Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[lordnincompoop]

i'll agree that that wasn't a good example of bad character design. there is some stylistical consistence, the eyes, nose and mouth are very simplified, yet the artist still manages to make the characters distinct through manipulation of the face outline and slight variations to the face traits, that's not bad character design, that's syntheticism and subtlety

Fine, it was a bad example. I still maintain my sentiment re. actually looking at the person instead of drawing a generic "nose".

there's another thing, bringing up character design when criticizing someone's draughtsmanship is pretty dumb, there are no "characters" in draughtsmanship

I disagree. Perhaps you're referring to technical drawings, but graphite and charcoal are just as valid a medium for creating characters.

Lately I've been experimenting with simplified black and white drawings to help me simplify my shading to something more manageable. I have a problem of overdetailing things in my drawings, so if I can get used to two and three shade drawings then it'll help me in the long run. Here is my attempt at a two tone picture.

I have to say, I much preferred it when you weren't half-assing tone. :p

What is flawed about this:

• The creature looks like it's floating. This is due not only to uneven and awkward leg and abdominal posture but also to the fact that there is no discernible ground and no shadow being cast on it due to the creature's presence. Thus: Levitating in a grey void with no ground or sky in sight.
• Posture of man is unconvincing. He looks tacked-on due to not having very much to do with the creature space-wise and having inconsistent lighting in regards to the creature.

I'm not happy with the front leg shape, and the back leg placement, but it was a good example of stylizing an image as well as symbolism in drawings. The person is almost entirely made of symbols. The body shape, face construction, and clothes are all a kind of symbol. Since this isn't realism, and these things don't exist we rely on what we think they should be. While the creature doesn't exist we can tell where the head is, and of where the legs are. To do this I used a shape that represents something that already exists elsewhere, a symbol (a moderately detailed symbol, but a symbol none the less).

I don't think you're quite understanding what "symbols" are.

You likely don't need to think too much about them if you're not going to try to do a proper (accuracy-wise) portrait of people. Let's move on from this discussion, shall we?

Symbolism can exist in realism, but what style of drawing you're using will change what kind of symbol you'll want to use. If you look at the concept art of the creatures from Amnesia, you can tell that they all were intended to be human, but horribly twisted. The same goes for most creature designs in video games, because many of the muscle structures are based on animals that exist, or at the very least have some form of logical head placement.

"Symbols" as the term was earlier has nothing to do with "symbolism" as you're discussing it, nor does it have to do with Symbolism.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

actually looking at the person instead of drawing a generic "nose".

i agree with that

there's another thing, bringing up character design when criticizing someone's draughtsmanship is pretty dumb, there are no "characters" in draughtsmanship

I disagree. Perhaps you're referring to technical drawings, but graphite and charcoal are just as valid a medium for creating characters.

i'm referring to the action of drawing something that exists and trying to represent it faithfully in a two dimensional support. draughtsmanship works with lines and shapes, not with characters or objects, that's how you overcome the innate urge to draw symbols, you start thinking about images as the shapes you actually see and not as the concepts they represent. i'm not a native speaker, so i may be using the wrong word.

i can't afford to explain it right now, i both lack the time and disposition to do it, but may i suggest you explain and give a bit of advice on drawing negative spaces?_{(did i said that right? does that exist in english?)} people might find it easier to overcome their preconceptions and symbolisms when drawing abstract empty spaces rather than recognized noses

[The Fool]

I'll admit that poses aren't exactly my forte. In fact I'd say it's by far my biggest problem. I also don't stylize things often (or ever), so a black and white two tone image was new to me.

As for the comment about the creature floating, I knew. That was the main reason I didn't like the back leg positioning.

Yeah... Maybe I shouldn't write a post after midnight, because I'm reading over it now and I'm not entirely sure what definition of symbol I was using. I'm in favor of dropping that topic though.

[Robocorn]

i can't afford to explain it right now, i both lack the time and disposition to do it, but may i suggest you explain and give a bit of advice on drawing negative spaces?_{(did i said that right? does that exist in english?)} people might find it easier to overcome their preconceptions and symbolisms when drawing abstract empty spaces rather than recognized noses

You have it pretty much right. In Draughtsmanship Draughting Drafting you've got to draw the solids that make up an
object instead of the object itself because if you're drawing a symbol it limits your ability to transpose the perspective of the thing
that you're drawing.


In English, negative space drawing refers to this shit.

