Ninjam's creations.(hopefully less monster-like)

• frozenwilderness wrote on 2013-04-18 16:13

  Quote from Ashikoki;1070009:

  The point I'm trying to make is that results are what matters, not the scaling of results. In a college course of, say for example, 20 people, it is not outlandish or improbable to have all 20 students try very hard and get A's. The course, in this case, is not flawed. If we had to scale this, we'd be having C students for getting 3~5 points less than the A student.

  
  
  I don't agree with that. You shouldn't have everyone getting A's, and it is actually VERY outlandish to have all 20 students try really hard and all get A's, so if a course ends up where everyone gets A's, then the course curriculum itself is flawed.
  
  I'm not saying it's impossible for everyone to have given their 100%, but the chances of that are so very very low, and if you end up in a course where everyone gives their all, but the course is graded on a curve, then just consider yourself extremely unlucky. It's not going to be like that for every course. Also, afaik, college courses aren't based on how much you try, but the performance you output. Therefore everyone shouldn't be getting all A's because if they are, then the course material is too easy. And if it's actually a really difficult course but every single person in that course performed well... again, the chances of that happening are extremely low. Not to mention, many college courses can have up to 400-500 students, and the smaller courses generally have 30-40, then the really small ones might have like 10-20. I, for one, can say I've never been in a college course where everyone got A's or everyone did extremely well.
• Ashikoki wrote on 2013-04-18 17:09
  I understand what you're trying to say, but I'm sure we're completely disconnected here.
  
  

  college courses aren't based on how much you try, but the performance you output.

  
  
  It is exactly because of this that a scaled system is completely unnecessary. What kind of insane world do we live in, where the worth of your results are determined by comparison to the results of your peers?
  
  A college course literally exists to prepare you for the material it is designed to teach. What matters is whether you learn it, and not the balance of the course as for who gets A's or C's.
  
  I've been in exactly one university course where grades were scaled up. The highest exam scores would be somewhere around 60%. And then to balance it out, that would become the new 100%. Professor, your course is inherently flawed and your scoring system is busted.
  
  Either the exam was beyond a reasonable level expected of the course, or there was a strange probability occurrence in which no one managed to learn the sufficient material expected of the course. If former, the class is too hard. If latter, he shouldn't have scaled. He should've failed every last one of us.
  
  Test scores and grading rules are all arbitrary decisions made by the professor to begin with and doesn't necessarily reflect what you've learned. In the end, what matters most are results. This thread is a pretty good example of that, since art is a very tangible form of results. If every student drew an A-grade product, we're not going to start ranking it and scaling it down to a C. Highly improbable? Yes, but each of those students simply got the A that they deserve, and the system wasn't flawed.
  
  I just can't fathom why anyone would try to scale the course so that it matches the student's performance rather than what the course itself was intended to teach. A professor's mindset when creating his curriculum should be "the students need to know X, Y, and Z to obtain the necessary knowledge and skills for what this course is preparing them for", and not "the student score average should be 85%".
  
  The course might be balanced for underachievers to get C's or overachievers to get A's, and is correlated with the ideal balanced courses. But it does not mean it is the cause of balanced courses. It really is irrelevant and doesn't matter in the slightest.
  
  Edit: The point is, scaling actually balances itself out without effort. What the curriculum worries about isn't the balance of students getting a range of scores, but whether they're learning the material or not. That said, I have zero need to be thankful for students who achieve less than I do in class. It has absolutely no relevancy to me.
• Ninjam wrote on 2013-04-18 17:48

  Quote from BizarreJuju;1070097:

  You have only changed a slight bit. But its not enough to call it a full improvement. You're still drawing huge shapes to identify "parts of a human?"
  

  
  
  • Round head
    
  • Long oval eyes
    
  • Very thick neck
    
  • No shoulder
    
  • Line to identify nose and mouth
    
  • A solid block of hair?
    

  
  You easily identified your errors but didn't take the time to go back and fix it. Should try questioning yourself while comparing your drawing to your face "does my drawing look anything like my face?".
  
