• Draw The Cutest Girl You Can
    1,568 replies, posted
You do the thing well.
Is this a good thing to reference? [t]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m88qqb1Qug1qc5bvxo1_500.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=Waffle Lord;45098189]Is this a good thing to reference? [t]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m88qqb1Qug1qc5bvxo1_500.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] If you want a thing to reference, look at real life.
If you're looking at something stylised, it generally should be your "style ref" and nothing more. The more simplified something is, the more wholly it becomes that artist's interpretation of anatomy. You want to get as close to the real thing as possible to provide you with a knowledge base. So look at your favourite art for stylistic techniques once you've grasped the figure - things like shadows, mark making, how line weight is handled, more personal stuff. If you want to know how breasts or any other body part behaves, use an anatomical text.
[QUOTE=Waffle Lord;45098189]Is this a good thing to reference?[/QUOTE] Oh hey, I used that reference before too. [IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/15949445/23232132312112312123.JPG[/IMG] But I hided the hands more.
[QUOTE=mech126;45099662]Oh hey, I used that reference before too. [IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/15949445/23232132312112312123.JPG[/IMG] But I hided the hands more.[/QUOTE] For a gnome, that just looks adorable...a little bit on the shortstackish side, but the slight chub just moves it back to cute again. [QUOTE=GastricTank;45097674][img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/67144542/Drawings/2014/222_Jun13_LosEyeView.png[/img] i did the thing again[/QUOTE] I want to do the thing...but little black dresses seem like your department. I normally lean slightly towards some sort of casual/stage-magic sort of thing. it's a bit of a work in progress, but i think i'm to my limit in usability with SAI tools. i personally like how my proportions is shaping up, but i can't help but feel that the dress is just acting as a distraction from drawing finer details. I'll have to shape up on color/shading sometime. The breast looks right to an extent, but dresses are supposed to be shapely to an extent, think i added too much butt, or maybe the arm doesn't show enough of her back. The Old dress looked more "flowy" but figuring out how to add a slit is difficult without significant leg work..think i should post the under-layers from before the final somewhere to figure out what i'm missing? [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/F1DU9Vl.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Waffle Lord;45098189]Is this a good thing to reference? [t]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m88qqb1Qug1qc5bvxo1_500.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] no breasts react like sacks of fluid not inflated balls [editline]14th June 2014[/editline] imagine water-balloons instead of basketballs
Thank you all for the helpful advice, I will definitely use it.
[QUOTE=Fire Kracker;45100364] breasts react like sacks of fluid not inflated balls [/QUOTE] [img]http://i.imgur.com/ozxdpIr.png[/img] I'm sorry,I couldn't resist
[QUOTE=Plucky;45099988] [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/F1DU9Vl.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] I'm not trying to be mean, but it would be in your best interests to reference a human body as you draw one - that goes for anything you'd like to draw, really. It helps a lot.
[QUOTE=Bynine;45103105]I'm not trying to be mean, but it would be in your best interests to reference a human body as you draw one - that goes for anything you'd like to draw, really. It helps a lot.[/QUOTE] But if i reference one, then eventually it'll just devolve into tracing. jumping off to the realistic end just feels a bit startling. been trying for years but they never turned out to be that great, it just sat dormant until /vp/ came around. you pop in here and see Kahgarak's and GastricTank's art and they just look really great. just thought that if i just simplify and try to build up, maybe mine might get better. Heck, i even took up binary pens (Gastric!) just because the color is distinct enough to actually select areas easily, but everything just looks fat at 5/6 pixels and above, at least i used 3-4 for inside areas and finer details like eyes...scale is just hard to work with, hard as hell to stylize art to get great ratings instead of just winding up as a joke. What to do? draw the same bits lots of times, lay the good ones on top of each over until you get a frankenpic, trace optimal area, chisel that down, turn the page a bit to see if it's symmetrical/flat with the rest, copy/paste layers 10 more times....just to wind up with something bad in 4 hours? feeling inspired felt good, thought to myself that what i drew was the best i did yet, then it just winds up being passed.
