...ONLY if you are into realism or semi realism styles..Then obviously you need these skills. I'm tired of people telling everyone they have to have these skills when they don't depending on their favored type of style. They don't even ask first what type of artwork the other person does!...
I'm sure the person who does abstract work does need other skills that people into realism don't. Since of course being an abstract artist is more then just doing something welll abstract.
Edit: I think I put this in the wrong place, opps.

There's a difference between having a style and having a mistake. People who insist that their mistakes are simply part of their style can never improve. Having your own style is taking realism and warping it the way you want and to do that, you obviously need to have a firm grasp on realism.

Or at least, that's what I've heard. I'm not much of an artist, so I wouldn't know first-hand.

Yeah it looks like you accidentally put this in the wrong forum. D= I'm sure it'll get moved, soon, though. =3

But, I'm defiantly going to have to disagree with you there on that one. Let's take the popular cartoon sitcom The Simpsons, for an example. It may still be a cartoon, but the animators who work on it need to know proportion for each and every character, and anatomy, in order for the characters to look proper and human and/or animal like. Just because it is in the cartoon style, doesn't mean that the animators are free to ignore the rules of proportion and anatomy.

The cartoon style may seem to be a bit more lienit on these rules, but that does not mean that they have been ignored. No matter what you draw in a cartoon style, all the rules still apply, even if you are exaggerating something.

Some people like to make excuses for not wanting to learn the rues of proportion and anatomy, but saying "it's just part of my style" when, really, they know they could improve much more if they took the time to learn it... I look down on these people. I have studied art for years (I'd like to say my whole life, actually) and it is not an easy thing to learn for most people. But, anyone can draw if they just take the time to learn, and have the will to learn. Making up an excuse by saying "it's my style" is just pure laziness.

Now, I DO know, however, that there are very many artists out there who do abstract and such. But, you have to remember that just because someone does abstract doesn't mean they completely ignore the rules of anatomy and proportion. Hey, even a child who does, say, scribbles of other people ever takes anatomy and proportion into consideration. Of course, they may not be "perfect" since they're just children and are inexperienced in this sort of thing, but they still draw out a head, torso, arms, stomach, and legs. Sure, one arm might be longer than the other, but that doesn't matter since they are still learning.

I agree with Linkfreak.

You NEED to know basic anatomy if you want to draw. (Semi)realist styles follow it closely, but you need to know what anatomy is like before you can alter it successfully to produce comic styles. Legs with knees that are halfway down their shins, for example, are distracting. Beefy legs and stick-thin arms are too. Huge boobs that are implanted almost on the character's shoulders are too. Etc etc etc.

you still need some grasp of anatomy, despite what style you have, in my opinion.
there's a fine line between warping anatomy until it's your own style, and simply not knowing the basics.

i.e. Picasso might have some pretty oddly proportioned art, but before that he drew AMAZING realistic pictures which WERE anatomically correct.

Bad anatomy is insulting, even when stylized.
people will notice your lack of skill, even when you go into abstract. You need to know art basics to make things look good. Picasso had already mastered painting, and was a genius when it came to drawing before he started his abstract paintings.
It seems like you're just lazy.

I agree that there is a difference between style and mistake as well. HOWEVER, I will concede that if your particular abstract style follows very loose constructs of anatomy consistently, then by all means, no one can tell you your art is wrong or you are lazy.

It's the beauty of the human mind to grasp and respond to images, no matter how far they deviate from the anatomically correct. If this is your perception of life versus art, your artistic vision in your mind and how you visibly represent it, then it is NOT WRONG. It may not be aesthetically pleasing to the masses or to artistic elitists... (we artists tend to be very scrutinizing when it comes to the art of others) and may not receive the same merit as the works of others, but it is not wrong!

Artistic imagery is meant to convey an idea, emotion, etc etc etc. Think of how we all respond to icons and symbols, or even fragments of these things. The human brain takes this information and understands! Just because something isn't considered pretty or right against someone else's measuring stick, doesn't make it wrong. If the message is conveyed or appreciated, then the goal was accomplished.

I've drawn all my life, I spent high school in the art room and went to college for graphic design and visual communications and have an appreciation for all kinds of art; all kinds of artistic styles. Oddly, as I have been stating points in agreement with this, I am not a huge fan of abstraction and anatomically incorrect pieces. However, I would never state that the artist was wrong. I'll say this again, if this is your consistent style and the way you express yourself... then no one can say a damn thing.

