That's funny. I was reading Hardold's Speeds book and I came to the same realization one week ago. It's very amazing book. I already sold paintings and I do portraits, but still my process wasn't set and I was always kinda meandering. Now I can be really creative, as I have this base on which everything else sets. When I saw this video thumbnail and name, I immediately knew what You are going to talk about. Also cool video ! That value layering system allows me to work much faster now, and with better results.
Really love your vids not only are they informative, and show the process. You explain the struggle and it clicks cause sometimes you don't even know what the road block is. Thank you!
Bro, nice presentation. I salute you for your perseverance . That is what I call passion , intense love for recreating beauty of the world and people 🏆🏆🏆🏆
For me personally a game changer was loomis method combined with Nathan Fowkes Schoolism course on portrait drawing with charcoal. I never had used charcoal before. Charcoal has taught me a lot about being free, doing big shapes and values. It is messy tho and keeping them is a hassle.
The likeness is never the thing that draws me to a portrait painting anyway. It's usually the interpretation. The colors, the pose, the look, the technique. The choices of the artist.
Yes me too. The only thing is if it’s someone you know well. Then it’s a strange feeling of “somethings off”. So then it needs to be dead on accurate. Will discuss in the next vid!
So relatable! With faces, I find it especially hard to stay disciplined that way, moving from big to small. Countless hours spent on minute details of noses, eyes, mouth corners! Approaching from a cartoon / caricature standpoint helped me a lot. Haven't done portraits in a long time, feeling motivated to get back into it now :)
Yeah faces draw you in more than anything else! I agree that cartoon and caricature help a lot, even though I don't love caricature itself. I also think Reilly ideas help with cartoons a lot
Kenzo, wonderful insights as always. I had the same issues with the Loomis Method, while it has its place, it just didn't work for me. I started taking lessons in figurative and portraiture last summer because I found I had peaked in my abilities, and needed an active mentor to show me what I am likely missing. My mentor(s) all have Russian academic backgrounds in draftsmanship, and what you've found here is exactly what I learned. Big simple forms, and value buckets. Going from large to small we carve out the person (figure or portrait) through a series of simple expressive lines. Essentially, a Russian academic approach to a drawing is a series of drawings, and as always we leave the details for the end (as you know). Great insights, and I applaud you for keeping at the portrait!
Great video! I'm just starting out learning portraits and this video was very helpful. I had wondered about the Loomis method and it seemed to me to be almost perfect except for the fact that one has to do a heck of a lot of wrangling to make the portrait work. Your suggestion to put in the big shapes and values first makes a whole lot of sense to me because I'm coming from a landscape background and this is what I do first, put in the shapes. I don't know why I didn't think of doing this with portraits but I guess I was thinking do it the way that has been done by others already. Thanks for sharing that there is a better way. I signed up for your course (and subscribed to this channel). Looking forward to it.
There was an drawing class where we drew over and over the same person the only thing changing is timing. eventually it was 5 seconds. 20 secods to 30 sketch was the best usually.
I've bounced around a bit with the different portrait techniques myself - early on I used a grid drawing book, I did a little bit of Loomis, a little bit of Asaro, and so on - but I noticed just a month or two ago that I was actually doing OK at capturing some thumbnail likenesses in ink. The only thing I was doing for a long period was to freeze-frame and sketch TH-camrs - almost always in ballpoint or dark ink. I think I might have done one or two of Kenzo. But I was focusing on fundamentals, not portraits - contour some of the time, form other times, value more recently. Working in ink would emphasize the darkest elements, and I was working small, the way in which I wanted to cartoon, so the nose would often simplify to two dots, the lips to three lines, and so on. I was not too worried about the likeness, just getting something reasonably proportioned at that scale and level of detail. Somewhere along the way I was like, "well, now I want to caricature a few billionaires" and I spent quite a few attempts striving for the most symbolic version of Sam Altman. I tried over and over to exaggerate different things but I was never satisfied with that project. However, it wasn't that long after that, that I noticed that I was actually more accurate with my thumbnails. I wasn't trying to caricature, but I was starting to use some part of what I had explored as the observational framework, I think. I can still see a lot of things I could do more with, particularly my understanding of the head anatomy, but I'm focused on hands right now.