[img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/67144542/Drawings/2014/224_Jun14_DateNight.png[/img] enough paisley, more ella
[QUOTE=Plucky;45103571]But if i reference one, then eventually it'll just devolve into tracing. jumping off to the realistic end just feels a bit startling. been trying for years but they never turned out to be that great, it just sat dormant until /vp/ came around. you pop in here and see Kahgarak's and GastricTank's art and they just look really great. just thought that if i just simplify and try to build up, maybe mine might get better. Heck, i even took up binary pens (Gastric!) just because the color is distinct enough to actually select areas easily, but everything just looks fat at 5/6 pixels and above, at least i used 3-4 for inside areas and finer details like eyes...scale is just hard to work with, hard as hell to stylize art to get great ratings instead of just winding up as a joke. What to do? draw the same bits lots of times, lay the good ones on top of each over until you get a frankenpic, trace optimal area, chisel that down, turn the page a bit to see if it's symmetrical/flat with the rest, copy/paste layers 10 more times....just to wind up with something bad in 4 hours? feeling inspired felt good, thought to myself that what i drew was the best i did yet, then it just winds up being passed.[/QUOTE] It's not tracing if you try to make sense out of what you're seeing, ie trying to see the object as a three dimensional entity, and breaking it down into basic forms that give you a better understanding of it. Also you don't have to spend 4 hours refining a sketch that you only do as training. Just do quick studies of 10 minutes on paper every now and then to improve, and go through the process of digitalizing/coloring/shadowing them if you end up with one you find worthy of your time.
[QUOTE=_Axel;45103643]It's not tracing if you try to make sense out of what you're seeing, ie trying to see the object as a three dimensional entity, and breaking it down into basic forms that give you a better understanding of it. Also you don't have to spend 4 hours refining a sketch that you only do as training. Just do quick studies of 10 minutes on paper every now and then to improve, and go through the process of digitalizing/coloring/shadowing them if you end up with one you find worthy of your time.[/QUOTE] To be totally clear too you shouldn't be overlaying anything. You should be looking at it and trying to draw it as it is, here is an example (if you'll pardon the lack of a cute girl) I was bored and decided I wanted to make a free lineart (adoptables, its a thing on DA) that was something other than a wolf or a horse because there are 20 billion of those already. She suggested a deer. And I have never drawn a deer before. Hell I've only drawn a horse once, maybe twice. So I went and found a reference; [thumb]http://i.imgur.com/HQqkYH0.jpg[/thumb] and then stared at it while I did my sketch, trying to get the details as close as possible (except I did decide to change the angle of the back up a bit to make the pose clearer, and I added the left legs because it looked odd without them) [thumb]http://i.imgur.com/7vfafwa.png[/thumb] [thumb]http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2014/162/5/1/deer_lineart__f2u__by_kaydenfrei-d7m10bj.png[/thumb] If you actually overlay them, the placement is quite different but the proportioning and pose look right. Thats basically what a reference will do for you, but you need to train your observational skill to be able to do it. It's not an instant gratification kinda thing. The great thing though is once you have trained yourself to be able to look and draw, you arn't restricted to drawing that one thing you know how to draw, you can look at a reference and manage to draw just about anything. You need to practice your observational skills to be good at drawing from a reference, but drawing from a reference is pretty much the only good way to learn to draw something new. Starting from stylized and working backwards is possible, but will take 20x as long.
