character posted above.
*downloaded some GREAT pose reference pacs from a deviant art account. really helpful 8-)
Update.
Playing around some more. Added tribal looking paterns to some fabric areas. And refined his face. I may give him a more rugged look. Might look at some clint eastwood pics for reference.
What do you guys think i should add/change to make him look more 'badass'? Im open for suggestions.
cheers for looking
Cheers dude. Tattoos are a cool idea. Rather than giving him pansy ones, i reckon i'll give him dirty, prison type tattoos
Also started working on the back design. blocking in the colours/value
[IMG][/img]
LARGER image
[IMG][/img]
winter_combat_knight on
0
Options
NappuccinoSurveyor of Things and StuffRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
I'm really not a fan of the black outlines on his skin- lose those and (if you have to) tighten it up a bit more and i think it'd be much better.
Started colouring tonight. My goal with this piece was to do something original. i think i failed right at the point of choosing chinese architecture seriously, everyone seems to be doing it now.
I really like how you're progressing, you're getting really good at bringing together concepts into environment pieces, and your anatomy is taking leaps and bounds; keep at it!
Clear day. Sunlight bouncing all around the blue of the atmosphere is going to result in blue light being bounced into the shadows. You won't see the kind of dull dark gray coloration you've got going in the shadows during a clear sunny day.
EX:
Look at the shadows here. Where the surfaces are open to the sky, they are very, very blue. Where the surfaces are being shielded from the sky, such as under overhangs, they become darker and less saturated with color. You can also see in the arches where the shadows are blue, and they get darker as they curve away from being open to the sky into being an overhang- but you can also see where sunlight is bouncing off the walls and ground, injecting more yellow into the shadows.
The perspective is still all wack, though. The small garden beds are sloping in different directions, the one nearest us is pointing upwards, the truck and the far wall aren't on the same plane, the big building on the left hand side has a different vanishing point to everything else, etc. etc. Perspective is a persistent problem with your drawings and until you learn to eyeball it, you really should keep drawing tonnes of guidelines.
cheers for the comment. youre right about the perspective being off a bit. Ive got a grid set up but i usually turn it off most of the time when i'm drawing in my ideas. Otherwise it gets distracting. Once ive got everything that i want jotted in, i'll refine it all with the grid turned on.
ATM im mainly concerned about the colour palette.
BTW ditched the truck. teckon i'll draw it all up as an environment piece on its own, and then i'll add in a few people and maybe little shop stools. Kinda like in Aladdin
btw, just so i'm not all negative, I do like the atmosphere you've achieved here. I'm definitely seeing improvement in your digital paintings, good work.
nah mate, i need to get used to honest crits if i want to have a career in concept art.
Anyway, last update before bed. Look at it with fresh eyes tomorrow i thinks
EDIT: actually looks like a step backward. bah. too tired
Where am I, as the viewer, looking at that? Why is the horizon in the middle againnnnnnnnn so booooooorrrrrrrrrinnnnnnnnggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
edit: what im trying to say is... where's the hierachy of importance in this image? What's most important here? Is it the gateway? The building in the background? Something in the foreground? Everything in the image directs the eye to the buildings in the background. Does the truck or whatever that's happening in the mid-ground relate, at all, to things in the fore/background?
I think you'd get a lot out of thinking/re-thinking/re-re-rethinking your compositions. See a cool shot in a film? Try to emulate it. At the moment your environments are very...... postcardy.
I want ppl to view the courtyard area where the truck was, then i want their eyes to follow above to the buildings in the background. When i add in the foreground elements such as people and other objects im hoping it will be more interesting.
my attempt has been to make it interesting, while at the same time being practical (e.g. something for 3d modellers to interprete, since my aim is game art)
i understand what you mean by it being a boring angle, especially in regards to illustration.
perhaps its time to dust of my lord of the rings dvds and start looking for some badass jackson shots
liking the detail progress so far, keep it up!
Where's the vanishing point for that plant stand dealie in the immediate foreground?
