>roughly intermediate >feel like my skill is stagnating >just got a real job so I can only dedicate ~1 hour a day to drawingWhat should I draw during that one hour daily to maximize my gains? I've tried copying my favorite artists daily but that got me nowhereMy goal is being able to more clearly envision things before I draw them I feel like that's holding me back the most
>>78767181 hour a day is just enough to maintain intermediate, you need to draw more
it comes to a point where you cannot copy from your favorite artists anymore, and you have to begin studying from real life, at least for me that is what it worked.
>>7876718Creating a personal project. If I only had 1 hour to fucking draw I wouldnt just do fucking homework. A part of "drawing from imagination" is actually utilizing your imagination. If the drawings come out shitty, then do research to improve on those areas. Like you got that OP pic, assuming its not just a copy, you would then examine people actually doing that pose, practice the different variations that are out their, and apply that to your original piece. If the next day you want to do some architecture for your original project, try bullshitting the vague idea in your head onto paper, and then actually analyze what you are trying to achieve, and study architecture that is similar to your goals that you put on paper, and apply that to your unique piece. And so on and so on.If you only got that one hour Id rather you focus on actually using critical thinking into doing what you actually want to do with your art and go from there. I mean if you just want like class recomendations I recommend like Karl Gnass's online life drawing classes cause he breaks it down is simple terms compared to other lectures, but you need something to apply that knowledge gained in the first placeAlso I say "original" but it can be fan work if thats what motivates you at the moment like those fan doujins
>>7876723What the fuck would I even be drawing even if I had more time, I don't know what steps to take to move to the next level>>7876727Studying real life is what got me to intermediate, once I got the fundies down and wanted to build a style I didn't know what the fuck to do so I studied the styles of the artists I aspired to, that resulted in fuck all because my "default drawing state" still results in the exact same type of drawing as before I started
>>7876730I did lots of personal projects in various styles but I feel like I didn't take away a lot from them, I'll go all in on a piece, make something much better than I thought I could do, and the next day my drawing style still defaults to my basic fundie knowledge I got after my first couple of books, I feel like I haven't moved my "skill floor" at all or developed any style quirksWhat do I do after making a shitty imagination drawing, what are the next steps that will actually result in permanent improvement instead of just a polished isolated piece that I won't learn anything from
>>7876735Well its a case by case basis depending on the drawing you shit out that day, but if you want an example from like a master, theres this practice based on Da Vinci.When Da Vinci did his studies, it wasnt just one shitty drawing he did and called it, he would study the inner workings, try drawing the same thing but different angles, have one initial shitty drawing but then blow it up to larger scale. If the subject was a human figure, have it perform a motion and study the different phases.
>>7876742Just having one of your characters lets say stretching, draw that shitty initial sketch, then do research on it either by studying from life or through tutorials, and apply it to a more in depth sketch
>>7876718>My goal is being able to more clearly envision things before I draw them I feel like that's holding me back the mostPart of drawing from imagination is burning references and skills into your brain. If you want to draw a woman in a sexy pose, you dont just imagine some random pose and freehand it, you think of other sexy poses, how you drew those, and then combine them to make a new one.One way you could do this is you could try easing away from reference. Pick an image (preferably something with varied objects or poses in it, like a large manga or comic panel. A screenshot from tv shows or movies would also be good)>Day/session 1 draw while looking at reference>Day/session2 draw it again, but you can only look at the reference once or twice, and not while drawing>Day/session 3 look at the picture once and then draw entirely from memory, no reference at all while workingOn each day overlay your drawing with the semi-transparent source (if you draw traditionally scan it with your phone and import it into krita or something) and spend a good 5-10 minutes studying it to see what you did wrong, and then correct those mistakes.>only 1 hourThat other anon is right, its pretty hard to become advanced at a skill with only one hour practice a day, even bumping it up to 2 hours a day or adding a marathon session on weekends would make a huge difference.
>>7876730>Karl GnassAre his courses available for free somewhere?