[QUOTE=Plucky;45103571]But if i reference one, then eventually it'll just devolve into tracing. jumping off to the realistic end just feels a bit startling. been trying for years but they never turned out to be that great, it just sat dormant until /vp/ came around. you pop in here and see Kahgarak's and GastricTank's art and they just look really great. just thought that if i just simplify and try to build up, maybe mine might get better. Heck, i even took up binary pens (Gastric!) just because the color is distinct enough to actually select areas easily, but everything just looks fat at 5/6 pixels and above, at least i used 3-4 for inside areas and finer details like eyes...scale is just hard to work with, hard as hell to stylize art to get great ratings instead of just winding up as a joke. What to do? draw the same bits lots of times, lay the good ones on top of each over until you get a frankenpic, trace optimal area, chisel that down, turn the page a bit to see if it's symmetrical/flat with the rest, copy/paste layers 10 more times....just to wind up with something bad in 4 hours? feeling inspired felt good, thought to myself that what i drew was the best i did yet, then it just winds up being passed.[/QUOTE] Every good artist started with learning from real life Heck, avoid digital for now and try starting with pencil/charcoal and observational drawings of figures if you're even remotely serious about this
[QUOTE=Rhenae;45103842]Starting from stylized and working backwards is possible, but will take 20x as long.[/QUOTE] [img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/67144542/Drawings/2014/Scraps/247_Jun14_TruthBomb.png[/img]
Sadly, I can say the same. Started by getting me references from stylized characters to more anatomically correct ones. Took very long for me to be able to do what I can do today. I literally started with Rayman and attached limbs, using stickmen as skeletons and then making them less stiff over time. Or straight up copy from eye reference things that were beyond my skill. Let's just say it made me unhappy with many of the end results. I'd say set yourself some challenges. Draw whenever you can. Choose a reference, look for what you want to practice, practice the elements you deem hard during the week and try your best to reproduce it at the end of the week. AKA don't be me and put goals to reach from time to time!
the gf [img]http://i985.photobucket.com/albums/ae337/exivimi/she_zps4118e22f.jpg[/img] and that fucking cat
[QUOTE=Plucky;45103571]But if i reference one, then eventually it'll just devolve into tracing. jumping off to the realistic end just feels a bit startling. been trying for years but they never turned out to be that great, it just sat dormant until /vp/ came around. you pop in here and see Kahgarak's and GastricTank's art and they just look really great. just thought that if i just simplify and try to build up, maybe mine might get better. [/QUOTE] Well there's your problem,you need to go out and look at a real life thing,a picture or whatever and draw whatever you see.DON'T TRACE! I've been drawing stylised shit all my life till around September of last year,my art never improved much.Starting september last year I've started drawing from life and improved from this [t]http://i.imgur.com/0UEP8xP.jpg[/t] to this in just a couple of months [t]http://i.imgur.com/dqH3EfU.jpg[/t] Sadly I've thrown away my even worst drawings from back then so I can't give a better example
theres nothing wrong with tracing, it just depends on what you do with it. if you post it up expecting praise then yeah fuck tracing but it's a respectable studying technique as long as you keep it to yourself
[QUOTE=Anonymuzz;45107871]theres nothing wrong with tracing, it just depends on what you do with it. if you post it up expecting praise then yeah fuck tracing but it's a respectable studying technique as long as you keep it to yourself[/QUOTE] Im sure you can learn a bit by tracing a picture to pick up the details but it would be far more effective to just try to draw it by eye.
[QUOTE=Rhenae;45103842]but drawing from a reference is pretty much the only good way to learn to draw something new.[/QUOTE] Not so, the way to do it is to learn the proportions and then the anatomy (or otherwise the workings of the thing) and simplifying in terms of forms. You can do a million referenced pictures of a deer and still only posses a superficial, detached knowledge of how a deer's body is built and moves. Understanding your subject should come before copying any photographs or doing master copies - these things are good for rendering practice, fine tuning the portrayal of elements that you should already know, gaining insight into (but not aping) other artist's means of interpretation as well as how things appear in action in some cases. You should [B]not[/B] learn solely by doing photostudies, that's another situation where you're learning backwards, building the roof with no walls under it. It's funny, I would have given the same advice as you not very long ago, I think a lot of people have been under the impression that reffing is the be all and end all solution. As I'm learning myself I'm realising a lot of the stuff I might have said with conviction in the past about art is simply not true :/ I don't even consider photostudies to be art anymore honestly, I just see it as practice now, not something to show off. There's more room for interpretation than with a master copy say, but it's still copying. Good for learning when it's part of a much broader learning process, but worth very little as far as artistic credibility goes. We ALL used to parade photostudies around in CW like a year+ ago and pat each other on the back, it was all a bit deviantart looking back on it. Having said all that, before you undergo study you should have good base drawing skills. Just simply being able to draw a nice line or curve with a pencil, gaining the skill of seeing your subject so that you may record it as it appears without spending a lot of time or effort, being able to draw with relaxed grips and different pressures and so on and so on. For these foundations, draw from life, starting with the most primitive objects possible. That last paragraph wasn't so much for you Rhen, more for Plucky or whoever else might be paying attention to anything I say :v: [editline]15th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Anonymuzz;45107871]theres nothing wrong with tracing, it just depends on what you do with it. if you post it up expecting praise then yeah fuck tracing but it's a respectable studying technique as long as you keep it to yourself[/QUOTE] I doubt there is anything less effective then tracing. There's nothing MORALLY wrong with it if you do keep it as private practice, but in terms of value as practice everything is wrong with it. It can be useful if it's for a reason, I.E tracing off a figure outline for perfect accuracy and then inserting the skeleton or similar, but tracing as a standalone "technique" is useless. You can claim to be learning some minutiae from doing it, but the fact is you'll learn some tiny residue of information no matter what you do, and you'll learn more doing literally anything other than tracing.
