One thing I never understood about the Loomis method and it drives me crazy is in the books Loomis draws the head as a sphere with it's sides cut off. But all drawing tutorials, and even Loomis himself don't cut the sides of the sphere when it's seen from 3/4 or any other angle. It doesn't make any sense. A sphere doesn't have foreshortening, it doesn't matter from what angle you look at it it's 2D contour is always a perfect circle. But when you cut it's side, with exception of a few angles it makes a huge difference in perspective. Most drawing tutorials and even Loomis just draw a sphere with ovals on it's sides, but if the sphere was actually cut it would look something like this. Also from most tutorials the back of the head isn't cut to give the cranium it's distinct oval shape.
>>7438397ustedes estupido
>>7438415This isn't what a sphere with it's sides cut looks like in perspective.
>>7438419This is.
okay
The problem with it is if you're doing multiple heads using the method the way people do it, it's impossible to do it consistently because the construction isn't proper. If you were actually taking a sphere and cutting it, you could place multiple spheres on the paper, one after another and do a turnaround of the head. But doing it this way is impossible without having to lengthen or shorten the jaw to make the sphere look slimmer like it was cut.
>>7438421ustedes estupido y tus ojos no funciona.
>>7438441If he had cut the sphere I wouldn't be able to fit it in a sphere. From some angles where the head is in profile or almost in profile it doesn't matter, but like I showed in the models it can make a huge difference and make the method inconsistent.
>>7438397You're right. The sliced sphere should indeed take up less visual space at a more acute angle. To a point it isn't a problem, but the more directly the head is facing the eye the more it will be distorted.I've always cut actual sections off the sphere when going through this construction and I'm a little surprised that Loomis doesn't do it as rigorously.Also, spheres do have foreshortening. Consider how much you can see of the earth to see the effect ad absurdum. It just doesn't affect the shape of the contour.Loomis' construction methods are inconsistent from page to page even in the same book. It's not very rigorous.
>>7438463No, pero ustedes estudiar mucho y Tendrá sentido. Los inconsistencias existen en tu mente, no en realidad. Dibujar mas cajas, pendejo.
>>7438463>doesnt know how perspective worksnot to mention the 3d reference isnt even rotated as much as the drawingthe 3d reference is rotated around 10 degreesthe drawing is rotated around 40 degreesbut you clearly wont be convinced otherwise and just want to be argumentativeif you REALLY cared (you don't) then you'd study orthographic projections
>>7438485As I have said the closer the head is from profile the less of a gap there is. If you are doing a head turnaround you cannot do it consistently unless you actually cut the head. Because otherwise you'll have to vary the length of the jaw to make it look sorta right because you constructed it wrong. In his books sometimes he does it, sometimes he doesn't do it. Ans generally on drawing tutorials and such people only cut the head when it's draw straight from the front, the problem with that is that your heads will be much wider then they should from all other angles.
>>7438397Because it's mostly scaffolding for the proportions. The only part of the construction that matches in the finished drawing is usually just the forehead and scalp because you're supposed to cut and fill other parts as needed to give the head and face the shape you want.
>>7438491>As I have said the closer the head is from profile the less of a gap there is. If you are doing a head turnaround you cannot do it consistently unless you actually cut the head. Because otherwise you'll have to vary the length of the jaw to make it look sorta right because you constructed it wrong.then cut the headno idea what you mean by the length of the jaw being wrong and having to vary it, the mandible is attached the cranium, it's not a part of the cranium itselfi'm being serious that you should look into orthographic projection, it will answer your questionsrelevant https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dewuJqCK3xM>In his books sometimes he does it, sometimes he doesn't do itgranted, loomis skips steps, the concept he presents is solid whether or not he shorthands his process or notthe point is that you can create a layin with just a ball and a cross, if you want more technical information then you should be looking in perspective or industrial design books
>>7438397Just use a box instead.
