Check Out NMA    About our Partnership    Collapse this Ad

Visual Library and the Drawabox approach

1:57 PM, Wednesday September 2nd 2020

Hello there :),

I have got a question regarding building a visual library through sketching. So I never had real interest in sketching and drawing from observation and I thought this is bad, especially because building a visual library is imoportant. But I love the approach (I am currently in lesson 4), how Drawabox handles drawing from observation, it just feels so good and one hundred times better than how I got taught traditional sketching (aka copy exactly what you see and use 2D shapes and angles). Also I have the feeling that understanding the 3D form of my subject and it´s texture is building my visual library far more effective, but because I think I may be missing the point here, I am asking.

So now for the core of my question: Can I use this approach to build a visual library (Drawabox approach through construction and texture) from sketching and drop the other approach (drawing exactly what you see, using mostly angles and 2D shapes), or is there more value in the other approach and would I miss something?

I would be glad for any answers, also have a good day :).

Report
2 users agree
3:37 PM, Thursday September 3rd 2020
edited at 3:43 PM, Sep 3rd 2020

Having a visual library means understanding the object, so using the Drawabox construction method is better than the the other approach. Not only because you are forced to think about the form of the object, but because the drawabox method doesn't focus on reproducing the exact same subject but instead tries to makes it feel like that kind of subject. In Uncomfortable's words: "We're not trying to draw this exact potato plant. We're drawing a potato plant". Or something like that hahah.

That being said, applying the construction method to fill your visual library isn't that great of an option either. It's more of an exercise to train your spacial awareness skills. Here are some reasons why you shouldn't use this method as a method to fill your visual library:

  • It takes too much. There are too many objects in this world for you to expect to draw a sufficient fraction of them using the construction method. The method takes too long for pretty much every object (and imagine complex objects).

  • The focus is elsewhere. The focus of this exercise, the stuff you're brain will be most occupied with, will always be the three dimensionality. Not the object.

  • You don't cover everything about the object. Yes, you understand more about the object than with the copying method. But it doesn't answer questions like: "Why is the object like this?", "How are the parts connected?", "What is the function of each part?", "How does it work?"... . In short, we understand better objects by studying how function instead of their volume. Take, for example, a belt. You will learn to draw it much faster if you understand how the fastening works rather than studying the form. Because it will make sense to you!

The best thing about understanding why an object, animal, plant is that way rather than how it exists in space is that in this way the knowledge translates to other countless objects. I mentioned a belt before. If you understand how a belt works, you can apply that knowledge to other countless objects that use the same fastening system, like watches or some hats. Yes, you can TECHNICALLY apply the same logic here with the construction method, but the problem is that the similarities between difference objects won't be that obvious if you only see the form.

So, all this explanation is great, but how could you apply this? I'd recommend to try this exercise I devised a few weeks ago that it's helping me so much to build a visual library. Try it a few days before deciding to discard it, I promise it was a game changer to me! I applied lots of concepts I read on a few "how to learn" type books.

The exercise: takes around 30 minutes, I do it once per day. The strong point about this exercise is that it forces you to think actively about the objects before studying them. It may seem complex at first but it's very rewarding. Steps:

  1. Think about around 5 things. Literally anything will do. For example: triceratops, Lakers cap, guitar, clothespin and a braid.

  2. Draw all of them from imagination for around 25 minutes, as accurately as you remember them. If you're not sure of how some part is, it's much better to make a guess and draw it than leave it blank. Pay special attention to try to understand how they work. You can do multiple drawings of the same objects and even write some notes.

  3. The remaining 5 minutes (you can take more time here if you need to), you can choose one of the following two options. Either study in detail only one of the five objects (example: search how a triceratops is), or ask three very specific questions about any of the 5 objects (1. how are the pegs of a guitar positioned? 2. How is the visor of a Lakers cap sawed? 3. How long is a triceratops tail?)

  4. Based on what you learned, write down the three things you learned you think are the most valuable. These three things must be very specific. If you chose to ask the three questions, the three lessons will obviously be their three answers.

  5. Next day (and only this day), before starting again, try to recall from memory those three keypoint you selected. If you don't remember, read them again.