ofc i dont mean "do nothing but trace". some people learn differently, and i'm saying to someone starting out with art to not immediately reject tracing if they find themselves doing it. just don't make a habit of it
[QUOTE=MakoSkyDub;45108079]Not so, the way to do it is to learn the proportions and then the anatomy (or otherwise the workings of the thing) and simplifying in terms of forms. You can do a million referenced pictures of a deer and still only posses a superficial, detached knowledge of how a deer's body is built and moves. Understanding your subject should come before copying any photographs or doing master copies - these things are good for rendering practice, fine tuning the portrayal of elements that you should already know, gaining insight into (but not aping) other artist's means of interpretation as well as how things appear in action in some cases. You should [B]not[/B] learn solely by doing photostudies, that's another situation where you're learning backwards, building the roof with no walls under it. It's funny, I would have given the same advice as you not very long ago, I think a lot of people have been under the impression that reffing is the be all and end all solution. As I'm learning myself I'm realising a lot of the stuff I might have said with conviction in the past about art is simply not true :/ I don't even consider photostudies to be art anymore honestly, I just see it as practice now, not something to show off. There's more room for interpretation than with a master copy say, but it's still copying. Good for learning when it's part of a much broader learning process, but worth very little as far as artistic credibility goes. We ALL used to parade photostudies around in CW like a year+ ago and pat each other on the back, it was all a bit deviantart looking back on it. Having said all that, before you undergo study you should have good base drawing skills. Just simply being able to draw a nice line or curve with a pencil, gaining the skill of seeing your subject so that you may record it as it appears without spending a lot of time or effort, being able to draw with relaxed grips and different pressures and so on and so on. For these foundations, draw from life, starting with the most primitive objects possible. That last paragraph wasn't so much for you Rhen, more for Plucky or whoever else might be paying attention to anything I say :v: [editline]15th June 2014[/editline] I doubt there is anything less effective then tracing. There's nothing MORALLY wrong with it if you do keep it as private practice, but in terms of value as practice everything is wrong with it. It can be useful if it's for a reason, I.E tracing off a figure outline for perfect accuracy and then inserting the skeleton or similar, but tracing as a standalone "technique" is useless. You can claim to be learning some minutiae from doing it, but the fact is you'll learn some tiny residue of information no matter what you do, and you'll learn more doing literally anything other than tracing.[/QUOTE] i remember when u used to be all about refing lol this isn't directed towards you but I personally don't think reffing is the greatest way to learn unless you know why you are reffing in the first place made a hand tut but it's not the best(cuz i'm not great at arts) and someone could probably explain it better, i'm not the greatest at writing what i want to say :V [t]http://oi57.tinypic.com/125tlqt.jpg[/t]
I know I'm a blatant hypocrite by saying this, but just shut up & enjoy what you've made. Post it, & if anyone gives you shit, fuck them. If someone gives you a fitting critique & gives advice, thank them.
I don't think you should be making tutorials right now.
