Imo it’s good note for experienced artists but not beginner ones. Beginners do need to be able to get used to detail first rather than focus on what looks right imo. What looks right to an experienced artist isn’t the same as what looks right to a beginner. And what looks right to a beginner can be very wrong imo.
Hi, professional 3D animator here. 1:54 Who cares about breaking the model? CFX and rendering artists (a lot). Imagine running cloth or fur simulations on some of those broken models, and then later down the line realizing that the posing/animation, despite looking good in previz/playblast, not only breaking those sims, but also casting a dropped shadow or a reflection in a mirror that looks eye popping, goofy, and completely out of place (like in earlier versions of Cyberpunk 2077 where when you swim underwater you could see the legs of the dropped shadow being in T pose). Foreshortening and any other major distortion can be good in 3D depending on the project's style and appeal (in fact this is something 3D artists learn a lot from 2D), but it's very important to ask what will be the final render and how those foreshortening will affect subsequent departments to avoid unpleasant surprises. If the project has a semi or hyper realistic look with detailed dropped shadows/reflections, fur and/or cloth sim, try not to break the model too much and use foreshortening in moderation or more smartly. If not, like for simpler or very stylized projects, go nuts! 😊 In a lot of prods I worked on we were recalled to fix our animation because the decisions we made during this process broke things later down the pipeline that were deemed too expensive/complicated to fix in cfx/render (despite it being validated in previz). And it's not just in smaller productions. Those things happen even at Illum and DW. Moral of the story: ask yourself or your client about the final output first. If the cfx/render are going to be realistic, try achieving appealing anims/poses with breaking the model as little as possible. This can also help the animator learn about body mechanics and make foreshortening less faked.
Hi! Thanks so much for telling me all this. Considering the later process in animation is key when working with a team, although for 2d artists that might not really apply as much. Still, the point that I was trying to make (and I may have failed to do so) is the following: when studying perspective and foreshortening most teachers and available resources will tell students to focus on accuracy and realism, and the idea of having to draw things "the right way" is something that has stopped my progress as an artist several times during the last 20 years. This video is about foreshortening, yes, but it is also a bit about moving away from all the technical aspects from classical drawing because it may not deliver the results you want, and that conflict between "how you should draw something" vs "what you want your drawing to look like" can take a big hit on your confidence. Or as someone said in other comment, know the rules so you can break them.
@@Javicandraw Yes, I can definitely understand the "know the rules stance". Of course the experience will greatly vary from individual animators, and at the end of the day the technique/rules can become irrelevant as long as the end result looks interesting and fun (and for all you know this can spark innovation in the long run), and breaking the model is also a valid way to test its limits (especially in pre prod).
There's a really nasty habit of trying to turn art (and music, so media) into an exact science- and of course when we do that, we get caught up in a metaphorical machine. Art always has been, and always will be, based on FEEL over all.
I agree... I had made a video on foreshortening 8 years ago and at some point my recommendation was to "wing it" or to feel things out. While I still believe this, I also like to find small tricks that might let me keep my confidence on the process a bit high during the "feeling" part
The severed limbs could actually be cool for cinematography stuff. Like having another person hold extend their arms towards the camera but it's not the actor's hands to get the composition you want
@@prrithwirajbarman8389 you can have both depending on how stylized you want your work to be, but even if you want to be really anatomically correct, being able to read a characters actions and pose takes a priority over how correct the anatomy or the perspective is. Thats why Tony Bonilla stretched Mirabels arms. The “correct” version wasn’t as clear and the hands looked to close to her face.
this is actually how ive always done foreshortening ! i never found the coils to be particularly useful, and the whole rubber band thing was something i used to check if i drew it right rather than to construct the drawing
It's funny that he says to think like a 3D artist, whereas I think of this as thinking like a 2D artist. Draw the parts you want to focus on (head, hand, etc), then draw everything in between. Overlapping shapes is the only thing you really need to practice, mentioned at 7:09. I've done it this way since I was a teen starting to draw comic books, and it's always worked.
Hey! Yeah I get what you mean. maybe it's me but in fine arts school everything that had to do with foreshortening and perspective was so overwhelmingly technical that my idea of "thinking like a 2d artist" might not be the same as everyone else. This is a video where I try to tell myself to let go of that idea and share my process.
This "landmarks" technique is very interesting, I've been doing something similar on instinct. The cylinders and coiling still come in handy when I'm struggling with definition of the shape, though.
Another great example of foreshortening is in Fellowship of the Ring: when climbing the Misty Mountains to take the path of Caradhras, Frodo slips and tumbles down a slope of snow, dropping the Ring in the process. When the Ring is picked up (by Boromir), it is a close-up of the Ring in the snow being lifted by a chain-the ring used in the shot (and other similar close-ups) was about 6 inches wide and was so heavy they needed mechanical help to lift it with the chain.
