Boing Boing: The rules of drawing have got through a serious metamorphosis from the days before digital canvasses. Back in the day, it took a lot of consideration if you wanted to draw a human figure. You had to settle on the proportions of your figure, then start to bubble in the shape of various body segments.
6 comments:
This isn’t actually a good article. It’s basically an add for an app that isn’t that good. I have a 3D model app downloaded and it’s pretty helpful if you struggle with proportions. I struggle the most with lighting and shading so that’s what I use it for. While I didn’t like the article, they brought up a good point: it is a lot easier to learn how to draw now than it used to. Digital drawing and social media has really inspired a lot of young artist. This is actually why I decided not to become a freelance artist. I was really good at hyper realism but I didn’t feel like I could really contribute anything new to the 2D art world. Anyone can learn how to draw hyper realistic pictures. It’s harder to create good design that really impacts something, in the case of theater— a story.
To be honest, I was shocked by the price of this app. $50 already seemed like a lot for 3D modeling tool (that does not even offer a variety of models but just adjustable human figures?), and it being $540 regularly really seems nonsensical to me. I have several 3D programs installed that offers way more service than this one and they are not even $25. In addition, to be honest, I think referencing the 3D model could be definitely helpful, but people, especially when you are the “artist” considering to pay $50 for the program, should not be relying on this kind of softwares. Just like all the other fields, I think knowing the very basic fundamentals is extremely crucial for drawing; artists might not be expected to know all the names and the shapes of muscles while they move, but they should at least have a sense of how they would work. There is reason why people still do croquis although it is a very classical practice.
As someone that isn't an artist I found this app concept very interesting since it's the first time hearing about it. But after reading the other comments I realized I have a lot to learn about price vs product. I do agree that the article left something to be desired, I wish it had gone more in depth to the program or the work behind it. As my artistically inclined peers above said, there are other programs out there that give more for a lot less and I'm interested as to why it costs so much if better, cheaper alternatives exist. Is it something like AutoCad where part of the price is the name rather than solely the value of the functions? I'm curious about the team that created this app and what sets it apart from those less than $25 programs that do similar if not identical work. Something for me to look into in the future I suppose.
This article acts as though these tools will replace the traditional learning of proportions that every traditional artist goes through. Having taken art classes throughout my life, I believe these foundations are really important to learn so then one can play with these concepts later when making their art. This article just comes from a weird angle because I think anyone willing to drop 50$ on such an app would be an already established artist looking for a new tool. It is a very specific app too, I don’t know if it is eye-catching to non-artists or people who are learning to do art because of the price tag. Either way, I think this app is cool, but from what It looks like I have had free apps from the app store or on my computer that fulfill the same function down to the look of the characters, so I am left wondering what this app offers that justifies its investment.
Whenever I read about some 3-D rendering art that creates realistic people, whether it be art or robots, it always freaks me out a little. But after reading this article, I think it won't be too realistic and a great aid for artists who want to create a realistic and proportional human figure. However, rather than an art program, it feels more like an app where you just enter in some parameters. I wonder if this is truly considered art of the artist who enters in such parameters, because wouldn't it be the creators of the app who developed the starting sample and the parameters of how you can make the figure? It is like creating a mii or a sim or any other virtual character, where you are given the "headstart" that the article directly mentions and just change it a little from there. I seriously wonder if the rest of the world and artists alike will consider this to be truly art.
I completely agree with Jin and Rhiannon’s points that this article is basically an advertisement for an overpriced app which does not have that much crazy functionality that you can’t find on other 3D modeling software and apps. I do think that the price of 50$ is pretty ridiculous. I really agree with the point that it is much easier to learn how to draw human figures on the app then by hand and a lot of it has to do with simple human error and tangible mistakes that don’t happen on a digital piece of paper. This conversation also kind of relates to the article we read a few weeks back about whether artists prefer to draw in a physical or digital medium. There are many benefits to both of the mediums and applications such as this one help with many of the tedious problems of drawing in real life.
Post a Comment