  However I now have a full understanding of your limit in analyzing/identifying shapes, measurement, and estimating the distance between each landmarks (eyes to nose to lip to chin). Its harder for me to teach you through text since I'm not physically drawing with you or seeing what you're doing/thinking. Your secondary source to drawing human face will be through the internet/youtube. Despite some of their crummy drawings, they can teach you the simple basics of drawing and measuring faces. Another suggestion is if you are serious about improving your drawing, lay off the games and leisure...
  
  Also dont sit close to the mirror and if you cant see WEAR GLASSES!!!
  
  You said you're in a University? Don't tell me this whole "I don't mind failing" business, cause your just wasting money and time not passing a class.... Even if you're claiming to be "having fun", the whole "fun" excuse won't pass if the work you're producing doesn't meet the standards to move up to the next level. Instructors can't easily send/pass these students to bring conflict with upper-division courses. A curve is only awarded for students that can prove/show they have the potential and ambition to improve.
  
  By the way, what is your major? (this is my most serious question)
  
  
  
  [SPOILER="Spoiler"][video=youtube;umDr0mPuyQc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umDr0mPuyQc[/video]
  I consider this technique as "cheating" or more like "copying" off a photography. Visual analysis isn't improved, just taking a shortcut without trying to analyze a model or self.
  
  The whole grid is used to transport an image onto paper without using digital tool. Very handy for people who can't draw off a 3D Model[/SPOILER]

  
  
  I am majoring in computer science with a second major in graphic art. I have it all planned out with my counciler to where it should only take me a single semester extra.
  I think next time I'll post my drawing at the halfway point. I feel like something goes wrong about there for some reason.
  I think I'm improving but its only minor improvements. The closest thing we drew before this was a skull.
  
  I think I'm going to break the rule that it had to be from direct observation and draw one from a photograph. It might help me to be able to be in a well-light room and have a model that doesn't move around each time to draw.
  Failing that I'll do the portrait option and have my roommate model for me. That might turn out better too.
  
  I'm not saying I want to fail this class. I'm saying that what I learn is more important than grades to me. And I learned a ton in this class.
  This is just my first week of drawing humans. If I keep improving even by a little bit soon they will begin looking better. I'll look up some good youtube videos too.
  
  And I'm taking 3-5 hours of drawing a day out of leisure time, though admittedly I'm also working on an extra credit still life for the class to boost my grade and get better.
• Cucurbita wrote on 2013-04-18 18:01

  Quote from Ninjam;1070333:

  I am majoring in computer science with a second major in graphic art. I have it all planned out with my counciler to where it should only take me a single semester extra.
  I think next time I'll post my drawing at the halfway point. I feel like something goes wrong about there for some reason.
  I think I'm improving but its only minor improvements. The closest thing we drew before this was a skull.
  
  I think I'm going to break the rule that it had to be from direct observation and draw one from a photograph. It might help me to be able to be in a well-light room and have a model that doesn't move around each time to draw.
  Failing that I'll do the portrait option and have my roommate model for me. That might turn out better too.
  
  I'm not saying I want to fail this class. I'm saying that what I learn is more important than grades to me. And I learned a ton in this class.
  This is just my first week of drawing humans. If I keep improving even by a little bit soon they will begin looking better. I'll look up some good youtube videos too.

  
  
  The problem I have with this is that it doesn't seem to show much effort. I'm not a good artist or anything, but it feels very... inconsiderate? Like, a 5 minute attempt. Regardless of skill, knowledge, or techniques, this couldn't have possibly taken more than 15 minutes to do.
  
  You really should take your time and get all the details in. I'm sure anyone can do it if they tried. There is just no way you could have messed up your proportions that badly unless you were winging it, since you're simply drawing what you see. The shading also seems to be somewhat... lazy mode.
  
  I guess what I'm trying to say is, I think you can do better even now, and not later. Raise your minimum bar of standards and try to maintain it as high as you can. If you're serious about having a secondary major in graphic arts, you have a lot of catching up to do.
• Ninjam wrote on 2013-04-18 18:15

  Quote from Cucurbita;1070349:

  The problem I have with this is that it doesn't seem to show much effort. I'm not a good artist or anything, but it feels very... inconsiderate? Like, a 5 minute attempt. Regardless of skill, knowledge, or techniques, this couldn't have possibly taken more than 15 minutes to do.
  