🐚 The 3d forshorting trick is genius,never new they had to Actually stretch the models,but honesly that makes it good because your able to stylize the perpective,and make it easier.🐠
Watching your channel is so bizarre and delightfully inspiring to me, because I haven't drawn in nearly 4 years and pretty much gave up on it after about 12 years of doing it fulltime, because being self taught none of my techniques were matching with what i was seeing in books and videos, and I just found myself trying to relearn everything I already knew before I could even get to the baseline of what others wanted to teach me! It just got too frustrating and I decided I wouldn't do it anymore until I could afford formal classical training because I didn't want to reinforce anymore 'bad habits' in my construction techniques. Then a few weeks ago I stumble across your video about drawing faces better and think, oh! Maybe this will help me do it the 'right' way! But then your crazy new drawing technique is to debunk the standard technique in books and start with the nose, which is the way I've always done it! It was fun to watch, an amusing coincidence, and I drew some faces for fun. Then a few days ago I come across your technique for simplifying underface chin angles, and again, thought I might learn the 'right' way to do it, but that C curve is exactly what I have always done as well! Though your arrow idea has definitely blown my mind and will be added to refine my system in the future Since I was always a character designer I also went ahead and watched your asian eye tutorial to see if it taught me anything new, and again, the technique was to draw the brows and eye sockets before the actual eyes or lids themselves, which has always been the technique I used because it gives so much more freedom in building out the features and creating personal eye shapes for each person that's being drawn! Your duck-foot technique is also very similar to the one I prefer, except for me I always used poorly trimmed horse hooves as my shape guide lol. Now this technique using key points and filling in the gaps to help with foreshortening is killing me bc again, I thought I'd learn the 'right' way to do it but you're again debunking the classical literature and doing things the way that /I/ always have It's clear to me that we have very similar thought processes, and watching you unlearn confusing classical techniques has managed to teach me far more than any other system ever has, while also helping me improve my own techniques and realize they're apparently not 'wrong' after all, just non technical.
turns out there's not a "correct" way to draw. we all have different processes because we all have different strenghts and weaknesses. That's why I always look up to animators, because they have to be really resourcefull while on the clock so they come up with fantastic tricks that get the job done, even if it is not supposedly "correct"
it is the least tricky part, trust me. if you are a digital illustrator, a lot of apps like Adobe fresco and Clip studio have perspective tools that draw the lines for you. If not, there's always Lazy Nezumi which is a plug in for photoshop. If you are a traditional ilustrator, get a ruler, draw lines towards the points. IT can get more complicated than that but not by much.
In my opinion, most of these 3d shots with stretched characters can be achieved by changing the field of view of the camera. They're just putting the distortion on the characters instead of the lens
It's like that in game making too. A 3D environment may be designed to look kind of bad to save on time and memory so that at a distance, it still looks good. That, or nothing is drawn where the camera doesn't look.
@Javicandraw seriously, it's easy to forget when practising art that the point of it at the end is to have a cool result and get bogged down trying to have everything accurate. This makes me want to go and do really dynamic angles that I was always intimidated by. ☆O☆
@@Howdyasdo that’s the thing isn’t it? We get overwhelmed with academic and mathematical accuracy that it is easy to forget that we as artists are trying to comunícate something. And if that mathematical accuracy gets in the way of what we want to say we should throw it out of the way!
Since you mentioned sculpture, such forced foreshortening is actually used in sculpture and architecture, although not so exaggerated. In a lot of classical buildings the columns are not parallel, but instead are slightly narrower at the top to make them look taller. The opposite is done too. Michelangelo's David has bigger head and torso then it should have in order to make it look better when seen from the bottom. I think a similar trick was used in the statue of liberty... Since ancient times artists have figured out that you can get more 'believable' results by being less realistic.
That's wild, man! Like Marshal from Draftsmen said, perspective is both a discovery and an invention. Honestly, seeing those broken models reminds me of 'squash and stretch' method.
I actually stumbled into this technique a couple of years ago when I was trying to get better with drawing hands and fingers. I realised that drawing the hand becomes easier if I draw the palm first then where I think the finger tips should be. I then connect the fingertips to the base of the hand using 2 or 3 cylinders.
Great approach. Especially with no more than two landmarks, you can do whatever you want size-wise and still make it work by connecting the dots correctly. As always, the hard part is consistency, as soon as several different subjects are prone to the same foreshortening. Also, one should not understand this as a "get out of jail free" card to not complete the sketch of the body, lest one might end up with a Fight Club movie poster style abomination.
Exactly! It's not really a cheat, but with the landmarks in place you have a good idea of how the rest of the body should appear proportionally compared to the landmarks.
I learned to use landmarks by myself, without knowing it was the right way, I tought that cheating like this wouldn't be anywhere near the right way to do it, but it was what looked the best for my drawings. Glad to know that I wasn't doing it wrong the whole time
I found out the same thing myself awhile back when I moved to 3D art becuase I was getting frustrated with my drawing skills, my drawings did'nt look right because I could tell they weren't accurate but when making 3d they didnt feel right even though they were technically correct then another npr artist showed how they did it some mech art showed how the arm was super streched and it made so much more sense to me and was easier to grasp mentally becuase breaking something that is accurate to make it to look good was mentally easier to grasp this made 3d and 2d stuff so much better for me.
Every 3D artist will, at some point, encounter a scenario where their model can't do a pose that a real person can, due to the model's stylized proportions. There are three options: 1. Try another pose 2. Break the rig 3. Give up
I'm so honestly impressed with myself rn bc this is what I already do. I never understood coils bc it just never looked correct. Through trial and error I figured out this method all on my own a few years back! It makes me so happy to know it's actually a method other people use and not just some weird thing I do
Well, that's interesting, i kinda always draw like this '-' I do this with 3D too, while modeling i do the parts that i want to model first, and change scale a thousand times to decide if the feel is right. In my actual game protagonist, i started with his 6 finger foot-hands, then legs, HUD spine, harpoon hand, torso, mask, normal arm, a chain that hangs in the waist, armor, and the final part was his skull underneath the mask, so yeah! landmarks!
