
Why should you?
Because when studying Preston Blair type construction - made of spheres and pear shapes, there is a tendency for some cartoonists to think cartoon characters are made up of balls piled on top of each other. Or they draw the balls and pears too mechanical and not organic enough.
Also another point: THE STIFF PERIOD OF LEARNING
Any time you learn a new concept, when you actually first try to draw it you will probably be very stiff, because you haven't practiced the concept enough for it to sink in. This is the tough period of learning anything.
Drawing 1 - STIFF, study drawing. Slow and careful, grinding my teeth

When I first drew this guy, I slowly, carefully blocked in the construction first - having to think about the types of shapes that make up a strong man. I couldn't use balls and pears because real life is made up of more complex parts. They are still solid forms, but bendable solid forms. They are complex organic forms.
Once I finished the first drawing, I knew a lot of things I didn't know before: How the traps are shaped on one side compared to the other in a 3/4 pose. What biceps look like from 2 different angles in relaxed mode. How the biceps fit next to the triceps and the space between.
How muscles weave in and out of each other under the skin. The feeling of flesh, not just the wooden proportions of man.
How the 6 pack works as a whole unit before it's split into parts
How big pecs hang in repose (it's very important to know this, especially for you girls)
etc.
Drawing 2 - Looser yet still solid, more organic and confident, more fun to do
my conservative attempt at Chloe's style
Then I redrew the drawing faster and looser - while still trying to keep all the forms solid, but to make them less stiff, more flowing: more ORGANIC
Some artists go too far in the direction of organic lines and get wobbly formless characters.


Ever see those Gene Deitch Tom and Jerrys made in the 60s in eastern europe? They are a total misunderstanding of the 40s American animation style. The characters are drawn stiff and move stiff. They look like they are made of badly drawn balls stacked on top of each other.

The trick to good drawing is to combine solidity with fluidity. And life.
You have to look at both sides of an object (say a bicep) and draw the whole form, not two lines on either side. Look at the form inside the lines.
I made a mistake that I warn everyone else about: the side of the man's head that is closer to us (on the right) is too cramped. I squashed the space between his face and cranium. Lots of us have that problem.
Preston Blair Forms don't work for everything!
I saw one student's attempt at caricatures and he was trying to construct them as if they were Preston Blair forms.
That doesn't work.
When you draw from life- DRAW WHAT YOU SEE
Don't try to impose what you think things are supposed to look like. We aren't made of balls and pears. Only cartoon characters are.
What you learn from drawing from life and using your eyes to observe new things can then be applied to your cartoon drawings in simplified form.
Very Organic and Solid Preston Blair Forms
These drawings are not remotely realistic. They have no real anatomy. They are entirely made up of animated cartoon forms - spheres and pears. Yet they don't look mechanical and they are full of life.




It's organic and solid at the same time - and obeys some expected sense of physics.
Don't draw stiff (except when learning and you can't help it). Don't draw wobbly. Aim at drawing convincing solid organic life.
Great post... I think you'd remembered my style pretty well, in the sense that you took a man who isn't Randy Orton and made him look like Randy Orton, through drawing magic!
ReplyDeleteIt is worth hammering home this stuff... personally I feel like my cartoon studies would get nowhere if I didn't do drawings from life/ from natural forms inbetween.
I find if I focus too much on just the Preston Blair shapes, they become isolated and strange, unrelated to natural laws or anything else. My cartoonier doodles all too easily veer off into formless pointless nonsense, or bizarre unnatural concoctions.
I suppose I'm thinking that your core concept of hierarchy is intimately related to 'organicness'... you can't see the big picture unless you're picturing it as a collection of alive tangible physical objects, and most of your perceptions of moving tangible physical objects come from real life, sensual experience.
I find as my drawings evolve, both my 'personal' drawings and cartoon studies, what I'm gradually figuring out is how to strike the balance... to put enough weight and realness from life into the cartoons, without making them overly scratchy and pock-marked.... whilst applying cartoon fundamentals to all my drawings, an ability to see the simplest forms in three dimensions and take control over moving and posing them... with the best of both you have both maximum control and maximum versatility... hopefully. One day.
Oh yeah, and even now I still have to tell myself that it's OK to have some very boring conservative 'learning drawings', in relation to new subjects... to not get arrogant and assume you've seen it all just because you're looking at it, so you can skip ahead to the fun bit. Accuracy can be your friend. Precision can be your pal. For a while.
ReplyDeletewhew!
ReplyDeletewell said
great!
ReplyDeleteevery time much more clear, thanks John
I will give it another try
Yeah it was a bit of a long comment. I nearly broke a rule there.
ReplyDelete