Uncomfortable

Joined 4 years ago

581725 Reputation

uncomfortable's Sketchbook

  • Sharing the Knowledge
    3 users agree
    7:00 PM, Sunday September 24th 2023

    I suppose the big question to start with is, have you been holding to the 50% rule from Lesson 0? If not, that's a good place to start.

    0 users agree
    9:51 PM, Thursday September 21st 2023

    I've got good news, and I've got bad news. The good news is that you've done an amazing job, and the bad news is that I can't actually see anything worth calling out as criticism, so I'm instead going to go over exactly why you did such a great job, and formally acknowledge the specific nails you're hitting so squarely on the head.

    Starting with your form intersections, you're clearly demonstrating a strong awareness of how the intersections between these forms occurs not between the overall forms, but rather between individual pairs of surfaces. This relates to how a sphere is composed of three individual faces - the flat ends, and the length portion which is curved in one dimension and straight in the other. This is often what leads to all of the confusion relating to how forms intersect with one another, and you're clearly showing a strong grasp of how it works.

    Continuing onto your object constructions, you've similarly grabbed the core focus of the lesson and run with it. This lesson is all about the concept of precision, and how we can approach our work and break up the process to increase that precision. Precision is often conflated with accuracy, but they're actually two different things (at least insofar as I use the terms here). Where accuracy speaks to how close you were to executing the mark you intended to, precision actually has nothing to do with putting the mark down on the page. It's about the steps you take beforehand to declare those intentions.

    So for example, if we look at the ghosting method, when going through the planning phase of a straight line, we can place a start/end point down. This increases the precision of our drawing, by declaring what we intend to do. From there the mark may miss those points, or it may nail them, it may overshoot, or whatever else - but prior to any of that, we have declared our intent, explaining our thought process, and in so doing, ensuring that we ourselves are acting on that clearly defined intent, rather than just putting marks down and then figuring things out as we go.

    In our constructions here, we build up precision primarily through the use of the subdivisions. These allow us to meaningfully study the proportions of our intended object in two dimensions with an orthographic study, then apply those same proportions to the object in three dimensions.

    Your use of orthographic plans clearly demonstrates that you understand the value this tool can provide, and that you can leverage it to great effect. I'm especially pleased to see things like where in the cutting board, you only added additional levels of subdivision where it was required, and avoided building up clutter where it did not really serve a purpose.

    The last bit I wanted to credit you for is just the sheer amount of patience and care you've demonstrated throughout the process of your constructions. These are not quick things, and even though you clearly know what you're doing, it still demands a great investment of time. It is not at all uncommon for students to find situations like this to be especially difficult - where they know what they're doing, and so it may feel almost superficial to then go on to put the time into the work to demonstrate it. But it does matter, and the fact that you were wholly willing to do so speaks to your discipline, which will serve you extremely well in the future.

    So with that, I'll go ahead and mark this challenge as complete. Keep up the great work!

    Next Steps:

    Feel free to move onto the 25 wheel challenge, which is a prerequisite for Lesson 7.

    This critique marks this lesson as complete.
    0 users agree
    8:58 PM, Thursday September 21st 2023

    Starting with your form intersections, overall you're making good headway. There are some issues, but it is not by any means strange to still have things to iron out with this exercise. It's one of those that continually grows with us throughout the course, so it does make a last appearance in Lesson 7.

