Stuck

[Synista]

I've finally decided I should sketch and draw more often. I'm reading this book, and I'm stuck.

http://www.accad.ohio-state.edu/~cbe...IGURE_draw.pdf


It's on page 23, it's called THE FLAT DIAGRAM. The author recommends I do something, but I have no idea. o_O It has something to do with diagonals etc.

Can anyone help me out? Thanks.


Here, I managed to make a JPG of the page in question:

http://www.fox302.com/userdata/Synis...sc/asdf023.jpg

[Elwell]

Are you talking about the two figures on the lower left? Loomis is showing how to use diagonals to place the horizontal divisions so that they are in proper prospective. You can then use that 2x8 grid to map out the basic outline of the body, as shown on the rest of the page.

[Synista]

Yeah, the two bottom left pictures. I don't get it.

Is it only for proportions? Because I don't have trouble with proportions. Perspective on the other hand....

What are the diagonals for?


Is it supposed to be something like this?



I don't see the whole point of making the diagonals, nor do I see how the picture in the far bottom left is linked to the one on its right.

You'll see more of me here too... :o

[Elwell]

The diagonals are used to construct the boxes so that thier proportions remain consistent with the perpective that they are in. If you simply divided the vertical measure into equal spaces you wouldn't get the proper recession, and trying to do it by eye would defeat the purpose of having an accurate grid to refer the figure to.

The two figures show two different ways of going about this. In the first one, you establish the proportions of the bottom row, snap the diagonal, and use where it intersects with the vertical line to draw your next row. Repeat until you have eight rows.

In the second method, you first establish the overall proportions of your box, then use diagonals to break it down into smaller and smaller boxes untill you have a 2x8 grid.

[Synista]

Call me stupid, but I seriously don't get it. :ranting: It's frustrating, kinda like learning 3dsmax. :mumble:

Why can't I make the 2x8 grid right away, like he did in the upper left picture?

Is the upper left picture laid down so it becomes the bottom left one?





I really hate feeling like this, when I don't get it at all. I just feel like punching into something or biting into something really hard. :mad: You probably explained it nicely too.... AARGH

[Elwell]

The upper left picture is the outline of the figure laid onto a simple grid with no perspective distortions. He's showing how you can use that as a guide if you have to draw a figure in a foreshortened situation by first drawing that grid in perspective and then laying the figure outline over it. The stuff with the diagonals is how you get the grid into perspective in the first place.

Get it?

[Synista]

lol, I'm halfway there. I still don't see the point of putting diagonals in there. :bash: I can make the 2x8 grid without diagonals and fit a figure in there.


feeb helped me out:

http://mikespencil.com/temp/funwithboxes.jpg

I'm at 65% of understanding...

[Elwell]

Don't get too hung up on it as long as you understand the basic principle. The stuff with the diagonals is really basic perspective. Doing it that way ensures that those weird, stretched out trapezoids you're drawing are "really" squares. Any perpective book can explain it far better than I can. Loomis has a good section on perpective in Successful Drawing which you can probably also find on the net.

[Elwell]

Originally posted by Synista
feeb helped me out:

http://mikespencil.com/temp/funwithboxes.jpg

I'm at 65% of understanding...

As usual, pictures trump words!

(And stop editing your posts while I'm replying!)

[tbone28]

I agree with Elwell, don't get hung up. You are not going to be drawing boring frontal views of people all the time and the box is only there to get you to see at what points of the human body are segmented from. This way you know that the nippl3 is 1 head down. Look for the spacial qualities. I can bet you that professional artists seldom construct their figures using such methods. Further into the book you got that from you will find Loomis doesn't either.

Drawing is more about seeing. One of my favorite artists is awesome at constructing the figure. I am studying him right now like a dog. I have learned soooooo much.

Alan Tew is awesome. I really don't mean to praise him so much. It is just that what I am going for in my art is exactly the kind of form alan has. So I get excited. Once I learn what I am going for I will move on to learning other things.

[Synista]

Yeah. I consider myself average, I don't have problems with proportion or whatever, just forthshortening and perspective. I didn't think it was a big deal but he did stress to do that part, and I didn't know what he was talking about, nor do I know right now. :p

[Mike Frank]

You made me notice that I sort of brushed over this too but its really simple. The only real point of doing any of this in the first place is so that you can create even distances in perspective. If you want to say that one division is equal to 5 feet and you divide it in this manner, than every division is equal to 5 feet.


I made a pic that should pretty much explain this to you. Iff you want a diagram to the other method let me know.

[Synista]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH I get it now. So if I were to make a rectange in perspective and needed to divide it in 8, I do it like that. It's kinda easier starting with the big rectangle and divide it afterwards than build one square by one.



Thanks, I'll practice that a little then move on.

[rktoons]

I've also created a step-by-step breakdown of page 30 of Andrew Loomis's Figure Drawing For All It's Worth here:

http://kreatedbykrause.blogspot.com/...rampart-i.html