This thread is placed in the wrong forum. It should belong to 'Art Discussion'. I will be moving this thread to it's proper place. :)

Anatomy is very difficult. I don't know how to emphasive just how difficult it is. I've drawn for a few years now and I'm very interested in realism, my way of drawing without references is a bit stylized, I have no idea why. My point is, that the further you get into the study of anatomy, the more you see that there is to it. I'm not even good enough to be considered an ametuer. I love drawing, but it's one of the hardest things to do . . .

So I can understand why someone would go for having a style right away, but like many other people have said, you have to know realism to do any proper stylized works. I'm guilty of doing it anyway without a mastery of realism, especially when I started out, that's what I did. I said "that's my style" and all that stuff, but I didn't get anywhere until I dropped that attitude.

While you don't need to learn basic anatomy, it makes it so much easier in the long run. I know when I first started drawing several years ago, I didn't bother to learn the basics. I'm kicking myself for that now because I had to go and relearn everything.

You do need a basic grasp on anatomy in order to draw anything. It's all well and good trying to draw say a horse if you have no idea how the legs work, because it will just look wrong. Yes you can warp it in cartoonism, but to warp something you need a basic grasp of it. I'm not saying you need to know how to draw every ligament, but understand that they exist.

In cartoons jaws may drop and hit the floor which isn't realistic, but knowing about what's in your face and how it all interconnects is important otherwise it won't work. The jaw hitting the floor is an exaggeration of a real thing and if you don't know the real thing how can you exaggerate it?

Most artists in the animation/comic book industry are well versed in anatomy before they stylize it. It's essential in order to have a career in art.

Well it depends.
If you want to be taken seriously by your peers, or if you wish to work in a cartooning style that emulates realism, OR if you're NOT a genius whose style is SO appealing and SO unique that that nobody can tell your problems are flaws, then...you'll need to understand anatomy.

Besides your example about abstractionism not needing anatomical understanding is kind of flawed seeing as one of the most EXPENSIVE work(s) of Art so far in history happen to be done by Pablo Picasso (also the generally believed starter of abstract artwork) who actually understood anatomy and realism very well :/

But yea, sure, if you're a genius go ahead. Screw basic training.

Having a cartoon style does not mean you have to suck. What's the saying? "In order to break the rules you must first learn them"?

There are still a lot of concepts you need to know even if you work in abstract. Having an artist's eye is important. You know, the simple things like the rule of thirds and other basic concepts of composition.

I dunno. I really wonder the motives of this thread at all. As in Trolling or self stroking EgoBoo after someone insulted a drawing in art class. ;)

Lol, I just reread the title of this thread -- what exactly comprises "know"? An arm coming out of the top of someone's head is ok?

Originally Posted by Guivre

Having a cartoon style does not mean you have to suck. What's the saying? "In order to break the rules you must first learn them"?

There are still a lot of concepts you need to know even if you work in abstract. Having an artist's eye is important. You know, the simple things like the rule of thirds and other basic concepts of composition.

I dunno. I really wonder the motives of this thread at all. As in Trolling or self stroking EgoBoo after someone insulted a drawing in art class. ;)

Lol, I just reread the title of this thread -- what exactly comprises "know"? An arm coming out of the top of someone's head is ok?

Yes an arm coming out a head is OK if that's the person's goal. I had to learn that abstract art and unrealistic type cartoons be good artwork and it takes skills to make them. I used to simply label it as low quality art and realistic art as high quality.
I've come to realize the abstract artist just needs different skills to produce good quality artwork.

I know as someone who has followed realism type drawing and then later semi realism type cartoons myself, I couldn't possibly produce good quality abstract artwork/.

I must disagree.
While it is possible to build a reputation for a cartoon style without knowing anatomy, that person will not be creative to experiment or grow because there is no solid foundation to stylize upon.
But with a firm knowledge on anatomy, cartoonists are free to distort the designs based on real movements, thats how great cartoons that looks sorta realistic (in terms of movement, etc) is created.
Without a firm grounding, the designs created will be unrealistic and unconvincing. Other artists will be able to spot it right away.

lol tisk tisk. You DO need to know realism before going into that sort of thing if you want to be good at it. Even the great artist Malovich (I think it's him) who did black squares on a white background new how to draw amazingly detailed pictures. You need to know anatomy so that you can then warp/sculpt it into your own style.

Ofcourse anyone can draw without knowing about anatomy but you will greatly improve if you do.

Originally Posted by luciole

I must disagree.
While it is possible to build a reputation for a cartoon style without knowing anatomy, that person will not be creative to experiment or grow because there is no solid foundation to stylize upon.
But with a firm knowledge on anatomy, cartoonists are free to distort the designs based on real movements, thats how great cartoons that looks sorta realistic (in terms of movement, etc) is created.
Without a firm grounding, the designs created will be unrealistic and unconvincing. Other artists will be able to spot it right away.

lol and you would know what you're talking about. Your art is amazing!!