yeah it's a slow combination of various skillsets i think and caricature definitely has some really useful ideas to use for portraits, even if you don't love actual caricatures
I'll never understand why people think the Loomis "method" is any way shape or form stringent? Do people actually read the book? He goes in depth about the "method" being a guideline and its up to you the artist to deviate to fit your needs or the needs of the subject. It blows my mind when people say "Loomis doesn't work for me. I did the formula?" I mean what the h3 LL? Its meant for an initial quick block in then YOU adjust from the base. The first chapter is all about stretching and pulling and warping. Didn't mean to come off as negative. Love the work you do and your progress and think you are further along then I am. I do however think people either take Loomis out of cotext or have no context whatsoever. He goes through using large shapes to make features and that proportions are different for each individual. He goes though rhythms. He goes though shadow shapes. He has an entire section on planes of the face. Yet all you see youtubers say is. "Loomis is fine but" then all your "buts" are things he discusses extensively IF the book is read however all of that seems to get ignored......
if you watched the video I did not criticise Loomis at all, I just explain how I misused it at first. Making mistakes or misunderstanding how to apply ideas is normal. I also explain how I continue to use it, teach it and it is central to my system. People often misuse the ideas because drawings heads is hard and you don’t trust yourself. It is taught in a formulaic fashion to get to grips with it, and that formula feels like a life raft in a storm so you cling to it.
@@lovelifedrawing And all I'm saying is people claim Loomis is rigid. Most generally youtubers. I did not single you out or even say you specifically. When "Drawing the Head and Hands" and "Fun with a Pencil" are actually read. The things people claim are different idea's "rhythms" and "planes of the face" are literally in Loomis's books and weren't new. They weren't even new when Loomis covered them. "Rhythms" page 41 and literal 3D examples of of heads with face planes are all over pages 33,34 of Drawing the Head and Hands. Fun with a Pencil he is making heads without even using a circle shape. If that's not "fluid" then nothing is. Both books have no less then 20 different head shapes as examples which I mention since I've seen other comments claiming Loomis is only good for a "singular" head shape. Squishing, squashing and skewing also happen to be right at the start of Drawing the Head lol.
Hi Kenzo, nice drawings, specially the last one. I love the way you handle the core shadows, it´s just eye catching! Congratulations!! I love to draw with charcoal pencils on newsprint paper - I think it´s a good match to me, and watching you sketch it looks like that the paper you are using, it´s a good alternative to and I wondering which paper is - thank you!
@@lovelifedrawing It´s a pleasure! I admire your edge work!! Ow and thank you! I´m afraid that I don´t have access to any different type of newsprint rather than the regular one - also the cheapest newsprint you can get - not for drawing! But it´s good to know anyways!! Thanks again!! And hugs from Brazil!!
start with the grid srsly - when you see that you actually SEE (and not think what you see) and feel good about the result (and grid helps amazingly with portrait painting), try again without so many brackets withing the grid or without any grid at all. But do it at least once. It really has an impact on your observation skills.
Learning to freehand portraits is a great thing, but let's not forget art history here. A lot of very famous people traced portraits. Leonardo Da Vinci used a camera obscura. Norman Rockwell used and overhead projector. I'm not here to say any particular process is bad, but we need to temper our expected results depending on what we're looking at. A large number of portraits have been accomplished with tracing, so when an artist compares their portrait to another artists' portrait, they need to consider if the work they are comparing is created using photography or an optical technique.
yes that's a good point and one i want to address in the next upcoming video on likeness. i'll talk about tracing or grids etc, and how in my opinion it's not 'cheating', but what method you choose to pursue depends on what you want to make. freehanding is good for me, but i love artwork from artists who use tracing and grids too. great point about comparing your own stuff to others!
