# Almost non-serious typing thread (drawing analysis)



## To_august

Fractals and Pterodactyls said:


> My drawing skills are absolutely pathetic, reduced to the level of stick figures. Sometimes not even that. Anyway, here's mine @_To_august_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL]scan0001 by W-L, on Flickr[/IMG]


Lean introversion as objects are small and I don't see inclination to expand them in some way.

Static type - there's no motion in the drawing. The only hint on dynamic that I see is that foliage of the tree is tilted slightly, but that's about it. So -> static type.

Drawing lines are rational (there's no additional strokes or shading) and arrangement of objects (that is in strict rows) is rational as well -> rational type.

Face is smiling. Helicopter is a challenging object to draw, but at least you tried to make it, while horse is omitted altogether. There's also no humanization of other objects. Lean logical ego.

Intuition vs sensing. Flag is specific - with stars and stripes - but other objects don't have any details. Of course it could be just the result of drawing skills, but from this I can discern only intuition (because of lack of details or visible desire to make objects more concrete).

In total | - introverted, static, rational, logical, intuitive - | LII.


----------



## To_august

selena87 said:


> View attachment 323074
> 
> 
> Thank you for taking the time, this is really interesting and I'm very curious about your analysis. The numbers in pink show the order in which I drew the objects.


Lean dynamic type. Horse seems to be in motion and wanting to break away of its tether, water is dripping off the clothes.

Introverted type. Small objects and there's a lot of space in between them. Also area of the page is used in a typical introverted manner - that is: "I have to use all this free space somehow, so I put this thing here and this one over there, so it would seem as if I occupied the entire area."

Drawing lines are rational, but placement of objects is irrational and a bit chaotic. Unsure.

Ethics vs logic. Unclear. Man and horse are thoroughly drawn. Man is drawn in full length, so we can see not only his face, and this made him emphasized to a degree, but there's no particular expression to eather man or horse and no humanization of other inanimate objects, so, probably, it's closer to logical ego.

Intuition vs sensing. Hmm. Can be sensing as there is an addition of details in the drawing - like horse's leash - but difficult to say for sure. Something prods me in the sensing direction, but I can't pinpoint what it is exactly, so can be intuition as well.

All in all - think it's introverted type from serious quadra - ILI, ESI, EII or SLI, and since I leant dynamic, I'll narrow it down to ILI or SLI.


----------



## The Exception

To_august said:


> Lean introversion as objects are small and I don't see inclination to expand them in some way.
> 
> Static type - there's no motion in the drawing. The only hint on dynamic that I see is that foliage of the tree is tilted slightly, but that's about it. So -> static type.
> 
> Drawing lines are rational (there's no additional strokes or shading) and arrangement of objects (that is in strict rows) is rational as well -> rational type.
> 
> Face is smiling. Helicopter is a challenging object to draw, but at least you tried to make it, while horse is omitted altogether. There's also no humanization of other objects. Lean logical ego.
> 
> Intuition vs sensing. Flag is specific - with stars and stripes - but other objects don't have any details. Of course it could be just the result of drawing skills, but from this I can discern only intuition (because of lack of details or visible desire to make objects more concrete).
> 
> In total | - introverted, static, rational, logical, intuitive - | LII.


Interesting. I didn't even think to consider motion in my drawing. If the tree looks like it's swaying a little it's just because I rushed and drew it fast. I intended to draw a still tree. I strongly identify with the static dichotomy from what I've read about it. 

I don't enjoy drawing and have never been good at it. I remember dabbling in it as a child and getting really frustrated with it. Beyond the required art classes in school I never desired to pursue it further. I have a vision of what it should look like in my head but trying to actually translate it to paper is a whole different story. I have a strong concept in my head of what a horse should look like but when I put it down on paper, I don't even know how to start drawing it so it remotely looks like one. Similar with a helicopter and most other objects.

I know the helicopter was missing some parts but because I wasn't quite sure what they specifically looked like 
or where it was placed. Like I didn't know for sure where the motor part was. So I omitted it. I guess you could say I strived for logical accuracy in my drawing (Ti) but didn't exactly succeed in that. 

Interesting what you say about introversion. Yes I am introverted. I did feel a need to spread out the images throughout the whole paper though, even the images themselves were kind of small.

Regarding intuition, I strongly identify with intuition in socionics but I probably would have included a few more details had my drawing skills been a little better. I put stars and stripes on the flag to make it more obvious that it is a flag. I was aware that the number of stars and stripes is incorrect but I was just trying to get the gist of it across. Same with the face, I was aware that many details were missing but once again, I just wanted to get the drawing done with because I don't enjoy drawing, but I was curious about the typing method so I did it anyway. So I did the minimum to get the point across. The clothesline I realized that how do the pants and the socks stay on the line if they are not pinned even if I actually didn't draw the pins. The tree I would have included some more detail like branches and leaves if my drawing skills were better. 

Logic vs. ethics, this dichotomy is less clear for me. I think I'm logical overall with a strong ethical streak. Kind of between LII and EII but more LII. I probably would have put a little more expression on the face if my drawing skills were better. The face was smiling but the nuance wasn't there. It didn't occur to me to draw with feeling on the other photos. More important to me was to logically depict them accurately. (Hard to do when your drawing skills as a pitiful as mine).

Rationality, yes. I guess you could say that I wanted some sense of structure to the drawings. To me I followed the directions and didn't really deviate from that. Also it was simply natural for me to draw them side-by-side in rows and in the order listed. You're probably going to laugh at this but I was thinking that 7 photos was awkward because it meant putting the last picture all by itself in the last row, disrupting the overall symmetry. I suppose wanting that kind of symmetry is a Ti thing? I was thinking it would be better to have 9 pictures, in a nice 3X3 grid. :laughing:


----------



## To_august

Fractals and Pterodactyls said:


> Interesting what you say about introversion. Yes I am introverted. I did feel a need to spread out the images throughout the whole paper though, even the images themselves were kind of small.
> 
> Rationality, yes. I guess you could say that I wanted some sense of structure to the drawings. To me I followed the directions and didn't really deviate from that. Also it was simply natural for me to draw them side-by-side in rows and in the order listed. You're probably going to laugh at this but I was thinking that 7 photos was awkward because it meant putting the last picture all by itself in the last row, disrupting the overall symmetry. I suppose wanting that kind of symmetry is a Ti thing? I was thinking it would be better to have 9 pictures, in a nice 3X3 grid. :laughing:


You spread images in totally introverted manner though. It doesn't really resembles extroverted drive to make them bigger, wider, broader and occupy all the space so that they end up lacking space on page XD That would be typical extraversion.

In this methodology symmetry would point rather to rationality particularity and I noticed so far that many Ji types tend to have similar drawings in terms of objects arrangement. There are different examples and specimens of course, but I'd say that your drawing looks typically Ji.


----------



## To_august

Tsurukaze said:


> I hope you enjoy my pictures. I certainly enjoyed drawing them!


Can't see your pictures.
Maybe try to upload them somewhere and then insert URL through "Insert Image" option. Don't forget to uncheck "Retrieve remote file and reference locally".


----------



## Ninjaws

@To_august senpai, notice me. :3

I posted my images at the bottom of the previous page, could you give a rundown of it? I'm interested in which types you would suggest.


----------



## reptilian

haha this one should be easy

I started with the middle object, I wanted to imply some humor.
Face-horse-tree-heli-stringclothes-sun-flag

this was done in under 2min


----------



## To_august

Ninjaws said:


> My aplogies for the poor quality, I drew it in paint.net. (don't have anything to make pictures with)
> 
> View attachment 323538





> @_To_august_ senpai, notice me. :3
> I posted my images at the bottom of the previous page, could you give a rundown of it? I'm interested in which types you would suggest.


Woops. Guess I missed your drawing because it went without mentioning.