I think the premise of doing this is that you don't have a free camera perspective. And you need to distort part of it. And the destroyed model will not appear in the camera. Otherwise, it will lose the meaning of doing this. Although this does save a lot of time. For example, the time to adjust the camera. But this is still limited. Whether it is an animated film or a live-action film, this method has very large limitations, or in other words, it cannot be used in all shots. It can only be used in some shots. This method is not suitable for games because players can rotate the camera to control the camera. Once the perspective can be left, you can't just make part of it. Early FPS games did separate the third-person perspective and the first-person perspective. But the premise of doing this is that other people will not see what happens in the first-person perspective. However, this was done at the beginning only because of limited computing power. It can only be done this way. Now the game can freely switch between the first-person or third-person perspectives. Any animation distortion will be seen. Therefore, it is necessary to point out the scope of application of this method. That Sonic is actually a static picture, he only needs to output one frame at a specific angle. But if you are making a continuous animation, obviously you can't do this. The correct perspective is still important, and people can easily find those distorted parts. So this can't be everything.
Ok, but this explanation is not complete without showing what those 3D model shots would look like with accurate models, and explaining why the broken models look "better".
I see it working in all of then...except for Mirabel. I refuse to accept they couldn't do the shot without streeeching her like that 😅 It really felt like a camera problem, not a proportion problem.
🫶I suck at dynamic poses, this might he a game changer. This might be useful for newbies like me: - Paste the perspective grid - Mask it - Let only the lines that you need visible - (You can also make some other lines semitransparent) - Draw I struggle with those perspective grids. And I'm bad at making my own persoective lines. What I usually do is erase all the lines that aren't useful and then start drawing. It's a good midpoint compromise when you're starting imo.
Maybe it would be easier if you worked on the overall composition first (placing the elements where you want them in the frame) and then fit he grid to that idea. don't let yourself be bound by that grid, remember we are "breaking" perspective to get the results we want. focus on that!
@@Javicandraw thank you 🫶 I guess I could place the first anchor points, I don't remember the term you used, then draw a couple of guiding lines and then keep on drawing. I know it's exactly what you said on the video, but it clicked just now for me. I really appreciate the reply 🙌
I feel like a lot of the 3D model breaking could be avoided by just widening the field of view of the camera. There's probably a more practical reason beyond the immediate shot for not doing this, though.
I've been working as an animator for kids series and animators in my team felt guild for doing it all the time... we felt like cheap cheaters... when we saw that Mirabel thing we're like "wait, disney animators are doning it too?? so screw it!!"
The real reason is that it isn't about cheating real 3D, it's that non-linear FOV is necessary to mimic on a 2D projective image what our eyes focus on in our 3D world. The issue is that it's oftentimes easier to cheat the model because 3D software are not made to have non-linear FOV adjustments
@@H2SO4pyro well I don’t really consider any of this cheating, but I needed the clickbaity title. I also find your take on this very interesting, I hadn’t considered this before: Compositions have to take into account that you focus on the whole image, and not on one thing like we do with your eyes, so attention must be redirected through composition
@Javicandraw Oh yeah, no misunderstandings here. I didn't use the word cheating on a negative sense ^^. Actually it's more than just correcting the attention focus, it's about the eye physically changing the FOV depending on where the eye is accomodating. The FOV's length is a direct consequence of the eye lens' ajustments, which increases the closer the object is to the eye. We don't really notice it because our brain corrects de distortion effects, but the change really do happen inside our eyes. On a piece of media that doesnt feature accomodation blur, we should increase the FOV the closer the object is to the eye, to keep the whole image as undistorted as possible no matter where the viewer is looking.
to a degree, it does, you still want to respect perspective, but sometimes the rule of "obeying angles and perspective" might be too much work and it might not give us the results we want.
Well, it's only half the explanation unless you show us what happens if the 3D artists do NOT use distortion. Why can't they use fish-eye lens? Why can't they... just do it without distortion? Isn't the whole point of foreshortening to convey reality that works like this? I thought our brain only likes what makes sense physics-wise.
Fish-eye lenses would distort the background and other elements too which isn't what they want 90% of the time. It's also, a very specific kind of distortion that they might not like. Why can't they do it without distortion? Because they don't get the shot they want in that case. Remember that these are STYLIZED models and aren't proportionally true to... most things we know in real life. For example, the sonic image they were compositing bear almost no resemblance to human proportions, and seen from an angle that effect might be exaggerated. Also a lot of other examples were exaggerated for a cartoony effect (TF2 ones for example) and once again, bear no relation to real life.
I imagine it's because changing the camera and optics will affect everything in the scene from composition to perspective and proportions. Breaking the rig allows you to do dramatic scenes more easily.
@@milesyalzin2018 Still would love to see comparison to non-exaggerated version. Would it be that bad? I don't mean giving up on exaggeration in animation, just no breaking the model. Can't fish-eye lens be only applied to the model? It's a program after all, not RL. Seen those videos of n-dimensions? You can pretty much have ALL of possible geometries in one frame. 3D world next to 4D world next to 5D, spherical and triangular...
@@RedGallardo The easiest way to think about an example is if you want a character to have extreme foreshortening on their hands, but also keep their face in focus. With a fish-eye lens, there would be too much perspective and probably barrel distortion on the face it becomes really ugly if you want a good composition between the hand and the face. By breaking the rig, you can keep a good focal length while still achieving the composition you are looking for without much distortion.