If you actually try this, I would love to hear if it ends up working for you. If you want more information about the exercise or the reasoning behind some of the steps, feel free to ask.

edited at 3:43 PM, Sep 3rd 2020
8:22 AM, Friday September 4th 2020
edited at 8:25 AM, Sep 4th 2020

Hi!

I'm very interested in knowing some more about this method, that seems to me more agile than the Shrimp method, which shares many of the downsides you pointed out.

My question is: the next day, after recalling the key points, am I supposed to redraw the object(s) based on my acquired knowledge of the object(s) or should I move on with a new selection of subjects to draw?

Thank you!

edited at 8:25 AM, Sep 4th 2020
9:32 AM, Friday September 4th 2020
edited at 9:34 AM, Sep 4th 2020

Hey, I'm glad to hear someone is interested on this!

I didn't know about the shrimp method. I looked it up and yeah, definitely the tracing and drawing from reference part is too long. I also think it's more based on muscle memory than on an actual understanding of the subject.

Answering to your question: No. You can and should move onto the new set, because what matters are the three takeaways, not the whole subject itself. Don't you think that it's kind of a waste of time to draw the whole subject again just to apply one specific change?

In fact, even if you don't remember the keypoints from the previous day (which doesn't happen that much) I wouldn't recommend to draw it again.

If you're really going to try this, here's a tip. Remember that you have two options for active learning, studying one subject or making three specific questions? I'd recommend to use the three questions more often than the other. The reason is that answers to questions you asked yourself are much easier to remember.

There is really only one situation where I'd rather study in detail one subject, which is when you really have no idea whatsoever on how that object is. These are the objects that come out horribly wrong during the drawing from imagination part.

edited at 9:34 AM, Sep 4th 2020
10:59 AM, Friday September 4th 2020

Thank you for your explanation!

I can see the value in this approach, especially in the long run, and just the other day I was wondering about the importance of understanding how things work.

Okay, I'll gladly give it a try for 3-4 days and then I'll share how it worked for me.

1:38 PM, Friday September 18th 2020

Hey, so I've been trying your method for a week or so and I think it's great.

It encouraged me to draw so many different subjects and I started thinking more about how things work and not only how they look.

I can still remember the key points and the references I have researched even after many days!

Since I'm a complete beginner I can't say much about the best way to build a visual library, but this method of yours is something I plan to keep on doing for a while, and maybe tweak it along the way when I'm more experienced.

Thanks for sharing!

3:20 PM, Friday September 4th 2020

Ok, first, thank you for this long detailed answer :).

The method you describe sounds really interesting and I am going to try it :D.

There are just some parts that bother me: this method relys completely on imagination, but I heared from so many artists how important it is to study from reference, so should there not be a part in the exercise where you check if you actually did it right o.o?

Also, I am more of an "form and construction" loving person than a "rendering and detail" person ^^´´, but don´t you need some reference to also study the texture and smaller details of an object, in order to draw it from imagination?

And I often got the information that you should study one subject rather often and long, instead of multiple subjects only briefly.

I saw a video about a method that got some similar steps and I think this imagination step, instead of studying too much from reference sounds like a good idea, but I am still a bit unsure, there just seem to be very different opinions going around on how to study to create a good visual library o.O.

Again, thank you for the answer, I am going to try this for some days and look how it works for me :D.

4:04 PM, Friday September 4th 2020
  • should there not be a part in the exercise where you check if you actually did it right o.o?

There is, check step 3! Though you won't check all objects. Both options given in the step involve you looking on the Internet or in real life actual true information.

Why the imagination part? Because it forces you to think actively about the subject so that you'll remember better the corrections you make in step 3. It also makes you train some abilities that you won't get only drawing from references, like the ability to retrieve from memory and the ability to see more when you observe.

  • but don´t you need some reference to also study the texture and smaller details of an object, in order to draw it from imagination?

You can choose any set of five subjects. Textures are a perfect valid subject too. And again, you'll correct it at step 3 if you want to.

  • And I often got the information that you should study one subject rather often and long, instead of multiple subjects only briefly.

