>>13666020Le sigh. Another case of having to BTFO some midwit.
If your claim is that drawing is significantly based on visualization, then what is exercising drawing actually done for? Because you, clearly, can learn to visualize more vividly without that physical aid. Also no artist has ever reported, or art course taught, that increased visualization is the key to becoming better at drawing.
Exercising drawing strengthens your mind-muscle coordination as it pertains to drawing/painting, and teaches knowledge on proper materials, techniques, etc. Finally, it does better your visualization capabilities, but not in the way you imagine: for example, by giving you an eye how to apply perspective. But any visualizer will tell you their mental image does not actually look like some perspectiveless flat medieval Jesus painting. It still has naturalistic perspective (if we so desire). But that doesn't automatically, inherently give you an eye how to apply it, in the same way as watching others bike or drive a car doesn't automatically give you an eye how to properly drive in them.
Even if you uphold whatever point you are trying to make, you will have to yield that above factors are ridiculously more central than strengthening the mind's eye. Thus, the concept of mind's eye barely intersects, in relative terms (i.e. it does so peripherally), with the minor concept of artistry -- it's a much wider concept not influenced much by how well one can draw (but the inverse is due to the different relative importances not true, as a good visualization capability does impact artistry immensely).