  You really should take your time and get all the details in. I'm sure anyone can do it if they tried. There is just no way you could have messed up your proportions that badly unless you were winging it, since you're simply drawing what you see. The shading also seems to be somewhat... lazy mode.
  
  I guess what I'm trying to say is, I think you can do better even now, and not later. Raise your minimum bar of standards and try to maintain it as high as you can. If you're serious about having a secondary major in graphic arts, you have a lot of catching up to do.

  
  
  I have been spending a lot of time on them, each attempt is at least 2 hours or more. I just kept moving my head to look at what I was drawing or to try and cite an angle and then shading turned out all wrong. I had the perportions down at one point but I think I messed them up by messing with my head length for some unknown reason.
  
  I'll try on another person, my 12 year old sister would love to sit still for 3+ hours I'm sure. Or my roommate, and I'll make sure to slow down and take much more time to properly measure out every angle and compare every distance!
  Either way the next one will be at least 10x better!
• Cucurbita wrote on 2013-04-18 18:21

  Quote from Ninjam;1070362:

  each attempt is at least 2 hours or more.

  
  
  Oh. Well then. Best of luck to you. I'll be exiting this thread forever now.
• Enoshima Smoothie wrote on 2013-04-18 18:57

  Quote from BizarreJuju;1070097:

  
  [SPOILER="Spoiler"][video=youtube;umDr0mPuyQc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umDr0mPuyQc[/video]
  I consider this technique as "cheating" or more like "copying" off a photography. Visual analysis isn't improved, just taking a shortcut without trying to analyze a model or self.
  
  The whole grid is used to transport an image onto paper without using digital tool. Very handy for people who can't draw off a 3D Model[/SPOILER]

  
  
  I'm not saying for him to use this method as an end all, but just for some basic BASIC help like knowing where facial features belong on a very basic scale. Like planning out a floor plan.
  I'm not telling him stop analyzing life or any of that because that shit is important, but I only see it as "cheating" if he traces over a picture of his face and turns that in for a grade.
  
  Again, I don't really "get" some thought processes of artists sooo...-shrug- whatever.
• BizarreJuju wrote on 2013-04-18 19:11

  Quote from Ninjam;1070362:

  I have been spending a lot of time on them, each attempt is at least 2 hours or more. I just kept moving my head to look at what I was drawing or to try and cite an angle and then shading turned out all wrong. I had the perportions down at one point but I think I messed them up by messing with my head length for some unknown reason.
  
  I'll try on another person, my 12 year old sister would love to sit still for 3+ hours I'm sure. Or my roommate, and I'll make sure to slow down and take much more time to properly measure out every angle and compare every distance!
  Either way the next one will be at least 10x better!

  
  
  Hold up, thats too much time for a model to sit still, especially your little sister. People have other things to do you dont want them to pressure them to sit still for hours unpaid. For now just keep practicing with your face (I dont mean drawing one different person a sketch).
  
  If you have a sketch book experiment drawing your face. You can also try drawing parts of your face to atleast get used to the folds of your eye lid and identifying a visible are that relates to the skull structure. When you sketch, dont press down too hard on the paper. Draw lightly and create an outline, then from there go over the outline (don't erase your outline). A house cannot be built without supports.
  
  Try sketching without shading. Shading really is a last step, you need a really good outline to make shadings work.
  
  And example I pulled from the net. This should help you with the measurement of the face (if you haven't used it) You will need to find the center line of your face the ndivide your face into three sections (area above where the skull of your upper eye and brow meet and under your nostril) Example on the bottom right (4th face). That should help you with your face placement.
  
