A Discussion of Expressive Poses

[Nyil]

It occurred to me (through the help of Turnsky) that one of the things beginning artists tend to need a lot of help on is expressive poses - how do you draw something expressive and fluid, instead of stiff and emotionless? This is really a matter of opinion that varies from artist to artist, so I've decided to set up a bit of a discussion here so that we might discuss why some poses are expressive, but some poses are hard to relate to.





So what the heck makes a pose successful? How can we make viewers relate to characters through their poses?

Personally, I think the first step is drawing from life, and just knowing -how- things work in a visual way as opposed to how you think they -should- look. The second step is knowing how to exaggerate these perceptions in a somewhat realistic way. Sound like an oxymoron? It's not - just look at any anime. These animators are masters of exaggerating physical expression so that we can know -exactly- what a character is thinking. Ambiguity is hard to relate to after all. Do any of us -really- throw our arms around when we're happy or sad or what have you? I sure don't, but characters in anime tend to. Anime is a good example to look for expressive poses, but it is NOT something beginners should outright copy, as this tends to create false perceptions in anatomy and other important fundamentals.

For action-y poses that are dynamic, I tend to use the silhouette rule - if it wouldn't look good and recognizable as a silhouette, it won't look fantastic as an action pose.

So, I'm curious as to what other artists have to say about this matter. Let's discuss!

[Turnsky]

I think a lot of beginner artists forget to realise, or stick religiously to those rather stiff and inarticulate mannequins is that the body is a rather flexible thing, shoulders roll, backs bend (to a point), twist, and all other fun stuff, when doing comics for example, it's easy to forget that there's a subtext running under the main dialogue, and that's the body language and mannerisms of a character, that convey feeling towards the viewer that what they're seeing is not just static art on their screen but something with a little more emotional investment put towards it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v625/Turnsky/Sketches/ffc20090323wip.jpg
even with Adaras here, who's effectively just a walking slab of granite, doesn't act as stiffly as one would imagine, load shifts, inertia comes into play, all sorts of things to convey that there's a sense of life and motion in him.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v625/Turnsky/Sketches/nyilcommishwip.jpg this for example, too, shows that nyil here is prepared to not only throw that fireball, but put some gusto in it, leaning forward, all the while putting some weight on his back foot.

Expressiveness, intent, language, emotion. key things to remember when posing, i think.

[Nyil]

I think a lot of beginner artists forget to realise, or stick religiously to those rather stiff and inarticulate mannequins is that the body is a rather flexible thing, shoulders roll, backs bend (to a point), twist, and all other fun stuff, when doing comics for example, it's easy to forget that there's a subtext running under the main dialogue, and that's the body language and mannerisms of a character, that convey feeling towards the viewer that what they're seeing is not just static art on their screen but something with a little more emotional investment put towards it.

I think that's a pretty good point to bring up - another way to get away from mannequins is to exaggerate perspective. When you look at an artist like Iggi, you can see really fluid poses, especially when she wants to play with perspective and foreshortening. For almost everything she produces, there's always something that's RIGHT IN YOUR FACE - usually a foot or a hand. You just can't get that kind of exaggeration from a mannequin.
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6527989/ - as an example. The feet aren't that big compared to the body, but she's doing a pretty awesome job of representing a 3 dimensional object in 2 dimensional space.

If anyone wants to explore her gallery, it's very well worth it, though I will say that it's pretty NSFW. You've been warned.

[WhiteFox]

Personally, I think the first step is drawing from life, and just knowing -how- things work in a visual way as opposed to how you think they -should- look.

Quoted for truth. Such truth.

The second step is knowing how to exaggerate these perceptions in a somewhat realistic way.

I think there's a big difference between an exaggerated body language, and clear body language. There are visual cues people use for reading expressions. If those cues are taken into consideration, viewers will pick up on them. Exaggerating them usually looks something like phoney acting... which, depending on the desired tone and mood of the art, can be a good thing.

For example: elbows up and out implies tension, elbows down and in implies relaxation. Even if the the arm is only crooked at a very slight angle, the difference is notable. It doesn't have to be exaggerated, it just has to be there.

A major cue that I think artists typically gloss over is the tilt of the head. I can appreciate that drawing heads and faces at a variety of angles can be a laborious affair, but a slight angle makes a huge difference. Pitch, yaw, and roll all have a range of distinct expressions connected to them.

[Nyil]

I think there's a big difference between an exaggerated body language, and clear body language. There are visual cues people use for reading expressions. If those cues are taken into consideration, viewers will pick up on them. Exaggerating them usually looks something like phoney acting... which, depending on the desired tone and mood of the art, can be a good thing.

For example: elbows up and out implies tension, elbows down and in implies relaxation. Even if the the arm is only crooked at a very slight angle, the difference is notable. It doesn't have to be exaggerated, it just has to be there.

A major cue that I think artists typically gloss over is the tilt of the head. I can appreciate that drawing heads and faces at a variety of angles can be a laborious affair, but a slight angle makes a huge difference. Pitch, yaw, and roll all have a range of distinct expressions connected to them.

As far as clear body language and exaggeration goes, I think they're both important, but there is a difference between artistic exaggeration and just plain trying to beat someone over the head with it. Most amazingly expressive work has a bit of exaggeration in it, since that's part of what it means to be an artist. In paintings, for example, an artist will put more detail into the person's face and less detail in moving away from the face, so they eye has a path to travel, and a place to return to. The eye will always be drawn to the face, the eyes specifically. That in and of itself is an exaggeration - the face doesn't naturally have THAT MUCH MORE detail and refinement than the rest of the body, it's just exaggerated so that we have a place to look.
If you notice, in photographs, things will often look completely stiff and unnatural when they're taken from life. However, when you look in, say, a magazine, it looks a bit more natural and fluid. As someone that's done modeling for billboards, I can say that the more uncomfortable the pose, the more fluid and natural it will look to the audience. Not counting the amateur models that will look stiff no matter what, I'm talking about the really well done photographs.

As one more example, MissMab exaggerates pretty much everything, but the poses tend to look pretty natural. Just saying.

[WhiteFox]

In paintings, for example, an artist will put more detail into the person's face and less detail in moving away from the face, so they eye has a path to travel, and a place to return to.

That reminds me of something... italian painters, I forget what era, would make use of the hands to convey expression. Even a stonefaced, stalwart figure could express surprise with a splayed hand.

As one more example, MissMab exaggerates pretty much everything, but the poses tend to look pretty natural. Just saying.

If you say so... They look pretty outrageous to me.

Don't get me wrong: it's a really good flavour of outrageous. Dynamic and highly energetic, but still looks "plausible." It still looks like explosively cartoony poses.

[Turnsky]

Don't get me wrong: it's a really good flavour of outrageous. Dynamic and highly energetic, but still looks "plausible." It still looks like explosively cartoony poses.

you've obviously never watched comedy of any sort.

edit: a good note to observe in expressive characters is the Nick Park character of Gromit. whom has no discernable mouth, and is mostly expressive via his eyes and brow.

the idea here is that hands aren't the only expressive thing on the body, hands generally go under 'body language', what one needs to understand is how others communicate with each other without words, watch a silent movie sometime.

oddly enough of a good example too is the movie "v for vendetta" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chqi8m4CEEY Hugo Weaving wears the mask throughout the whole movie, and the body language is brilliantly subtle, but allows for quite a fair bit of expression.