>>7438491so whats the problem exactly, 3d model gives you the right answer, all is good
>>7438529The problem is if you're drawing multiple heads from different angles in a scene or in a turnaround of the head you have to cut it consistently otherwise you can't do it without changing the proportions. Try drawing multiple circles of the exact same size on a page and only cut the sides of the front view, you'll find that the other views of the head are too wide, so you'll have to stretch the jaw for example. It's possible to draw consistently with this method if you cut the sphere consistently on all views but if you don't like 99% of people don't and Loomis himself doesn't a lot of the time, and I never understood why, you'll always have to adjust after you're done or just leave it looking that way. Or you could do like I did when I started drawing and never cut the sides and just extend the jaw but then the problem is that in profile and some 3/4 the cranium won't be wide enough.
>NOOO the sphere isn't 100% perfect>I made a 3D model to show how wrong you areI see, you have chosen the path of the perma-beg.
>>7438535such a weird problem to have considering people would or should also be different proportioned not to mention all the things in a scenethis is just a matter of understanding how different forms look in space. this is such a nothingburger problem, you are just complaining for the sake of complaining
>>7438554He's just having trouble understanding the abstraction. Classic autism brain.
>>7438568It is a problem if you're trying to think of it as 3d object in space that's properly constructed.
>>7438570easily mitigated by something called studying
>>7438577Which is what I did and realized that's generally being done wrong and that's the motive I couldn't get it to match from some angles so I made the thread to discuss it.
>>7438579tell me the reason why you won't use orthographic projection
OP really needs to post work because this is all permabeg shit. It's not worth trying to explain anything that's just going to zip over his head anyway.
>>7438582>orthographic projectionBecause it doesn't help at all with this problem,
>>7438586it's specifically made for problems like thesetake it from teal. boy where is he when you need himwell whatever, stew on this forever then, maybe it'll at least help someone else
>>7438594It works in these cases because the objects don't taper like a sphere does.
>>7438535>and I never understood whywell, for many artists, it's not all about the construction and use of absolutely right and correct 3d shapes, which can be impractical, other things come into play, visual memory, instinct, 2d shapes (the general form of the head can at every angle be simplified into a 2d shape, and yes it'll be different for every angle, but it's still useful, you often draw the same angles, an experienced artist will integrate these shapes unconsciously by drawing different angles and they'll help in addition to the general 3d shape). >It's possible to draw consistently with this method if you cut the sphere consistently on all viewscool then, all is good
>>7438473I never expected to see a fake beaner calling someone stupid over the loomis method.Props for not using google tl tho
>>7438782onions no usar englesia con infrahumanos
>>7438516But then the problem becomes even worse, you are just eyeballing everything with even less consistency than the ball, which will always be ball from any angle, while the box not so much...
>>7438397Take the Huston pill.https://youtu.be/2T7cDY7YDsg?t=70
>>7438419Wow yeah, that will definitely confuse the autistics reading Loomis manuals
>>7438595waiting warmly for teal to come in here and btfo your ass
>>7438397ITS ALL FUCKING FAKENOBODY DRAWS HEADS WITH THESE SHAPESNOBODY VISUALIZES THESE SHAPESCONSTRUCTION IS NONSENSE THEY INVENTED AFTER ALREADY KNOWING HOW TO DRAWTHE ONLY THING YOU SHOULD BE "CONSTRUCTING" IS THE ACTUAL HUMAN FIGURE
>>7439507Aw sweet a /beg/ mental breakdown
>>7439507So many courses have been put out by these so called pros and you only come to realize they sank exp points into 1 area that hides all the areas they're /beg/ at. So if someone doesn't know how to really draw a head they'll make up for it by caking their art with rendering. Or if they suck at constructing the figure in perspective they'll cheat a little with 3D model abuse or using silhouettes and so on. In the case of someone being really good at portraits, they suck with something, like the body.
>>7439657Anon discovers what an art style is
>>7439657Aw sweet crab cope
>>7439663God gave me 2 eyes and this is what I observed in the broad wide open for all, even you, to see and confess.