@@RusticKey But they manage in theaters and films, mimes and magicians don't need it to look good... Photography also only uses reality as a base. So I wonder why only 1 area needs this.
2:04 I don't get this. Those 3d artists are literally animating by using 2d artists technique. You could see them especially in splasharts for games like Lol and other mobas. So why you as a "2d artist" start drawing like a 3d artists exactly. Also I get the idea of breaking the character model to exaggerate movements but I will never understand the Mirabel example. Can't he just change the camera focal length to achieve the same effect? I guess if you're using onky 1 focal length you have to do that but am i crazy for thinking in 3d animation you can control a "virtual camera" and it's focal length and etc.?
In the thread the artist explains how he couldn't get the right lens without having mirabel's arms looking too close to the face, so he ended up doing this. Maybe I shoud have explained that I went to fine arts school and my teaching was too classical, so things like perspective and foreshortening had strict rules. So the idea of breaking this rules to get the drawing you want was hard for me to grasp in the beginning.
because sometimes distorting the perspective still doesn't give you the results you want. Camera angles and accurate perspective doesn't account for readable action or flow. You have to do what's best for what you are trying to communicate, even if it's not accurate.
"stop thinking like photographers" perhaps some of the foreshortening can be solved in 3d if they understood camera, actually. The extreme foreshortening stems from wide angle lens.... that 3d can simulate. Exaggeration is great. But varying lens is too. It's kind of embarrassing that they break mold rather than stage things.
That is not what is going on though. Animators do understand how camera lenses work. But readability and composition are more important than accuracy. And while your argument can seem logical for animators, how do you explain that shot from Hellboy 2? the logic is the same: no lens width or angle matched the composition desired, so they "cheated" to get the results they wanted.
@@Javicandraw I get the cheating. But it seems like jumping to it rather than taking advantage, first, of filmmaking knowledge. As more and more people start with the fake-way, they lose connection with what the tool they are using was replicating to begin with. That's all.
0:00 But wait, based on the thumbnail, wouldn't this almost mostly apply to 3D animation/rigging at best? I guess if a separate opinion could elaborate while I'm asking.
![PASULOL รามเกียรติ์ ตอนที่ 4 นนทกพบรัก [Ramakien Ep.4: Nonthok in love]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tMUQgmZzf_A/mqdefault.jpg)
In stylised art, drawing what _looks right_ is always more important than drawing what is true! That is the main advantage of stylisation, too, imo.
WORD 🥂my dude, can tell people what you just said?? I'm gonna use that 🔥🔥
Agreed, also in 2d art, foreshortening is exaggerated, especially in action shots
heck even in graphics design and lettering that's true , always do what looks correct rather than what's accurate
Exactly! I've found myself thinking about how to draw something "right" when I should have been asking myself how to make it look good.
Imo it’s good note for experienced artists but not beginner ones. Beginners do need to be able to get used to detail first rather than focus on what looks right imo.
What looks right to an experienced artist isn’t the same as what looks right to a beginner. And what looks right to a beginner can be very wrong imo.
Splatoon 3 also does this! The more exaggerated the style is, the best it works
I agree!!!
W splat 3 comment
Do you have examples? I love splatoon, would be hilarious to see some behind the scenes stuff
Hi, professional 3D animator here.
1:54 Who cares about breaking the model? CFX and rendering artists (a lot).
Imagine running cloth or fur simulations on some of those broken models, and then later down the line realizing that the posing/animation, despite looking good in previz/playblast, not only breaking those sims, but also casting a dropped shadow or a reflection in a mirror that looks eye popping, goofy, and completely out of place (like in earlier versions of Cyberpunk 2077 where when you swim underwater you could see the legs of the dropped shadow being in T pose).
Foreshortening and any other major distortion can be good in 3D depending on the project's style and appeal (in fact this is something 3D artists learn a lot from 2D), but it's very important to ask what will be the final render and how those foreshortening will affect subsequent departments to avoid unpleasant surprises.
If the project has a semi or hyper realistic look with detailed dropped shadows/reflections, fur and/or cloth sim, try not to break the model too much and use foreshortening in moderation or more smartly.
If not, like for simpler or very stylized projects, go nuts! 😊
In a lot of prods I worked on we were recalled to fix our animation because the decisions we made during this process broke things later down the pipeline that were deemed too expensive/complicated to fix in cfx/render (despite it being validated in previz).
And it's not just in smaller productions. Those things happen even at Illum and DW.
Moral of the story: ask yourself or your client about the final output first.
If the cfx/render are going to be realistic, try achieving appealing anims/poses with breaking the model as little as possible. This can also help the animator learn about body mechanics and make foreshortening less faked.
Hi! Thanks so much for telling me all this. Considering the later process in animation is key when working with a team, although for 2d artists that might not really apply as much. Still, the point that I was trying to make (and I may have failed to do so) is the following: when studying perspective and foreshortening most teachers and available resources will tell students to focus on accuracy and realism, and the idea of having to draw things "the right way" is something that has stopped my progress as an artist several times during the last 20 years. This video is about foreshortening, yes, but it is also a bit about moving away from all the technical aspects from classical drawing because it may not deliver the results you want, and that conflict between "how you should draw something" vs "what you want your drawing to look like" can take a big hit on your confidence. Or as someone said in other comment, know the rules so you can break them.