I think the problem people have with the Loomis method is that they miss key aspects of the method. They start with a circle, then the dividing of the face ect. Then they start adding the features inside the sphere and parameters, that misses two crucial steps. You start as I just described then you add on top of the sphere the protruding bone mass ( cheek bones, the brow protruding bones ect.) then after studying the muscle anatomy you lay that knowledge on top of the bone structure. It's a conceptual idea that starts off with a sphere, then protruding bone, then muscle. If you miss those two other steps then the face usually becomes very claustrophobic and flat. Please read the book if haven't done so and try to copy his basic drawings of those two concepts. I didn't like the method either for ages until I read the book instead of someone else explaining it to me. It only makes sense if you follow ALL the concepts
Also it is just a rough guide, the division of the head isn't exactly the same for every head, neither are concepts on how long legs or torso is on every person but it is damn close. Loomis method will make your heads have a structure that is hard to match but you sacrifice being more liberal with approach that can make your drawings lack in other ways you might desire. My advice is to learn as many ways as possible but really learn them to enhance your breadth as an artist if you're into that sort of thing
Last thing is that counting on value will limit you to things with dramatic lighting for a guide on measuring. If you use the Loomis method you'll be able to draw the head in diffused lighting
Thanks Paul! I did read the book, and went over sections a few times, but that was a long time ago during those failed early attempts. So I need to revisit it for sure. I do find that for me at least the Reilly rhythms work so well to start sculpting out the face itself and make sense with my gestural ideas for the figure too, so that’s been such a strong addition with Loomis helping me throw down the first lump of clay
Nice! I honestly haven't looked up the Rielly rhythm method, I've seen pictures of it, just haven't looked into the theory behind it. Keen to get into life drawing and your vids are tops!! Cheers mate
hey thanks! it was so funny cos i tried so many times to draw breaking bad characters a decade ago, then i try again and the sketch came out in 5 mins!
Hello, Kenzo! Trying to post a comment here about how to reach you but it keeps disappearing. If I sign up for a month’s paid subscription will contact information be provided there? Thanks in advance!
Been through this struggle. Once you realise the methods aren’t step by steps, but much like a figure abstraction just a means to help you see it starts to click. A modified Loomis/Reilly approach seems to yield the best results, at least for me. With celebrity portraits also the great Neil Adams has a piece of advice: trace! This is something few artists realise: most illustrators who leave you thinking, ‘how the hell did they do that?’ are actually tracing, tracing with know how, for sure, but tracing because in commercial art what matters is a good result on a deadline, not how you got there! From Mucha and Hopper to Fuchs and Sienkiewicz a LOT of graphic artists TRACE. Be careful here though guys, tracing is for advanced draughtsman, you need to do plenty of reps before you can do it well. But while for us artists tracing might as well be a four letter word for illustrators it’s just another tool, albeit an advanced one.
Not a popular opinion, but somehow i dont really like loomis, reilly, asarov... But when i saw bridgeman faces daaamn, i actually felt like i can undarstand things, not just learn rules... Ofc im not an artist or anything, i just wanted to mention theres a lot of methods, that u can try and have another perspective on how u approach drawing somebody, not just the famous ones (loomis, asarov...)
You should actually try reading the Loomis books and not just assume he has one specific face type. Far from it. That he has only one technique. Far from it. I've read 6 of Loomis books. "Drawing the Head and Hands" has 129 pages dedicated to the head. Seems like a lot of pages for "one specific face type". Then there is "Fun with a Pencil" with 49 more pages dedicated to the head alone which is almost half the book. Covers cartoon heads of every shape, caricature and realistic heads of every age. Yet you claim only one head type? I don't expect everyone to be happy with Loomis but find it odd that the internet seems to think the only thing to Loomis is one picture from one page from one of his books.
That's the exact opposite of how I found the methods. I always had trouble with all the other methods, but when I found the loomis method on drawing faces daamn, I actually fet like I could undertstand.
@@ducksoff7236 My bad, gonna edit the comment. As I said, im not an artist, haven't read the book. I watched proko and other artist's tutorials on that, and they said, this is the Loomis head and u can exaggarate and modify as you wish. (And I took that for granted.) The fundamental constration is the same, but with other modification, but as you said, its then not the case. Gonna look for it, when I have that much time for this hobby.