It just seems a bit off from the way the road is going... Maybe it's just me, or maybe it's something you've already got in mind to fix as you go along.
quite right sir. It is waaaaaay out.
heres the vanishing points ive got marked on a seperate layer (incase anyone can see anything dramatically out that ive missed)
the third point perspective i havnt been to worried about getting accurate. kinda guessed it mostly
just a suggestion. I think you might be better served just doing perspective drawings right now. That seems to be the major issue that you are tackling right now is you didnt have the drawing worked out.
Focussing on the drawing itself would definately help. I should have had it all finalised detailed in pencil before painting (instead of a lined doodle). I think this is good though because its forced me to think about colour and refer to reference a lot. But true, my perspective issues are showing through.
last update for today.
Also did this for fun. saw it on beavs thread so decided to copy . mine only goes back to 2008 because thats when i started drawing (first collumn is actually 2008, not 2009)
winter_combat_knight on
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
Posts
I think you're relying on lines too much in everything else. The squared figure-blocking style probably isn't productive for the issues you have, which seem to have less to do with anatomy and more to do with your understanding of three-dimensional space. Things started falling into place more for me when I was forced to just think about light and shadow on the body, and while the anatomy will take time, it might help you get a better grasp of these as bodies in space rather than lines which signify bodies in space.
You're ending up with a lot of limbs that are too big or too short or not the right shapes. What I think the problem is is that you're thinking about these bodies like "anatomy you need to learn" instead of as objects in space, which is ultimately what a body is. I might be wrong about what you're thinking, but using lines as an approach isn't going to get you all the way there when it comes to getting a grasp of shape.
What would you think is more beneficial for my learning at the moment? Working from photo reference, studying the lighting/shape of the figure, or studying from anatomy books (e.g loomis,bridgeman)?
I don't know, I'm not an authority on it, I don't have a powerful grasp of anatomy, but I think figure drawing helped me see the body in space rather than just the outline. When you look at something which you can get multiple perspectives on, your brain has to form pathways that basically put together a model of the object you're observing in your mind, whereas a photo is completely two-dimensional, even if it's of a three-dimensional subject.
But I don't know, it's probably possible to get a grasp of anatomy without having to do only figure drawing. However, you still should draw from life more, as the fundamental issue is connecting anatomy to three-dimensional form. I'd say things like (I can't remember the name) those drawings where you use lines over a three-dimensional shape to define the dimensions, kind of like a topographic map, and then just working on value in still lives. I say this because the recurring speed-bump you hit in drawing (faces especially) is relying on lines and forgetting the dimension.
If you're restricted to photos for people references, I'd use ones with dramatic light sources that are coming from one direction. Like I said in the doodle thread, a front-lit or surround-lit model is just going to give you an idea of where the lines go more than of the body as a three-dimensional object.
Anyway, spent some time on this tonight, just for a bit of fun. Started referencing and took a photo of myself in the pose i want.
*my computer, for some reason doesnt want to display images from tinypic
Also, the face on this last guy is a dramatic improvement on just about every face I've seen you put on a character ever. Did you base it on a photo reference or something?
The body is another matter. His gesture is stiff and his musculature looks like a G.I. Joe toy. The lighting is confused as ken said.
Ive been using references in areas like the muscles. ive never done muscle studies, so i'll definately have to do some more male drawings this coming week.
Thats good to hear! Most pictures i do use photo reference, but i think my understanding of structure has improved since doing those bernini faces. For this I used a reference of paul newman (though, not trying to make it look like him)
heres an update, with my main ref for the body pose.
this is phenomenal
decided to colour it a little tonight. i could keep working it, but i need to practice my muscles some more. ill give it a break for a while
im calling this one finished
spoiler higher res
The muscles are treated far, far too harshly. It's almost like you're taking some rudimentary muscular diagrams and turning them into full figures and totally not realizing that there is skin and fat and tendons that sit on top of them. This happens because you have not studied actual figures enough. There are also some spots that are simply shaped wrong or the muscle insertion is wrong (where the pectoralis attaches to the arm, for example).
