i need to learn how to simplify more

dawniel  asked:

i checked your art advice tag but i haven't seen any tutorial on backs (slightly seeing the face?) can you please help once again? thank you very much for helping :))

Honestly I’m still learning how to draw the back myself. We only learned back muscle anatomy in the last few weeks of life drawing, and it’s confusing AS HECK. You obviously don’t need to draw all the muscle groups, depending on the buff-ness of your character. Below is a diagram I drew during class. It’s not super clear so I would highly encourage studying other references. 

Here’s a more simplified version, with the face slightly showing, like you asked: 

Remember to shape everything out first before adding detail!! 

abd3efc  asked:

How do you draw cartoon bodies?

Okay so cartoon bodies-
Basically you want to learn how anatomy works in real life to get a cartoon body down.
It’s just mainly simplification.
Draw a realistic and anatomically correct arm, see how it bends, see how its proportionate to other body parts, see how the hand and shoulder connect, etc.
once you’ve got a good grasp on how something looks and works in life you can take the steps to exaggerate and simplify- you don’t need to draw every muscle and tendon for something to look like an arm.

Does that kinda make sense?
I cannot stress learning from life to draw more-
Learn realism before you attempt a style or something, it’s so much easier and your art will benefit from it!

As much as I like the fact that we have seminars on youth cultures and their fashions, it bothers me to no end when the tutors refuse to listen to the contributions of students.

I have lived in the world they are trying to explain for over a decade. I am surrounded by it and its sibling-subcultures every single day, I have seen it evolve and evolved with it, I have seen new styles be born and old ones become frowned upon. I see first-hand where people get their inspirations from and how styles within the subculture come and go. Why are my experiences shrugged off as wrong or unimportant, when their knowledge comes from books and documentaries but mine from the actual community? Just because thing X seems to be a continuation of thing Y doesn’t make it so.

I understand the need to simplify because many other students are learning about these subcultures for the first time. But I don’t understand why someone who is supposed to encourage learning refuses to take in more knowledge themself.


dat-profound-bond-tho said // Castiel in 18

send me a character and a number and i will draw it

bellonasolocarr  asked:

Of the three ISFJs I know, they all seem to have a problem with generalizing or simplifying concepts to understand them, leading to inaccuracies. Is this something you've noticed or observed to be true as well on occasion for ISFJs in particular, or is it more likely that I've just run into a coincidence?

It’s a product of Ne, to assume you have the basic essence of a topic and then intelligently converse about it through generalizations – but unlike higher Ne, lower Ne is not as effective in truly grasping the idea enough to be convincing or accurate without a great deal more information to pull off of. NPs do this too (go off half-assed on a topic), but their higher Ne makes it at least SOUND like they are knowledgeable so people tend to cut them more slack. 

But yes, huge generalizations seem to be a Fe/Ne thing. It happens in ESFJs too. Think about some of Taylor Swift’s generalizations about love, dating, and men. No, Taylor, this is true only for the men that you happen to have dated, it is not a universal truth. Melodrama taints generalizations and… I think comes with Fe more than anything, although Ne seems to make it even more dramatic, because it wants to leave an impact.

The simplification of concepts… depending on how it is done, it does not lose its accuracy, but Sensors need to understand something fully before they can simplify it to the point where others can easily understand it, and in the process if they are beginning with very abstract concepts (such as Jung) they might get it wrong. But it is the process of simplification which helps them learn, and usually Si/Ne is open to changing its mind when it learns more, so eventually they will be accurate. Just maybe not when they first start out. 

The more the ISFJ develops Ti, the less prone they’ll be to generalizing as much. It still might be their first instinct but they’ll start recognizing it in themselves and in an effort to be more accurate, will stop doing it.

anonymous asked:

So, what are your favourite POI episodes?

Why must you torture me anon? :P (I totally love you for this question.) These are in some kind of a vague order, but I didn’t think too hard about their placement on the list.  

1. RAM - This was an episode made purely for the fans. I dare say a lot of causal viewers were completely lost while watching it, but the concept of having an episode told entirely in flashbacks delighted me. 