Lean logical ego type. Face has some expression and horse is rather big, but this is not the way to present them that I expect from an ethical ego. Also, don't feel that there's some emotional background or desire to humanize inanimate objects.

Drawing lines of the objects in the upper part of the drawing are closer to irrational side of things, while wash on a line and helicopter are more rational. Overall composition - i.e. arrangement of objects - is irrational, so lean the latter, but hard to say for sure. I blame it partially on the fact that it was made with paint.net, because computer drawing may look different from what person can draw with their hand.

Extraversion vs introversion. Looks like extraversion, but I'm unsure as I can't properly estimate how big the objects truly are and how much space would they take if this were a physical sheet of paper. If this were real full page and objects were located like that and were that size, I would say extraversion, because they look pretty big and cover the whole page area, living little space unused.

Static vs dynamic. Horse and face look dynamic. Horse is definitely moving and reaching out for the sun. Face also seem to be in motion, but other objects are still and motionless. Unclear.

Sensing vs intuition. Lean intuition simply because there's no addition of any details and no drive to make objects more specific and unique.

To sum it up - basing on the drawing, it is logic+intuition. The rest is vague, but I'd say this doesn't look like Ne base, so we end up with LII, ILI and LIE.


----------



## The_Truth




----------



## Ksara

@To_august I'm curious what you think 


The order I drew things was 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 4.
The flag, washing and helicopter was more simplistic as I do not enjoy drawing those objects as much, I preferred the tree, face sun and horse. I first drew lightly with a green pen then went over with a black pen (I don't think you can see the green in the photo) nothing was erased.

I wanted to do something interesting with the sun (thinking like a face, or half sun face half moon face, but there was alread one of those), I wasn't to sure how I wanted to draw it so I left it to last, and didn't quite leave enough space so I did it more as a background thing haha. I did think about combining the images into one scene but in then end I decided to draw them separated then tied them together in a different way.

I am used to drawing on A3, this is A4, so I think my images may appear larger in comparison to the page. The images would have been roughly the same size if I had done it on A3.

All images were from my head. For the face and the horse I used my knowledge of proportions (however horses aren't something I have drawn or seen much of).

I enjoyed this task


----------



## To_august

Ksara said:


> View attachment 326514
> 
> @_To_august_ I'm curious what you think
> 
> 
> The order I drew things was 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 4.
> The flag, washing and helicopter was more simplistic as I do not enjoy drawing those objects as much, I preferred the tree, face sun and horse. I first drew lightly with a green pen then went over with a black pen (I don't think you can see the green in the photo) nothing was erased.
> 
> I wanted to do something interesting with the sun (thinking like a face, or half sun face half moon face, but there was alread one of those), I wasn't to sure how I wanted to draw it so I left it to last, and didn't quite leave enough space so I did it more as a background thing haha. I did think about combining the images into one scene but in then end I decided to draw them separated then tied them together in a different way.
> 
> I am used to drawing on A3, this is A4, so I think my images may appear larger in comparison to the page. The images would have been roughly the same size if I had done it on A3.
> 
> All images were from my head. For the face and the horse I used my knowledge of proportions (however horses aren't something I have drawn or seen much of).
> 
> I enjoyed this task


Lean dynamic type. Helicopter is flying, horse is running and its mane is fluttering in the wind. Flag is moving as well.

Drawing lines are clearly irrational. There are may strokes and shading used. I can't see any straight lines in the drawing, so, yep, think it's obviously irrational bent.

Lean extraversion, because objects are rather big and occupied the entire area of the page. They indeed appear larger, as you mentioned it, and the fact that you didn't left space for the sun - it's all closer to extraversion. But if I understood correctly, you draw quite often and do it on a sheet of paper of certain size, so that could be the result of the technique or habit and thus not indicative of extraversion/introversion.

Sensing vs intuition. Lean sensing, because there are different additional details - bird, leaf on the tree, inscription on a t-shirt. Tree is drawn in rather detailed and specific manner, it even has roots (grounding elements in the drawing usually speak in favour of sensing). On the other hand, all other objects except the tree are floating in space, wash on a line doesn't have supporting poles, helicopter is depicted under the unusual angle, flag is unspecific. All this can speak for intuition.

Logic vs ethics. Lean ethical ego, because of the big and thoroughly drawn human face that occupied central part of the drawing, horse is also emphasized and there's inclusion of the bird - one more animate object. 

In total - judging by the drawing I'm sure the most of irrationality and dynamic. This also adds introversion to the result, since extroverted, irrational, dynamic types do not exist.
This leaves four possible types: SEI, IEI, ILI and SLI.


----------



## reptilian

jkp said:


> View attachment 326178
> 
> 
> haha this one should be easy
> 
> I started with the middle object, I wanted to imply some humor.
> Face-horse-tree-heli-stringclothes-sun-flag
> 
> this was done in under 2min


 @To_august Do it pls


----------



## vintage stardust

@To_august I made sure before I drew this to only read the first post as to not skew what I was drawing...I'm not the best at drawing, but I tried...lol. Wish I would have invested more time now after looking at some of the others haha... I had to google helicopter to give me something to draw from...

Edit:

I forgot to add my drawing process. I started with the sun first because I already knew I wanted it in the top corner. I drew the tree next, because I wanted to use the tree and flag pole as a means to add the line with clothes, as I didn't want to add any addition elements to the picture other than what was specified. Also, I thought it was a good position right under the sun to dry the clothes faster. I drew the horse next, and then I had to google the helicopter. I almost forgot the face. I wanted a side profile of the face to be focusing on other elements in the picture, as I wanted them all to fit together in ways that made sense instead of drawing them separately and not together as a whole.


----------



## To_august

jkp said:


> View attachment 326178
> 
> 
> haha this one should be easy
> 
> I started with the middle object, I wanted to imply some humor.
> Face-horse-tree-heli-stringclothes-sun-flag
> 
> this was done in under 2min





> @_To_august_ Do it pls


Sure 

Lean logical ego. Horse is big and smiling, man's face has a distinct expression, but nope, this is not how ethical egos do it. I expect something like this to be drawn by logical Pe valuers.

Lean irrational type as drawing lines are more irrational with usage of shading and hatching.

Static type. Helicopter is kind of falling and seems in motion, but all other objects are stagnant. Horse stands still, lifeless flag lies on the floor, sun doesn't radiate its energy. Yep. Think it's clearly static.

Extraversion vs introversion. Unclear. Some objects are just HUGE, while other ones are small. But, since I'm more sure of irrational and static dichotomies and introverted, irrational, static types do not exist, this must be extroversion.

Sensing vs intuition. Horse and face are depicted at the... erm... 'peculiar' angle, this could speak in favour of intuition, but except that nothing really tips the scale in eather direction. I can see the case for both options.

This is logical, irrational, static, extraverted type = ILE or SLE.


----------



## To_august

vintage stardust said:


> View attachment 326818
> @_To_august_ I made sure before I drew this to only read the first post as to not skew what I was drawing...I'm not the best at drawing, but I tried...lol. Wish I would have invested more time now after looking at some of the others haha... I had to google helicopter to give me something to draw from...
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I forgot to add my drawing process. I started with the sun first because I already knew I wanted it in the top corner. I drew the tree next, because I wanted to use the tree and flag pole as a means to add the line with clothes, as I didn't want to add any addition elements to the picture other than what was specified. Also, I thought it was a good position right under the sun to dry the clothes faster. I drew the horse next, and then I had to google the helicopter. I almost forgot the face. I wanted a side profile of the face to be focusing on other elements in the picture, as I wanted them all to fit together in ways that made sense instead of drawing them separately and not together as a whole.


Initial vibe - Ji type. Let's see what I'll get to in the end.

Not seeing any motion. Horse is still, clothes on a line are motionless, flag is stagnant as well, helicopter isn't flying anywhere = static type.

Lean ethical ego. Face and horse are drawn more thoroughly in comparison to other objects. Horse is smiling and I guess there's a little man in the helicopter? Roundish, soft lines - ethical type.

