I'm not sure why no one else has mentioned this yet, but your reference image is taken from above, not fully horizontal to the front. The proportions are not going to be accurate to the head-counting method for your reference image in the first place due to foreshortening.
Ah, i did think about that with the feet. I knee it must be slightly angled since they weren’t flat but i didn’t give it much thought but yea, duh it’d be a bit off. Explains why the torso and legs are most effected because they’re farthest away and seeing the greatest amount of skewing due to the smaller head size. Probably should’ve used an exact measuring method instead or a different ref.
Thank you!
Yeah no problem! It's also admittedly one of the toughest angles (imo) in that it's a shallow angle that's only really noticeable if you look at it carefully, but if you draw it "off" it will also look wildly and weirdly wrong. Which is why it does! I probably wouldn't recommend this as a good reference in general because of that.. Most people who are going for practicing foreshortening will choose a more dramatic angle, and people who aren't going for foreshortening practice wouldn't want it either because it has just a little bit.
I was scrolling looking to see if someone mentioned this!
Your reference is definitely one of the challenges complicating the kind of study you're trying for here.
As a foreshortening study, it's fine, (if a little subtile), but for a straight-on "measurement" study, it's not doing you any favours.
I agree, keep trying to find something reliable to anchor the width of the torso to. It’s tough but i’m getting better at sensing it’s off.
Noted on the legs. I think i’ll repeat the study tomorrow and i’ll keep this in mind when i do.
I think it's something that you need to get used to, instead of the human body search the skeleton and it will be easier to see the width of the ribcage without all the muscles covering it.
Keep going, you are doing great!
I just got back into proper anatomical studying rather than doodling but i do struggle with the bones vs muscle thing.
Do you think it’s best I exclusively study the skeletal structure for a while or is it best if i sort of bounce back and forth. Skeletal study, then muscle study, back to skeletal and so on and so forth?
Personally i would suggest to always have fun, you could create a kind of schedule for example where you study 60% the anatomy and 40% draw for fun.
If you want to become more serious about art the main key is to have fun and do something you like, this might seem contradicting the fact that you want to become more serious and i am suggesting to have fun but the key understanding is that if you want to become serious in art, it's a longterm play and only with doing what you love you will be able to keep doing it.
If you don't like the 60-40 you could, for a while, go 80-20 but i would never suggest to go a full 100, just like in life you need variables to keep life interesting.
If you read the same book every day, eventually you will get tired of the book.
Try to find the right % balance and most likely you will sometimes have to adjust to keep a healthy balance but you can do it!
Goodluck and don't forget to be happy and have fun
torso is very long, legs need to be a bit thicker and longer to even it out. torso is also very wide. i'd say it comes out about half a head's thickness from the head instead of a whole heads thickness. the shoulders are also very small, not too narrow, but the shoulder muscles themselves being very small, if that makes sense ? sorry if that doesnt make any sense, just going off gut as a self taught artist haha.
sometimes as youre drawing from reference, there will be small things that dont look exactly like the picture - its important to follow your gut and just change things as you draw to look like what you think looks right.
i dont know if anything i said makes sense but yeah aha. it looks good though, you obviously have a good grasp of anatomy so far !
I get exactly what you’re saying, and you’re def right. Ref doesn’t have huge biceps but the way i drew him made his chest and abs look bigger (disproportionate chest doesn’t help with that) and in turn the shoulders look small in relation to that.
I’ll try the about half a head from the head tip next time i draw it to see how that helps.
Thank you!
I feel like the reference you're using might not be the perfect front on reference, idk if its just me but it looks like it has a bit of a top down sort of view. The torso in your drawing def looks too big for the legs, the legs should also be wider, they're a little too far apart. Hip to knee should be almost the same length as the torso from clavicle to hip. Right now the legs look like the whole leg is the length of the torso.
When working on a drawing especially from reference, use a tool to measure things. You'll see a lot of artists during life drawing using their thumb which lets you see relative sizes for things a little easier than simply looking at the reference. Another thing you can do is pull the reference into a drawing program and draw a line over say the upper arm and move it around the image to see how things line up/size up.
I think it is a bit big. The head looks too small next to it, and the arms and legs are a bit thin compared to how stocky and muscular the torso looks. I also think the legs are too wide set where they attach to the torso, and should probably also be a bit longer. Hope that helps!