Absolutely not. And this is not just my opinion, is a well proven scientific fact that mixing stuff up boosts comprehension and makes it easier to stick in your memory rather than doing one at a time. I'm sure you will find the studies easily on the Internet, I read them on the book "make it stick: The Science of Successful Learning". It feels more confusing though, but you're still learning more.

Also, you simply can't study all the objects one at a time, for a long time. As I said on my previous comment, there are just too many objects in the world to do that. With this method, you're drawing 150 subjects per month, 5x365= 1825 subjects per year! And since you are forced to select 3 takeaways every day, it amounts to 1095 keypoints per year! That's 1095 lessons you'll hardly forget.

  • there just seem to be very different opinions going around on how to study to create a good visual library o.O.

YES! Every artist will tell you their method like it's the absolute truth! That's exactly why I devised a method myself, so I could base it on actual scientific studies on how the human brain works rather than on my personal opinion. Still, this method is still in progress, and probably isn't perfect. I'll keep doing it and improving it as I go.

Best of luck!

3:20 PM, Saturday September 5th 2020

Thank you for the quick reply ^^.

First, wow sorry that was embarassing, I checked your post so often because I was sure there has to be one part where you study from reference and I wanted to avoid asking you again for exactly that reason ^^´´, like not seeing the mayonaise in the fridge directly in front of you (part of me knew this would happen).

Yea this makes sense and I thought that the imagination part was a good idea, I was just confused because as it seems I missed your part about checking the reference, multiple times ^^´´.

Ah ok thanks for including this information about textures, this way it seems better for me.

This fact about mixing up stuff while learning, is actually something I already learned about in "general / meta learning", but I did not thought this would apply to drawing (also because I got bombarded with people telling me to study one thing very often). Nice to know that this applys too :).

But thanks anyway for sharing it! Really interesting and as you said, science really is a better source than just opinion, let´s me realize that yea maybe there are good artists who tell how good some method for learning is, but maybe they just think that because they learned no other method and still got good through a lot of time, but needed a lot more time because their method was bad. So with a better method they could have done what they have done, far more effective.

Thank you, you too and thanks for the answers ^^.

Below this point is mostly ads. Indie projects, and tool/course recommendations from us.
This section is reserved for low-cost advertising space for art related indie projects.
With how saturated the market is, it is tough for such projects to get eyes on their work.
By providing this section, we hope to help with that.
If you'd like to advertise here, you can do so through comicad.net
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 we've used ourselves, or know to be of impeccable quality. If you're interested, here is a full list.
Rapid Viz

Rapid Viz

Rapid Viz is a book after mine own heart, and exists very much in the same spirit of the concepts that inspired Drawabox. It's all about getting your ideas down on the page, doing so quickly and clearly, so as to communicate them to others. These skills are not only critical in design, but also in the myriad of technical and STEM fields that can really benefit from having someone who can facilitate getting one person's idea across to another.

Where Drawabox focuses on developing underlying spatial thinking skills to help facilitate that kind of communication, Rapid Viz's quick and dirty approach can help students loosen up and really move past the irrelevant matters of being "perfect" or "correct", and focus instead on getting your ideas from your brain, onto the page, and into someone else's brain as efficiently as possible.

Remember that when you agree with something another user has written, you are putting your own reputation behind it.

Consider the following:

  • If it's homework feedback, does it address each section of the lesson/challenge, or only briefly touch upon one or two exercises?
  • Does it provide clearly defined next steps for the student to follow?
  • Have you read through it thoroughly, or are you simply agreeing so the student earns a superficial badge?
  • Replies you agree with will be visible in your sketchbook

Agreeing blindly just to be nice is a good way to get your permissions associated with this function revoked, so make sure that you genuinely feel that the response is beneficial to the student.

We use cookies in conjunction with Google Analytics to anonymously track how our website is used.

This data is not shared with any other parties or sold to anyone. They are also disabled until consent is provided by clicking the button below, and this consent can be revoked at any time by clicking the "Revoke Analytics Cookie Consent" link in our website footer.

You can read more about what we do with them, read our privacy policy.