/b/ - Random

That's nice

/b/e happy
/b/e urself
:D

>>6971
This

They're neat doodles :)

That is nice.

>>6969 (OP) 
>I'm relatively good (I think) at transferring objects from my vision onto paper
Afaik that's what they call "drawing from reference".
>and all I'd have to work on is visualization if I want to draw fictional things like anthros
There's a lot more to it imo; there is an infinite number of ways the same PC mouse can be drawn. There is no unequivocally correct or wrong way to do it but some ways (or styles) are more graceful and aesthetically pleasing than the others. Sometimes depicting an object is good enough but an artist would probably aim to do it in a way that makes you stop and appreciate his work.
>And yet... it's just not enjoyable to me tbh.
To each their own. But since you did draw the mouse, there's probably *something* enjoyable about the whole thing? Maybe deep down you did like the way it came out, deeming it worth sharing. Why not find what that is and use it as motivation to keep progressing?

Oh also do note that you definitely can draw passable anthro doodles without being to conjure the whole thing from imagination, many don't. You can technically cram multiple reference images (photo of a lady in a pose you wish to use, a few drawings of an anthro head of choice at an angle that would make sense, someone's drawing of digitigrade at an appropriate angle; probably don't need a reference for a tail at all) and create something new.  
But simply copying the shapes and curves (especially if the pose reference is a real photo and not an already "cooked" cartoonish drawing with lines visible) without understanding what makes them so appealing and how they flow would likely lead to a subpar result. Being able to sketch a blueprint, a passable depiction of an inanimate object is a good adjacent skill but isn't enough to make cool anthros. If you put some effort into it it's definitely doable though and you've made some steps towards it already.
The motivation? Well, you'd get to share images of anthros as you see them in your mind's eye. Others would appreciate it. You'd be able to impress people irl sketching anything (proper figure&gesture drawing skills transfer well to humans, animals, inanimate objects etc). The learning process can also be gamified to an extent (time challenges, timelapses; redoing a drawing after a period of time to see the difference in skill etc; anfoo has drawathons now and then, too)

aramis.jpg U A
[Hide] (2.1MB, 1884x2628) Reverse

>>7126
>there's probably *something* enjoyable about the whole thing?
Maybe there is, after all. I was never much of an artist as a kid even though, like I said, there was & still is that itch when I see a blank sheet of paper or art supplies or anything that seems to be begging to have something created. In my case it wasn't necessarily drawing. Sometimes I'd see a notebook and think of all the cool information that I could fill it with, etc.
Starting around middle school, there'd be forced drawings as part of assignments and even though now I can see how teaching that basic drawing proficiency I spoke about earlier makes sense (just like teaching reading & writing makes sense), maybe it's the fact it was introduced around that time that made me refuse to do it for rebellion's sake. I recall thinking to myself somewhat indignantly, "how dare they make drawing part of the assignment as if everyone had that skill? I'll just do the bare minimum to show them."
Later, in high school, I remember doing one such assignment for some science class where we were tasked with sketching some bugs and I guess this did pique my interest somewhat since I did and still do like the style of older academic illustrations. So I forced myself to actually try, and I remember being pleasantly surprised at the result, going "wow, I can't believe I was actually able to do that even half decently. I'm not supposed to be able to draw-- it's not something I care about."
Then I went to community college for architecture which was a massive mistake in its own right but, whatever. Lesson learned. More forced drawing and a second, minor rebellious phase, except as an adult this time. Maybe it's time to grow up. geg.
Anyways, you might be right. Drawing may not be my single favoritest art but there might be some enjoyment to be found in it, after all.

ebc9e45495c782c07611474f956656a9e711cf9569975d376c2921cd1da5784b.png U A
[Hide] (4.7MB, 1884x2628) Reverse

>>7140
Fixed the face (kind of) and hat in post.

>>7140
Forcing students to draw things for non-art-related subjects does seem excessive. 
Though there are times when to demonstrate understanding of a topic one must also visualize something, even in a purely technical course, e.g. wave propagation, or circuitry (they do get complex and arcane-looking after a certain point even if you don't give them the Canticle of Leibowitz monk treatment).

Taking an elective in architecture and being surprised that the course would include art is indeed odd. Used to know someone who studied architecture, she had the whole shebang at home: busts, skulls, that one set of shapes everyone draws when they study shading etc. Even if one somehow ignores the artistic part of the field, they'd still be expected to make schematics, right? 

Drawing as an artform isn't just about copying what one sees, I mean some probably make a living or receive acclaim by doing just that but there are successful "artists" who ducttape bananas to whiteboards or fling poop at canvas too.
From what I understood from all the media consooomed (partially or otherwise) to gain some understanding on the subject, in order to do it "right" one has to be mindful of what they are doing. You don't just directly copy what you see, you have to understand how and why. In case of using real world references we also have to be mindful of where to put the lines (we don't have thick black outlines around our eyes, mouths and such, right? Going overboard with those is how one ends up in the symbol drawing hell). It is a learned skill that we all are capable of getting the hang of but it takes some conscious effort and practice. 

Some books worth checking out could be "Keys to Drawing" (it does start with a couple of exercises and tips on sketchings object as we see them, and is generally not too technical), "Fun with Pencil" (boomer book but maybe it can shed some light on how few lines one needs in order to create a more refined kind of trollface?) and, say, Proko's youtube video where he draws seals (it should reveal another dimension to the whole thing, showing how thoughtful line/curve placement can elevate a drawing from just trying to blindly trace the subject from reference to a level where motion and energy are conveyed, grabbing and keeping the viewer's attention).
Probably a more wholesome and dignified way of spending free time than doomscrolling or playing modern videogames anyhow.

>>7157
>there are times when to demonstrate understanding of a topic one must also visualize something, even in a purely technical course
I'm aware. In retrospect, I understand their intentions. I do think teaching at least the basics of drawing alongside reading & writing is sensible. But, as with most things schools intend, the implementation was poor.
>Taking an elective in architecture and being surprised that the course would include art is indeed odd.
It wasn't an elective. It was my major. I ended up with two associate's degrees in architecture. lol. I had no intention to go to any sort of college but I also quickly realized I knew fuck-all about the world about a year after high school and I freaked out and gave in to my parents' pressure to just go to some school. Plus, you can game the system here using community college and effectively get paid to attend. I was expecting to draw but I wasn't expecting it to be a glorified art major. 90% is modernist or postmodernist arts BS and only about 10% is really technical. I was expecting a more even split (as would've been the case in ye olden days). But it turns out that's basically all been delegated to engineers and other trades. What I was really aiming to do and what I'm doing now is more aptly called drafting. I'm a draftsman, not an architect. And that, as with all other trades, you can teach yourself.
>Drawing as an artform isn't just about copying what one sees
I'm aware it's more than that but I meant to say that's the foundation of it just like the foundation of music can be boiled down to playing the right notes at the right time. In theory, the greatest mastery one can achieve is the ability to conjure up in the mind what needs to be put to paper all at once, the same way Mozart would allegedly just write music with the same ease most can just write words, isn't it? All other processes between start and finish are scaffolding, so to speak. There's something poetic in that though Mozart is perhaps the most famous of Classical composers, Bach, who's arguably the best, arrived at that position almost entirely through study instead.

We'll see. Maybe I've been repressing the desire to draw all along.

Interesting discussion.