For those of you who scour the online japanese drawing world, is it true that a lot of them learn to do construction in their minds without ever really applying it on paper like the Loomis method?
Not really, it's more like a lot of the same information filters down culturally through different avenues. This is probably going to come as a shock to everyone on this board, but Loomis didn't invent construction and Bridgeman didn't invent perspective.
>>7996182where did her shoulder go?>>7996199this nigga is crazy, ready the stake
>>7996182Not really. I watch lots of Japanese YouTube art videos and one thing they all have in common is nailing down forms (from multiple angles) before they move on to values/light and shadow/color.It's something of a lost art when it comes to learning how to draw in America. Traditionally, things are supposed to go like this:>line --> shape ---> form ---> gesture ---> values/light and shadow ---> ink---> color and paint>copying manga art>studying cuboid/spherical/rectangular forms from lifeInstead, far too many artists are encouraged to skip ahead to rendering and painting despite having poor construction skills, a middling visual library, and a lack of experience with drawing simple forms from various angles.If you want to draw like the Japanese, you have to take the time to learn in the right order.
>>7996199Well what are they doing if they're not doing the Loomis ball and planes?
>>7996182I've never seen a japanese do construction.
>>7996182The pros obviously skip it. Based on watching manben.
>>7996182I don't know. Sometimes they show a video of their process but those are boring to me
>>7996244>>7996341They always draw a line -> undo x100 ad nauseam
>>7996205retarded post, pyw
>>7996182for japanese artists, you can actually see the ghosted lines in their drawings, its usually very simple lines to define the scaffolding, like a sphere for the head then some light gestural lines and then they fill in the resti see the over the top construction bammes level stuff more from koreans