@@samueltorok601 No worries. I just feel like Loomis has been getting a bad rap on the internet lately. Since everyone just sees one picture or some youtuber giving a lesson on one thing then claiming "Loomis method". If you really want to start down the Loomis road "Fun with a Pencil is severely under represented and is a treasure trove of both the "basics" and how to play with the basics to get differing results.
The loomis method is useless if you don’t know the structure of the head, all these cheat sheets only work if you know what the different things of the method portray.
Dear young sir , I think that it is nicer of you (bad grammar) to actually share with other artists and enthusiasts re drawings and painting. BTW.... what is your formula for your youthful appearance? Let me guess. ………passion for life and art. Ciao, from Capetown
Face, hands, feet, minimum lines- makes me want to quit. Edit: Every-time these videos pop up, I'd like to try drawing but fear paralyses cause I want to do a good job and know I'll hate it. The struggle man...
Practice is key, you have to keep doing the hard yards, you never stop learning or improving- I have the fear of failure too that stops me trying just to avoid the crushing disappointment of failure but then there’s the odd time when a part is right and so I just try to reflect on this and do more. For me it’s time. But carry a5 sketchbook and a pencil everywhere and draw anything. Eventually even your mark making will improve even if your accuracy isn’t. Good luck
Silly me, I thought "a portrait system that works" in the title meant that is what you would present. Instead you give a history of failure and a claim to have finally found a method, and indication that it's easier if you don't need the portrait to look like the subject. So, thanks for the personal history.
The thing is there is no “one system” that will work for everyone. I think him giving a history of his past work was very helpful and important to show his progress and how combining 3 different drawing methods as well as being a little more patient was what pushed him over the difficulty hump he faced with portraits for years. If anything how he explained his process is rather helpful! In portraiture your priority shouldn’t always be likeness, that will only slow you down. If you actually focus on the general planes of the head first and getting the basic values down you will get a resemblance of the reference by default (assuming your construction is decent) and yes simplifying your subject into only a couple values IS easier so what he said is not wrong 🤷♀️ that can be applied to all of drawing and painting too! Over time you’ll automatically become more accurate and get the likeness better. I’m sorry if I misinterpreted your comment in anyway but I hope what I said is helpful regardless!
It is a system that he found to work… not a short cut which is what I think you were looking for if you’re honest? He’s saying it’s a combination of loomis, Riley, ditching searching for likeness, looking for big forms, blocking in and practicing shorter sketches, ignoring the failures just sketch and do more and more of them. There’s no “short cut” that other people promise, he’s saying that “the system” is not one thing but a combination of things that have OBVIOUSLY worked for him and can work for others as it’s totally relatable.
Perfectly articulated the struggle as always Kenzo!
Hehe I’ve had so many struggles that’s why!
That's funny. I was reading Hardold's Speeds book and I came to the same realization one week ago. It's very amazing book. I already sold paintings and I do portraits, but still my process wasn't set and I was always kinda meandering. Now I can be really creative, as I have this base on which everything else sets. When I saw this video thumbnail and name, I immediately knew what You are going to talk about. Also cool video ! That value layering system allows me to work much faster now, and with better results.
I just came back from giving up on a drawing and PERFECT TIMING this video comes out!!
You got this! Breaks are essential and keep going!
@@VorpalSnickerSnack thank u ❤️
Hell yeah, Earthsworld is the best! Such interesting and unique faces!
Ah thanks I couldn’t catch the name in the video
Really love your vids not only are they informative, and show the process. You explain the struggle and it clicks cause sometimes you don't even know what the road block is. Thank you!
Really exited for the likeness video
Bro, nice presentation. I salute you for your perseverance . That is what I call passion , intense love for recreating beauty of the world and people 🏆🏆🏆🏆
So nice of you!
Kenzo you are an amazing teacher. Greetings from Australia 🇦🇺 😊
Thank you! 😃
For me personally a game changer was loomis method combined with Nathan Fowkes Schoolism course on portrait drawing with charcoal. I never had used charcoal before. Charcoal has taught me a lot about being free, doing big shapes and values. It is messy tho and keeping them is a hassle.