Some plant I had. took ten minutes looks better when you're not seeing it.
I probably give better advice when I've had some sleep but I've got a book somewhere that
says stuff like what Askot said.

[lordnincompoop]

I disagree. Perhaps you're referring to technical drawings, but graphite and charcoal are just as valid a medium for creating characters.

i'm referring to the action of drawing something that exists and trying to represent it faithfully in a two dimensional support. draughtsmanship works with lines and shapes, not with characters or objects, that's how you overcome the innate urge to draw symbols, you start thinking about images as the shapes you actually see and not as the concepts they represent. i'm not a native speaker, so i may be using the wrong word.

Oh, that. Yeah, I know what you mean, and yes, that's a nice approach.

Sorry, it was a little unclear at first.

i can't afford to explain it right now, i both lack the time and disposition to do it, but may i suggest you explain and give a bit of advice on drawing negative spaces?_{(did i said that right? does that exist in english?)} people might find it easier to overcome their preconceptions and symbolisms when drawing abstract empty spaces rather than recognized noses

Yeah, that's the term for it. That's a little more difficult to do for noses, since there aren't really defined boundaries between "nose" and "not nose".

Negative spaces:
http://www.tutorial9.net/articles/design/enhancing-your-art-with-negative-space/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_space

[Errol]

Even reading this thread does wonders for me. It, in particular the posts of lordnincompoop, is an ideal tool to humble yourself.
I have been flipping through the latest sketchbook I recently filled. All the faces, they look the same. There are exceptions, but... few. And the shading's pretty atrocious on the drawing I like the most of the bunch.
I am going to need some serious reflection, to avoid drawing the same thing over and over again. Although I got a bit better in general anatomy and posture at least.

Let us have the "good picture" as an example to thoroughly dissect. Best medicine.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Here's my list of ten flaws. I'm interested whether your flaw list and mine match up (or if yours is significantly longer - likely enough), so please look for flaws before opening this spoiler if you wish to critique. Please, critique me, help me to get better.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

- Shading's sketchy and inconsistent.
- The left hand's position isn't that natural.
- Eyes are way too dark. The rubber was wearing out the paper, so I couldn't revise more.
- I am pretty sure sheathes are not supposed to look like that. I am not sore how sheathes are even supposed to look in the first place.
- The pauldrons seem to be drawn from different perspectives. Jarring.
- Swords should be straight. This one is not.
- Left elbow is poking out too much, perhaps the whole arm section is too long.
- Face's missing some minor features, like fully-drawn lips, good cheeks etc. Symbols at work.
- Cloaks cannot billow like this one does. It billows either too harshly or starts billowing at a far too low place.
- The hair is exceptionally voluminous and opaque. This, most likely - like MANY of my flaws - can be traced back to learning to draw from manga. Not a method I'd recommend.

tldr kids if you want to learn how to draw don't start with manga style.

[Guardian G.I.]

Errol: You really should draw from life. Read lordincompoop's posts on the previous pages for more details.

[Errol]

Errol: You really should draw from life. Read lordincompoop's posts on the previous pages for more details.

*you should really draw from life far more would be a more fitting choice of words. Nevertheless, point conceded, even though you are still incredibly vague.

[Guardian G.I.]

Errol: You really should draw from life. Read lordincompoop's posts on the previous pages for more details.

*you should really draw from life far more would be a more fitting choice of words. Nevertheless, point conceded, even though you are still incredibly vague.

Whoops, I did sound a bit vague, but anyway, get a sketchbook and a pencil, go outside and do some sketches of people, buildings, animals, trees... Here's a site full of examples of these sketches: http://www.urbansketchers.org/

[lordnincompoop]

"Phallic" is about the best term I can use on that nose. :p

_Sorry.

Even reading this thread does wonders for me. It, in particular the posts of lordnincompoop, is an ideal tool to humble yourself.
I have been flipping through the latest sketchbook I recently filled. All the faces, they look the same. There are exceptions, but... few. And the shading's pretty atrocious on the drawing I like the most of the bunch.
I am going to need some serious reflection, to avoid drawing the same thing over and over again. Although I got a bit better in general anatomy and posture at least.