@@Javicandraw Yes, I can definitely understand the "know the rules stance".
Of course the experience will greatly vary from individual animators, and at the end of the day the technique/rules can become irrelevant as long as the end result looks interesting and fun (and for all you know this can spark innovation in the long run), and breaking the model is also a valid way to test its limits (especially in pre prod).
There's a really nasty habit of trying to turn art (and music, so media) into an exact science- and of course when we do that, we get caught up in a metaphorical machine. Art always has been, and always will be, based on FEEL over all.
I agree... I had made a video on foreshortening 8 years ago and at some point my recommendation was to "wing it" or to feel things out. While I still believe this, I also like to find small tricks that might let me keep my confidence on the process a bit high during the "feeling" part
Interpreting art is for sure based on feeling. Making art is based on principles so specific it might as well be a science.
The severed limbs could actually be cool for cinematography stuff. Like having another person hold extend their arms towards the camera but it's not the actor's hands to get the composition you want
I imagine that, just like in the hellboy example I showed, this technique has been used a lot of times!
This goes on the list of “advantage of 2d”
hahahaa I agree!
@@Javicandraw So visualizing is more important than learning a correct full body anatomy?
@@prrithwirajbarman8389 you can have both depending on how stylized you want your work to be, but even if you want to be really anatomically correct, being able to read a characters actions and pose takes a priority over how correct the anatomy or the perspective is. Thats why Tony Bonilla stretched Mirabels arms. The “correct” version wasn’t as clear and the hands looked to close to her face.
>example is 3D
this is actually how ive always done foreshortening ! i never found the coils to be particularly useful, and the whole rubber band thing was something i used to check if i drew it right rather than to construct the drawing
I always just used the boxes hahaha 😅
From my little 3D experience, fussing with camera settings, focus points,wide angles etc can be frustrating..so good hack to know..
I imagine that if even disney artists skip all that messing with settings it must be for a reason!
It's funny that he says to think like a 3D artist, whereas I think of this as thinking like a 2D artist. Draw the parts you want to focus on (head, hand, etc), then draw everything in between. Overlapping shapes is the only thing you really need to practice, mentioned at 7:09. I've done it this way since I was a teen starting to draw comic books, and it's always worked.
Hey! Yeah I get what you mean. maybe it's me but in fine arts school everything that had to do with foreshortening and perspective was so overwhelmingly technical that my idea of "thinking like a 2d artist" might not be the same as everyone else. This is a video where I try to tell myself to let go of that idea and share my process.
This "landmarks" technique is very interesting, I've been doing something similar on instinct. The cylinders and coiling still come in handy when I'm struggling with definition of the shape, though.
I agree, I'm not against coiling just not as an first step but rather as a way to connect the landmarks
Another great example of foreshortening is in Fellowship of the Ring: when climbing the Misty Mountains to take the path of Caradhras, Frodo slips and tumbles down a slope of snow, dropping the Ring in the process. When the Ring is picked up (by Boromir), it is a close-up of the Ring in the snow being lifted by a chain-the ring used in the shot (and other similar close-ups) was about 6 inches wide and was so heavy they needed mechanical help to lift it with the chain.
This is so cool
🐚 The 3d forshorting trick is genius,never new they had to Actually stretch the models,but honesly that makes it good because your able to stylize the perpective,and make it easier.🐠
exactly! us 2d artists need to keep this in mind when physical accuracy gets in the way.
Watching your channel is so bizarre and delightfully inspiring to me, because I haven't drawn in nearly 4 years and pretty much gave up on it after about 12 years of doing it fulltime, because being self taught none of my techniques were matching with what i was seeing in books and videos, and I just found myself trying to relearn everything I already knew before I could even get to the baseline of what others wanted to teach me! It just got too frustrating and I decided I wouldn't do it anymore until I could afford formal classical training because I didn't want to reinforce anymore 'bad habits' in my construction techniques.
Then a few weeks ago I stumble across your video about drawing faces better and think, oh! Maybe this will help me do it the 'right' way! But then your crazy new drawing technique is to debunk the standard technique in books and start with the nose, which is the way I've always done it! It was fun to watch, an amusing coincidence, and I drew some faces for fun.
Then a few days ago I come across your technique for simplifying underface chin angles, and again, thought I might learn the 'right' way to do it, but that C curve is exactly what I have always done as well! Though your arrow idea has definitely blown my mind and will be added to refine my system in the future
Since I was always a character designer I also went ahead and watched your asian eye tutorial to see if it taught me anything new, and again, the technique was to draw the brows and eye sockets before the actual eyes or lids themselves, which has always been the technique I used because it gives so much more freedom in building out the features and creating personal eye shapes for each person that's being drawn!
Your duck-foot technique is also very similar to the one I prefer, except for me I always used poorly trimmed horse hooves as my shape guide lol.
Now this technique using key points and filling in the gaps to help with foreshortening is killing me bc again, I thought I'd learn the 'right' way to do it but you're again debunking the classical literature and doing things the way that /I/ always have
It's clear to me that we have very similar thought processes, and watching you unlearn confusing classical techniques has managed to teach me far more than any other system ever has, while also helping me improve my own techniques and realize they're apparently not 'wrong' after all, just non technical.
turns out there's not a "correct" way to draw. we all have different processes because we all have different strenghts and weaknesses. That's why I always look up to animators, because they have to be really resourcefull while on the clock so they come up with fantastic tricks that get the job done, even if it is not supposedly "correct"
Give me 2D art any day. The labor it takes to work with pencil and paper are far more impressive than the cheats of 3D.
