= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Raemon comments on Drawing Less Wrong: Technical Skill - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (36)
I thought this was clear but a few people have been confused. I don't think I can explain it better than the followup paragraph already tried though:
"But the figures there communicate a good understanding of anatomy, a grasp of weight, decent composition. You can see from the third example, where the body turns and the shoulders overlap, that they're drawing what they see. You can tell that one foot is pointing towards the audience and the other is pointed to the right, even though both feet are a buzzy blob of lines."
Example A is floating in the air, not showing any realistic weight to how a body would fall, and each limb is sort of presented "flatly", instead of foreshortened.
Oh, okay. Your original wording just seemed to imply that there was some deeper skill involved with drawing pictures like example A, which was specific to that style and independent from the stuff in the paragraph that you just quoted.
Part of the confusion came from the fact that I interpret the style of example A as being one that doesn't even try to look realistic, so a paragraph explaining the greater realism of example B came off as unrelated.