Congrats on finishing the 250 cylinder challenge! I'll do my best to give you useful feedback so that you can improve.
Starting with the cylinders around an arbitrary axis, for the most part you've done the challenge somewhat correctly though there are a few errors I want to call out.
Moving on to your boxed cylinders, 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).
Though, something strange happened here in that you started checking them correctly at the start of the set but then reduced the lines which are used to check the ellipse only keeping them contained inside the plane of the box. Furthermore instead of continuing to check the sides of the cylinder by extending them towards the vanishing point you instead drew lines where it was supposed to be. By doing this you remove any benefit you would have gotten from the exercise because by checking where it should be and not extending the lines you essentially take the ability to learn from your mistakes away. If you take a look at 168 I've extended where it "should" have been which we have no reliable method of deciding (in this challenge at least) and it still ends up being "wrong". If you extended the side of the cylinder you could have said "I should try reduce the rate of convergence" and then tried that on the next cylinder.
If some of the line extensions are neglected / wrong, it undermines the purpose of the entire error analysis, and thus the exercise as a whole. 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).
By neglecting one, two, or half of the lines that we're extending, then you leave places for errors to hide and go unnoticed. Thus, the growth and improvement we seek to gain in the assigned work, specifically in honing our estimation of those proportions, is limited at best.
Finally some of your boxes ended up becoming extremely distorted (186 for example) because the degree between the lines ended up less than 90 causing the box to look very weird and therefore causing the cylinder to have diverging sides.
Therefore, I'll be assigning revisions for the boxed cylinders. When you do the revision make sure you go over the error checking method again https://drawabox.com/lesson/250cylinders/1/stage2check and to extend out all of your lines to the VP so that you can clearly see your mistakes and adjust for future attempts.
Next Steps:
50 additional boxed cylinders
Overall thank you for your critique, but i don't see how the correction lines would make any difference when the important factor is how good i fit the circles inside the box and how good the box was.
Because the box dictates the form of the cylinder, so if could not fit it inside correctly it will be incorrect anyway.
Some of the distortions happened after a longer break and the mistakes are obvious to me the moment i make them, on the correction method well i posted my boxed cylinders in the discord and asked if how i checked was correct, because i was not sure, but it got ignored. So i went to check finished cylinder challenges with critiques and my method seemed fine.
I don't know why you keep repeating things about memorization of each position, that was never the point.
I can see why you want me to repeat some boxed cylinders so i do the correct error checking method but 50 is way too much, honestly i don't see how extending the incorrect cylinder line would help me if it was already fitted incorrectly. So i would base my next box on the errors of the not correctly placed cylinder of the current box.
I would understand if i would draw a box around some cylinders but thats not the case.
Please explain it to me in another way because i don't see your point you are making.
So it seems to me that you don't see the purpose of using correction lines because the box that contains the cylinder will never be perfect or good enough?
The goal of drawing all of these boxed cylinders was never to draw good or perfect boxes and cylinders.
"This error checking method serves to help us work on gradually building a more intuitive sense for the proportion of these forms. Don't get stressed if you're constantly turning up mistakes - it's entirely normal, especially with so many different factors to control. The point is to gradually get better.
The truth of the matter is that for the most part, for any given drawing, you only need to be close enough. These correction methods go much farther than that, making every single error excruciatingly obvious. This in turn helps us learn from them a lot better, but don't think that you're going to be held to this standard in your actual drawings"
In the words of uncomfortable it's about building your sense of intuitive proportions.
If you ignore the extensions you may as well be drawing boxes and ignoring the cylinder. I could have reassigned the whole 100/150 boxed cylinders but I've looked at submissions that had a similar error to yours and were told to redo 50 of them.
By extending the incorrect similar line you get feedback that is crucial for improving on the next one. If you neglect the feedback there is no point in doing it.
Finally, I don't believe I repeat instructions all of it is written as if uncomfortable was the one critiquing.
If I was still unclear or if you have any more questions please let me know.
I see what you mean, but i was looking for more detailed advice on the boxed cylinders so i can improve them or some hidden concept that i was missing. That is worth doing them over. Just to grind them to get a better feel is not worth my time now. To me these boxed cylinders in this form take too long.
It took me 6 Months for the boxed ones only. You just asking too much of me at the moment.
While I have a massive library of non-instructional art books I've collected over the years, there's only a handful that are actually important to me. This is one of them - so much so that I jammed my copy into my overstuffed backpack when flying back from my parents' house just so I could have it at my apartment. My back's been sore for a week.
The reason I hold this book in such high esteem is because of how it puts the relatively new field of game art into perspective, showing how concept art really just started off as crude sketches intended to communicate ideas to storytellers, designers and 3D modelers. How all of this focus on beautiful illustrations is really secondary to the core of a concept artist's job. A real eye-opener.
This website uses cookies. You can read more about what we do with them, read our privacy policy.