This is one of these videos that you really need in your journey, it's essential and yet you can barely find something like that on YT.
This is the story of my life. I live Loomus thought it woukd solve everything until.... it didn't. I took your advice. I think it could happen.
The likeness is never the thing that draws me to a portrait painting anyway. It's usually the interpretation. The colors, the pose, the look, the technique. The choices of the artist.
Yes me too. The only thing is if it’s someone you know well. Then it’s a strange feeling of “somethings off”. So then it needs to be dead on accurate. Will discuss in the next vid!
Hi Kenzo, thanks for that Earth’s World, brilliant for real natural portraits. You are an inspiration and thats the best gift.
As Steve Houston says, simple yet characteristic.
Yeah it’s such a great way to explain it
So relatable! With faces, I find it especially hard to stay disciplined that way, moving from big to small. Countless hours spent on minute details of noses, eyes, mouth corners! Approaching from a cartoon / caricature standpoint helped me a lot. Haven't done portraits in a long time, feeling motivated to get back into it now :)
Yeah faces draw you in more than anything else! I agree that cartoon and caricature help a lot, even though I don't love caricature itself. I also think Reilly ideas help with cartoons a lot
Kenzo, wonderful insights as always. I had the same issues with the Loomis Method, while it has its place, it just didn't work for me. I started taking lessons in figurative and portraiture last summer because I found I had peaked in my abilities, and needed an active mentor to show me what I am likely missing. My mentor(s) all have Russian academic backgrounds in draftsmanship, and what you've found here is exactly what I learned. Big simple forms, and value buckets. Going from large to small we carve out the person (figure or portrait) through a series of simple expressive lines. Essentially, a Russian academic approach to a drawing is a series of drawings, and as always we leave the details for the end (as you know).
Great insights, and I applaud you for keeping at the portrait!
Great video! I'm just starting out learning portraits and this video was very helpful. I had wondered about the Loomis method and it seemed to me to be almost perfect except for the fact that one has to do a heck of a lot of wrangling to make the portrait work. Your suggestion to put in the big shapes and values first makes a whole lot of sense to me because I'm coming from a landscape background and this is what I do first, put in the shapes. I don't know why I didn't think of doing this with portraits but I guess I was thinking do it the way that has been done by others already. Thanks for sharing that there is a better way. I signed up for your course (and subscribed to this channel). Looking forward to it.
That’s great Danita! Portraits are so much fun once you start applying those big shape ideas :)
I excited for this class I've never did one by you😊
I did with proko a very long time ago
been through this as well. this inspired me that its not too late to learn again. thanks Kenzo!
You can do it!
There was an drawing class where we drew over and over the same person the only thing changing is timing. eventually it was 5 seconds. 20 secods to 30 sketch was the best usually.
I've bounced around a bit with the different portrait techniques myself - early on I used a grid drawing book, I did a little bit of Loomis, a little bit of Asaro, and so on - but I noticed just a month or two ago that I was actually doing OK at capturing some thumbnail likenesses in ink. The only thing I was doing for a long period was to freeze-frame and sketch TH-camrs - almost always in ballpoint or dark ink. I think I might have done one or two of Kenzo. But I was focusing on fundamentals, not portraits - contour some of the time, form other times, value more recently. Working in ink would emphasize the darkest elements, and I was working small, the way in which I wanted to cartoon, so the nose would often simplify to two dots, the lips to three lines, and so on. I was not too worried about the likeness, just getting something reasonably proportioned at that scale and level of detail. Somewhere along the way I was like, "well, now I want to caricature a few billionaires" and I spent quite a few attempts striving for the most symbolic version of Sam Altman. I tried over and over to exaggerate different things but I was never satisfied with that project.
However, it wasn't that long after that, that I noticed that I was actually more accurate with my thumbnails. I wasn't trying to caricature, but I was starting to use some part of what I had explored as the observational framework, I think. I can still see a lot of things I could do more with, particularly my understanding of the head anatomy, but I'm focused on hands right now.
yeah it's a slow combination of various skillsets i think and caricature definitely has some really useful ideas to use for portraits, even if you don't love actual caricatures
no linky to site?
