You are spot on about the organization and exercises in the book. However, the advice about drawing what you see and about simplifying complex objects by breaking them down into simpler shapes is not contradictory. In fact, there are merely hidden premises which would show that it's not contradictory, and these pieces of advice are solutions to two different problems. A contradiction is (as is stated in the Law of Noncontradiction) both A and not-A *_in the same way and at the same time._***. The advice to draw what you see, not what you think ought to be drawn is common art instruction that helps reduce the likelihood that the student will draw unrealistic details because the mind tries to shortcut the process, leading them to to draw something other than what they see. This is very good and very necessary advice. You should not let your mind make you draw unrealistic, disproportionate, details. So, in that sense, you should only draw what you see. However, when things are too complex to easily draw what you see, ***_THEN_* (so at a different time) you should simplify the drawing into basic shapes (called stereometry). However, there is a caveat! The finished drawing shouldn't stay that way. You use stereometry to help you "block in" or construct a simplified image, but you go in and add in, and change, things to make it increasingly closer to reality in subsequent steps. This way you gradually transform the drawing from these simplified shapes *_INTO_* what you actually see. Since you aren't supposed to both draw what you see and not draw what you see, in the same way and at the same time, these two pieces of advice are not contradictory. Both things are actually necessary to draw well, just not at the same time or in the same way, and they are solutions to different problems. Betty Edward's book, even though the scientific claims in it are seemingly bunk, is great for solving the first issue (i.e., getting you to draw what you see), and books like How to Draw People and Sketching People by Jeff Mellem, How to Draw by Scott Robertson, just about any book on perspective, Basic Anatomy and Dynamic Human Anatomy by Roberto Osti, just about any book on illustration or animation, etc., are great for solving the second issue (i.e., helping you draw things that are complex by first simplifying them with basic shapes and, then, coming in and improving upon them afterwards). Please, don't take this as harsh criticism. It's not intended to be. I'm just trying to share constructive criticism. I think your video was great, and largely accurate! I agree with much of your criticism about this book, which is why I've not used it. And, as you say, you were pretty new to drawing when you made it, so you probably weren't yet familiar with these things that are well known to those who are knowledgeable about drawing.
I am halfway through the book and also find it frustrating that practically he doesn't teach any technical stuff about rendering, etc. It was fun to see your drawings! I think you are doing great actually. Good luck on the creative journey :)
Great Video. I started doing art seriously last summer, and recognise a lot of the themes in that book. Am I correct in thinking you have a scientific/logical approach to art? Does the book say start at the begginning and work your way through or is it a book to dip into where you need advice? How about making a video of painting a picture which you want to make? Making your own individual piece of art.
@@simbo57 Well, I do have an engineering background and I am sure it affects the way I do a lot of things. I don't try making masterpieces as I fail and get frustrated. Instead, I do some combination of journaling with quick sketches that only try to convey or illustrate an idea. However, I am getting more comfortable with a blank paper so I may do that sometime. Yes, you can dip into the book anywhere. I needed practice with it all though. Thanks for the nice comment!
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
You are spot on about the organization and exercises in the book. However, the advice about drawing what you see and about simplifying complex objects by breaking them down into simpler shapes is not contradictory. In fact, there are merely hidden premises which would show that it's not contradictory, and these pieces of advice are solutions to two different problems.
A contradiction is (as is stated in the Law of Noncontradiction) both A and not-A *_in the same way and at the same time._***. The advice to draw what you see, not what you think ought to be drawn is common art instruction that helps reduce the likelihood that the student will draw unrealistic details because the mind tries to shortcut the process, leading them to to draw something other than what they see. This is very good and very necessary advice. You should not let your mind make you draw unrealistic, disproportionate, details. So, in that sense, you should only draw what you see. However, when things are too complex to easily draw what you see, ***_THEN_* (so at a different time) you should simplify the drawing into basic shapes (called stereometry). However, there is a caveat! The finished drawing shouldn't stay that way. You use stereometry to help you "block in" or construct a simplified image, but you go in and add in, and change, things to make it increasingly closer to reality in subsequent steps. This way you gradually transform the drawing from these simplified shapes *_INTO_* what you actually see.
Since you aren't supposed to both draw what you see and not draw what you see, in the same way and at the same time, these two pieces of advice are not contradictory. Both things are actually necessary to draw well, just not at the same time or in the same way, and they are solutions to different problems. Betty Edward's book, even though the scientific claims in it are seemingly bunk, is great for solving the first issue (i.e., getting you to draw what you see), and books like How to Draw People and Sketching People by Jeff Mellem, How to Draw by Scott Robertson, just about any book on perspective, Basic Anatomy and Dynamic Human Anatomy by Roberto Osti, just about any book on illustration or animation, etc., are great for solving the second issue (i.e., helping you draw things that are complex by first simplifying them with basic shapes and, then, coming in and improving upon them afterwards).
Please, don't take this as harsh criticism. It's not intended to be. I'm just trying to share constructive criticism. I think your video was great, and largely accurate! I agree with much of your criticism about this book, which is why I've not used it. And, as you say, you were pretty new to drawing when you made it, so you probably weren't yet familiar with these things that are well known to those who are knowledgeable about drawing.
Thank you for an honest review so refreshing
I am glad you liked it. I hope it doesn't sound to negative as I have a tendency to nit pick on the small things.
Your a beginner at drawing? Your drawings look amazing to me.
I am halfway through the book and also find it frustrating that practically he doesn't teach any technical stuff about rendering, etc. It was fun to see your drawings! I think you are doing great actually. Good luck on the creative journey :)
Great Video. I started doing art seriously last summer, and recognise a lot of the themes in that book. Am I correct in thinking you have a scientific/logical approach to art? Does the book say start at the begginning and work your way through or is it a book to dip into where you need advice? How about making a video of painting a picture which you want to make? Making your own individual piece of art.
@@simbo57 Well, I do have an engineering background and I am sure it affects the way I do a lot of things. I don't try making masterpieces as I fail and get frustrated. Instead, I do some combination of journaling with quick sketches that only try to convey or illustrate an idea. However, I am getting more comfortable with a blank paper so I may do that sometime. Yes, you can dip into the book anywhere. I needed practice with it all though. Thanks for the nice comment!