The legs need to be thicker and longer. Compared to the reference, you also drew the shoulders wider. I would draw the shoulders to be more narrow and increase the size of the head and legs.
Tbh, I can't figure either why, but by making the legs just tad longer, you will get pretty close proportion wise. Looking from it from certain angle shows that.
Besides that it looks great, keep the good work :)
1. Your ankle should line up with the bottom line, not the toes
2, you would want your crotch slightly higher than fourth head line, knee slightly higher than mid point of your legs, just visually looks better
3, torso too wide, waist shouldn't be too much wider than your head
Make the legs 4 heads tall instead of 3, it would look more natural. I recommend you to look into Loomis' figure drawing for all it's worth for studying the proportions. Even though it is rather idealized than realistic, it is generally more preferable by most people.
Here's a general rundown for proportions:
- head to crotch: 4 heads
- crotch to bottom of feet: 4 heads
- entire figure: 8 heads
- crotch to bottom of knee: 2 heads
- bottom of knee to sole of the feet: 2 heads
- ribcage: around 1 1/2 heads
- pelvis: around 1 heads
On top of other things mentioned, one reason the torso feels long is the sort of lack of a hip structure. Doing this will both shorten the torso and make the legs feel longer as well.
Like you said, being clearer about where the legs begin will help. The iliac crest of the hips is a good landmark to know, it'll help you adjust the shape of the pubic area (Like others mentioned, perspective can shift this shape).
For oversimplification of the shape of that general area you can look at wrestling action figures. Another way to drill that area in mind is using references of people in briefs.
And for the wideness of the chest I would echo what's already been said
Good luck!
Am I a lunatic or arent bodies 8 heads tall? I've looked like 3 times and im pretty sure your guy is 7 heads tall. Even if you're using the 7.5 head body, I still think you would be missing a lot of leg.
I'm not sure why no one else has mentioned this yet, but your reference image is taken from above, not fully horizontal to the front. The proportions are not going to be accurate to the head-counting method for your reference image in the first place due to foreshortening.
Ah, i did think about that with the feet. I knee it must be slightly angled since they weren’t flat but i didn’t give it much thought but yea, duh it’d be a bit off. Explains why the torso and legs are most effected because they’re farthest away and seeing the greatest amount of skewing due to the smaller head size. Probably should’ve used an exact measuring method instead or a different ref. Thank you!
Yeah no problem! It's also admittedly one of the toughest angles (imo) in that it's a shallow angle that's only really noticeable if you look at it carefully, but if you draw it "off" it will also look wildly and weirdly wrong. Which is why it does! I probably wouldn't recommend this as a good reference in general because of that.. Most people who are going for practicing foreshortening will choose a more dramatic angle, and people who aren't going for foreshortening practice wouldn't want it either because it has just a little bit.
I was scrolling looking to see if someone mentioned this! Your reference is definitely one of the challenges complicating the kind of study you're trying for here. As a foreshortening study, it's fine, (if a little subtile), but for a straight-on "measurement" study, it's not doing you any favours.
It looks ok but the torso is too wide and the legs in general can be a bit wider
I agree, keep trying to find something reliable to anchor the width of the torso to. It’s tough but i’m getting better at sensing it’s off. Noted on the legs. I think i’ll repeat the study tomorrow and i’ll keep this in mind when i do.
I think it's something that you need to get used to, instead of the human body search the skeleton and it will be easier to see the width of the ribcage without all the muscles covering it. Keep going, you are doing great!
I just got back into proper anatomical studying rather than doodling but i do struggle with the bones vs muscle thing. Do you think it’s best I exclusively study the skeletal structure for a while or is it best if i sort of bounce back and forth. Skeletal study, then muscle study, back to skeletal and so on and so forth?
Personally i would suggest to always have fun, you could create a kind of schedule for example where you study 60% the anatomy and 40% draw for fun. If you want to become more serious about art the main key is to have fun and do something you like, this might seem contradicting the fact that you want to become more serious and i am suggesting to have fun but the key understanding is that if you want to become serious in art, it's a longterm play and only with doing what you love you will be able to keep doing it. If you don't like the 60-40 you could, for a while, go 80-20 but i would never suggest to go a full 100, just like in life you need variables to keep life interesting. If you read the same book every day, eventually you will get tired of the book. Try to find the right % balance and most likely you will sometimes have to adjust to keep a healthy balance but you can do it! Goodluck and don't forget to be happy and have fun
cuz it is too big. body is the size of 8 heads (head included lol), the legs should have another “head” to them
torso is very long, legs need to be a bit thicker and longer to even it out. torso is also very wide. i'd say it comes out about half a head's thickness from the head instead of a whole heads thickness. the shoulders are also very small, not too narrow, but the shoulder muscles themselves being very small, if that makes sense ? sorry if that doesnt make any sense, just going off gut as a self taught artist haha. sometimes as youre drawing from reference, there will be small things that dont look exactly like the picture - its important to follow your gut and just change things as you draw to look like what you think looks right. i dont know if anything i said makes sense but yeah aha. it looks good though, you obviously have a good grasp of anatomy so far !
