Anatomy
polycounter lvl 6
I've been working on a character sculpt this week and it's had me thinking about my lack of deep anatomy training. I went to art school and did life drawing, so I'm not at zero, but I'm also very aware that I'm not where I should be.
For those of you who really took the time to get a deep understanding of anatomy, your eyes will probably do a backflip as you read my next thoughts, but know that I am in fact this naiive.
Here's what I want to discuss... How many people here (would love to hear from professionals, but anybody else too) never really formally trained (self taught or schooling) in anatomy and gets by? Part of why I ask is because it's never really interested me to look at bare skulls and muscle illustrations, learn the names of bones, all that jazz. I feel like a lot of people get off on it, and that's great, I wish I did too. But what I'm wondering is can you be successful without it? Is this a black and white answer, "No, jackass, of course you need to be an anatomy expert to succeed as a character artist," or do some people fly under the anatomy radar and get by without knowing the intricacies of anatomy? Can knowing the "important" ones get you by or will your bluffs always be caught by the average joe?
For those of you who really took the time to get a deep understanding of anatomy, your eyes will probably do a backflip as you read my next thoughts, but know that I am in fact this naiive.
Here's what I want to discuss... How many people here (would love to hear from professionals, but anybody else too) never really formally trained (self taught or schooling) in anatomy and gets by? Part of why I ask is because it's never really interested me to look at bare skulls and muscle illustrations, learn the names of bones, all that jazz. I feel like a lot of people get off on it, and that's great, I wish I did too. But what I'm wondering is can you be successful without it? Is this a black and white answer, "No, jackass, of course you need to be an anatomy expert to succeed as a character artist," or do some people fly under the anatomy radar and get by without knowing the intricacies of anatomy? Can knowing the "important" ones get you by or will your bluffs always be caught by the average joe?
Replies
Faking it will only get you so far.
How much of these forms can be learned during projects (e.g. A polycount contest) vs exercises like modeling a skeleton and then building it up in an ecorche approach? My reservations aren't in putting work in. I'm just put off by the classic approach (see Ryan Kingslien) of obsessing over orbital processes and frontal eminences and wonder if that's what all good sculptors do.
You should at least be able to identify every muscle that presents itself in life. It is much easier to sculpt the individual muscles of an arm than to sculpt a rough approximation of what you think an arm looks like as a whole. Likewise with an entire body.
Whats in a name?
The vast majority of the nomenclature of anatomical forms was not selected at random. The names are extremely descriptive of the form itself. For muscles in particular, the names usually describe shape, skeletal origin and insertion, as well as function. On many occasions, just recalling the name of a particular muscle - or group of muscles - has helped me identify errors in my own work.
I taught myself as much as I could through anatomy books, and studies of the masters. However, I made the decision to supplement this knowledge by taking a couple of online anatomy courses designed specifically for artists. I think that if you're dedicated it is possible to learn all of these things on your own, but there is a huge advantage - in both speed of learning and depth of knowledge - to learning from somebody that has already mastered this topic.
In general, I would advise tackling the study of anatomy in this order:
1. Proportion and Simplified Geometric Forms
2. Skeletal Anatomy
3. Musculature
Each step is built upon knowledge gained from the previous step. Start with a broad scope and work your way down to specific details. This will help to prevent you from getting overwhelmed with details.
This is a tough one. Because for me personally, you're studying people, you better damn know what people look like. So it's always been a top priority for me. And it really annoys me when people on my team don't care.
But.... truth be told, there are quite a lot of people who work in the industry who get by with fairly basic knowledge. At the end of the day your presentation and execution counts for more. Sadly so, for people like me, but that's just the way it is.
I've heard it said that you only need to be "good enough" so that the anatomy is passable. I've even heard it said that any knowledge beyond a certain point is wasted because the players will never notice it.
Sad fact though is that those people are probably right. And at the end of the day, your job is to make something appealing that people would like so they buy the game. If you can accomplish this, then I guess nothing else matters.
Again. To me personally it's extremely important. But others put less of an emphasis on it and get by just fine.
So interpret that information as you will. But I've encountered both types of people in the industry.
but anatomy study is one of those key things I keep pushing myself on, I have a ton of high res pics from fineart SK from when I briefly subbed to that, but I also have a anatomy wall and a artists mannequin.
I am not doing any of this to fly under the radar, I am doing this because characters are quite cool, people that master it are legit, and I have a mind that doesn't shut up and is in a constant need to learn.