Sweet 💖👌 Now I just gotta figure out perspective 💀
it is the least tricky part, trust me. if you are a digital illustrator, a lot of apps like Adobe fresco and Clip studio have perspective tools that draw the lines for you. If not, there's always Lazy Nezumi which is a plug in for photoshop.
If you are a traditional ilustrator, get a ruler, draw lines towards the points. IT can get more complicated than that but not by much.
I like how short and to the point this video is, while still being very informative. Thank you so much for this!
Never thought about how the phrase " your muscles are a subtle shape" could be used as a great insult.
lol now I want to use it 🤣
In my opinion, most of these 3d shots with stretched characters can be achieved by changing the field of view of the camera. They're just putting the distortion on the characters instead of the lens
It's like that in game making too. A 3D environment may be designed to look kind of bad to save on time and memory so that at a distance, it still looks good. That, or nothing is drawn where the camera doesn't look.
You make it seem so easy!! Saved this for later reference, I've been struggling a bit with foreshortening recently.
awesome! let me know if it worked!
I LOVE this sort of stuff so much! It is so interesting how it works and can really liven up artwork
Holy shit this is a game changer
Thanks!!! it's a bit of a mindset change but it has helped me a lot.
@Javicandraw seriously, it's easy to forget when practising art that the point of it at the end is to have a cool result and get bogged down trying to have everything accurate.
This makes me want to go and do really dynamic angles that I was always intimidated by.
☆O☆
@@Howdyasdo that’s the thing isn’t it? We get overwhelmed with academic and mathematical accuracy that it is easy to forget that we as artists are trying to comunícate something. And if that mathematical accuracy gets in the way of what we want to say we should throw it out of the way!
haha, recognizing some of those renders in the twitter thread was a pleasant surprise! this video was really helpful so thank you :D
lol that thread changed my life.
Your tutorials are so mind blowing to me ,your face guide and this guide is so useful
That's great!!!! I work hard on them, I'm glad you like them!
Since you mentioned sculpture, such forced foreshortening is actually used in sculpture and architecture, although not so exaggerated.
In a lot of classical buildings the columns are not parallel, but instead are slightly narrower at the top to make them look taller.
The opposite is done too. Michelangelo's David has bigger head and torso then it should have in order to make it look better when seen from the bottom. I think a similar trick was used in the statue of liberty...
Since ancient times artists have figured out that you can get more 'believable' results by being less realistic.
That's wild, man! Like Marshal from Draftsmen said, perspective is both a discovery and an invention. Honestly, seeing those broken models reminds me of 'squash and stretch' method.
I actually stumbled into this technique a couple of years ago when I was trying to get better with drawing hands and fingers. I realised that drawing the hand becomes easier if I draw the palm first then where I think the finger tips should be. I then connect the fingertips to the base of the hand using 2 or 3 cylinders.
This is so helpful! Thank you!
You are welcome! glad to help!
Best advice ever! Thank you so much!
I'm glad you liked it!
Great approach. Especially with no more than two landmarks, you can do whatever you want size-wise and still make it work by connecting the dots correctly. As always, the hard part is consistency, as soon as several different subjects are prone to the same foreshortening.
Also, one should not understand this as a "get out of jail free" card to not complete the sketch of the body, lest one might end up with a Fight Club movie poster style abomination.
Exactly! It's not really a cheat, but with the landmarks in place you have a good idea of how the rest of the body should appear proportionally compared to the landmarks.
oh my god that's me! 0:05 i was Not expecting this on election night 😂
Hehehe I owe you my thanks, your "tricks" unlocked something in my brain
@ happy to help XD
This is a game changer to me, who did both 2D and 3D, but my 2D frames were always wonkier than the 3D ones as I couldn't hit those landmarks right.
I learned to use landmarks by myself, without knowing it was the right way, I tought that cheating like this wouldn't be anywhere near the right way to do it, but it was what looked the best for my drawings. Glad to know that I wasn't doing it wrong the whole time
wbk, it's called forced perspective, and it's always been my favorite technique to use when drawing.
I don't draw much, I'm more of a 3D artist but I still learn from watching people draw!
I found out the same thing myself awhile back when I moved to 3D art becuase I was getting frustrated with my drawing skills, my drawings did'nt look right because I could tell they weren't accurate but when making 3d they didnt feel right even though they were technically correct then another npr artist showed how they did it some mech art showed how the arm was super streched and it made so much more sense to me and was easier to grasp mentally becuase breaking something that is accurate to make it to look good was mentally easier to grasp this made 3d and 2d stuff so much better for me.
absolutely! I spent years focuse on accuracy when I should have spent it focusing on how to make it look good.
Thanks for this video! All this info sounds super useful!
hilarious thumbnail, perfect!
good stuff!
Thank you! I'm glad you liked it!
Super useful, thank you !
You are welcome!
Every 3D artist will, at some point, encounter a scenario where their model can't do a pose that a real person can, due to the model's stylized proportions. There are three options:
1. Try another pose
2. Break the rig
3. Give up
lol, I need to come up with "break the rig" but for 2d artists.
I'm so honestly impressed with myself rn bc this is what I already do. I never understood coils bc it just never looked correct. Through trial and error I figured out this method all on my own a few years back! It makes me so happy to know it's actually a method other people use and not just some weird thing I do
You are a lot talented than me then because I only figured this out two weeks ago!
