Stuff like pic related. Mechanical more than sculptural
bump
>>7809255Can you elaborate a bit on what you mean?I've been going through Morpho muscled bodies recently and really liking it. All the examples are bodybuilders so you get a good sense of how the muscles actually sit and move on the body (albeit in a somewhat overexaggerated way compared to the regular person).It's also very cheap, like $10 or something (has 95 pages), so that is pretty nice for having it in physical form.
>>7813078not him but it's pretty clear?he wants sketches that shows the construction blocks of the body, exactly like in his picture.what kind of shape to use for bodies, and how different artists use different shapes.as for me, OP, it's pretty shitty but here's my own.
>>7813246Well I think the general idea is clear but beyond that I'm not so sure, he didn't mention whether he wants sketches or learning materials/diagrams that utilize this approach, whether he wants the structures to be simplifications or possibly also actual anatomical representations or something else or if all of that is finecool sketch
>>7813520LikeHow to think about how the trapezius and pecs and deltoids move to raise the armIf all you study is the forms you end up without the rhythms, and so you get pic related
>>7814912I see I see, well I think my original contribution regarding Morpho Muscled Bodies is relevant then, because it focuses almost solely on the muscles and what they do to move the body around.
>>7815646So how do I use these arrows? Is it like contraction is pulling in the direction the arrow faces, or is it perpendicular to it?
>>7817064>Is it like contraction is pulling in the direction the arrow facesyes, each thick grey-filled arrow a simplification of one muscle, pointing in the direction the muscle pulls; the black thin arrows show which way a bone is rotated via action of the respective muscle.The numbers for muscles stay consistent throughout the whole book and often reappear, so here they are 21 - infraspinatus, 20 - teres major. I'm assuming there isn't an arrow for teres minor because it does basically the same thing as infraspinatus.What I found the best so far for studying the book was to pick a group of muscles that are explained together, draw the relevant diagram(s) myself with colors and muscle identifications, from memory if possible, correct it as needed, and then look at photos of (ideally lower bodyfat and/or muscular) references and draw just the studied-muscle-group bodyparts from those references, possibly also drawing the "muscle fiber" lines and naming the muscles. I'd say it's actually really fun because suddenly instead of having to guess at vague mysterious shapes, one can draw a few simplified bones then start explicitly laying on the muscles in simple blob shapes and end up with a relatively accurate-looking bodypart (along with a better understanding of how the bodypart functions, which will then eventually translate into working simplifications for accurately drawing it without needing to do all the muscle construction).I also feel like it could train general form understanding quite well because this entire time you're working with and drawing 3D shapes, but I don't feel confident enoguh to make a general statement like that yet haha.
>>7817064Also the muscle names can seem unnecessarily complicated at first but there's some order to the names and I think it can be useful to anchor one's understanding.Some things that have helped me so far with this:medial vs lateral = "inner side" vs "outer side"brachium = arm -> brachio... relates to parts of the arm (brachialis, coracobrachialis, biceps brachii, ...)supraspinatus vs infraspinatus - supra is on top of the shoulder blade/scapulateres minor vs major - straight up size/"importance" difference (major "more important" because minor's role is already also done by infraspinatus)there's likely many more like thisofc. a rough idea can often probably be enough for most figures so it's up to you how you use the book
>>7819644>>7819649holy shit, not them but i love you with the power of the sun. both you and these posts are absolutely amazing. thank you so much!
>>7819750Thank you anon I'm really glad the posts could help.One thing I'd forgotten to mention is that even though the book is great, there's still only so much it can cover in under 100 pages, so I personally often also google around for more resources if I feel like I'm missing some info, there's lots of great stuff online (I mostly use wikipedia, kenhub and physiopedia but that's just what I get from searching so might not be "optimal").Just be careful, on some places you can run into legit real dead person muscle dissection photos/videos (made by doctors for doctors) (even Google images has some of those and I think I saw some on YouTube that a med. school person showed me years ago but idk the details if they can just be found through search randomly or something), I personally avoid that lol.Also one thing I forgotanterior vs posterior = front vs back
>>7819750>>7819796and picrel. is an image I found very useful, anterior of left humerus (upper arm bone) muscle attachmentsthere's lots of images like these for other bones too, they're from the book Gray's Anatomy but should be present at the wikipedia pages for the respective bones
>>7819802oh wow dude, i’d never even heard of this sort of diagram, super cool. for sure i’ll google around for more, never heard of kenhub/physiopedia either. yess @ great links.(also lol at cadavers, love the alt resources we have nowadays but if i’d gone one more class into my major i would’ve gotten to work with them..)>and i’ve always thought it would be secretly amazing to see in person what i only ever try to understand from scattered illustrations. ..online rl photos kinda lack the clarity of our cleanly bookish diagrams, too, hehthanks for the even more!
>>7819861no problem anon hope you enjoy! what major were you studying? are you only refreshing your anatomy now? I thought it was course-wise a prerequisite to going and studying real cadavers but maybe I got that confused.>>online rl photos kinda lack the clarity of our cleanly bookish diagramsDefinitely agree, I find it quite hard to parse real life photos before learning the relevant anatomy.I also found this image on my computer, which seems to be from the book Human Anatomy For Artists by Xiao Weichun.