    I've made some notes on your work here. There are two main points to keep in mind here:

    • Most significantly, when considering how two forms will intersect, it helps to specifically identify which pairs of surfaces are intersecting with one another and where. While it's these two forms intersecting, it's the nature of the surfaces themselves that determine the path the intersection will follow. Some forms are made up of only one surface - like spheres, which consist of a single curved surface. Other forms may contain several surfaces, like boxes which are made up of six flat surfaces. You've also got forms that may consist of multiple surfaces of different kinds, like cylinders and cones which feature both flat surfaces and curved ones. Making it even more complicated, the lengthwise surface of cones and cylinders are actually only curved in one direction - they're straight in the direction from one end to the other, meaning that the actual direction in which we're intersecting with it matters. So rather than looking at the forms to determine the kinds of intersections we're looking at, we have to look at the forms themselves, and the way in which they're cutting into one another. This can help to avoid issues like what we see in that bottom-right cone, where you default to using curves for the intersection with the box above it. Instead, the portion of the intersection involving one of the box's faces intersecting with the base of the cone should be a straight line, and the portion intersecting with the length of the cone should curve but only very slightly, as it's still mostly moving along the length of the cone, leaning more into the flatter aspect of the surface.

    • The above is pretty long and likely hard to consume, so this diagram which demonstrates how we can look at those different surfaces, as well as how our intersections might change as the surfaces themselves do, may help to better understand.

    • The second point is somewhat simpler - when deciding which planes to focus on, make sure they aren't the ones pointing away from the viewer. I noticed in some cases, like the box-box intersection towards the upper right, it appeared as though you may have been thinking about the intersection from the opposite side.

    Continuing onto your object constructions, overall you're moving in the right direction here with many of your constructions coming out fairly decently, although there are a few critical points I want to make sure you understand - the biggest of those being to do with how we use the orthographic plans, as currently you aren't really employing them as instructed in the lesson.

    I'm going to work under the assumption that you did not read through those notes or go through that demo (since your own approach differs quite significantly from it). Instead of reiterating it here, I'll ask that before you continue reading through this feedback, you read through what's stated and demonstrated there.

    Ultimately as explained in those notes, the orthographic plans serve the purpose of allowing us to make clear and specific decisions on how the different aspects of our constructions relate to one another - mostly in terms of relative proportions, how big one section should be relative to another. We want to make those decisions two dimensions at a time (so as to avoid the additional complexity of worrying about the third dimension), and using techniques and tools that allow us to transfer that information into the third dimension once it's all been pinned down.

    Your orthographic plans don't really assist in this, because as we can see here in this spray bottle, you haven't actually made any decisions. You've simply drawn the object in a simplified form, floating in a space, but without leveraging any of the subdivision techniques that would allow you to decide on the sizes and proportions, and then transfer them to a three dimensional construction. As such, the resulting three dimensional construction suffers from inconsistencies as we see here. Due to the lack of appropriate planning, you ended up trying to make way too many decisions at once here, and ended up with inconsistencies like the back edge slanting inwards when you likely intended for it to be aligned to the vertical edge. I also noticed that the point at which that edge touches the ground is further from the side plane than the corresponding edge along the front is (which is why I drew the forward blue rectangle larger. In general, there are a lot of little things here that build up into more and more issues:

    • Not applying the orthographic plan means having to make more decisions while you're constructing your 3D structure.

    • The bounding box itself has issues, as we can see here. You may want to shift your warmup routine around so you can spend more time on exercises like the freely rotated boxes with line extensions introduced in the 250 box challenge.

    • While you've definitely made much better use of subdivision in other constructions, like the mouse demo drawing, this plug adapter, and so forth, for this spray bottle you relied much more on just eyeballing things without going into the specificity and precision that subdivisions provide.

    Precision is often conflated with accuracy, but they're actually two different things (at least insofar as I use the terms here). Where accuracy speaks to how close you were to executing the mark you intended to, precision actually has nothing to do with putting the mark down on the page. It's about the steps you take beforehand to declare those intentions.

    So for example, if we look at the ghosting method, when going through the planning phase of a straight line, we can place a start/end point down. This increases the precision of our drawing, by declaring what we intend to do. From there the mark may miss those points, or it may nail them, it may overshoot, or whatever else - but prior to any of that, we have declared our intent, explaining our thought process, and in so doing, ensuring that we ourselves are acting on that clearly defined intent, rather than just putting marks down and then figuring things out as we go.