Introverted type. Objects are rather small and there's unused space left. Not seeing wish to expand the objects or make them bigger, wider, grander and cover all the page area with them.

Drawing lines are clearly rational and positioning of objects - that of placing them in linear manner (helicopter and sun are in the upper part, while the rest objects are standing in line at the bottom) - also is in favour of rationality.

Sensing vs intuition. Lean intuition as there aren't any additional details in the drawing. Only horse and face are more nuanced then the rest objects, but that only further supports ethical valuing type. So, I think intuition, but can see the case for sensing too.

Static, ethical, introverted, rational, intuitive type -> EII
If sensing valuer -> ESI


----------



## reptilian

To_august said:


> This is logical, irrational, static, extraverted type = ILE or SLE.


Yeeeeee, very good, ILE it is! I could never pick between E or I myself but ENTP stereotype fits me well and I like being around people.


----------



## vintage stardust

To_august said:


> Initial vibe - Ji type. Let's see what I'll get to in the end.
> 
> Not seeing any motion. Horse is still, clothes on a line are motionless, flag is stagnant as well, helicopter isn't flying anywhere = static type.
> 
> Lean ethical ego. Face and horse are drawn more thoroughly in comparison to other objects. Horse is smiling and I guess there's a little man in the helicopter? Roundish, soft lines - ethical type.
> 
> Introverted type. Objects are rather small and there's unused space left. Not seeing wish to expand the objects or make them bigger, wider, grander and cover all the page area with them.
> 
> Drawing lines are clearly rational and positioning of objects - that of placing them in linear manner (helicopter and sun are in the upper part, while the rest objects are standing in line at the bottom) - also is in favour of rationality.
> 
> Sensing vs intuition. Lean intuition as there aren't any additional details in the drawing. Only horse and face are more nuanced then the rest objects, but that only further supports ethical valuing type. So, I think intuition, but can see the case for sensing too.
> 
> Static, ethical, introverted, rational, intuitive type -> EII
> If sensing valuer -> ESI


Thank's, @To_august! I self-type EII-Fi, so pretty accurate . 
Would you mind taking a look at my husband's? He's been a little hard to pin down. He didn't want to draw the horse, so he drew it last. He didn't want to draw the human face because he said he doesn't like drawing faces, so no face...


----------



## Zamyatin

I'll give this a try.


* *













Drawing process: basically just went down the list, drawing the images left to right. No guiding idea behind the process aside from trying to make them clear and reasonably good reflections of what they are supposed to reflect.

The forum seems to squash the image for some reason, so I suggest right clicking it and viewing the image directly.


----------



## To_august

vintage stardust said:


> Thank's, @_To_august_! I self-type EII-Fi, so pretty accurate .
> Would you mind taking a look at my husband's? He's been a little hard to pin down. He didn't want to draw the horse, so he drew it last. He didn't want to draw the human face because he said he doesn't like drawing faces, so no face...


Logical ego. Omission of human face, small expressionless horse, in comparison to the latter helicopter looks much bigger (logical egos tend to like drawing inanimate objects more, helicopter particularly), inanimate objects aren't humanized in any way - all this speaks is in favour of logical type.

Lean static as only helicopter blades are spinning. All the other objects are still and motionless. Flag and wash on a line doesn't flutter, horse stands still.

Lean introversion, because objects are small and there's a lot of space left unused.

Rational vs irrational. Unclear, but seems more rational as there's a strict positioning of objects - horse, tree, flag and laundry line support poles are located on the ground, sun and helicopter in the sky. The overall composition is also concrete and logically balanced.

Sensing vs intuition. Lean sensing, because tree is very detailed with leaves, hole in a trunk and bark. Helicopter is detailed as well. Horse has hoofs and overall grounding theme that is common for sensors is present here.

Logical, static, introverted, sensing type - LSI. If I messed up intuition, then - LII.


----------



## To_august

Zamyatin said:


> I'll give this a try.
> 
> 
> * *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Drawing process: basically just went down the list, drawing the images left to right. No guiding idea behind the process aside from trying to make them clear and reasonably good reflections of what they are supposed to reflect.
> 
> The forum seems to squash the image for some reason, so I suggest right clicking it and viewing the image directly.


Can't help but type it at once as LII. Don't think I'll deduce anything except logical intuitive introvert from this. Lol. So, onto the elaboration.

Static type. Nothing moves in the drawing. Tree is still, horse doesn't kick the dirt, helicopter is motionless, clothes on a line is frozen.

Drawing lines are rational. There's no additional strokes or shading. Virtually everything is drawn in one-line. Composition of the drawing is rational as well - that is placing of objects in three orderly rows.

Lean intuition as there aren't any details added and all the objects are schematic, unspecific and floating in the air without support.

Logical type - face and horse don't have any particular expression and other inanimate objects aren't humanized.

And finally - introversion, because objects are small, there's a lot of unused space between them and no drive to make them bigger or wider of fill all the page with them. 

Static, rational, intuitive, logical, introverted type - LII.


----------



## Snow

I know my type, but figured you guys could have fun with this. Too lazy to put into a thumbnail so feel free to do so if you care to.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3YrxThadhYhWWg1NjJyWWVIUlk/view?usp=sharing


----------



## Ixim

To_august said:


> I saw this typing method used a couple years ago somewhere else (don't remember where exactly, it was some other board I guess), but it might be fun to try.
> 
> All you have to do is take a blank piece of paper (preferably a standard A4 sheet, but could be any size that is broad enough) and draw a picture of the following objects in pencil or pen (watercolour and gouache are not allowed):
> 1. Tree
> 2. Human's face
> 3. Flag
> 4. Sun
> 5. Horse
> 6. Wash on a line
> 7. Helicopter
> 
> After you finish, take a photo or a scan of your picture and upload it to this thread, so we can analyse the result. This is it.
> 
> _*IMPORTANT NOTES:*
> - All objects must be drawn on a single sheet of paper.
> - When taking a photo or a scan of the picture, make sure that you captured the entire sheet of paper from edge to edge and top to bottom.
> - It is not desirable to sneak peek at the pictures and analyses of others, or else there's a chance of being primed while drawing your own one.
> - Drawing skills have no importance in this task.
> - This is non-serious typing method, hence it should not be used as the sole source of truth concerning anybody's type, but it may or may not provide insight into it.
> __It is desirable that you add short summary describing the process of drawing. For instance, what object you started with, how you proceeded with the other ones, idea of the drawing (if there was one). Actually anything about the drawing process will be helpful during making the analysis._
> 
> _This thread is open for everybody to analyse and make guesses concerning other people's drawings. If you want me in particular to analyse your drawing, please, mention me in your post._


But I can't draw all of those. I'm bad at drawing! Actually, I'm not if it comes from my head, but if I have to put reality on a piece of paper...lord help you! I had HUGE problems with Technical Drawing.

Does this tell anything?


----------



## Caelestis

My horse is an anatomical abomination, ugh. B(

Order of drawing: 

1. Tree
2. Sun
3. Clothesline 
4. Flag
5. Helicopter
6. Horse
7. Face

At first I started with the tree, and then I decided to add some branches and a couple birds to make it look more like a tree instead of a thick line with a circle. After that, I put the sun in the corner once I added some distant hills, to make it resemble a sunset. Before I moved on to the clothesline, I decided to draw a shore and an ocean to make it more of a picture and give it a warm, breezy feeling. I really wanted to draw a basket under the clothesline, so I did just that. I drew the flag by the tree since I thought it was the most relevant space draw it. I drew the helicopter tipped downwards, so I added a stick man and made it a rescue scene on a lone island. I wanted to draw a more detailed horse (and face) so I drew it on a bigger scale relative to the rest of the scene, then I realized how out of place it looked, said screw it and then just drew the face floating in the air.


----------



## selena87

Thanks again for the analysis, very eye opening.