It was also superbly written and I loved how it tied multiple characters and storylines together, and finally told us the full story of how that laptop got to Ordos. It also basically related everyone in the POI universe to Harold somehow, which I adored. Combine that with Dillinger, Control, Special Counsel, Hersh, Shaw, Kara, the many callbacks and parallels, and finally Root’s appearance in real time at the end, and this episode definitely makes it to the top of my list. 

2. If-Then-Else - I’d been clamouring for an episode that gave us a peek inside TM, and this episode delivered brilliantly. It’s one of the most innovative concepts ever attempted by this show and I love how much thought and detail went into this episode. It was also a very difficult episode to shoot, so kudos to the entire team for that.

This episode was an awesome blend of heartbreaking drama, angst and humour. The repeated simulations juxtaposed by flashbacks to Harold teaching TM were very well structured and written. We learned so much about TM – how it thinks, how it reacts, how it views its assets, how it prioritizes its tasks, how it sees the world. Add to that some amazing direction and cinematography, Harold’s speech about chess just being a game, the simplified simulations, and of course, Shaw and Root’s big moment at the end, and we’ve got ourselves a winner.

Keep reading

The science of Yang’s eyes no one probably asked for but I still did it.

Okay because I love genes and because im a science nerd and because I see some people getting confused let’s talk about genes and Yang’s eyes.

I should say I do only know so much about genes. As much as I love them I only know so much (im still annoyed I didn’t get books about it for Christmas) and I do plan on taking a class about them in the future so sorry if I mess up.

Now, first off. Genes are weird as shit. While they are ‘rules’ for genes that they can follow and sometimes you get a mutation. There are four im going to talk about. Recessive, incomplete, mutation, and codominant.


Okay this is easy. We all must have taken like 4th grade science and learned about genes and how they work. Some genes are dominant over others while some are recessive and stay hidden. Yang’s purple can be recessive. If you are wondering how, let me show you something called a Punnett Square, my favorite thing as a child when the rest of my class hated them. Note Tai’s genes will be in Yellow and Raven’s in red.

(yeah I did it in paint)

So ‘B’ is Blue and ‘R’ is red. They are both capitalized because they are dominant. ‘p’ is purple and its smaller since its recessive. So there was a 25% change Yang could have purple and she did. Simple as that.


Incomplete refers to neither being 100% dominant over another. An example that is used is a red flower breeding with a white to get a pink flower. So one parent had all recessive genes while the other has all dominant. So:

So if this is true, Yang had a 100% change of having purple eyes since they mixed. I’m not sure how often this can happen or how common it is with eyes so im still a little unsure on this. But it is possible for the eyes to mix.


Pretty much what it says and I don’t need a chart. It could have been a random mutation. I mean, that’s how we got blue eyes. Everyone was a brown eyed human until one day, bam, blue eyed human!


Now this one has me thinking. Codominance is when both genes are being dominant.  An example is AB blood. A and B are both dominant over O blood but when you have a child with both of those genes it’s not A or B. It’s both due to codominance. What gets me thinking about this is that it could explain why Yang gets red eyes. Like okay yes it could be her semblance but come on, her mom and uncle both have red eyes. So the chart would look like this:

There are two squares with the ‘pr’ genes. If neither is dominant over each other (just because they are both recessive doesn’t mean they can’t be dominant over each other. To get side tracked for a moment that is how green and blue eyes are. Both are recessive compared to brown but green is dominant over blue. Its why me and my brother have blue eyes and my sister has green.) So with both are dominant with each other they will show up. It does in Yang’s case. She has been shown to have red eyes.

Why did I do this? Cause im living up to my name and I got bored and I like this shit. Does this mean any of this is true? No. Can I be wrong? Yes. We don’t know how remnant’s genes work, im just going off of our world genes. And there is a lot more than just this going into genes. Genes are weird and that’s why I love them. I just simplified everything and I may have gotten something wrong because im still learning about genes but this is what I got and know. So yeah, probably didn’t need this but I did it.