I think once you have the basics of form perspective etc, you just need to:
Look
Learn
Practice
The rest will take care of itself over time.
if you see it as just a 9-5 job and dont really care that much about it, i guess you can just avarage your way through work.
if you want to push yourself and master what your doing and strive to be the best then like anything else you should feel the want to learn as much as you can to push your art further.
http://www.scott-eaton.com/anatomy-for-artists-online-course
But yeah if you've got the space or are willing to upgrade then go for it. Otherwise, in my opinion the extra fine pencil detail doesn't add a lot of educational value to the book so it'll serve it's primary function just fine in small format.
also you when you now the basics you can get a lot better by just trying to get better.
i always look at reference when sculpting because you never know everything perfectly right.
and by doing that slowly you learn everything, even with names and stuff.
Oh yeah, I remember when I first decided to sink my teeth into it. I thought, "Oh well, I'll just buy this book, and I'll be set." Two years, a dozen books, tons of Vilppu lectures, and two of Scott Eaton's courses later, and I feel like I've got more to learn than when I started.
But anyway, did this never happen to you guys? I've been working as a character artist for a few years, and I constantly encounter a point when I try and talk to someone about a subtle point of anatomy, and I get hit with the "that's just too much" speech, followed by something about how the players will never notice it. Which is technically true I suppose. But frustrating nonetheless.
But in case you're not trolling, no, I'm frustrated that I'm trying to make better stuff and people aren't open to that idea. When it comes to people who are better-skilled than me, which is really most artists out there, nothing would make me happier if someone like that pointed things that I got wrong in my art.
I just thought you were implying I was frustrated because I thought I was better than other people. Which I'll be the first to tell you that no, I'm pretty sure I suck more than others. What frustrates me is when I see a way to do things better, which I think is helpful, but I get hostility in return. Which is something that's important to me, because as I said, if someone points out something that I'm doing wrong, really almost nothing makes me happier. Most of the time-saving or quality-increasing things I do now come from other people pointing out that I was doing something wrong.
Mind you, I'm not a professional and still have long ways to go but, after I did study the books, I find when I look in a mirror, anatomy "starts to make sense".
I guess this is because no one knows you better than yourself. So why not translate that into art?
Life is always the best reference. When I'm studying from an images, I will constantly poke and prod myself to verify the information from whatever resource I happened to be using at the time. I'm constantly catching myself doing this in public after a long night of sculpting. People sometimes look at me like I've fallen off the deep end.
I thought this thread was about if you needed anatomy knowledge to survive in the industry.
Frazetta, and Hogarth have less than passable anatomy. They're great reference material as an introduction to anatomy, but they're so far removed from anything that anyone should use professionally.
http://www.zackpetroc.com/skeleton-and-muscles-lecture/
It's not the most in depth, but he covers many important landmarks very quickly. It's what boosted me onto my journey of learning anatomy.
i've taken both of these. personally, i'd recommend scott eaton over zack petroc.
Yeah Hogarth has some crazy exaggerated muscle shapes which are useful for learning but learning to tone that down is the hard part.
Jacque, can you recommend any other artists for anatomy books?
Scott Eaton's class is a must for any serious Character Artist IMHO.
Paul Richer's Artistic Anatomy is one of the few accurate anatomical books for artists:
French version is free (and Public Domain):
http://sherristakes.com/download/art/Artistic%20Anatomy%20-Paul%20Richer.pdf
However I'm starting to look at more of his work again, trying to think less about who visualizes anatomy better and rather gain an understanding of the best parts to take away from each of them.
I never got on with Hogarth, his stuff is always over exaggerated and lumpy, hes also got the back of the knee wrong in that pick hehe.
this is the best ref Ive found anywhere http://www.3dscanstore.com/ and as they are scans there is no inaccuracies or over exaggerations going on. It also teaches you about surface quality and to throw away the 0% body fat, ripped to hell peeps. One day I will buy one but the pics are just as good!!!!!
@Phil, the latest Call of Duty is heavily using 3d scan data for their character work, like a ton of it. The character team does slight modifications to them, but that's about it. So I think we'll see more games that use scans in the near future but the majority of artistic sense is lost in my humble opinion. Obviously they're going for hyperrealism, so scan data gets the job done.
Hogarth is a really good starting point. But once you want to learn about actual functional forms, striation direction and breakdown of muscle groups, insertion and origin points, then his work really starts to fall apart.
Lets start with the Pec as it's a very glaringly obvious example (But the same principal follow through to ALL of how Hogarth represents his muscles):
The way a pectoral is formed, is there are 3 parts to it:
Clavicular head of the Pectoral (Attaches to the Clavicle)
Sternal (Attaches to the Sternum)
Costal (attaches to the Costal cartilege)
All of these 'heads' of the pectoral attach to the of the Humerus. But the Costal head of the Pectoral attaches to a higher part of the Humerus, the Sternal goes to the more middle, and the Clavicular overlaps them, and attaches to a lower part of the humerus:
It's important to realize that there is a Pectoralis Minor underneath this that augments the shape of the Pectoral giving it a 'ridge' on the outer side of the pectoral.. (and this shape becomes more or less obvious depending on the arm position).