I noticed that some users drew the objects separately like a gallery of sorts, and some like me drew everything in a single picture like an imaginary world. Do you think it carries any significance?


----------



## To_august

Ixim said:


> But I can't draw all of those. I'm bad at drawing! Actually, I'm not if it comes from my head, but if I have to put reality on a piece of paper...lord help you! I had HUGE problems with Technical Drawing.
> 
> Does this tell anything?


That you are disinterested/bored with drawing real objects probably?
Anyway, objects listed are totally imaginable. They don't exist in reality and are solely your ideas about those things that you can translate to paper. Besides, without a traceable reason, there's no such thing as "I can't", only "I don't want to".

Believe in your abilities you should.
Masterpiece worthy of an artist's brush required is not.



selena87 said:


> Thanks again for the analysis, very eye opening.
> 
> I noticed that some users drew the objects separately like a gallery of sorts, and some like me drew everything in a single picture like an imaginary world. Do you think it carries any significance?


Simply tying objects together doesn't carry significance imo (but I'm open to suggestions:kitteh, it's more important how it's done and whether it supposed to represent something.

If objects are united as to represent some single idea or drawing gives a holistic impression, this may point to Ne. Like this one, or this one.

If they are united by common logical placement, it may be rationality. I don't mean "logical" in Socionics terms, but in a meaning that, for example, objects are drawn where they belong (tree, horse, wash on a line are placed on the ground, sun is in the sky etc.), there aren't objects that "sit on the fence", but everything has its defined place. It's hard to explain, lol. But I imagine it to be something like that. 

It doesn't mean that rational types will always draw objects exactly this way though. I noticed it's more common for Ji to draw them all separately actually. It also speaks is favour of rationality, because, then again, there's definite rational placement of objects - that is - in rows.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Oh, this is an interesting thread. Wanted to give it a try, but never got around to finishing, and I imagine I can guess what my "result" might be.


----------



## Ixim

To_august said:


> That you are disinterested/bored with drawing real objects probably?
> Anyway, objects listed are totally imaginable. They don't exist in reality and are solely your ideas about those things that you can translate to paper. Besides, without a traceable reason, there's no such thing as "I can't", only "I don't want to".
> 
> Believe in your abilities you should.
> Masterpiece worthy of an artist's brush required is not.
> 
> 
> Simply tying objects together doesn't carry significance imo (but I'm open to suggestions:kitteh, it's more important how it's done and whether it supposed to represent something.
> 
> If objects are united as to represent some single idea or drawing gives a holistic impression, this may point to Ne. Like this one, or this one.
> 
> If they are united by common logical placement, it may be rationality. I don't mean "logical" in Socionics terms, but in a meaning that, for example, objects are drawn where they belong (tree, horse, wash on a line are placed on the ground, sun is in the sky etc.), there aren't objects that "sit on the fence", but everything has its defined place. It's hard to explain, lol. But I imagine it to be something like that.
> 
> It doesn't mean that rational types will always draw objects exactly this way though. I noticed it's more common for Ji to draw them all separately actually. It also speaks is favour of rationality, because, then again, there's definite rational placement of objects - that is - in rows.


Ok, I understand now. Be warned, if I do this, you'll get stick men.

edit: could I rather describe how the drawing should/would look like? So I don't embarass myself beyond any belief?


----------



## Mr inappropriate

Ixim said:


> Ok, I understand now. Be warned, if I do this, you'll get stick men.
> 
> edit: could I rather describe how the drawing should/would look like? So I don't embarass myself beyond any belief?


lol just do it ! what happened to your Se ? just draw !!


----------



## aendern

selena87 said:


> I noticed that some users drew the objects separately like a gallery of sorts, and some like me drew everything in a single picture like an imaginary world. Do you think it carries any significance?


I think it signifies that the directions were unclear.


----------



## To_august

Ixim said:


> Ok, I understand now. Be warned, if I do this, you'll get stick men.
> 
> edit: could I rather describe how the drawing should/would look like? So I don't embarass myself beyond any belief?


Sure. We can try it through description only. That must be interesting. I personally struggle to describe all the stuff that could be conveyed through the drawing, it's easier to show then to describe. Lol. 
And be ready for additional questions then.



emberfly said:


> I think it signifies that the directions were unclear.


The vagueness was intentional.


----------



## Ixim

To_august said:


> Sure. We can try it through description only. That must be interesting. I personally struggle to describe all the stuff that could be conveyed through the drawing, it's easier to show then to describe. Lol.
> And be ready for additional questions then.
> 
> 
> The vagueness was intentional.


No problem!


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Oh well, here's my attempt anyway (well, it's like a redo/trace of the drawing I did earlier):


* *














My approach:
-Looked up whatever I was supposed to draw on google image search for reference
-Drew each object on separate sheaths of paper
-Reread the instructions and realized I was supposed to draw them all on the same paper
-Whoops
-Tried to draw them again, this time on the same paper as instructed
-Drew it like a "proper" picture even though I'm not too good at compositions because just drawing several objects on the same sheath of paper is too distracting otherwise
-With this approach, though, it was hard fitting a human face into it without making it very small, so tried drawing something like the creepy sun from teletubbies, but by the time I thought of that I had already drawn a sun that was a bit too small to fit a face into, so I GAVE UP
-Then later I saw this thread again and decided to redraw it (partly because I didn't have the pen I originally used, and this time I had a pencil to use, so easier anyway)
-Also looked up references again because I've gotten so used to using those rather than drawing from my imagination
-Started with the tree, probably because it's the first thing listed, but also it's the largest object (typically) so it's the best way to frame it in a way. Idk. Then drew like a slope I could place the other stuff on
-Did some fretting over the scale, but couldn't be arsed to be really exact about that stuff because it's hard/tedious
-Kinda gave up on drawing the horse too >_>


----------



## Ixim

crashbandicoot said:


> lol just do it ! what happened to your Se ? just draw !!


You'll see the Se soon enough.


----------



## Ixim

To_august said:


> Sure. We can try it through description only. That must be interesting. I personally struggle to describe all the stuff that could be conveyed through the drawing, it's easier to show then to describe. Lol.
> And be ready for additional questions then.
> 
> 
> The vagueness was intentional.


Ok, here we go:

Let's start with how the paper is oriented. It is oriented horizontally, what would be call a..."landscape" mode in Word etc.

There is an oak tree to the left. It is kinda old and has a huge treetop. It looks like it could be used to take a quick nap. Nearing the centre of the paper there is a person hanging his washed clothes on a washing line. It's a typical washing line consisting of 3 line between two poles. It's not one of those 70s american rotating things. A person's face looks kinda exasperated like a person is doing a thing he doesn't feel like doing. One would assume that person wasn't meant to originally do the hanging. In the background beyond a person, there is a house and above the porch there is a flag mounted. It looks like it is some kind of holiday. Which would explain even more why a person looks exasperated-a holiday is meant for resting and recreation, but chores never wait! Near the house there is a stable with few horses in it. It is to the right from the house.

The sky is clear. Just a bit to the right of the upper middle of paper there is sun. There are few clouds gathering from the left, but overall it's clear. In the upper right piece of paper you can spot few helicopters of(crazy incoming!) Ka-29 type and a few of recreational turbopropeller, say Piper, planes can be seen nearing the upper left piece of the paper. The atmosphere of a nigh perfect holiday is almost palpable.

That's it!

Ready for further questions...


