everyone talks about the loomis method of drawing the head, but why nobody talks about the loomis method of drawing the figure? at least i haven't seen anyone talking about it anywhere.
>>7736740I tried using it once. It's not really that useful.
I think mostly because it is needlessly complicated. Why draw a complicated rib cage and cape structure when you can just use an oval with a line to show direction? Why use a complicated warped cylinder for the pelvis when you could use a box varient?Also being so structural makes it difficult to focus on gesture.
>>7736750can you give your reasons as to why?>>7736756is that the more "developed' version from later pages right? yeah it really does suck, but do you think that the more simplified version from OP's picture to be better or is it just as bad?
>>7736763>but do you think that the more simplified version from OP's picture to be better or is it just as badI still think it is overly complicated which is why it doesn't get talked about much. There are definiely artists that do use it though so if you like the method and it works for you then there is no reason that you can't use it.
>>7736756You can build your structure on top of gesture though. That's just a skill issue
>>7736756i kinda like the two ovals to mark the hip bone.
>>7736756If I recall correctly, loomis recommends exploring and finding a "manniken" that suits you're preferences, this is just the one he explores most thoroughly in the book, assumedly because it's the one he uses.Also, I don't get what you mean about it being complicated? It's 2 balls, and two disks, and some lines. The most complicated thing was that he recommended drawing a 'cape' on the chest ball to help visualise the shoulders, pecs, and back muscles (the traps).
>>7736740Just look at the pic, those poses are stiff as shit. There's a reason people recommend Bridgeman alongside Loomis
>>7736740I’m going through his figure drawing book right now and I really like it, more than Bridgman honestly because there’s less emphasis on stylization and more on clear and concise lines. However, this is just a bit awkward looking. Like I couldn’t see myself consistently using a method like this. It’s good as a way to train the brain to see the landmarks but it’s a bit difficult to build atop. It’s good practice though
>>7736914Torso looks simple, It’s literally just the oval +delts The hips look funny
>>7736763Because even this little thing needs practice to be used correctly. First you need to learn how to draw it right, then you need to learn how to use it to draw an actual figure. I think it's way easier and faster to just memorize proportions and certain anatomy rules.
>>7737547Continuing, it's pretty much what this anon >>7736756 said
>>7736740I've been studying it and yea its badLoomis early in his books loves pages where he tries to break down the body with retarded grids, or pages like OP where he has these ugly stiff manniquins. Theres plenty of good pages afterwards once he gets past his autistic manniquin grid shit though
>>7736740you need to actually know perspective to let this be useful to you
>>7737617Which is probably why he has a section on perspective very early on in the book, I believe before this as well.
>>7736740bridgman and hogarth mog.
>>7736740I'm a beg and I used it for a while. It is ok.