[QUOTE=MakoSkyDub;45108079]Not so, the way to do it is to learn the proportions and then the anatomy (or otherwise the workings of the thing) and simplifying in terms of forms. You can do a million referenced pictures of a deer and still only posses a superficial, detached knowledge of how a deer's body is built and moves. Understanding your subject should come before copying any photographs or doing master copies - these things are good for rendering practice, fine tuning the portrayal of elements that you should already know, gaining insight into (but not aping) other artist's means of interpretation as well as how things appear in action in some cases. You should [B]not[/B] learn solely by doing photostudies, that's another situation where you're learning backwards, building the roof with no walls under it. It's funny, I would have given the same advice as you not very long ago, I think a lot of people have been under the impression that reffing is the be all and end all solution. As I'm learning myself I'm realising a lot of the stuff I might have said with conviction in the past about art is simply not true :/ I don't even consider photostudies to be art anymore honestly, I just see it as practice now, not something to show off. There's more room for interpretation than with a master copy say, but it's still copying. Good for learning when it's part of a much broader learning process, but worth very little as far as artistic credibility goes. We ALL used to parade photostudies around in CW like a year+ ago and pat each other on the back, it was all a bit deviantart looking back on it. Having said all that, before you undergo study you should have good base drawing skills. Just simply being able to draw a nice line or curve with a pencil, gaining the skill of seeing your subject so that you may record it as it appears without spending a lot of time or effort, being able to draw with relaxed grips and different pressures and so on and so on. For these foundations, draw from life, starting with the most primitive objects possible. That last paragraph wasn't so much for you Rhen, more for Plucky or whoever else might be paying attention to anything I say :v: .[/QUOTE] This is true. I wasn't thinking about it when I wrote it out but things like that I do at the same time as using a reference (at least for things other than people, since there isnt huge volumes on how to draw and simplify the anatomy of a deer haha) Listen to Mako he is a better teacher than me :v: [editline]15th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Fire Kracker;45113166]i remember when u used to be all about refing lol this isn't directed towards you but I personally don't think reffing is the greatest way to learn unless you know why you are reffing in the first place made a hand tut but it's not the best(cuz i'm not great at arts) and someone could probably explain it better, i'm not the greatest at writing what i want to say :V [t]http://oi57.tinypic.com/125tlqt.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] This isn't really helpful and doesn't say anything much about specifically how to draw a hand...
i guess it's not really a tut on how to draw hands but to show that when you draw something you can't just draw a representation of something if you want to learn how to draw I used a hand because we all know what hands look like, every single one of us has a hand, but it's something people struggle with the most, because we keep drawing a hand symbolically rather than actually just drawing the hand(which has nothing to do with skill, just with seeing how the hand actually looks) i think everyone has the ability to draw hands, it doesn't need to be taught [editline]15th June 2014[/editline] I admit I don't know how to teach how to see though :v: probably shouldn't have made a "hand tut"
You're not talking about drawing a hand in general though, you're talking about achieving the knack of observational drawing - the elusive "seeing" of your subject in front of you and on your paper simultaneously. Beginners certainly don't have that ability anyway, it is something that needs to be taught, but has little to do with hands. It's definitely a skill though. And yeah if you can't draw something well yourself don't make a tutorial :v: even if the process of learning seems clear to you, wait until you've reached the end of it, or at least to the point which you'd like to impart to others. You'll probably realise that some of your ideas were incorrect and also know some valuable extra information - the most vital stuff probably, that wasn't obvious from the beginning. [QUOTE=Rhenae;45113770]This is true. I wasn't thinking about it when I wrote it out but things like that I do at the same time as using a reference (at least for things other than people, since there isnt huge volumes on how to draw and simplify the anatomy of a deer haha)[/QUOTE] In american art schools they run animal anatomy subjects, where they'd do the whole process for animals and get various dogs, deer, horses, big cats etc. etc. into the studios for life drawing D: Besides, you could get a book on animal anatomy to show you the bones and muscles and attempt to simplify them into salient groups yourself, if you can't find a good resource where somebody else has successfully done so. Would be laborious but you'd be pretty hot drawing deer at the end of it :v: [editline]16th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Anonymuzz;45108430]ofc i dont mean "do nothing but trace". some people learn differently, and i'm saying to someone starting out with art to not immediately reject tracing if they find themselves doing it. just don't make a habit of it[/QUOTE] I don't think you were listening but whatever
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/Q6snnd8.png[/IMG]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.