05-09-2024, 04:12 AM
Hmmmm I think I understand where you're coming from. I think if you are making effort to reconstruct the form of what is in the reference, rather than blindly copying shapes, then you don't have to worry about that so much. You can still be accurate about the shapes, forms, and proportions and yet not be photocopying. It's about how you're thinking and how you arrive at the result. Your drawings, from what I see here are in no way close to being a photocopy of the reference. I mean no offense in that, I mean that I don't really see that copying mindset so much.
In addition, these are anatomy studies, useful for learning the muscles. I think you might want to clarify your goals a bit. This study I think probably works best if you stay close to the reference. It doesn't make sense to do your own thing here, just for the sake of 'not copying' when you're just trying to learn. A lot of people actually trace over photos, drawing where the muscles go in order to learn from it.
I do agree with your teacher that it's best to draw from understanding, not just copy. But you can still do that with a good amount of 2D accuracy to get things the right size and shape. And I don't think it's a big concern for this particular study. I would just encourage you to put more focus on 3D construction and giving your drawings form. If you can start constructing the body more from big forms, and get the feeling you are sculpting, then you can naturally get away from the copying thing. Later you can even try using indirect reference, which is a good test of your ability to do this. So your drawing would be viewed from a different angle than your references and you cannot copy them directly. That's basically what I've done in my draw-over, where I looked at the 3D sculpture for the muscles, and translated that to my leg, though it's drawn at mostly the same as in the photo, but not exactly.
With the flow, it's really about how the parts relate to the whole thing. Not about the contour of individual shapes. Look for the connecting lines between parts, the rhythm, and draw along with it. Don't start and stop forms abruptly where they go behind something or appear to stop. Keep drawing them through.
In addition, these are anatomy studies, useful for learning the muscles. I think you might want to clarify your goals a bit. This study I think probably works best if you stay close to the reference. It doesn't make sense to do your own thing here, just for the sake of 'not copying' when you're just trying to learn. A lot of people actually trace over photos, drawing where the muscles go in order to learn from it.
I do agree with your teacher that it's best to draw from understanding, not just copy. But you can still do that with a good amount of 2D accuracy to get things the right size and shape. And I don't think it's a big concern for this particular study. I would just encourage you to put more focus on 3D construction and giving your drawings form. If you can start constructing the body more from big forms, and get the feeling you are sculpting, then you can naturally get away from the copying thing. Later you can even try using indirect reference, which is a good test of your ability to do this. So your drawing would be viewed from a different angle than your references and you cannot copy them directly. That's basically what I've done in my draw-over, where I looked at the 3D sculpture for the muscles, and translated that to my leg, though it's drawn at mostly the same as in the photo, but not exactly.
With the flow, it's really about how the parts relate to the whole thing. Not about the contour of individual shapes. Look for the connecting lines between parts, the rhythm, and draw along with it. Don't start and stop forms abruptly where they go behind something or appear to stop. Keep drawing them through.