>>7877033online-courses . club still has the main one for life drawing from him
>>7876718>intermediateI'm laughing my ass off
>>7877354Post what you consider intermediate
>>7877625>>7866209
If I draw something and it sucks, but I can get it to a nice looking state by erasing, adjusting, liquefying etc, does that help me get better at drawing from imagination? If I want to be able to imagine that nice looking state in advance and then draw it from imagination right on the canvas I feel like relying on fixing the drawing after I draw it will only teach me how to fix drawings, not how to create good drawings in my head
>>7876718You are not intermediate by /ic/ standards.Go here for a rating >>7866209If you want my rating low beg but maybe int beg if you post your best work and get a lenient critic.I think you could become an /ic/ low int in 5 years if you are diligent with your practice, but as it stands your work is deffinetly rough around the edges.
>>7879480pyw
>>7879480>I think you could become an /ic/ low int in 5 yearsThe absolute state of this crab infested shithole
>>7879513>>7879517>Permabegs can't accept realityThis is not your hugbox. Your shit sucks, get better or fuck off.
>>7879531>can't phwAnon YOU are the permabegs
>>7879531Pyw or close your whore mouth with your dogshit crabbing attempts
>>7879534PMW doesn’t change the fact that OP is low beg.
>>7879549Actually it does, how can we trust a permabeg to judge another permabeg
>>7879513Ight, your turn.I am by no means int but I don't need to be one to tell this isn't int quality work.>>7879531This post is not mine btw >>7879534>>7879517Was my estimate too high or too low?
>>7879558>This post is not mine btwProve it. I think my post WAS legitimate and YOU’RE the imposter!
>>7879564How do you want me to prove it?Writing style analysis?
>>7879567Yes. Or you can hack the backdoor IP sniffer tool to the root protocol. Whichever is easier for you.
> can only dedicate ~1 hour a day to drawingI doesn't matter. At that rate your'e just a hobbyist. Draw whatever you want
>>7879480>low beg, int begCan we stop with this shit? This is retarded. Do people not know what the word BEGINNER means? It means someone literally just started. THAT'S IT.Why does everyone here have a hard on to call others beginners? If you've been drawing performance-minded for over a year (which OP CLEARLY has), you are by definition NOT a beginner any more. Feel free to come up with a different term. I don't care.I reject these dumb made-up roles.
>>7881383all my this. been here ages and kept wondering what was up with the extremely harsh critique on anons levels recently even for /ic/, >begs are beg, ints are beg, the best of the best might earn a grudging high int, but probably will be called at most mid int, etcthen i read this chartso this is what you were all thinking of when you did this. so weird. i agree with this anon, as a native english speaker, using a really common word like beginner and assigning it another set of meanings that usually belong to a closely related words is pretty headache-inducing. we need some new terms is all, or to bring back the originally worded level interpretation, if you really need to assign these.i see why someone tried to assign so mamy levels to “beg,” it’s probably because they needed to artificially break all the levels into maybe nine or ten gradating levels, and tried to do it with the already used words “beg, int, adv”, but it’s not working. there’s a disjoint in meanings vs. titles.in the original assigning,low/mid/high beg was for actual beginners, like maybe after a year or so you could be moved to low int, then low/mid/high int was like the quality you typically see on the drawpile boards.low/mid/high adv meant w/e’s better than that,maybe master being the top guys, like working industry guys, and some crazy scattering of great artists who post to art platforms, with pro being either a separate add-on anywhere to mean you’re marketing your work privately, or it could mean working in the art industry. you could even have low/int/adv pro if there’s really a need to label things. this is basically what was meant by these terms on ic a few years ago, and it intuitively made sense to me, at least. hope these come back.
