Is this a good book for learning how to draw accurately?
>>8064871has too much rambling, just use the workbook version
It's more of a quick overview that teaches you to think of drawing as a series of applied techniques rather than some magical thing you need to somehow conjure from within yourself. I wouldn't look at it as a comprehensive how to draw course, but it is a good confidence booster you can easily complete.I also agree that the workbook version is probably the better option
>>8064888>>8064893Theres a workbook version?
>>8064895Yes
No. It tries to explain basic concepts but it does so badly. For accuracy and how to think about it, look up Dorian Iten's accuracy course on billibilli, and get the Bargue book. Do the plates.
>>8064871No. It doesn't really teach anything, and the before/after images of people who have gone through the book are largely very dishonest. All of the big "improvements" are from people who attempted a line drawing and failed spectacularly, then did much better with a value drawing. The latter is so much simpler and easier that they would obviously get far better results even if they learned absolutely nothing from the book.
I actually did the book and it was great, anon. I did keys to drawing afterwards and it wasnt nearly as good. People get filtered by the neuroscience being wrong, but the meat of the book is very well done. Everyone saying no never did it
>>8064871omg ive copied that leonardo face!one of my favorite 'homework" drawings
>>8064871Helped me years ago in 2017Might revisit it, I think i may have missed the last couple of lessons before I jumped to loomis
