/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3525251
idk but share that fuckin book anon-kun

why don't you try it and find out?

also this >>3525263

i googled "yoh yoshinari rough sketches pdf" and found a mega link within seconds

>>3525300
Thanks fellow redditor.

>>3525300
me too
the cover is deceitful, the pictures inside aren't even worth a free download

>>3525251
I don’t understand the hype around this guy.

>>3525311
Same, actually.
Why the hype? Sure, I've seen his work, but I feel it's nothing That impressive.

>>3525339
>>3525311
>>3525309
Would like to see what you guys think is impressive

>>3525309
really?

>>3525309
You think so? I can't help but get a boner on almost every page.

>>3525411
He's a pretty great cartoonist. Even if you don't want to do what he does specifically, there's definitely things to be learned from how he draws the figure.

>>3525251
OP here. Guess I'll go ahead and copy the entire sketchbook. I hope to become a god after doing so. Wish me luck :)

>>3525411
at least post the scans and not shitty photos

>>3525251
being really good at copying and being good at original design & stylization are fundamentally different things.
copying at it's most effective requires essentially no critical thought whatsoever, you just take shapes that already exist & mirror them as closely to 1:1 as possible. a better method is to do your own original work while referring back to the artist(s) you like to see how they solve the problems you run into in your own design. understanding why they made a particular mark is more valuable to improvement than grinding out 1000 mindless studies. this may not seem obvious as a beginner but as you get towards an intermediate level it'll become painfully apparent.

>>3525453
Wow, thanks for this post anon.
For some reason, thinking like this, something clicked for me. I appreciate the post. Thanks again!

>>3525448
phew nice trolling

>>3525251
its literally just sketches he did on spare pieces of animation paper.

but yes they are illuminating into his process

>>3525453
I Had a break through doing this recently. Stopped drawing what I saw and started drawing the actual shapes instead.

>>3525392
I think the cover is pretty good, but the inside is a lot more toon-ish than I was expecting.

nobody really cares about weebs copies, keep this in mind. nobody really cares about your crappy amateur original designs either.

What's to be done? hmm! heheh. I jest. You'll make it someday :)

>>3525481
autism

>>3525464
brainlet here, explain further

>>3525483
oh dear!!

>>3525489
Seeing the shorthand the artist uses to convey thing visually, (shapes they use, line quality, etc.) And applying that versus route copying.

Versus route copying

>>3525489
Using a mouse but bare with me. See how the artist uses OVERLAPPING CYLINDERS to convey folds in the cloth? That's pretty much the secret to line drawing right there.

Don't draw the pose, draw the shapes that make up the pose. Once you understand how to overlap and rotate the basic shapes (cube, cylinder, sphere, cone) it's easy.

>>3525542
Based anon actually helping others without disdain.

>>3525542
same brainlet here, you mean Forms?

>>3525542
Based anon I send you my kudos

>>3525449
I didn't know where to find scans. Forgive me :(

>>3525650
Shape = form. The form of a trash can is a cylinder and the form of a human being is a bunch of cubes, cylinders and sphere's all combined to make up the human form. It'll become more clear the more you practice.

>>3525650
You use 2D shapes to represent 3D forms, not him but I'm 90% sure he meant forms.

>>3525882
>>3525886
Ah yes I see now
I was confused because for me shape= flat 2D and forms=3D construct

>>3525453
I like this post :)

>>3525542
I'VE BEEN STUDYING WRONG FOR YEARS

>>3526044
you are starting to get a bit too dramatic now.

>>3526044
How the fuck can that take you years to understand when it's straight up mentioned at the start in books from Vilppu/Bridgeman/Hampton/Huston?

>>3525251
>will I obtain his powers?
Probably not. Unless you possess the same underlying level of technical knowledge about the subject matter all you'll learn is how to 1:1 copy his images, never innovate your own drawings.

If you don't know how to draw the figure as well as this artist, for example, copying his work won't teach you how to draw the figure better. Your images will still look like shit and you'll be that guy who badly copies artist "x". You still need to be studying from life in addition to studying from this artists. A better exercises I see a lot of artists do is drawing something original trying to emulate his style using cues from his work.

>>3525251
Good artists copy; great artists steal

good artist can take a van gogh and replicate everything, from color to brushstroke, and have a forgery, something people will have trouble without scientific methods to distinguish legit from fake

a great artist will learn why he did certain things, and take his technique and make it their own, so if they chose they could make a painting and pass it off as a van gogh

don't blindly copy, think of why things are they way they are.
With that said, the cover is VERY misleading, and if you want your art like what the cover is, you are better suited elsewhere. A quick look and almost everything inside is cartoony in a generic way, studying real people and mapping the shadows (largely what the cover is) will get you further, then learn the way he does his abstractions in the face, and you would probably be better off in general.

>>3526048
not him but I've been a xerox copy machine for over 4 years, how is then his comment overdramatic?

>>3526099
whoa man don't tell that to (((the anime study thread)))

>>3526107
This is also a really great post.

>>3526099
>A better exercises I see a lot of artists do is drawing something original trying to emulate his style using cues from his work.

That's what someone else basically suggested in this thread.
I guess another way to look at it is to do "fanart" but staying on model with said style, right?