Woah, it def opened my eye about foreshortening 🙏🏻✨
Thanks, It did the same for me!
Thanks, i keep this in mind when breaking the habit of perfectionism (not an insult)
lol you just helped me out a lot... and I"m a 3d artist 😂 I didn't know I was supposed to break models 😩
Well, that's interesting, i kinda always draw like this '-'
I do this with 3D too, while modeling i do the parts that i want to model first, and change scale a thousand times to decide if the feel is right. In my actual game protagonist, i started with his 6 finger foot-hands, then legs, HUD spine, harpoon hand, torso, mask, normal arm, a chain that hangs in the waist, armor, and the final part was his skull underneath the mask, so yeah! landmarks!
I think the premise of doing this is that you don't have a free camera perspective. And you need to distort part of it. And the destroyed model will not appear in the camera. Otherwise, it will lose the meaning of doing this. Although this does save a lot of time. For example, the time to adjust the camera. But this is still limited. Whether it is an animated film or a live-action film, this method has very large limitations, or in other words, it cannot be used in all shots. It can only be used in some shots. This method is not suitable for games because players can rotate the camera to control the camera. Once the perspective can be left, you can't just make part of it. Early FPS games did separate the third-person perspective and the first-person perspective. But the premise of doing this is that other people will not see what happens in the first-person perspective. However, this was done at the beginning only because of limited computing power. It can only be done this way. Now the game can freely switch between the first-person or third-person perspectives. Any animation distortion will be seen. Therefore, it is necessary to point out the scope of application of this method. That Sonic is actually a static picture, he only needs to output one frame at a specific angle. But if you are making a continuous animation, obviously you can't do this. The correct perspective is still important, and people can easily find those distorted parts. So this can't be everything.
Love this! Thank you so much!
You are welcome!
Learn the rules, then break them
Exactly
Ok, but this explanation is not complete without showing what those 3D model shots would look like with accurate models, and explaining why the broken models look "better".
You are so great to listen to, love your videos
Thanks so much! I'm a bit conscious of my accent so I try very hard to be clear and entertaining.
great solutions as always!
Thank you!
I see it working in all of then...except for Mirabel. I refuse to accept they couldn't do the shot without streeeching her like that 😅 It really felt like a camera problem, not a proportion problem.
Awesome. Subbed.
I'm happy to have you on board!
🫶I suck at dynamic poses, this might he a game changer.
This might be useful for newbies like me:
- Paste the perspective grid
- Mask it
- Let only the lines that you need visible
- (You can also make some other lines semitransparent)
- Draw
I struggle with those perspective grids. And I'm bad at making my own persoective lines.
What I usually do is erase all the lines that aren't useful and then start drawing.
It's a good midpoint compromise when you're starting imo.
Maybe it would be easier if you worked on the overall composition first (placing the elements where you want them in the frame) and then fit he grid to that idea. don't let yourself be bound by that grid, remember we are "breaking" perspective to get the results we want. focus on that!
@@Javicandraw thank you 🫶
I guess I could place the first anchor points, I don't remember the term you used, then draw a couple of guiding lines and then keep on drawing.
I know it's exactly what you said on the video, but it clicked just now for me.
I really appreciate the reply 🙌
Cool
I feel like a lot of the 3D model breaking could be avoided by just widening the field of view of the camera. There's probably a more practical reason beyond the immediate shot for not doing this, though.
As viewers, we’re like 2-Dimensional creatures who are incapable of seeing the 3D world. The 3D artist can play with our 2D minds however they like.
That's true, but as 2d artists, we can do the same!
I've always thought that drawing is basically turning your brain and hand into a 3D renderer.
I thought the same, only to find out that 3d artists don't do what I thought they did!
SYCRA MENTIONED🗣🗣🗣‼️🔥🔥🔥
that's a really good video.
Thanks!
You're welcome!
I saw that technique at pootis engage
I didn't know what that was and now I can't stop watching
I've been working as an animator for kids series and animators in my team felt guild for doing it all the time... we felt like cheap cheaters... when we saw that Mirabel thing we're like "wait, disney animators are doning it too?? so screw it!!"
is it really cheating if we are getting the results we want tho? Who judges our process?
Wonder if I can apply this to my stable diffusion arts.
it depends whether you are just using prompts or making the AI work over your art. it might work with that second option tho.
0:03 TF2 SPOTTED ‼️‼️‼️
I used to be addicted to that game
I'm so happy you're getting some attention :D !
Thank you! I'm also happy to get it :P
the way you pronounced guillermo del toro was a dead giveaway from where you are from
@@felicitaspng guissssssshhhhhherrrrrrrrmooo 🤣
Thanks
you are welcome!
The real reason is that it isn't about cheating real 3D, it's that non-linear FOV is necessary to mimic on a 2D projective image what our eyes focus on in our 3D world. The issue is that it's oftentimes easier to cheat the model because 3D software are not made to have non-linear FOV adjustments
@@H2SO4pyro well I don’t really consider any of this cheating, but I needed the clickbaity title. I also find your take on this very interesting, I hadn’t considered this before: Compositions have to take into account that you focus on the whole image, and not on one thing like we do with your eyes, so attention must be redirected through composition
@Javicandraw Oh yeah, no misunderstandings here. I didn't use the word cheating on a negative sense ^^.