This is a bit more of an advanced consideration but its also important to consider what sort of physique you want your character to have. If you want your character to have super ultra developed abs and be totally ripped with no body fat, that's fine, but understand that in the real world the only people who look like that are models and bodybuilders, and furthermore those types of physiques aren't even necessarily very strong (look at what the guys who enter "strongman" competitions look like. Hint: Not king leonidas from 300). If your character is some rugged wastelander mad max gladiator then what the fuck does he need to do crunches for. Think more
and less
I think it will help to focus on more natural bodies while learning anatomy rather than the extremes of "fitness". This will also mean you will be less tempted to draw a snake rattle and call it abdominal muscles. You're focusing too much on the fiddly little details of the hyper-cut chest and not understanding the basic anatomy. I think looking at classical sculpture is a good place to find physiques that are athletic without getting to the point where the person lives in a bowflex commercial.
Anyway, I also did a little sloppy paintover to simplify and correct some of the anatomy here. Don't scrutinize it too much since I didn't use reference and if I were to do a super cut torso I would definitely need some myself, but, just to give you an idea how I would simplify. Simpler forms also make it easier to execute your lightning model.
*downloaded some GREAT pose reference pacs from a deviant art account. really helpful 8-)
Playing around some more. Added tribal looking paterns to some fabric areas. And refined his face. I may give him a more rugged look. Might look at some clint eastwood pics for reference.
What do you guys think i should add/change to make him look more 'badass'? Im open for suggestions.
cheers for looking
Also started working on the back design. blocking in the colours/value
[IMG][/img]
LARGER image
seems like the current one would either fall out of place when he stretched his shoulder like that, or would move around during usual use
ditto on the black outlines thing, but man you've made a hell of a lot of progress on everything in the last couple of months. fun to watch!
Webcomic Twitter Steam Wishlist SATAN
ill try making those outlines more subtle.
fletcher, ill do some more research into the function of those shoulder pads.
thinking it needs more closer foreground elements to make the shot more interesting. Not sure exactly. hmmmm...
[IMG][/img]
EDIT: Also, giving that dude above a bit of a break.
Also:
Think you could link those perhaps?
EX:
Look at the shadows here. Where the surfaces are open to the sky, they are very, very blue. Where the surfaces are being shielded from the sky, such as under overhangs, they become darker and less saturated with color. You can also see in the arches where the shadows are blue, and they get darker as they curve away from being open to the sky into being an overhang- but you can also see where sunlight is bouncing off the walls and ground, injecting more yellow into the shadows.
Twitter
bacon - Cheers dude. That helps.
ATM im mainly concerned about the colour palette.
BTW ditched the truck. teckon i'll draw it all up as an environment piece on its own, and then i'll add in a few people and maybe little shop stools. Kinda like in Aladdin
Anyway, last update before bed. Look at it with fresh eyes tomorrow i thinks
EDIT: actually looks like a step backward. bah. too tired
edit: what im trying to say is... where's the hierachy of importance in this image? What's most important here? Is it the gateway? The building in the background? Something in the foreground? Everything in the image directs the eye to the buildings in the background. Does the truck or whatever that's happening in the mid-ground relate, at all, to things in the fore/background?
I think you'd get a lot out of thinking/re-thinking/re-re-rethinking your compositions. See a cool shot in a film? Try to emulate it. At the moment your environments are very...... postcardy.
my attempt has been to make it interesting, while at the same time being practical (e.g. something for 3d modellers to interprete, since my aim is game art)
i understand what you mean by it being a boring angle, especially in regards to illustration.
perhaps its time to dust of my lord of the rings dvds and start looking for some badass jackson shots
Where's the vanishing point for that plant stand dealie in the immediate foreground?
It just seems a bit off from the way the road is going... Maybe it's just me, or maybe it's something you've already got in mind to fix as you go along.
heres the vanishing points ive got marked on a seperate layer (incase anyone can see anything dramatically out that ive missed)
the third point perspective i havnt been to worried about getting accurate. kinda guessed it mostly
last update for today.
Also did this for fun. saw it on beavs thread so decided to copy