Post history /oc/56
>>54
Yea that's why I specified that it's a freehand sketch. If you actually want to bother to make the figure proportional and with a thought-out, well-flowing pose, you can be drawing the same picture for days.
This one, for example, I had worked on from the ~21st of october to the ~11th of november on and off, and even still I would never call it a finished or satisfactory picture.
>>55
>calculating if the cloth folds are mathematically/physically correct to the last detail
I do this.
Yea that's why I specified that it's a freehand sketch. If you actually want to bother to make the figure proportional and with a thought-out, well-flowing pose, you can be drawing the same picture for days.
This one, for example, I had worked on from the ~21st of october to the ~11th of november on and off, and even still I would never call it a finished or satisfactory picture.
>>55
>calculating if the cloth folds are mathematically/physically correct to the last detail
I do this.
>>54
Yea that's why I specified that it's a freehand sketch. If you actually want to bother to make the figure proportional and with a thought-out, well-flowing pose, you can be drawing the same picture for days.
This one, for example, I had worked on from the ~21st of october to the ~11th of november on and off, and even still I would never call it a finished or satisfactory picture.
>>55
>calculating if the cloth folds are mathematically/physically correct to the last detail
I do this.
Yea that's why I specified that it's a freehand sketch. If you actually want to bother to make the figure proportional and with a thought-out, well-flowing pose, you can be drawing the same picture for days.
This one, for example, I had worked on from the ~21st of october to the ~11th of november on and off, and even still I would never call it a finished or satisfactory picture.
>>55
>calculating if the cloth folds are mathematically/physically correct to the last detail
I do this.