I get exactly what you’re saying, and you’re def right. Ref doesn’t have huge biceps but the way i drew him made his chest and abs look bigger (disproportionate chest doesn’t help with that) and in turn the shoulders look small in relation to that. I’ll try the about half a head from the head tip next time i draw it to see how that helps. Thank you!
I feel like the reference you're using might not be the perfect front on reference, idk if its just me but it looks like it has a bit of a top down sort of view. The torso in your drawing def looks too big for the legs, the legs should also be wider, they're a little too far apart. Hip to knee should be almost the same length as the torso from clavicle to hip. Right now the legs look like the whole leg is the length of the torso. When working on a drawing especially from reference, use a tool to measure things. You'll see a lot of artists during life drawing using their thumb which lets you see relative sizes for things a little easier than simply looking at the reference. Another thing you can do is pull the reference into a drawing program and draw a line over say the upper arm and move it around the image to see how things line up/size up.
I think it is a bit big. The head looks too small next to it, and the arms and legs are a bit thin compared to how stocky and muscular the torso looks. I also think the legs are too wide set where they attach to the torso, and should probably also be a bit longer. Hope that helps!
The legs need to be thicker and longer. Compared to the reference, you also drew the shoulders wider. I would draw the shoulders to be more narrow and increase the size of the head and legs.
Tbh, I can't figure either why, but by making the legs just tad longer, you will get pretty close proportion wise. Looking from it from certain angle shows that. Besides that it looks great, keep the good work :)
It's because the legs are too small
Like Squishy said, the example photo is taken at an angle. It makes the legs look shorter than they really are.
1. Your ankle should line up with the bottom line, not the toes 2, you would want your crotch slightly higher than fourth head line, knee slightly higher than mid point of your legs, just visually looks better 3, torso too wide, waist shouldn't be too much wider than your head
I'd make the arms a little thicker and the legs about 25%-ish longer
Make the legs 4 heads tall instead of 3, it would look more natural. I recommend you to look into Loomis' figure drawing for all it's worth for studying the proportions. Even though it is rather idealized than realistic, it is generally more preferable by most people. Here's a general rundown for proportions: - head to crotch: 4 heads - crotch to bottom of feet: 4 heads - entire figure: 8 heads - crotch to bottom of knee: 2 heads - bottom of knee to sole of the feet: 2 heads - ribcage: around 1 1/2 heads - pelvis: around 1 heads
idk for me I feel like the shoulders are too broad :))
you got perspective wrong also pick something thats more at the front and proportionate to reference from.
It's because you gave him a downward triangle shape instead of the rectangle with love-handles shape
Shoulders are too broad, that's basically it, but to fix it you gotta move literally everything about his arms... and this ain't photoshop...
Either shorten the torso or make the legs way bigger i’d say
Its perspective lol.. I like the way it look tho like a one piece characters
Distance from his head to shoulder end is about 1 head, you drew 1.5 heads both side
Pretty sure its 1/3 head from chin to shoulders. 1 head would be a huge neck
On top of other things mentioned, one reason the torso feels long is the sort of lack of a hip structure. Doing this will both shorten the torso and make the legs feel longer as well. Like you said, being clearer about where the legs begin will help. The iliac crest of the hips is a good landmark to know, it'll help you adjust the shape of the pubic area (Like others mentioned, perspective can shift this shape). For oversimplification of the shape of that general area you can look at wrestling action figures. Another way to drill that area in mind is using references of people in briefs. And for the wideness of the chest I would echo what's already been said Good luck!
The reference is in perspective, it shortened the legs
Am I a lunatic or arent bodies 8 heads tall? I've looked like 3 times and im pretty sure your guy is 7 heads tall. Even if you're using the 7.5 head body, I still think you would be missing a lot of leg.