Let us have the "good picture" as an example to thoroughly dissect. Best medicine.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Here's my list of ten flaws. I'm interested whether your flaw list and mine match up (or if yours is significantly longer - likely enough), so please look for flaws before opening this spoiler if you wish to critique. Please, critique me, help me to get better.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

- Shading's sketchy and inconsistent.
- The left hand's position isn't that natural.
- Eyes are way too dark. The rubber was wearing out the paper, so I couldn't revise more.
- I am pretty sure sheathes are not supposed to look like that. I am not sore how sheathes are even supposed to look in the first place.
- The pauldrons seem to be drawn from different perspectives. Jarring.
- Swords should be straight. This one is not.
- Left elbow is poking out too much, perhaps the whole arm section is too long.
- Face's missing some minor features, like fully-drawn lips, good cheeks etc. Symbols at work.
- Cloaks cannot billow like this one does. It billows either too harshly or starts billowing at a far too low place.
- The hair is exceptionally voluminous and opaque. This, most likely - like MANY of my flaws - can be traced back to learning to draw from manga. Not a method I'd recommend.

tldr kids if you want to learn how to draw don't start with manga style.

It's not awful.

My issues with your piece, and methods for improvement:

---> Too many messy, rough, "sketchy" lines. Tighten up when you draw, because this is not something that should be in a final piece (in my opinion).

---> Composition is uninteresting and needs thorough improvement. This is difficult to fix through modification, as there'd be too much to change. I'd suggest you read up on the subject and redraw this with a setting and other missing elements in mind.

---> There is no background.

---> Posture is stiff and slightly unbalanced.

---> Cape is... :|

To fix: Grasp proper shading and lighting. Study drapery and cloth in wind.

---> Everything is incredibly flat. To fix, see below.

---> All the tones are severely washed out, and the light seems to be coming from no specific place at all. Additionally, shading (I'm kinda getting sick of that word) is messily and lazily done, mostly looking like scratchmarks (not on the armour - from the artist).

To fix:

Practice proper shading and don't be a lazy ass. It's incredibly easy to just Google shading tutorials now, and the first important order of business is gaining the ability to make even, gradual and subtle tones, so most things will do.

Get a better grip on the shapes that are in your drawing. I'm disagreement between lighting and  shapes in several places here, and objects not quite being able to decide what shape they are is distracting.

Decide on the position of the light source in space, light intensity, the specularity, tone and texture of your objects, and render the lighting using that information. I'd suggest you practice this by making still life studies or simpler drawings, noting presence and position of light.



I'm going to make a request I haven't made before: Taking my and others' advice into account, and reading the subjects suggested, I would like you to remake this piece, with changes as significant as you feel are needed. This way, you'll hopefully see yourself improving and you'll be able to more readily apply and understand the advice given to you.

I've had to do this a few times, and I've always gotten better from them. You don't have to do it if you don't want to; just a small suggestion that would be nice to see done.


_{and yes kids don't start with them mangas}

[Soadreqm]

that's my main gripe with, for example, anime and manga. it's a form of stylized drawing that has everything already layed out for you by someone else, with plenty of symbols and schematics someone else already came up with, so you don't need to learn to draw to think you can draw: it's instant "talent", just add water and stir

I've seen some of those "Learn To Draw Manga In Ten Minutes" books, and although I've never actually opened one, I feel quite comfortable saying that yes, they are bad. If you look at the works of someone who does that stuff for a living, though, you might notice that they actually have a clue about how a human body is supposed to move. And odds are that they could do realistic figure drawing if asked. The harsh economic realities of the adult world are a great motivator, I hear. >:]

But yeah. Knowing how things look in the real world and how to draw them realistically is vital if you want to draw anything, but once you do, there's nothing wrong about stylization. You are under no obligation to like anime or manga, and nobody expects you to like all anime and manga, but you really can't blame the whole genre for the "Learn To Draw Manga In Ten Minutes" books.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I think the biggest problem is that there's no real sense of motion. This looks like a museum diorama, with a wax sculpture knife man suspended with string above a taxidermied monster. I don't really know all that much about composition, but some perspective would probably help. Add some two-tone rocks in the background to establish space, maybe rotate viewpoint a bit so the critters aren't at the same distance from it, and rotate the critters themselves so that the directions they're facing make more sense.

Since shading was what you were trying to train here, I'll note that the lighting on the guy looks pretty cool, but the monster, not so much. I can't really get a clear idea of what shape it is, exactly, and the light on the different parts seems to be coming from different directions. Compare face, back and upper left foreleg.

[Vector]

Errol, you've got good line weight, but the face on the figure really needs some work.  It has a sort of boring look.

[Jopax]

Spoiler: HUUUUGE sketchdump HO! (click to show/hide)

[lordnincompoop]

(removed)

[Jopax]

Hey now, I took that as a compliment so no need to go around and fix things Toady ^_^