I'll never understand why people think the Loomis "method" is any way shape or form stringent? Do people actually read the book? He goes in depth about the "method" being a guideline and its up to you the artist to deviate to fit your needs or the needs of the subject. It blows my mind when people say "Loomis doesn't work for me. I did the formula?" I mean what the h3 LL? Its meant for an initial quick block in then YOU adjust from the base. The first chapter is all about stretching and pulling and warping.
Didn't mean to come off as negative. Love the work you do and your progress and think you are further along then I am. I do however think people either take Loomis out of cotext or have no context whatsoever. He goes through using large shapes to make features and that proportions are different for each individual. He goes though rhythms. He goes though shadow shapes. He has an entire section on planes of the face. Yet all you see youtubers say is. "Loomis is fine but" then all your "buts" are things he discusses extensively IF the book is read however all of that seems to get ignored......
if you watched the video I did not criticise Loomis at all, I just explain how I misused it at first. Making mistakes or misunderstanding how to apply ideas is normal. I also explain how I continue to use it, teach it and it is central to my system. People often misuse the ideas because drawings heads is hard and you don’t trust yourself. It is taught in a formulaic fashion to get to grips with it, and that formula feels like a life raft in a storm so you cling to it.
@@lovelifedrawing And all I'm saying is people claim Loomis is rigid. Most generally youtubers. I did not single you out or even say you specifically. When "Drawing the Head and Hands" and "Fun with a Pencil" are actually read. The things people claim are different idea's "rhythms" and "planes of the face" are literally in Loomis's books and weren't new. They weren't even new when Loomis covered them. "Rhythms" page 41 and literal 3D examples of of heads with face planes are all over pages 33,34 of Drawing the Head and Hands. Fun with a Pencil he is making heads without even using a circle shape. If that's not "fluid" then nothing is. Both books have no less then 20 different head shapes as examples which I mention since I've seen other comments claiming Loomis is only good for a "singular" head shape. Squishing, squashing and skewing also happen to be right at the start of Drawing the Head lol.
I engoy the way you explane I thank you gracias
Im around the same age and same progress, i'll forget the details and work in chunks and see where it takes me! thanks!
Thank you for the great video!
My pleasure!
Hi Kenzo, nice drawings, specially the last one.
I love the way you handle the core shadows, it´s just eye catching! Congratulations!!
I love to draw with charcoal pencils on newsprint paper - I think it´s a good match to me, and watching you sketch it looks like that the paper you are using, it´s a good alternative to and I wondering which paper is - thank you!
Thanks! Yes I’m drawing on smooth newsprint
@@lovelifedrawing It´s a pleasure! I admire your edge work!!
Ow and thank you!
I´m afraid that I don´t have access to any different type of newsprint rather than the regular one - also the cheapest newsprint you can get - not for drawing! But it´s good to know anyways!! Thanks again!! And hugs from Brazil!!
Great video Kenzo, thank you!
thanks Emma hope you've been well!
It's sooooo helpful!!! Thank you really!
Glad it helped!
I missed you so much) thank you for another great video an explanation!
Thanks Karina we miss you too! Hope you are doing ok there :)
start with the grid
srsly - when you see that you actually SEE (and not think what you see) and feel good about the result (and grid helps amazingly with portrait painting), try again without so many brackets withing the grid or without any grid at all.
But do it at least once. It really has an impact on your observation skills.
6:50 "i refuse the question"
من مصر شكرا لك على هذا المجهود الرائع الجميل
What a discovery.
Learning to freehand portraits is a great thing, but let's not forget art history here. A lot of very famous people traced portraits. Leonardo Da Vinci used a camera obscura. Norman Rockwell used and overhead projector.
I'm not here to say any particular process is bad, but we need to temper our expected results depending on what we're looking at. A large number of portraits have been accomplished with tracing, so when an artist compares their portrait to another artists' portrait, they need to consider if the work they are comparing is created using photography or an optical technique.
yes that's a good point and one i want to address in the next upcoming video on likeness. i'll talk about tracing or grids etc, and how in my opinion it's not 'cheating', but what method you choose to pursue depends on what you want to make. freehanding is good for me, but i love artwork from artists who use tracing and grids too. great point about comparing your own stuff to others!