----------



## Snow




----------



## To_august

Ixim said:


> Ok, here we go:
> 
> Let's start with how the paper is oriented. It is oriented horizontally, what would be call a..."landscape" mode in Word etc.
> 
> There is an oak tree to the left. It is kinda old and has a huge treetop. It looks like it could be used to take a quick nap. Nearing the centre of the paper there is a person hanging his washed clothes on a washing line. It's a typical washing line consisting of 3 line between two poles. It's not one of those 70s american rotating things. A person's face looks kinda exasperated like a person is doing a thing he doesn't feel like doing. One would assume that person wasn't meant to originally do the hanging. In the background beyond a person, there is a house and above the porch there is a flag mounted. It looks like it is some kind of holiday. Which would explain even more why a person looks exasperated-a holiday is meant for resting and recreation, but chores never wait! Near the house there is a stable with few horses in it. It is to the right from the house.
> 
> The sky is clear. Just a bit to the right of the upper middle of paper there is sun. There are few clouds gathering from the left, but overall it's clear. In the upper right piece of paper you can spot few helicopters of(crazy incoming!) Ka-29 type and a few of recreational turbopropeller, say Piper, planes can be seen nearing the upper left piece of the paper. The atmosphere of a nigh perfect holiday is almost palpable.
> 
> That's it!
> 
> Ready for further questions...


OK, I imagined it. Now I have to make sure that I wouldn't type my own imaginary drawing instead of yours XD

I really recommend to make the drawing at this point, without uploading it here, as I'm going to throw different possibilities at you right now and without having a physical representation of what you imagined in your mind's eye, you'd have nothing to refer to and it would be hard to tell what really was drawn and what wasn't.

So far I'm leaning rational type, because of the way you located objects in the drawing, but that's not solid for now, so, behold, questions are incoming.
__________

1. How big are objects in your drawing? Are there some objects that are bigger than the other ones? Does any object stand out in comparison to other ones? Are there any objects that are drawn more thoroughly then the other ones? Are they all the same size? Is there a lot of space in between the object left unused? Do any objects go beyond the limits of the page?
2. Describe the sun. How does it look like? Is it simple circle? Does it have beams? Does it radiate the energy over the drawing so we can see it?
3. Describe horses. Can we see them in stable? Are they doing something? Do they move, do they nicker? Are their manes fluttering and tails wagging? Do they have any facial expression, maybe smile or anything like that? Do they stand still? Do they have visible hooves?
4. Washed clothes. Do they have any patterns, designs, inscriptions? Do they move, maybe water is dripping off them?
5. We can see man in full length I suppose? What about his clothes? Any inscriptions, patterns? Does man's face has a distinct and thoroughly drawn facial expression?
6. Is there ground in your drawing, or the objects are sort of floating in space?
7. Describe the tree. Does it have roots, visible bark? Can wee see distinct leaves? Maybe bird's nest or anything additional?
8. Describe helicopters. Are they small dots in the sky or we can see them more clearly? Are they moving? Are their blades rotating? How big they are in comparison to other objects?
9. Describe the flag. Is the flag specific, i.e. flag of some country with visible pattern? Does it flutter? Can we see it moving?
10. Describe the house. Does it have door, windows, roof, columns or anything in particular? Maybe it's just a squire with a triangle on top?
11. Describe lines of the drawing. Are they more angular or soft and roundish?
12. Is there any other indication of movement in your drawing? Like putting stokes/dots around the objects that show wind or motion. For reference, there are three helicopters under spoiler below. First two helicopters are moving and the last one is static. 
_
PLEASE NOTE! Concerning all question that refer to explaining of objects in motion, it is important to remember that we are dealing with 2D image, not a 3D movie with landscape that we imagined, where helicopters would be moving of course, because otherwise how else would they fly. So it is important to distinguish whether we really see motion in the drawing and whether you thought about showing motion in the drawing.

_That's enough for now.
* *


----------



## To_august

Revenant said:


>


Irrational (too many strokes and shadings), logical (helicopter - that supposed to represent logical attitude - literally steals the show) ego.

Guess that's all I can deduce from this.


----------



## Ixim

To_august said:


> OK, I imagined it. Now I have to make sure that I wouldn't type my own imaginary drawing instead of yours XD
> 
> I really recommend to make the drawing at this point, without uploading it here, as I'm going to throw different possibilities at you right now and without having a physical representation of what you imagined in your mind's eye, you'd have nothing to refer to and it would be hard to tell what really was drawn and what wasn't.
> 
> So far I'm leaning rational type, because of the way you located objects in the drawing, but that's not solid for now, so, behold, questions are incoming.
> __________
> 
> 1. How big are objects in your drawing? Are there some objects that are bigger than the other ones? Does any object stand out in comparison to other ones? Are there any objects that are drawn more thoroughly then the other ones? Are they all the same size? Is there a lot of space in between the object left unused? Do any objects go beyond the limits of the page?
> 2. Describe the sun. How does it look like? Is it simple circle? Does it have beams? Does it radiate the energy over the drawing so we can see it?
> 3. Describe horses. Can we see them in stable? Are they doing something? Do they move, do they nicker? Are their manes fluttering and tails wagging? Do they have any facial expression, maybe smile or anything like that? Do they stand still? Do they have visible hooves?
> 4. Washed clothes. Do they have any patterns, designs, inscriptions? Do they move, maybe water is dripping off them?
> 5. We can see man in full length I suppose? What about his clothes? Any inscriptions, patterns? Does man's face has a distinct and thoroughly drawn facial expression?
> 6. Is there ground in your drawing, or the objects are sort of floating in space?
> 7. Describe the tree. Does it have roots, visible bark? Can wee see distinct leaves? Maybe bird's nest or anything additional?
> 8. Describe helicopters. Are they small dots in the sky or we can see them more clearly? Are they moving? Are their blades rotating? How big they are in comparison to other objects?
> 9. Describe the flag. Is the flag specific, i.e. flag of some country with visible pattern? Does it flutter? Can we see it moving?
> 10. Describe the house. Does it have door, windows, roof, columns or anything in particular? Maybe it's just a squire with a triangle on top?
> 11. Describe lines of the drawing. Are they more angular or soft and roundish?
> 12. Is there any other indication of movement in your drawing? Like putting stokes/dots around the objects that show wind or motion. For reference, there are three helicopters under spoiler below. First two helicopters are moving and the last one is static.
> _
> PLEASE NOTE! Concerning all question that refer to explaining of objects in motion, it is important to remember that we are dealing with 2D image, not a 3D movie with landscape that we imagined, where helicopters would be moving of course, because otherwise how else would they fly. So it is important to distinguish whether we really see motion in the drawing and whether you thought about showing motion in the drawing.
> 
> _That's enough for now.
> * *


Nice heli!

Eh...I can't draw my own picture. Because as I see it, it looks more like a classical painting only with modern elements. Kinda Rijksmuseum like. Vermeer and the like. Only with more of blue and green obviously!

For the questions:

1. I'd point out to the man in front of the house. That relation should be the core of it. Funnily enough, because of perspective most likely, a person and a house are nigh of the same size! Still, the house is visibly larger, but the perspective does its job.

2. A sun is a sun. What can I say? It is a ball of fire with beams. Maybe I'm too literal, but if I had to paint it, it'd look like an element incorporated into the painting. So, yes, it must add warmth and brightness. How'd it look like? /shrug A circle incorporated into the sky.

3. No, you can see just their heads. Kinda obvious. They are only a supportive element in the background.

4. To be honest, I didn't think of it! Gratz! No patterns, they are only clothes on a line, kinda like you can see in front of those rural US houses. With a piece of them(eh unit?) in a person's hand.

5. Yes, yes. Facial expressions are VERY important. He is in full length, kinda Baroque like. As is a man in general. I'd say that wears only undershirt(you know the white thing) and jeans.

6. Of course there is ground! Where'd those things be placed. A green grass/field/whatever. By now you see why I can't draw it  !

7. About the tree, you can see mostly the trunk(staying true to tradition I guess) with hints of treetops nearing the top of the drawing/painting. It is mostly used to give Chiarooscuro I guess(then I'd have to move the sun-maybe a sun could be implied? Nevermind). Shadows in normal speak.

8. They are small-ish in the distance as are the planes(just so I preempt that one too). You can notice them, but nothing specific is visible(except to me as a painter).