  

  [Image: https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/ehS6IR0jza1LimK8aQL9LFsEuGtOaQ3NpL547sn2y81Tza17-_HpdK5TU3x7wZyjJWYXwF_tVRxdvABSqI2y9O3dscxsvWYPJpjZ8rmpwM0PuUeK]

  
  
  Here's some example of some of my work early this semester:
  
  Head
  [SPOILER="Spoiler"]

  [Image: http://i.minus.com/i6Bph8KvHbgRo.JPG]

  [/SPOILER]
  Full figure
  [SPOILER="Spoiler"]

  [Image: http://i.minus.com/iLSQZwLaLJp79.JPG]

  [/SPOILER]
  
  @Cucurbita
  
  You can clearly see his limits. He just needs to learn how to visually analyze what he see and transfer them onto paper. 3D -> 2D
• Ninjam wrote on 2013-04-18 20:49
  That's a great tip! I'll pull out my sketchbook tonight and experiment more with the outlines and how to analyze and put to paper everything I see.
  
  My teacher drew pretty much exactiy that too. I should go in early tommorow before class and practice with one of the plastic skulls she keeps around.
  
  And I would have given my sister a break every hour or so. And paid her in candy. Lots of candy.
• frozenwilderness wrote on 2013-04-18 21:55

  Quote from Ashikoki;1070306:

  I understand what you're trying to say, but I'm sure we're completely disconnected here.
  
  
  
  It is exactly because of this that a scaled system is completely unnecessary. What kind of insane world do we live in, where the worth of your results are determined by comparison to the results of your peers?
  
  A college course literally exists to prepare you for the material it is designed to teach. What matters is whether you learn it, and not the balance of the course as for who gets A's or C's.
  
  I've been in exactly one university course where grades were scaled up. The highest exam scores would be somewhere around 60%. And then to balance it out, that would become the new 100%. Professor, your course is inherently flawed and your scoring system is busted.
  
  Either the exam was beyond a reasonable level expected of the course, or there was a strange probability occurrence in which no one managed to learn the sufficient material expected of the course. If former, the class is too hard. If latter, he shouldn't have scaled. He should've failed every last one of us.
  
  Test scores and grading rules are all arbitrary decisions made by the professor to begin with and doesn't necessarily reflect what you've learned. In the end, what matters most are results. This thread is a pretty good example of that, since art is a very tangible form of results. If every student drew an A-grade product, we're not going to start ranking it and scaling it down to a C. Highly improbable? Yes, but each of those students simply got the A that they deserve, and the system wasn't flawed.
  
  I just can't fathom why anyone would try to scale the course so that it matches the student's performance rather than what the course itself was intended to teach. A professor's mindset when creating his curriculum should be "the students need to know X, Y, and Z to obtain the necessary knowledge and skills for what this course is preparing them for", and not "the student score average should be 85%".
  
  The course might be balanced for underachievers to get C's or overachievers to get A's, and is correlated with the ideal balanced courses. But it does not mean it is the cause of balanced courses. It really is irrelevant and doesn't matter in the slightest.
  
  Edit: The point is, scaling actually balances itself out without effort. What the curriculum worries about isn't the balance of students getting a range of scores, but whether they're learning the material or not. That said, I have zero need to be thankful for students who achieve less than I do in class. It has absolutely no relevancy to me.

  
  
  If you don't care about grades, then sure. the following response from a prof on why classes are curved explains it better than I ever could explain it:
  
  

  [Image: http://puu.sh/2CCAA.png]

  
  
  and it's because course objectives might be unfair/too easy/too difficult that grades are scaled. there would be no need to curve a course if the material were fair and balanced. to address your point on the following:
  
  

  Quote from Ashikoki;1070306:

  Either the exam was beyond a reasonable level expected of the course, or there was a strange probability occurrence in which no one managed to learn the sufficient material expected of the course. If former, the class is too hard. If latter, he shouldn't have scaled. He should've failed every last one of us.

  
  
  if this turns out to be the case, how do you know which one it is?
  
  and in response to this:
  
  

  Quote from Ashikoki;1070306:

  What kind of insane world do we live in, where the worth of your results are determined by comparison to the results of your peers?