@@lovelifedrawing Just to be clear, I don't think it's cheating either. If Da Vinci can do it, we all can.
Which charcoal are you using here?
Pitt Pastel pencil
I think the problem people have with the Loomis method is that they miss key aspects of the method. They start with a circle, then the dividing of the face ect. Then they start adding the features inside the sphere and parameters, that misses two crucial steps. You start as I just described then you add on top of the sphere the protruding bone mass ( cheek bones, the brow protruding bones ect.) then after studying the muscle anatomy you lay that knowledge on top of the bone structure. It's a conceptual idea that starts off with a sphere, then protruding bone, then muscle. If you miss those two other steps then the face usually becomes very claustrophobic and flat. Please read the book if haven't done so and try to copy his basic drawings of those two concepts. I didn't like the method either for ages until I read the book instead of someone else explaining it to me. It only makes sense if you follow ALL the concepts
Also it is just a rough guide, the division of the head isn't exactly the same for every head, neither are concepts on how long legs or torso is on every person but it is damn close.
Loomis method will make your heads have a structure that is hard to match but you sacrifice being more liberal with approach that can make your drawings lack in other ways you might desire. My advice is to learn as many ways as possible but really learn them to enhance your breadth as an artist if you're into that sort of thing
Last thing is that counting on value will limit you to things with dramatic lighting for a guide on measuring. If you use the Loomis method you'll be able to draw the head in diffused lighting
Thanks Paul! I did read the book, and went over sections a few times, but that was a long time ago during those failed early attempts. So I need to revisit it for sure. I do find that for me at least the Reilly rhythms work so well to start sculpting out the face itself and make sense with my gestural ideas for the figure too, so that’s been such a strong addition with Loomis helping me throw down the first lump of clay
Nice! I honestly haven't looked up the Rielly rhythm method, I've seen pictures of it, just haven't looked into the theory behind it. Keen to get into life drawing and your vids are tops!! Cheers mate
Is your channel demonetized or why do I get no ads? Either way, your videos are really useful 👍
yes i got banned from ever getting any ad revenue unfortunately. still don't know why!
😯@@lovelifedrawing
That Walter white sketch 😍
hey thanks! it was so funny cos i tried so many times to draw breaking bad characters a decade ago, then i try again and the sketch came out in 5 mins!
What's that small pencil you're using? Is it charcoal?
it's a black Pitt Pastel pencil. charcoal pencil would also work great
Hello, Kenzo! Trying to post a comment here about how to reach you but it keeps disappearing. If I sign up for a month’s paid subscription will contact information be provided there? Thanks in advance!
Hi yes or you can just sign up to our newsletter through our website and reply. i don't usually put my email address out on public pages
@@lovelifedrawingOk, Kenzo - I'll sign up for the newsletter and then go from there once I've had a chance to ask you my question. 😊
what is the pencil?
Pitt Pastel black
“See if you can relate to this”, pulls up footage of him drawing a reference i have tried to draw before. 0:06
I lost my focus when he mentioned that he was once 38! Now, back to the video.
None of the links are working for me...
Should be fixed now hopefully- let me know if jot
Been through this struggle. Once you realise the methods aren’t step by steps, but much like a figure abstraction just a means to help you see it starts to click. A modified Loomis/Reilly approach seems to yield the best results, at least for me.
With celebrity portraits also the great Neil Adams has a piece of advice: trace! This is something few artists realise: most illustrators who leave you thinking, ‘how the hell did they do that?’ are actually tracing, tracing with know how, for sure, but tracing because in commercial art what matters is a good result on a deadline, not how you got there! From Mucha and Hopper to Fuchs and Sienkiewicz a LOT of graphic artists TRACE. Be careful here though guys, tracing is for advanced draughtsman, you need to do plenty of reps before you can do it well. But while for us artists tracing might as well be a four letter word for illustrators it’s just another tool, albeit an advanced one.