I would come home from a long night of tossing boxes around, smoke a bowlful of inspiration, and draw stuff for the hour I had before chores and bed beckoned. Each of these videos represent such results of that, and I had planned on dragging the strips into Photoshop to color and tweak. But...life intervened. https://youtu.be/s8d8CmhEe-A?si=G5lrZGsV9D04VKaohttps://youtu.be/UoTBkDRWCSw?si=IpA8IIs4nlLl498_https://youtu.be/D2gEr0dIf1k?si=XbYlcyeIg8ddSGf4
>>7881383>>7881410The term "beginner" used to describe a low skill level is perfectly apropos. The term "novice" is used the same way and its exact most literal meaning is also "new". You're being far too literal minded. Would you call Chris Chan an intermediate or journeyman just because he's been drawing for 20 or 30 years? Of course not. The issue is not the rating system. The issue isn't there being a subdivision of the three major skill levels, all that does is allow one to more accurately gauge skill level, because naturally not all people that fall under a certain category are of the same skill level. I don't think that the rating system shown in the image is perfect- frankly I don't see the point of making a distinction between /pro/ and /adv/ based on whether it's marketable or the artist has a job, that doesn't really make any sense. In that case Irshad Karim is /pro/ since he's technically competent enough to land a job, even though he's *really* bad when illustrating anything that's not object or environment design.The real issues are crab mentality, and/or beginners that lack the knowledge and understanding to accurately analyze an art piece critically. I guess you could call that the Dunning Kruger effect. Then, of course, if they aren't malicious or ignorant, there is still good old fashioned stupidity to round things out.OP gauged theirself correctly, they are of intermediate skill. You can tell that this is someone who has learned construction on an intuitive level to the point that they can freehand the contour of an object or figure and have it still feel three dimensional. Not to mention that the sketch feels confident and natural. Someone in the /beg/ category can't really do that. That isn't to say there aren't mistakes, glaring ones even, but these are mistakes borne of someone flying by the seat of their pants, not from someone trying very hard and being very meticulous and failing anyways due to a lack of knowledge and skill.
>>7881955aye, that I can agree with.
>>7881955i agree with everything you said, sorry, i guess i articulated too incompletely and slapdash what i meant, >like when i tossed out the random timeframe of something like a year or so for moving from ‘beg,’ termed as it used to mean, btw, thinking a random typical example of some sort might help explain what i meant.i know the actual arbitrarily changing rates of improvement would be totally unique to every person, sorry if it sounded otherwisealso i must’ve really written my tldr poorly because i considered the breaking up into 9,10 lvl of gradation the prerequisite structure for completeness that the chart maker was going for, not that this was a bad idea. the only thing i was really tldr’ing about and wishing to the ether would go back to how it was first used was the confusing termage, to me personally, not the contents of the gradated brackets, which was just fine. it’s all good really, just someone finally voiced something that’s been bothering me for a while so i articulated a ‘same.’ phew, i should never ic post, i really don’t have enough time and it kind of sucks you in to unimportant things and you don’t get things done. any case, yes you’re entirely right and i def agree op’s int, and their works rly cool. haha thank you for bothering to reply to my random text wall anyway just now.
>>7881955Another issue arises because it seems there's no clearly defined consensus on what the fundamentals are, and even when there is agreement on a named fundamental skill there's no consensus for how it's defined.Let's take construction, for example. Everyone agrees there is a thing called construction. But ask people to define it and you will get some wildly different answers. I, for example, would define Kim Jung Gi freehanding figures in space as construction, just so highly advanced that he's building the full-detail forms outright from the start rather than going through an iterative process of starting with simpler volumes that are easier to calculate and foreshorten in perspective as guides and then drawing the complete form on top. Others have argued with me very vehemently otherwise, because to them, construction is that thing that you do with the Loomis. I define it as a fundamental way that you interact with the canvas. Others define it as the system of guidelines. Then of course there's gesture. Going by the amount of threads on the subject, nobody apparently knows what the fuck that even is except I dunno you like sketch a figure with swoopy swoosh lines real fast and feel the form or some shit I guess.
>>7881883This is fantastic, very cool i finally got to see you work live. thanks so much for showing these.
>>7876718>My goal is being able to more clearly envision things before I draw them I feel like that's holding me back the mostThis is the most fundamental issue in illustration and has confounded, and continues to confound, millions of people far more intelligent than you. Their solution was to create tools which will help you get to a "goal," use them, you won't find a better way by brute forcing it in your head. What you should be focusing on, is drawing what you want to draw based on references, fixing issues through trial and error, referencing your resources, and incorporating individual stylistic choice as to not be *too* derivative (it will always be varying degrees of derivative regardless of what you do). I'm not trying to be too much of an asshole, but I can tell from what you posted that you draw the same subjects over and over and likely do not incorporate background nor do any illustration beyond what are essentially pinups. If thats what you wish to draw, fine, but atleast try incorporating single point perspective, basic furniture/3d objects, etc, to your subjects, and FINISH A FUCKING DRAWING FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.open your eyes, its everywhere and it's far more beautiful than whats in your head.