  
  
  you have just defined exactly what the real world is. when you're getting a job your credentials are compared with that of others. when you're working, your performance is compared with those of others. i see nothing wrong with curving a course, nor being thankful for the people out there who don't care enough to try. if they don't seek help, it's their own problem.
• Hanna wrote on 2013-04-18 22:22
  Even though I disagree that a "B" is a lack of ambition (considering the only B i made in HS was because of a unfixable mistake), I 100% agree that passing by with just a C is nothing to be content with. Never stop trying to improve.
• Ninjam wrote on 2013-04-18 22:52
  I will post my next drawing in steps, perhaps that way I can get pointers on where I am failing at. I know I'm just not getting something, so I'll post 2 or so photos of the drawing as I am working on it.
  I just did a quick sketch using my phones forward facing camera as a mirror. I havent added any of the details because I just ran out of time but I got the guidelines dividing my face and everything and all the angles and measures looked accurate. I'll check it again once I get home in a few hours and post it before starting on my next attempt at this. I plan to take this one really slowly and make sure every single thing measures up correctly to what I am seeing.
• Shanghai wrote on 2013-04-19 00:51
  While my tips may not be of much use, but have you ever considered trying to sketch something different? Instead of drawing still life and realism, perhaps slide into a different drawing style? Most of my old sketches tie back to fairly anime-esque drawings, where to now it's transitioning out of it and where I want it to go. Might be hard to do when most of your time is spent towards fulfilling a class's requirements, but it's something to consider. I actually picked up face structure and anatomy better from works of art rather than full on realism.
  
  I definitely suggest holding off the shading until later like Juju said. Most of my sketches are bare outlines, because I don't want to start getting into the depths of art until I feel I've mastered the basics first: lines.
• dokmul wrote on 2013-04-19 02:22
  [FONT="Courier New"][SIZE="2"]So, yeah. I'm gonna talk my shit and then go about my day.
  
  So let's talk. For one, Hanna, to say that because someone is content enough to be passing with a C is not good because they should always try to improve is just not even remotely correct. We're talking about an art class, yes? Who are we to say he hasn't improved? Because he has a C in his class that means he can't possibly improve or have shown improvement? Yeah, no. Grades do not determine ones improvement. If that's the case, I think a good lot of artists, including famous artists, wouldn't have improved, yeah? Yeah. Cool.
  
  Now, I'll say this. While a C is not the best grade in the world to pass with, he is having fun. Having fun and enjoying what you're doing is what helps one to improve, not a silly grade. Maybe he's not good now, but we can't genuinely sit and here and say that he hasn't improved based on his grade because we're not him, we're not there, we're not attached to him, we're not in his closet, room, or wherever the hell he does his work at..... also, we're not buying his tuition, so how about we step off that money shit cause it's not our business.
  
  I'm done. Goodnight. Frolic happily in le wildeufleurs. Unicorns 'n shit.
  [I sounded terribly scatterbrained in this. Oh well, fuck it.][/SIZE][/FONT]
• Ninjam wrote on 2013-04-19 03:40
  Update time!
  [SPOILER="Spoiler"]

  [Image: http://puu.sh/2CNCG.jpg]

  [/SPOILER]
  Update 2
  [SPOILER="Spoiler"]

  [Image: http://puu.sh/2CPYO.jpg]

  [/SPOILER]
  
  Purely in line, with guidelines for the position of the top and bottom of my eyes, the position of my nose, and the position of my mouth, as well as the center-line for my face. I will go back over in about 30 minutes and make adjustments to angles and such with a fresh eye and start outlineing finer details. Perhaps a break will help me be able to see errors in my line angles and placements.
  
  Edit- I can already see that ear needs work.
  
  Update 2, with details in line.
  Not continuing until I can see everything I need to change.
  
  Just had a strange idea. I took my photo of my drawing, made it see-through in an image editing software, then placed it over an image of my head.
  
  this was the result.
  [SPOILER="Spoiler"]

  [Image: http://puu.sh/2CQas.jpg]

  [/SPOILER]
  
  I think my head might not be in the exact same position as when I was drawing, but it looks like my eye to mouth and mustache to mouth distances look ok! I even seem to have gotten the basic shape of my eyes!
  This actually looks very useful, I can compare my drawing with the photo sliding the oppacity bar as I want until I can spot everything that is off. I think I am going to go to bed though, and finish this tommorow morning after my first class but before my drawing class.