As much as I never wanted to believe it myself, every artist needs some background in realism and basic concepts of composition. Have you ever looked at Pablo Picasso's work before he moved to cubism? He was a master of realism before he ever moved to his less realistic works.

I've had my teachers at college tell me over and over that even Disney wants to see your realism skills before they even ask you to do any cartooning. You have to know the characteristics of whatever it is your morphing. Take a movie that has a lot of inanimate objects as main characters. You're certainly not going to start drawing the character before you know what that object looks like in real life are you? When Disney did Lion King they brought in real lions for the artists to draw from and morph into their cartoon counterparts.

I don't want it to feel like I'm shooting you down, but this is what I've heard time and time again.

Yeah, apparently my opinion is not very popular or understood.
It's OK, I had to learn myself at one time. All it takes is being introduced to some interesting abstract artwork and cartoon styles.

I must say I disagree with your opinion.

I started college, and just recently finished my first semester. After a semester of drawing the nude figure, it has greatly improved my personal works, despite the fact that I did no personal work the whole time I was studying. My work is stylized, and while it may retain some qualities of realism, it doesn't look very realistic. However, understanding the human body gave me a solid foundation that I can build upon. The movement in my pieces are more natural, the characters are less stiff, their proportions (at least, the way I draw them) seems more natural, among other things.

The art college I'm attending has various types of majors, but no matter what field one is going into, everyone learns the same thing the first year, including the human figure. It is important to understand something before it can be properly modified.

So they expect everyone to draw figures. Seems kinda limiting as a basic skill for an artist. Not everyone wants to keep drawing figures I assume.

Originally Posted by Claudia

So they expect everyone to draw figures. Seems kinda limiting as a basic skill for an artist. Not everyone wants to keep drawing figures I assume.

It seems more limiting to me to be unopen to a basic art education, or more importantly the fact that basic understanding of human anatomy will of course help with your drawing of cartoons. By that thinking, we might aswell throw all composition out of the window when drawing scenes, and colour, well who needs that.

They're called fundamentals for a reason.

Saying that drawing a figure and the anatomy of people is a fundamental skill seemed awfully biased to me. How about horse anatomy or dog anatomy?. I happen to have anatomy books of non human animals and I wouldn't consider them essential for every artist.

Understanding how one body works helps to more easily learn a different kind of body, especially when there are parts that move similarly. However, this is not the point I want to get into.

How many years would it take to teach someone everything that is considered essential? The fundamentals are taught to an artist, and it is their own choice what to do with them. Many of the skills learned to draw the human figure can also be used to draw animals, such as sighting important bone structures that show up in the surface of the animal's skin, sighting the angles from one point to another to capture a particular structure. We learn to capture proportion by establishing solid methods of measuring. The can, and do, in fact, help with cartooning. Those who animate cartoons first take anatomy. Many art majors make it a requirement. Otherwise, students come without understanding how their own characters, however proportioned, are supposed to move.

At any respected art academy that I have heard of, anatomy is required. Not because it is the single most important thing, but because it IS important to understand. It is not a bias. Those who wish to learn more about a specific field will do so. But they do so only after they have gained a required skills.

At the college I attend to, every single student starts out the same, and then they choose to do with that knowledge what they wish. We have fine artists and graphic designers. Fashion designers and illustrators. Concept artists. Animators, sculptors, architects, interior designers. In one way or another, the anatomy of a human is important to them. Understanding the way people are structured helps with functionality of buildings and interior spaces. It helps to understand the clothing people can move in. The way they should be moving. It helps cartoonists make even the strangest looking, super-deformed character look natural.

It is not biased. It is an understanding of the race which created art. An animal would probably have little interest in what we do, unless it endangered their lives. But how could those who attempt to create something that functions in the human world not understand the human body. I don't mean this in any sort of deep, spiritual meaning. It is important to have a foundation to build on.

Every student that attends the same college I attend understand that. It is why they choose the path of schooling instead of going their own way. If one possesses a knowledge so profound that they do not need school and can still be fantastic, then good for them. Unfortunately, not everyone is like that.

As far as I'm concerned (and have read. in a magazine) most designers (non-fashion ones, lulz. ) can't barely draw. They seem to draw lots of random cartoon-y characters with decent results. While I think it's important to have a basic understanding of human anatomy, if you're doing a cartoon style that involves basically an oval for a head, and an oval for the body, why bother XD?

But if you want any kind of realistic cartoons, learning human anatomy is definitely necessary :3

The problem is most people making their lack of knowledge in anatomy into an excuse ^^' They say something like "that's not an anatomy error, it's part of my style." Which is bad... because they're lying to themselves too.