>>7439665This is from a pro selling a 150 dollar course btw. Is this cope or just simply observation?
>>7439669Not good enough for you? Here's another "pro" with 100k followers selling a 180 dollar course.
>>7439676Is $180 supposed to be a lot of money for a course?
>>7439683That's a whole ass car insurance payment.
>>7439684And?
>>7439686Excuse me, mr made of money.
>>7439669>>7439676they're not gonna respond bro, you destroyed them and now they're going to exit the thread or call you a tranny.
>>7439687You get what you pay for. Don't complain your $10 watch aint a Rolex
>>7439693I know the game. It's just deflection now rather than the core point brought up.
>>7439697You had a point?
>>7439676>>7439669It's more like those pointless exercises they got from loomis or hampton don't actually help you draw. Art instructors sank all their points in those pointless exercises and that's why that's all they can't do. Those who can't do, teach.
>>7439699Yeah, go 41% yourself and stop replying to me.
This isn't an RPG. You don't have finite stat points. If you can learn to draw a head you can learn to draw a body. If you can learn to draw a body you can learn to draw a head.
>>7439705Aw, he's mad
>>7439711I'm proud to be a he, unlike you.
>>7439716You sure? Seem pretty defensive about that.
>>7439722Are you attempting to groom me outside of discord?
>>7439722You're nipples should be lower
>>7439730*yourLearn english
>>7439733Don't look at him; face me and answer my question like the man you once were.
>>7439733I think it's time to groom you inside of discord
>>7439739I didn't answer because I was trying to figure out what the fuck that sentence even means.Like, it's grammatically correct. But in context it doesn't really make sense.
>>7439748It's okay you can't come up with a good comeback. Speaking of comebacks, I cummed on the back of your mom as we tried to make another kid after the first failure (you) came to be. Like, what I just said is grammatically correct. But in context, all that matters is I fucked your mother.
>what I just said is grammatically correctIt's not, actually. Nor semantically. But you do you thirdie, you'll crack English sooner or later.
The only crack around here is your open wound.
You know the difference between a noun and a verb, right?
I don't think you know the difference between kill and yourself.
Well one of those is a pronoun and I didn't know you were into that kind of thing. Way to out yourself.
I'm glad we're on the subject of pronouns. Do you know you can't change your gender?
You're making it really hard to not see this as denial
>>7439786>>7439669>>7439676>>7439663What denial? You're just sliding the conversation away from the original topic.
>>7439791That you can't draw and are blaming it on everyone but yourself. Yeah, that sounds like denial.
>>7439794I have the right to call out shit business practices, point out teachers who shouldn't be teaching, and raise awareness on trannies like you who try to slide conversations in defense of bad business practices and bad art teachers.
>>7439799So not denying the part where you can't draw?
>>7439803my gestures look better than >>7439676 where's my coloso invite to teach?
Lol, he doesn't even know what gestures are
It's my version. I patented it. Now partner with me, Day1company. I will make you thousands.
You can't even pay for a $180 class, why would I trust you're worth anything
You're not Day1 Company, tranny.
>>7439824Is Day1company in the room with us?
>>7439825they will be when they see this thread in the archive on google search
>>7439828I have indeed de-transitioned, not sure if that matters but there you go.
just... draw... if it looks bad, keep drawing until it looks good, you're overthinking it
>>7438782There is no such thing as a fake beaner.Beaner is a state of mind, if you act like one, you are one.You fucking beaner
>>7439844But you're brown
>>7439812link to the video i wanna see you draw
Imagine getting filtered by loomis
>>743968390% of my future monthly salary
>>7438397Just learn from chommang on youtube
>>7438397Just do what David Finch doeshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i6JDwEwXJI
>>7441606here>>7441587 is also a great resource, especially if you want to draw pretty azns instead of beefcakes and statuesque wimminz
