Whoring my Zhang Lu study around to catch as many crits as I can

[Beeston]

Steps:

1. line art, trying to get my observational skills down pat, and trying to do the thing where I both construct a correct head and pay attention to shapes. I failed in both regards.

2. Doing value allowed me to do more nuanced corrections and see smaller shapes, but the overall big shapes still completely eluded me, including the overall angle/proportion of the head.

3. I traced over my grey scale with red lines for ref and yellow lines for mine and made corrections to the proportions/angles/shapes.

So mainly, I'm having trouble with getting a nuanced and accurate line drawing, and juggling construction and observing shape. Critique on these things (plus whatever else, since I don't know what I don't know) is highly appreciated.

Some have said that I've already pointed out the problem, but if I know what the problem is then I wouldn't still be making these mistakes. There might be a dude out there who knows something I don't know. If you're that dude, please help

Here is a more recent iteration based on Bargue's methods

[Adam Lina]

If you want more accurate lines then do more line drawing. Its that simple. Are you familiar with the bargue drawing method of measuring with a string to get accurate lines and angles? Do more measuring until your eye improves. Then you wont have to do as much measuring. Thats just how it works. I dont see the point of asking people to crit your study. You have the reference. You can look at it and compare where you were not accurate. Its an important skill to be able to problem solve on your own. Where outside input comes in handy is when you're working on personal work that you dont have a reference to compare whats incorrect or figure out if the composition is working. Sorry if thats not what you want to hear.

[Beeston]

If you want more accurate lines then do more line drawing. Its that simple. Are you familiar with the bargue drawing method of measuring with a string to get accurate lines and angles? Do more measuring until your eye improves. Then you wont have to do as much measuring. Thats just how it works. I dont see the point of asking people to crit your study. You have the reference. You can look at it and compare where you were not accurate. Its an important skill to be able to problem solve on your own. Where outside input comes in handy is when you're working on personal work that you dont have a reference to compare whats incorrect or figure out if the composition is working. Sorry if thats not what you want to hear.

Thanks dude, it's all g. The string thing is a good method, I 'partially' did that by drawing triangles with the line tool in photoshop over the ref to get a sense of the angles I would use. I didn't transfer them directly to the reiterated image though, because that would defeat the purpose of training my eye. The reason I post here is because there was another thread on Polycount by a guy who was getting a lot of things wrong, but he was getting a lot of good advice from skilled professionals because of it. I guess I'll chalk it up to a modified version of cunningham's law. If I'm doing something right enough that nobody can crit, well that's good I guess, but really I'm trying to fish for as much new information as I possibly can.

[Adam Lina]

I 'partially' did that by drawing triangles with the line tool in photoshop over the ref to get a sense of the angles I would use. I didn't transfer them directly to the reiterated image though, because that would defeat the purpose of training my eye.

Well the ateliers from what I understand actually transfer the string over. It is probably the most effective way of training your eye. If you know anyone who does carpentry for example. Ask them to eyeball a measurement and if they've been doing carpentry for any good length of time they'll be balls on accurate. That comes from measuring so many times with the tape measure that you dont need the tape measure anymore. The more careful measuring you do the better.