This is the difference between a well constructed pectoral:
vs what I consider to be a more poorly constructed one:
- The clavicular head of the pectoral does NOT only attach to the clavicle. it attaches to the sternum as well, which makes it incorrect. It is supposed to 'Overlap' with the sternal and costal heads of the pectoral.. which it doesnt.
- The Costal Head of the pectoral lumps at the bottom and doesnt seem to insert into the arm at all. It incorrectly seems to end into where the muscles are supposed to intertwine with each other.
- Rather than have actual fibers that look like they are going to a strict directional location on a bone, they warp really strangely.
The form also doesn't account for the shape change due to the Pectoralis Minor:
This exact same principal applies to pretty much every muscle group drawn by Hogarth. The 'lump' mass of the muscle is there, But the insertions/origins are often wrong, the shape is wrong, the striation directions are wrong. He also doesn't account for muscles changing shape and overlapping of bones depending on position/rotation/orientation of the skeleton (And his skeleton is also wrong).
I wouldn't dismiss any particular artist as "lacking" ( anatomy Nazi? )
because their strategies and language might just concentrate on a different approach.
( wouldn't assume they haven't spent less time agonizing and
pouring over the human form and with any less understanding of an ideal silhouette, weight, or
jes plain charming volume full of character! )
Particularly considering the infinite awesome variations skin and adipose contribute in the end?
Coming from a Naturalistic background which does put an importance on anatomy...
However, studying anatomy should be an endless infinite pursuit?
( a different understanding/execution of musculature and skeleton for every project would probably result in a wider array of interesting characters...
Fat people, old people, children that do no conform to the usual canon of proportions? )
Take fer instance the celebrated anatomy in the lacoon sculpture
where the priest lacoon is being chocked by serpents along with his two sons:
When studied through the vantage point our modern eyes reveal...
the perfect canon of musculature present on all 3 figures easily gives the impression of two men and a giant!
Where the effect of youth is rendered with nothing more than miniaturized musculature and stature( albeit with somewhat softer features and no facial hair
Compare the Lacoon to Degas's awesome ballerina bronze which is even stylized with slight gesture exaggeration in the pose! yet still is an honest anatomy study of a "youths proportions" compared to Lacoon's supposed sons.
Without the benefit of the basic ABC's of bulging musculature definition all the youths whimsical form is from an understanding of the youths subtle surface frame as well as the slouching weight underneath.
Sometimes it seems some get "hung up" on the musculature classifications and get stuck with muscled variations of everything!
( The "muscle-ee suit" in comic books comes to mind where Clark Kents' unable to escape their biceps and pecs cannot simply cast a tailored silhouette cut even when wearing his josBANK suited identity )
holy muscleee anatomy suit Batman!
In which case I would reject that such skeletal/musculature classification "owns" artistic anatomy vocabulary.
anatomy through Ron Mueck's inspirational "modern eyes":
obese
.
elderly
aND
youth
Anatomy ( character art ) also seems to be "a calling"..
instead of car guys (gals)
environment guys
weapon guys
( robot guys probably a large crossover )
So most likely u will have no choice anyway! and yer study of anatomy is/will be perty deep and inspiring...
( over 40 years fer me so far )
http://shop.3dtotal.com/figures/male-figure.html#t1
Having one of these on your desk is always good.
Edit: more like $90 cheaper, still a good buy.
It is interesting to see how people go about working a character. Spending a bunch of time carving the forms, with the intent to pose after the work is assumed to be done. IMO, that is when work can fall short for a lot of artists. The volume changes are not really taken into account a lot of the time, and you end up with odd looking musculature in a lot of cases. You can see this in master works.. The image below shows a proper volume change in the pectoral region. A volume change with stretching and flattening out of the pecs volume with the arm that is raised up, and more of a convexed shape when the arm is down.
Big time changes going on when the arm is curled up. The flattening out of the triceps, and the crunching up of the bicep, when the arm is curled. The opposite when the arm is un-curled.
You see this type of thing all the time with classic, and modern art works.
Also, there are bookoo changes when the jaw opens, and all the meat and skin gets stretched out. Bones that were hidden are revealed, skin folds over on itself, and more of the underlying bone structure can sometimes look exaggerated. I always hated watching people eat, because when they close their mouth, and crunch down on something, often times, there will be a protrusion appearing around the temple region.
The lower extremities is another area artists overlook. The volume in the calf region when the foot is bent up, is usually different from when the foot is bent down. Usually, people will draw, or sculpt that muscle flexed, as if the foot is in a stretched out position, like a ballerina.
And the only way I know to make these sub-humanoid characters is a deep foundation in human anatomy.
But why ignore the fundamentally obvious, best reason to study anatomy? because its fun!.
http://hippie.nu/~unicorn/tut/xhtml-chunked/ch03.html
Sculpts by Martin Canale. Base skeleton by Zack Petroc.