Comments on: Structure of Man

Structure of Man

DU — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:21:30 -0800

Single....err....232bleLinkYouTubeFilter Set of videos made by a user to teach drawing of the human form from head to toe without reference to a model. Very raw and unpolished, but an incredible (and, incredibly, free) resource. Also in blog form.

By: DU

DU — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:46:49 -0800

Also sold as a DVD set and vpopular if the recommendations are to be believed. I'm still not really clear if the poster is the same as the guy in the video or if these are a copyright violation, but since the blog and videos have been up for months, I assume they're OK.

By: substrate

substrate — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:50:33 -0800

This is interesting, I don't have time to watch it right now but I'll definitely watch a few episodes.

By: Brandon Blatcher

Brandon Blatcher — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:56:30 -0800

Set of videos made by a user to teach drawing of the human form from head to toe without reference to a model. Because yes, you shouldn't have to look at the human body to be able to draw it!!

By: brundlefly

brundlefly — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:05:05 -0800

Because yes, you shouldn't have to look at the human body to be able to draw it!! Er... correct? Sounds convenient to me. One doesn't always have a model around.

By: DU

DU — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:12:45 -0800

I should point out that the first video proper takes a while to get going. He doesn't seem to have thought out how he wants to say things (or maybe I'm exceptionally slow to pick it up) because I didn't get why he was doing what he was doing until about the 13:00 mark.

By: Richard Daly

Richard Daly — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:13:54 -0800

Ideally, you'd be able to do both, right? Draw with and without a model. The same way you should be able to read by recognition (faster, more convenient) but be able to resort to phonics (examination of a model) for words you've never seen before.

By: Brandon Blatcher

Brandon Blatcher — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:16:32 -0800

Er... correct? Sounds convenient to me. Eh, didn't seem like anything that couldn't be gotten from a book. Might help those who process information differently though. And of course, this assumes you know how to draw.

By: DU

DU — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:17:51 -0800

And of course, this assumes you know how to draw. If by "draw" you mean "drag a pen or pencil on a piece of paper to make a mark" this is true. Otherwise: false.

By: empath

empath — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:18:35 -0800

Brandon: Is that a clever parody of pointless, illogical contrarianism or the real deal?

By: Brandon Blatcher

Brandon Blatcher — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:21:52 -0800

Both

By: cortex

cortex — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:25:52 -0800

On of the funny things about drawing is that you have to learn to do it by, you know, doing it. This seems like it could be handy.

By: Brandon Blatcher

Brandon Blatcher — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:31:41 -0800

Actually, apologies for the attitude. Not trying to be be an ass, but just making a point. Namely, in order to draw, you should be drawing what you see, not drawing what someone else has drawn.

By: DU

DU — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:34:07 -0800

Did you even follow the link? The instructor is advocating neither drawing what you see nor drawing what someone else has drawn.

By: jeffamaphone

jeffamaphone — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:04:56 -0800

It's pretty cool. There are some things you pick up from watching other people draw that you can't get from a book, such as how to hold the pencil to draw different types of lines, etc. Plus it's much easier to follow along at home. There are different types of drawing as well. My drawing class had us draw different still-lifes to get practice in, which is where you want to draw what you see. But we would also draw things out of our head. Furthermore, even if you are drawing an actual person, the stuff he's showing you is applicable, since we all have the same basic skull structure and similar proportions. Once you master the stuff he's showing you, you can easily adapt it to draw actual subjects. It's just a framework.

By: xtian

xtian — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:18:55 -0800

Check out Dave Stevens. He's known to have said his drawings come from his head--what he's after is not real. I'd live in his imaginary world. hahah

By: empath

empath — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:44:57 -0800

hello NSFW drawings there, xtian..

By: Trochanter

Trochanter — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 13:08:30 -0800

Re: Dave Stevens-- He may create these out of his head, but you can bet your axe he's studied and studied and studied and done a million that oh no he DINT do out of his head.

By: Falconetti

Falconetti — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 13:53:42 -0800

I actually read a really big book on drawing and learned everything there is to know. I can draw the sinuous curves of a female bent over a water bucket, the grand spread of the eagle's wings as it descends on its prey, the terrifying geometries of a modern metropolis, and the intricate branchings of an oak tree. I haven't actually drawn any of it yet, but like all knowledge, it is in my head from the book, so I am sure I can.

By: NationalKato

NationalKato — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:15:23 -0800

Namely, in order to draw, you should be drawing what you see, not drawing what someone else has drawn. posted by Brandon Blatcher If I'd followed this advice as a youth, I'd never have had the pleasure of drawing superheroes, spaceships, gigantic stick figure army battles, alien invaders, Pushead sketches, etc.

By: Navelgazer

Navelgazer — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:47:08 -0800

This is unbelievably helpful for getting common proportions down and whatnot. Very good link.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 23:40:27 -0800

One doesn't always have a model around. One doesn't? Sucks to be you, mate. Me, I've always got a model around. Comes in handy for reaching things off the top shelf.