I’m pretty new to art and I was wondering how do I use art books? Do I literally just follow along and do what they say or am I supposed to just remember the knowledge? Do I have to choose just one book for each subject like anatomy and color? I know this question makes me seem very stupid but I’m just struggling.

i honestly can’t give a good advice to this, since me as a beginner looking at art books was over 10 years ago as a kid and then i didnt look at them again until i was pretty experienced.

I’ve been watching videos and reading books about how to draw for months and I’ve made no progress with my art skill on paper. So I bought a tablet and decided to go full digital to see if that will make me learn and draw well. But I’m worried that drawing exclusively digital won’t help my traditional skills. Is that true? I want to be good at both but I have to be great at one before the other right?

the main difference in traditional and digital art is mechanical, so the majority of your skills will transfer over between them. Only knowledge unique to one of them, like material qualities with traditional or program tricks with digital, will be unapplicable in the other one.

they will of course feel different but that’s just habit stuff.

… to be honest though I don’t think buying a tablet was wise economically, but that comes down to your spending cash amounts.

but soy making you a dicklette isn’t pseudo science, it used to be a pretty regular thing in the budding days of popularizing vegetarian lifestyles as i was younger that ‘soy’ made your dick shrink, and was a big part of why going ‘full vegan’ was considered autistic even by foodies going vegetarian. If I remember right there’s medical studies on that shit. Soy makes you have a baby dick and grow titties, that’s all shit that’s been known for 30 years now.

yeah there’s one medical study

from the 1940s

done on sheep

who ate clover, not soy

you’re repeating bodybuilder forum myths, it’s all fake. it’s embedded itself into people but it’s made up. we’re talking pseudoscience on the level of “oh phytoestrogen has estrogen in it so its feminine” when they’re completely different things.

The “Great Replacement” is something recognized by even the UN. The native populations of developing countries are projected to stagnate (already happening) and then shrink (happening in a few cases) while the overall population will increase thanks to immigration (depending on the country and policy) resulting in a larger percentage of foreign born/non-European population. This doesn’t mean there’s a conspiracy or anything, or white people going “extinct”, but there’s a kernel of truth to it.

I mean yes population growth and stagnation is a thing but we’re talking “oh caucasian europeans will be outnumbered in 2500 exactly following current growth rates without considering circumstances in the future″, not the wild conspiracy theory white genocide under another name.

 but native europeans not fucking enough is its own issue not one caused or actually related to immigration. see: japan