9. I don't want it to be a flag of any distinct country. Because I don't want to get into politics(this time ). We can see that it is kinda ripply from the wind. So, indeed, there is some wind in the picture.

10. Full realistic.

11. Definitely angular. I dislike round soft drawings. But not angular in the meaning of Picasso mind you! More like Raphael? Something like it is how I'd draw/paint it if I could.

12. There is no indication of movement except on the flag. It looks...static. Wow, I surprised myself! Didn't see that one when I imagined it! I'll admit.

Anything else?

edit: This is how my mind functions. Obviously I couldn't draw/paint something of this level. 98% of people couldn't. But almost every function of my thinking and expressing is visible here.


----------



## To_august

Ixim said:


> Eh...I can't draw my own picture. Because as I see it, it looks more like a classical painting only with modern elements. Kinda Rijksmuseum like. Vermeer and the like. Only with more of blue and green obviously!


Oh. This is painting... That's against the rules 
_"...in pencil or pen (*watercolour and gouache are not allowed*)"_
But, nevermind. We're still going to make it.


> For the questions:
> 
> 1. I'd point out to the man in front of the house. That relation should be the core of it. Funnily enough, because of perspective most likely, a person and a house are nigh of the same size! Still, the house is visibly larger, but the perspective does its job.


Still not understanding the proportions, hence remain fishy about extraverson/introversion. Guess, they must be medium size then.


> 2. A sun is a sun. What can I say? It is a ball of fire with beams. Maybe I'm too literal, but if I had to paint it, it'd look like an element incorporated into the painting. So, yes, it must add warmth and brightness. How'd it look like? /shrug A circle incorporated into the sky.


If it's a circle indeed then it points to static preference, as dynamic sun would look like this, sort of pouring its light all over the place ->











> 3. No, you can see just their heads. Kinda obvious. They are only a supportive element in the background.
> 4. To be honest, I didn't think of it! Gratz! No patterns, they are only clothes on a line, kinda like you can see in front of those rural US houses. With a piece of them(eh unit?) in a person's hand.
> 5. Yes, yes. Facial expressions are VERY important. He is in full length, kinda Baroque like. As is a man in general. I'd say that wears only undershirt(you know the white thing) and jeans.


Hmm. Horses weren't helpful. 
No patterns and lack of desire to add some extra details in order to make objects more concrete and unique - points away from sensing, but we'll see it further.
Human as the central part of the drawing and importance of facial expression speak in favour of ethical ego.


> 6. Of course there is ground! Where'd those things be placed. A green grass/field/whatever. By now you see why I can't draw it  !


Presence of ground and the fact that tree, man, washing line and house were all placed on it (not floating somewhere, who knows where, in page-space) points to sensing.


> 7. About the tree, you can see mostly the trunk(staying true to tradition I guess) with hints of treetops nearing the top of the drawing/painting. It is mostly used to give Chiarooscuro I guess(then I'd have to move the sun-maybe a sun could be implied? Nevermind). Shadows in normal speak.
> 8. They are small-ish in the distance as are the planes(just so I preempt that one too). You can notice them, but nothing specific is visible(except to me as a painter).


Ok. Tree is just a tree, nothing special.
Small helicopters - another point in support of ethical ego, as logical types usually like to draw big and detailed helicopters, or emphasize them in some way.


> 9. I don't want it to be a flag of any distinct country. Because I don't want to get into politics(this time ). We can see that it is kinda ripply from the wind. So, indeed, there is some wind in the picture.
> 10. Full realistic.


I guess flag would be the only evidence of possible dynamic type so far.
Addition of house also speaks in favour of sensing, as well as inclusion of additional details in general. Even better if it's full realistic and detailed. More sensing!


> 11. Definitely angular. I dislike round soft drawings. But not angular in the meaning of Picasso mind you! More like Raphael? Something like it is how I'd draw/paint it if I could.


Erm... I'm not an expert on Raphael, but I googled some of his paintings and they don't seem angular to me, at least not in a sense that angularity vs roundness is meant in this analysis. So, I'm leaving it up to you to decide.



> 12. There is no indication of movement except on the flag. It looks...static. Wow, I surprised myself! Didn't see that one when I imagined it! I'll admit.


Static then it is.

To sum it up - > ethical, static, sensing type. These ones exist in Gamma only. 
I'm on the fence as for extraversion/introversion, so this must be ESI or SEE.


----------



## piano

can i do it on paint, OP?


----------



## To_august

i cant play the piano said:


> can i do it on paint, OP?


Yes.
Better in pencil, but if there's no choice, let it be paint.


----------



## Caelestis

@To_august

Sorry if I'm rushing anything, but I'm really curious about your analysis of my drawing on page 19. You might have missed it.


----------



## piano

okay thank you 

i'd appreciate it if you would analyse my post @To_august but everyone is welcome (not that the task of analysing a picture is all that thrilling, or one that people would jump at the opportunity to fulfill)










process wasn't all that interesting. i just went straight down the list and drew everything to the best of my ability. i am not pleased with my drawing of the face. she looks pissed. i forgot what helicopters and horses look like and i had to google the wash line thing because i wasn't sure what it was. the dot and swoosh on the flag was supposed to be a winky face but i don't know where the smile went... could've sworn it was there when i uploaded the image. i unintentionally cheated and took a peek at others' drawings but that was before having read your first post. when i skimmed the thread i wasn't planning on participating but i came across a few humorous illustrations that inspired me to. i drew apples on the tree even though i hate apples. all i could do while drawing was wonder what each drawing of mine would suggest about my personality. i tried not to let those thoughts influence me too much but i'm afraid by simply over-thinking i failed. i thought using colour would be cheating so i refrained. i don't think i'm doing this right. earnestly speaking, it's a fairly systematic set of amateur drawings.

and if you're really bored, here's my INTJ friend's drawing:


* *















aside: if you don't mind me asking, what is your personality type? or are you not yet sure?



emberfly said:


> I think it signifies that the directions were unclear.


the lack of detailed instructions was a deliberate move on OP's part, i thought that much was obvious


----------



## Ixim

To_august said:


> Oh. This is painting... That's against the rules
> _"...in pencil or pen (*watercolour and gouache are not allowed*)"_
> But, nevermind. We're still going to make it.
> 
> Still not understanding the proportions, hence remain fishy about extraverson/introversion. Guess, they must be medium size then.
> 
> If it's a circle indeed then it points to static preference, as dynamic sun would look like this, sort of pouring its light all over the place ->
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm. Horses weren't helpful.
> No patterns and lack of desire to add some extra details in order to make objects more concrete and unique - points away from sensing, but we'll see it further.
> Human as the central part of the drawing and importance of facial expression speak in favour of ethical ego.
> 
> Presence of ground and the fact that tree, man, washing line and house were all placed on it (not floating somewhere, who knows where, in page-space) points to sensing.
> 
> Ok. Tree is just a tree, nothing special.
> Small helicopters - another point in support of ethical ego, as logical types usually like to draw big and detailed helicopters, or emphasize them in some way.
> 
> I guess flag would be the only evidence of possible dynamic type so far.
> Addition of house also speaks in favour of sensing, as well as inclusion of additional details in general. Even better if it's full realistic and detailed. More sensing!
> 
> Erm... I'm not an expert on Raphael, but I googled some of his paintings and they don't seem angular to me, at least not in a sense that angularity vs roundness is meant in this analysis. So, I'm leaving it up to you to decide.
> 
> Static then it is.
> 
> To sum it up - > ethical, static, sensing type. These ones exist in Gamma only.
> I'm on the fence as for extraversion/introversion, so this must be ESI or SEE.


Sorry!

But the mere fact you did this points to Se. I'd think.

Eh, yes! Thank you!

edit: the main themes would be the relation between a man, his house and his duties. How one impacts another yeah. The action that man is doing vs a holiday and a man not wanting to do what he does vs his home(as evidenced by the house). The only reason I would ever learn how to draw/paint is in order to do things like that. They'd make me very happy.