>page 57
--scared the piss out of my pee pee

>>3526051
Saying “behold these five forms, they hold the secret to everything, they’re really important okay” doesn’t actually say that much. People who learned from good art schools underestimate how much of this isn’t obvious

>>3525867
dumdum

>>3525448
will OP deliver?

>>3527087
OP here again.
I rather do what >>3526107 suggested, which actually feels a lot better. It feels "right".

>>3525542
thanks, that's my attempt, it's my 2nd digital sketch and i know shit about proper drawing

>>3525251
People learn to draw by drawing their vision of a picture by their favourite artists

>>3525453
This. And also don't forget, drawing from life is just copying if you aren't thinking critically.

>>3527092
I want you to take note, of the op image, most notably the shadows, zoom in and notice the edges, about half of them you are able to see a line, treat the shadows as a contour edge, and choose a cut off level

What I mean is don't focus on getting shadows perfect, If you correctly get the shadow couture in, and lets say you on a value chart where 1 is black 10 is white and 5 is grey, you decide the cutoff point of shadow is a 3 you should be able to, from that, know where the light source is, and fill in the blanks years down the road.

Most of the time with a shadow map, especially when the person what's to share an image such as the cover, they take the mapped area and smoothly shade it in, this gives you a largely finished drawing, that can be done fast, and that looks good to a normal viewer assuming nothing is proportionally fucked.
This also has a side benefit of giving you more contours to draw and train up skill.

I wish you luck in your endeavor, do note what's inside the pdf though, it may be simplistic, but there is a sense of weight and motion that you are going to want to remember, though there are other better ways to learn it, its probably going to be easier when its from an artist you like then just doing it to grind skill.

>>3527169
did you draw that? its terrible

>>3525882
Shape =/= form, you fucking brainlet

>>3527583
can be either the shapes in a work or the 3 dimensionality of parts of a work, depending on what youre talking about. used interchangeably in art school.

>>3525542
>things you learn in the first 10 mins of studying vilppu or any actual master drawer

>>3525251
TFW when content is nothing like the cover

>>3527577
yeah i know but it was fun to try, need to draw and learn more everyday

>>3525453
>>3525457
>>3525464
>copying at it's most effective requires essentially no critical thought whatsoever
Jesus Christ, the absolute state of this board. Copying a masters work has been the backbone of traditional art education from the very start, but fuck me, better listen to /ic/, they seem to know better than any of the old Italian schools that produced the greatest draftsmen and painters to this day.

>>3527668
fuck you snake.

you're great.

>>3527668
We're not saying copying is useless. Just need a balance from copying old masters, and creating.

Copying has it's place, but it needs to be treated as that; a study. A lot of people on /ic/ forget that they need to be Also creating at the same time.

>>3527681
>We're not saying copying is useless. Just need a balance from copying old masters, and creating.
Bullshit. That's a lot different from saying "copying requires essentially no critical thought" and "you just take shapes that already exist & mirror them as closely to 1:1 as possible." Both of which are the stupidest fucking things ive ever heard.

its fucking self evident that you have to actually be present and think about what the fuck you're doing and why you're doing it, and its self evident that you actually have to apply what you've reverse engineered from the copy to original work to see how well you learned and to reinforce the entire lesson.

That's the entire point of copying someone who is better than you.
Doesnt matter if its an animator, illustrator. sculptor, painter, writer, what have you.
Thats why its called a MASTER STUDY

>>3527668
But who did the first master copy?
checkm8

>>3527689
But copying actually requires essentially no critical thought. I think you're reading too much into this, that or your reading comprehension just doesn't exists.

>>3527699
>But copying actually requires essentially no critical thought.
Look here dipshit, There's two equal aspects to copying:
-Physically making the marks
-Thinking critically to understand why the marks were made/the way they were made

Im not saying the actual, physical process requires massive amounts of thought. What im saying is, you shouldnt be focused on that, you need to be thinking about what it is youre doing and why youre doing it which is far more important and takes far more thought. Its two sides of the same coin; physically doing the copy, and trying to break down and restructure the process from the work youre copying, which is what ive been saying, and what youve been failing to understand.

Have i made it simple enough for you to get yet? Do i need to get some puppets to help further illustrate this concept for you?

> I think you're reading too much into this, that or your reading comprehension just doesn't exists.
I perfectly understand what you morons are belting out, i just disagree with it. You cant separate the two facets of a master study.

>>3527721
Please no one respond to this obvious bait.

>>3527721
tl;dr make a formula similar to the original artist and go from there how hard was that?

>>3528217
>make a formula
While that's literally the fulcrum of stylization, /ic/ continues to fail at it so pretty hard I guess.

>>3527690
OP already said it.
>Jesus Christ, the absolute state of this board.

>>3528487
IC fails because it takes actually making work and keeping that up consistently for long hours over years to become skilled at.

Any moron can say, "make a formula" thats so generic and infantile a 7 year old could come up with it. Now actually develop all the skills and innumerable visual breakdowns for everyday and fantastical objects in order to draw that way consistently and at a high level. It's way more complex than just "make a formula". If any idiot could do it easily with no effort IC would be filled with decent artists.

>>3527690
nature