SUBMIT IN THE NEXT
SUBMIT IN THE NEXT
SUBMIT IN THE NEXT

Lesson 5 - i’m confused. why do we simplify the pelvis the way we do when pretty much all quadrupeds have their pelvis angled along the flow of the spine (photos in the description)

3:23 PM, Wednesday May 4th 2022
1 users agree
3:47 PM, Wednesday May 4th 2022

It comes down to the simple fact that we are not concerned with anything we cannot see. In a traditional animal drawing course, you'd certainly break things down into their major anatomical components - skeleton, then musculature, etc. But this course is not concerned with distinguishing between animals, and, say, a tree. Or a desk. Or a car.

How we generally approach starting them differs a little but it's all focused on capturing what we see in front of us. Focusing on specific masses and structures without guessing at what's underneath.

At the end of the day, we are merely using the focus of each lesson as a new lens through which to look at the same problem - how do we break down what we see into simple pieces, how do we understand their relationships in 3D space, and how do we rebuild them on the page.

Furthermore, we're also not caught up in reproducing that reference perfectly. We observe it as closely as we can, but it's less about reproducing the image before us, but rather about using it as a source of information for each new piece we pull from it and add to our construction.

We'll make mistakes - something will be too big or too small, too short or too long, and that's fine. The focus comes down to how those forms are fitted together, how they intersect or wrap around one another, and so on. We do want to make sure we spend ample time observing our reference, carefully and frequently, and that in and of itself takes a great deal of time - but it is only towards the interest of using accurate pieces as we build up and solve the puzzle before us.

4:43 PM, Wednesday May 4th 2022
edited at 4:50 PM, May 4th 2022

awesome tysm for the detailed answer. that definitely cleared things up for me and i guess it also answered my other question regarding proportions. i’ll try to focus on how the masses connect to each other and sit in 3d space rather than trying to reproduce the references accurately

edited at 4:50 PM, May 4th 2022
4:54 PM, Wednesday May 4th 2022

i quoted your answer to the same question in the comments on reddit since it seemed as if other people were interested as well. hope that’s okay

2:26 AM, Thursday May 5th 2022

Yup! I did notice, and yes, it's perfectly fine.

8:14 AM, Saturday May 7th 2022

i don't mean to be a smart ass but in the white pelican demo you write: "It is entirely necessary however for us to understand what is going on underneath the skin (...) this information will prove to be very valuable in pushing the believability of your drawings in the most unexpected of ways."

is this just due to it being an older demo? if so it might be helpful to clarify that when you're doing the overhaul of the later lessons

View more comments in this thread
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.
How to Draw by Scott Robertson

How to Draw by Scott Robertson

When it comes to technical drawing, there's no one better than Scott Robertson. I regularly use this book as a reference when eyeballing my perspective just won't cut it anymore. Need to figure out exactly how to rotate an object in 3D space? How to project a shape in perspective? Look no further.

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