One thing I also like are photos. There is...something magical about properly taken photos. Preferably of animals or nature and not of people. Of things? Could work provided I have a relation built to that thing.

edit edit: no, the Sun is not like that! That's just crazy. I wanted to congratulate you on not being able to choose between E and I. It is...very difficult to do when it comes to me. I usually get the results of 52% E, 47% E and the like. Which would clearly point to an ambivert. If you are in that kind of thing. I'd say that I has got a small 5-10% lead, but still. Your results are clear. Conglaturations!


----------



## To_august

I'll get to everybody's drawings soon.
Just a bit exhausted lately, as working days turn into working nights and further into working days.

Apologies for the wait and don't forget to mention or quote me, so I wouldn't miss your drawing.


----------



## Wisteria

hi @To_august
here is my drawing! hopefully I was following the right directions because the layout is untidy I don't know my socionics type yet so I am curious to see if it matches with other test results - after you have looked at everyone else's drawings.
my helicopter is quite poor it looks like a black smudge, there was not much space there;







(I had to outline in pen because my camera has a blurry focus, and I drew in order of the numbers)


----------



## To_august

Caelestis said:


> View attachment 328210
> 
> 
> My horse is an anatomical abomination, ugh. B(
> 
> Order of drawing:
> 
> 1. Tree
> 2. Sun
> 3. Clothesline
> 4. Flag
> 5. Helicopter
> 6. Horse
> 7. Face
> 
> At first I started with the tree, and then I decided to add some branches and a couple birds to make it look more like a tree instead of a thick line with a circle. After that, I put the sun in the corner once I added some distant hills, to make it resemble a sunset. Before I moved on to the clothesline, I decided to draw a shore and an ocean to make it more of a picture and give it a warm, breezy feeling. I really wanted to draw a basket under the clothesline, so I did just that. I drew the flag by the tree since I thought it was the most relevant space draw it. I drew the helicopter tipped downwards, so I added a stick man and made it a rescue scene on a lone island. I wanted to draw a more detailed horse (and face) so I drew it on a bigger scale relative to the rest of the scene, then I realized how out of place it looked, said screw it and then just drew the face floating in the air.


Lean sensing as there is inclusion of additional details - bird with nest, basket under clothesline. There's also grounding element present in your drawing, that is, virtually all objects that can stand on the ground (except for the face) do stand firmly on it. The latter usually points to sensing. 

Static vs dynamic. Unclear. There are waves indicated that may represent dynamic side of the dichotomy, helicopter is bent is if it's moving and clothes are moving a bit, but horse is motionless, so could be static as well.

Logic vs ethics. Unclear as well. There are four animate objects in your drawing. There's face in the center, horse is smiling a bit, small man in the background waving hand or something (oh, this could further support dynamic), and there is a bird.

Lean introversion. Nevertheless the entire area of the page been used, objects are small, and there's no drive for expansion or desire to make them bigger.

Not seeing anything particular in support of eather rationality or irrationality, but fuzziness of lines seems closer to irrationality. 

I'm thinking this is one of the introverted sensors - SEI, LSI, ESI, SLI. And since I think dynamic is more pronounced - SEI or SLI.


----------



## To_august

i cant play the piano said:


> okay thank you
> 
> i'd appreciate it if you would analyse my post @_To_august_ but everyone is welcome (not that the task of analysing a picture is all that thrilling, or one that people would jump at the opportunity to fulfill)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> process wasn't all that interesting. i just went straight down the list and drew everything to the best of my ability. i am not pleased with my drawing of the face. she looks pissed. i forgot what helicopters and horses look like and i had to google the wash line thing because i wasn't sure what it was. the dot and swoosh on the flag was supposed to be a winky face but i don't know where the smile went... could've sworn it was there when i uploaded the image. i unintentionally cheated and took a peek at others' drawings but that was before having read your first post. when i skimmed the thread i wasn't planning on participating but i came across a few humorous illustrations that inspired me to. i drew apples on the tree even though i hate apples. all i could do while drawing was wonder what each drawing of mine would suggest about my personality. i tried not to let those thoughts influence me too much but i'm afraid by simply over-thinking i failed. i thought using colour would be cheating so i refrained. i don't think i'm doing this right. earnestly speaking, it's a fairly systematic set of amateur drawings.


Hard to analyse computer drawings as they all look Ji, but anyway I'll try.

I'm not sure how reasonable it is to analyse drawing lines here, but they clearly look like the most stereotypical rational ones. Placement of objects in two rows also speaks in favour of rationality. 

Lean introversion. I'm not seeing the edges of the drawing and this is not a physical piece of paper, so, a bit hard to say. But, objects in itself look small and I don't see the desire to make them bigger, broader, wider and stretch in order to fill the whole area with them.

Lean static as I don't see any motion in here. Then again, hard to base myself upon drawing made in Paint. Sun looks dynamic though. Horse neighs. Hmm. It's eather emphasis on ethical element or on dynamic side of things. 

Lean ethical ego, because horse is greening, human face is drawn rather thoroughly and you mentioned that there supposed to be winky face on the flag. It's not uncommon for logical Fe or Pe valuers to draw something like that as well though.

Sensing vs intuition. Addition of apples speaks in favour of sensing, but except for that, the drawing doesn't have any additional details. Unsure.

In sum: rational, introverted and most likely ethical type - ESI or EII. 



> and if you're really bored, here's my INTJ friend's drawing:
> 
> 
> * *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aside: if you don't mind me asking, what is your personality type? or are you not yet sure?


Your friend looks like logical sensor. Haha! I may be badly wrong as this fun typing is too remote from serious cognitive analysis.

I used to selftype as ISTJ/SLI and still think that it's the type that makes the most sense, but lately I've been thinking if I could be Te dominant, or maybe Ti dominant. The latter has weak possibility though, as I'm almost certainly Te-Fi valuer. So, I prefer to stay in a blissful state of uncertainty for now.


----------



## To_august

jennalee said:


> hi @_To_august_
> here is my drawing! hopefully I was following the right directions because the layout is untidy I don't know my socionics type yet so I am curious to see if it matches with other test results - after you have looked at everyone else's drawings.
> my helicopter is quite poor it looks like a black smudge, there was not much space there;
> View attachment 329938
> 
> (I had to outline in pen because my camera has a blurry focus, and I drew in order of the numbers)


Huge human, big horse; both are thoroughly drawn. Human is particularly emphasized and stands out in comparison to other images. Helicopter is tiny and devalued - ethical ego type.

Lean dynamic type, as your drawing seems like it's in flow. Clothes are moving, flag flutters, horse is going somewhere, sun is shining among the passing clouds.

Drawing lines are more irrational. Objects were outlined in pen, but I see shading used behind. Composition is irrational as well.

Introversion/extraversion - unclear, but since I'm sure of irrationality and dynamic, they both combined could result in introversion only.

Sensing vs intuition. I can't see any additional details in you drawing and this usually points to intuition, but there is ground under the clothesline and under the tree, so could be sensing as well.

Ethical, dynamic, irrational type - IEI or SEI.


----------



## TTIOTBSAL

@To_august could you tell me what are your insights on that drawing please? 

Take your time, no hurry. Thank you.