Not a popular opinion, but somehow i dont really like loomis, reilly, asarov... But when i saw bridgeman faces daaamn, i actually felt like i can undarstand things, not just learn rules... Ofc im not an artist or anything, i just wanted to mention theres a lot of methods, that u can try and have another perspective on how u approach drawing somebody, not just the famous ones (loomis, asarov...)
You should actually try reading the Loomis books and not just assume he has one specific face type. Far from it. That he has only one technique. Far from it. I've read 6 of Loomis books. "Drawing the Head and Hands" has 129 pages dedicated to the head. Seems like a lot of pages for "one specific face type". Then there is "Fun with a Pencil" with 49 more pages dedicated to the head alone which is almost half the book. Covers cartoon heads of every shape, caricature and realistic heads of every age. Yet you claim only one head type? I don't expect everyone to be happy with Loomis but find it odd that the internet seems to think the only thing to Loomis is one picture from one page from one of his books.
That's the exact opposite of how I found the methods. I always had trouble with all the other methods, but when I found the loomis method on drawing faces daamn, I actually fet like I could undertstand.
@@ducksoff7236 My bad, gonna edit the comment. As I said, im not an artist, haven't read the book. I watched proko and other artist's tutorials on that, and they said, this is the Loomis head and u can exaggarate and modify as you wish. (And I took that for granted.) The fundamental constration is the same, but with other modification, but as you said, its then not the case. Gonna look for it, when I have that much time for this hobby.
@@samueltorok601 No worries. I just feel like Loomis has been getting a bad rap on the internet lately. Since everyone just sees one picture or some youtuber giving a lesson on one thing then claiming "Loomis method". If you really want to start down the Loomis road "Fun with a Pencil is severely under represented and is a treasure trove of both the "basics" and how to play with the basics to get differing results.
The loomis method is useless if you don’t know the structure of the head, all these cheat sheets only work if you know what the different things of the method portray.
Get out of my head! haha
Dear young sir , I think that it is nicer of you (bad grammar) to actually share with other artists and enthusiasts re drawings and painting.
BTW.... what is your formula for your youthful appearance? Let me guess. ………passion for life and art.
Ciao, from Capetown
Face, hands, feet, minimum lines- makes me want to quit. Edit: Every-time these videos pop up, I'd like to try drawing but fear paralyses cause I want to do a good job and know I'll hate it. The struggle man...
Practice is key, you have to keep doing the hard yards, you never stop learning or improving- I have the fear of failure too that stops me trying just to avoid the crushing disappointment of failure but then there’s the odd time when a part is right and so I just try to reflect on this and do more. For me it’s time. But carry a5 sketchbook and a pencil everywhere and draw anything. Eventually even your mark making will improve even if your accuracy isn’t. Good luck
Silly me, I thought "a portrait system that works" in the title meant that is what you would present. Instead you give a history of failure and a claim to have finally found a method, and indication that it's easier if you don't need the portrait to look like the subject. So, thanks for the personal history.
The thing is there is no “one system” that will work for everyone. I think him giving a history of his past work was very helpful and important to show his progress and how combining 3 different drawing methods as well as being a little more patient was what pushed him over the difficulty hump he faced with portraits for years. If anything how he explained his process is rather helpful! In portraiture your priority shouldn’t always be likeness, that will only slow you down. If you actually focus on the general planes of the head first and getting the basic values down you will get a resemblance of the reference by default (assuming your construction is decent) and yes simplifying your subject into only a couple values IS easier so what he said is not wrong 🤷♀️ that can be applied to all of drawing and painting too! Over time you’ll automatically become more accurate and get the likeness better. I’m sorry if I misinterpreted your comment in anyway but I hope what I said is helpful regardless!
It is a system that he found to work… not a short cut which is what I think you were looking for if you’re honest? He’s saying it’s a combination of loomis, Riley, ditching searching for likeness, looking for big forms, blocking in and practicing shorter sketches, ignoring the failures just sketch and do more and more of them. There’s no “short cut” that other people promise, he’s saying that “the system” is not one thing but a combination of things that have OBVIOUSLY worked for him and can work for others as it’s totally relatable.