    In our constructions here, we build up precision primarily through the use of the subdivisions. These allow us to meaningfully study the proportions of our intended object in two dimensions with an orthographic study, then apply those same proportions to the object in three dimensions.

    This is no doubt very time consuming - you're basically building a blueprint for your object and then going back through all of the steps in three dimension - but that is what this lesson demands. Before I can mark this lesson as complete, I will need to see more examples of you leveraging this more fully - both in terms of establishing those orthographic plans properly, and in terms of taking as much time as you require to build up your constructions without skipping any steps or estimating any relationships by eye.

    Next Steps:

    Please submit 4 additional pages of object constructions. Don't skip any steps - with every mark you wish to put down, ask yourself how you came to that decision. If it was on the basis of estimation, eyeballing, guessing, etc. where an intermediary step would have allowed you to be more specific and precise, take a step back and reassess your approach.

    When finished, reply to this critique with your revisions.
    0 users agree
    4:43 PM, Wednesday September 20th 2023

    One thing to keep in mind is that there are two things that will change the rate of convergence of an object's lines.

    • There's its orientation - as the form rotates, some of its sets of parallel edges shift more towards running parallel to the viewer's angle of sight, so those vanishing point slides closer to the center of the picture frame, and some of its sets of parallel edges rotate more towards running perpendicular to that angle of sight, so their vanishing points slide further and further away until they reach infinity.

    • And there's the overall rate of foreshortening, which applies to all of these sets of edges equally.

    If you're trying to shift the overall foreshortening, you'll be bringing all the vanishing points closer, or pushing them all further away. If you're only doing it to one or two sets of parallel edges, you'll be rotating the form instead.

    0 users agree
    4:39 PM, Wednesday September 20th 2023

    The process you describe as applying shadows based on how you think the shadows would be cast in the end is correct. This isn't working from "imagination" in that it still requires you to understand the nature of the forms that are present and casting those shadows (which is explained in this section of reminders).

    If you find that they come out looking like lines, then it's likely that you're not drawing them as shapes first - which means outlining the shadow shape itself first (so you can purposely design the shadow shape based on the relationship between the form casting it and the surface receiving it), then filling it in. You'll see this demonstrated in this video from Lesson 0, specifically in the section discussing brush pens. If you try to "paint" the shadows on stroke by stroke, they're more likely to read as lines.

    2 users agree
    11:27 PM, Friday September 15th 2023

    There is nothing wrong with using an art glove. If you feel it is beneficial in some way (for example, some students with sensory issues find it helps alleviate the discomfort of their hand rubbing against the page), then feel free to use it.

    0 users agree
    11:26 PM, Friday September 15th 2023

    No worries- I've removed it for you, along with this post. Right now students can't delete things themselves (just to avoid the potential issue of people posting offensive or otherwise rule breaking content and then deleting it before we can catch it, as we receive a lot of spam). Whether you ask to have it removed, or leave it where it is, it's all fine.

    6:39 PM, Friday September 15th 2023

    If you look at the mechanics of what exactly a wobble is - a distinct change in trajectory - you'll find that by definition any wobbling will generally suggest that the mark is not being made as confidently as it could. This is of course normal as it takes a great deal for students to shift from needing to consciously control and steer their strokes as they draw them, to trusting in the planning and preparation they performed in previous stages of the ghosting method, but it is still important for your gradual addressing of the issue through practice that you keep this in mind: wobbling goes hand in hand with hesitation.

    Keep pushing yourself to apply the ghosting method in its entirety to all of your freehanded marks, namely by ensuring that when your pen touches the page, you're not giving yourself any opportunity to steer it, but rather pushing through with the motion you'd already prepared (even though that may result in you making mistakes in regards to the stroke's accuracy).

    12:52 AM, Friday September 15th 2023

    Unfortunately while we allow those students who have already completed the box challenge to submit what they've already complete along with 50 additional boxes done after getting lesson 1 marked as complete, we still do require that the student submit a minimum of 250 boxes to show that at minimum they have done the required work.