Actually it's more than just correcting the attention focus, it's about the eye physically changing the FOV depending on where the eye is accomodating. The FOV's length is a direct consequence of the eye lens' ajustments, which increases the closer the object is to the eye. We don't really notice it because our brain corrects de distortion effects, but the change really do happen inside our eyes.
On a piece of media that doesnt feature accomodation blur, we should increase the FOV the closer the object is to the eye, to keep the whole image as undistorted as possible no matter where the viewer is looking.
The rule is that 2D takes precedence
Street fighter 4 designs come to mind
fighting games use this a lot. If you search for "dragon ball fighterZ free camera" you'll find a lot of examples.
Why did they model her head big asf anyway 😂
lol it looks great in the movie tho!
LoL does this too since it’s top down
I didn't know that! I'll look into it.
I thought foreshortening has to do something with camera angle
to a degree, it does, you still want to respect perspective, but sometimes the rule of "obeying angles and perspective" might be too much work and it might not give us the results we want.
@Javicandraw oh I understand
oh hey thas me
@@TubeBOI15 it was about time someone exposed you… CHEATER!!! 🤣
Well, it's only half the explanation unless you show us what happens if the 3D artists do NOT use distortion. Why can't they use fish-eye lens? Why can't they... just do it without distortion? Isn't the whole point of foreshortening to convey reality that works like this? I thought our brain only likes what makes sense physics-wise.
Fish-eye lenses would distort the background and other elements too which isn't what they want 90% of the time. It's also, a very specific kind of distortion that they might not like.
Why can't they do it without distortion? Because they don't get the shot they want in that case. Remember that these are STYLIZED models and aren't proportionally true to... most things we know in real life. For example, the sonic image they were compositing bear almost no resemblance to human proportions, and seen from an angle that effect might be exaggerated.
Also a lot of other examples were exaggerated for a cartoony effect (TF2 ones for example) and once again, bear no relation to real life.
I imagine it's because changing the camera and optics will affect everything in the scene from composition to perspective and proportions. Breaking the rig allows you to do dramatic scenes more easily.
@@milesyalzin2018 Still would love to see comparison to non-exaggerated version. Would it be that bad? I don't mean giving up on exaggeration in animation, just no breaking the model. Can't fish-eye lens be only applied to the model? It's a program after all, not RL. Seen those videos of n-dimensions? You can pretty much have ALL of possible geometries in one frame. 3D world next to 4D world next to 5D, spherical and triangular...
@@RedGallardo The easiest way to think about an example is if you want a character to have extreme foreshortening on their hands, but also keep their face in focus. With a fish-eye lens, there would be too much perspective and probably barrel distortion on the face it becomes really ugly if you want a good composition between the hand and the face. By breaking the rig, you can keep a good focal length while still achieving the composition you are looking for without much distortion.
@@RusticKey But they manage in theaters and films, mimes and magicians don't need it to look good... Photography also only uses reality as a base. So I wonder why only 1 area needs this.
i need the link to the twitter thread, please!
x.com/Tonymation/status/1633239873992953856
2:04 I don't get this. Those 3d artists are literally animating by using 2d artists technique. You could see them especially in splasharts for games like Lol and other mobas. So why you as a "2d artist" start drawing like a 3d artists exactly. Also I get the idea of breaking the character model to exaggerate movements but I will never understand the Mirabel example. Can't he just change the camera focal length to achieve the same effect? I guess if you're using onky 1 focal length you have to do that but am i crazy for thinking in 3d animation you can control a "virtual camera" and it's focal length and etc.?
In the thread the artist explains how he couldn't get the right lens without having mirabel's arms looking too close to the face, so he ended up doing this. Maybe I shoud have explained that I went to fine arts school and my teaching was too classical, so things like perspective and foreshortening had strict rules. So the idea of breaking this rules to get the drawing you want was hard for me to grasp in the beginning.
You're beginning to belive that the tube is reality and your own lives are unreal.
Bro, cheating isn't cool just call off the relationship
🤣 not that kind of cheating!
So instead of distorting the perspective they do things the hard way and distort the characters instead? WHY?!?!
because sometimes distorting the perspective still doesn't give you the results you want. Camera angles and accurate perspective doesn't account for readable action or flow. You have to do what's best for what you are trying to communicate, even if it's not accurate.
First?
🎉
🤡
☕🔥 Congratulations o(*￣▽￣*)ブ
👏👏🎉
Congratulations!
Uh? 1:56 is real? I though it was done by a robot.
@@alicesacco9329 it’s real!
"stop thinking like photographers"
perhaps some of the foreshortening can be solved in 3d if they understood camera, actually. The extreme foreshortening stems from wide angle lens.... that 3d can simulate. Exaggeration is great. But varying lens is too. It's kind of embarrassing that they break mold rather than stage things.
That is not what is going on though. Animators do understand how camera lenses work. But readability and composition are more important than accuracy. And while your argument can seem logical for animators, how do you explain that shot from Hellboy 2? the logic is the same: no lens width or angle matched the composition desired, so they "cheated" to get the results they wanted.
@@Javicandraw I get the cheating. But it seems like jumping to it rather than taking advantage, first, of filmmaking knowledge. As more and more people start with the fake-way, they lose connection with what the tool they are using was replicating to begin with. That's all.
0:00 But wait, based on the thumbnail, wouldn't this almost mostly apply to 3D animation/rigging at best? I guess if a separate opinion could elaborate while I'm asking.
Watch the video before commenting
I think the video was pretty self explainatory, what did you have questions about?