    If you're unable to find the box challenge work you already complete, there's no way around having to redo it.

    Edit: I checked your submission history, and it looks like the links to your previous attempt are still there. I'd download those pages off Imgur though to ensure you'll still have them once you've completed the additional 50.

    0 users agree
    8:50 PM, Thursday September 14th 2023

    Starting with your cylinders around arbitrary minor axes, overall you're doing well. Your linework is fairly confident, although I do see signs that you may not be as consistent in applying all the aspects of the ghosting method as you could be. Your results are still coming along fairly well, in terms of straight lines being straight and avoiding wobbling, but I do want to impress upon you the importance of following all the instructions to the letter while going through this course. The goal always comes down to influencing and rewiring the natural way in which we do things when not thinking consciously about it, so that when we draw our own things we can focus our cognitive resources on what it is we wish to draw, less so how we go about executing each individual mark. In order to achieve that however, we have to be especially intentional here.

    Just to be clear, you're mostly doing fine - just make sure you always plot those start/end points where applicable, or otherwise take that moment to consider the specific nature of the mark you wish to make, so you continue to get the most out of the process.

    When it comes to the cylinders themselves, you've done a good job of being fastidious with checking your minor axis alignments, catching both significant and minor issues. With the minor issues that can be a significant source of stagnation as one enters the "good enough" territory, so it's good that you're still very mindful of catching those little mistakes.

    Continuing onto the cylinders in boxes, all in all your work here is coming along well, in terms of following the instructions. This exercise is really all about helping develop students' understanding of how to construct boxes which feature two opposite faces which are proportionally square, regardless of how the form is oriented in space. We do this not by memorizing every possible configuration, but rather by continuing to develop your subconscious understanding of space through repetition, and through analysis (by way of the line extensions).

    Where the box challenge's line extensions helped to develop a stronger sense of how to achieve more consistent convergences in our lines, here we add three more lines for each ellipse: the minor axis, and the two contact point lines. In checking how far off these are from converging towards the box's own vanishing points, we can see how far off we were from having the ellipse represent a circle in 3D space, and in turn how far off we were from having the plane that encloses it from representing a square.

    The one thing I wanted to call out is to make sure that you're always striving to have your ellipses touch all 4 edges of the plane that encloses them. This will ensure that the line extensions we derive from the ellipses are essentially describing the plane's proportions, allowing us to glean useful information. If we approach them as done in cylinder 196 on this page, or on 211, 213, and 214 here, the ellipse doesn't end up telling us anything useful about the proportions of the overall box.

    I suspect this is something you were paying attention to earlier on, but that you may have lost track of later, resulting in it coming up more frequently in your work.

    So! Keep an eye on that, but I'll go ahead and mark this challenge as complete.

    Next Steps:

    Feel free to move onto Lesson 6.

    This critique marks this lesson as complete.
The recommendation below is an advertisement. Most of the links here are part of Amazon's affiliate program (unless otherwise stated), which helps support this website. It's also more than that - it's a hand-picked recommendation of something I've used myself. If you're interested, here is a full list.
Ellipse Master Template

Ellipse Master Template

This recommendation is really just for those of you who've reached lesson 6 and onwards.

I haven't found the actual brand you buy to matter much, so you may want to shop around. This one is a "master" template, which will give you a broad range of ellipse degrees and sizes (this one ranges between 0.25 inches and 1.5 inches), and is a good place to start. You may end up finding that this range limits the kinds of ellipses you draw, forcing you to work within those bounds, but it may still be worth it as full sets of ellipse guides can run you quite a bit more, simply due to the sizes and degrees that need to be covered.

No matter which brand of ellipse guide you decide to pick up, make sure they have little markings for the minor axes.

This website uses cookies. You can read more about what we do with them, read our privacy policy.