----------



## To_august

Nonsense said:


> Oh well, here's my attempt anyway (well, it's like a redo/trace of the drawing I did earlier):
> 
> 
> * *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My approach:
> -Looked up whatever I was supposed to draw on google image search for reference
> -Drew each object on separate sheaths of paper
> -Reread the instructions and realized I was supposed to draw them all on the same paper
> -Whoops
> -Tried to draw them again, this time on the same paper as instructed
> -Drew it like a "proper" picture even though I'm not too good at compositions because just drawing several objects on the same sheath of paper is too distracting otherwise
> -With this approach, though, it was hard fitting a human face into it without making it very small, so tried drawing something like the creepy sun from teletubbies, but by the time I thought of that I had already drawn a sun that was a bit too small to fit a face into, so I GAVE UP
> -Then later I saw this thread again and decided to redraw it (partly because I didn't have the pen I originally used, and this time I had a pencil to use, so easier anyway)
> -Also looked up references again because I've gotten so used to using those rather than drawing from my imagination
> -Started with the tree, probably because it's the first thing listed, but also it's the largest object (typically) so it's the best way to frame it in a way. Idk. Then drew like a slope I could place the other stuff on
> -Did some fretting over the scale, but couldn't be arsed to be really exact about that stuff because it's hard/tedious
> -Kinda gave up on drawing the horse too >_>


Ethical ego. Such a stereotypical ethical sun :kitteh: But! There's no humanization of other inanimate objects, no visible man in the helicopter, so I could see logical ego too. But, then again, such a warm ethical sun... sigh. Lean ethics after all.

Lean introversion as all objects are small and there's a lot of free space in between them.

Drawing lines are more rational, except for sun and helicopter, they are closer to irrationality. Drawing composition is rational as well, which is traceable reasoning behind the placement of objects - tree, clothesline, flag on the ground, sun in the sky etc. So, lean rational type.

Sensing vs intuition. Lean intuition as there aren't any details included in your drawing. Flag is unspecific, clothes don't have any patterns on them, but on the other hand, there is ground in the drawing, so could be sensing as well. 

Static vs dynamic. Hmm. Hard to say. Objects that are placed on the ground are expressively static, but helicopter and sun seem more dynamic. Sun is shining, helicopter's blades are rotating. Unsure. 

I think this is clearly introverted ethical type - SEI, IEI, ESI or EII. Since I leaned rationality, let's narrow it down to - ESI or EII.


----------



## To_august

StellaG said:


> @_To_august_ could you tell me what are your insights on that drawing please?
> 
> Take your time, no hurry. Thank you.
> 
> View attachment 330322


Nice avatar and signature you have:kitteh:

From this I can see only dynamic type, because... apples? are flying above person's head.

In case shamelessly stereotype it further - ethical ego, because there's only human in the center of the page and there's no other objects. Probably introvert, but hard to say because of lack of any other images except for human and apples.

That's all I can say from this.

Wait. Is this some sort of metaphor? 
Man denies to taste the forbidden fruit and tries to avoid the temptation? 
Someone keeps throwing apples at him from the front and he denies to accept them by throwing them back. But temptation persists since the apples income is permanent?

Oh. The ground. It's blue! It can be water actually! Man walking on water and denying to sin. Oh no. It couldn't be Jesus.

Pardon me, guess I overthought it too much.:crazy:


----------



## To_august

The_Truth said:


>


Irrational type as lines of the drawing are irrational with many stokes and shadings.

Dynamic vs static unclear. Helicopter's rotor blades are turning and man on a horse prepared to attack, but the upper part of the drawing seems totally static.

Lean logical ego, as there's no particular expression on human face and the man itself is drawn in couple lines, while all inanimate objects are drawn much more thoroughly.

Lean sensing, because there is inclusion/addition of details - hollow in tree trunk, flag is specific, sword in man's hand. There's also ground indicated in the drawing and the latter usually point to sensing.

Introversion vs extraversion. Unsure. Some objects are big, while the other ones are small. Perhaps closer to extraversion because of the distribution of objects.

This is SLE I think.


----------



## Macrosapien

hmmm I may just participate in this


----------



## Macrosapien

quick sketch for your study, by the time I did the helicopter i no longer cared haha. o I forgot the horse, well I guess thats going to mean something, eh?


----------



## The_Truth

To_august said:


> Irrational type as lines of the drawing are irrational with many stokes and shadings.
> 
> Dynamic vs static unclear. Helicopter's rotor blades are turning and man on a horse prepared to attack, but the upper part of the drawing seems totally static.
> 
> Lean logical ego, as there's no particular expression on human face and the man itself is drawn in couple lines, while all inanimate objects are drawn much more thoroughly.
> 
> Lean sensing, because there is inclusion/addition of details - hollow in tree trunk, flag is specific, sword in man's hand. There's also ground indicated in the drawing and the latter usually point to sensing.
> 
> Introversion vs extraversion. Unsure. Some objects are big, while the other ones are small. Perhaps closer to extraversion because of the distribution of objects.
> 
> This is SLE I think.


I remember making a point to add random details because my drawing is awful and I didn't want it to look _that _bad posting it on a forum. I'm not entirely sure of the differences between MBTI and Socionics sensing. 

I notice that most people drew this with all the items clumped together, where as I structured mine in a way so that they all synthesized in one setting. What do you make of that?


----------



## TTIOTBSAL

To_august said:


> Nice avatar and signature you have:kitteh:
> 
> From this I can see only dynamic type, because... apples? are flying above person's head.
> 
> In case shamelessly stereotype it further - ethical ego, because there's only human in the center of the page and there's no other objects. Probably introvert, but hard to say because of lack of any other images except for human and apples.
> That's all I can say from this.
> 
> Wait. Is this some sort of metaphor?
> Man denies to taste the forbidden fruit and tries to avoid the temptation?
> Someone keeps throwing apples at him from the front and he denies to accept them by throwing them back. But temptation persists since the apples income is permanent?
> 
> Oh. The ground. It's blue! It can be water actually! Man walking on water and denying to sin. Oh no. It couldn't be Jesus.
> 
> Pardon me, guess I overthought it too much.:crazy:


Thank you, and thanks for answering this quickly. 
I didn't give too much information on purpose I admit. 

It's an illustration I made when I was writing The little prince and the lost planets. It's real ground, just happens to be blue on that planet. These aren't apples, but you can't see that well, true. They are bubbles, and there's lots of wind on that planet. There's mostly nothing else, just the wind that can talk. And everything is colorful, but you can't see that too well either, as it's a picture I took with my phone. I have a few other drawings, I may post them later.


----------



## TTIOTBSAL

@To_august I only had old stuff, so I did these. I hadn't drawn anything in seven years, I had forgotten how relaxing it feels, listening to music in the same time. I hope that will do. Thank you.


----------



## dinkalink

Morbid, but it was the first thing to come to mind. Also light and very blurry but my phone refuses to let me upload another image. Fun times.


----------



## To_august

The_Truth said:


> I remember making a point to add random details because my drawing is awful and I didn't want it to look _that _bad posting it on a forum. I'm not entirely sure of the differences between MBTI and Socionics sensing.
> 
> I notice that most people drew this with all the items clumped together, where as I structured mine in a way so that they all synthesized in one setting. What do you make of that?


You mean that you did it like a story with certain idea in mind? 
The upper part looked like a string of objects and the lower one with "meanwhile..." phrase, so yeah, if there's a unifying idea behind the drawing it may point to Ne.

ILE is possible as well.

Bear in mind that this is not really serious cognitive typing though.


----------



## Dangerose

OvalCat said:


> Ewe. Glad drawing skills are not being tested. Sorry the lighting is bad and thank you!


Do compare your drawing to others on the thread...it's basically a masterpiece from that perspective)


----------



## To_august

Boogie man said:


> Ooh, I like this idea a lot!
> 
> View attachment 355610
> 
> 
> I started with the tree, then the horizon to make the sun, then the rest, the face was last.
> Even if it's a random bunch of elements, I like to put them all in the same 'scene'.
> Teeny tiny helicopter because I ran out of room. Heh, I had no plan..
> 
> *@To_august*


As plain as the sun at noonday - extraversion. The whole page area is occupied. Typical "lack of space" and tree overgrown beyond page limits.

Irrational drawing lines.

Seems dynamic, as hair flutters in the wind, sun is shining and flag is waving.

Lean ethical ego, because of the very small, virtually invisible, helicopter, but can be logical type as well, since there aren't any additional humanization of objects.

Intuition vs sensing is unclear. You united all images by one idea-scenery, this may point to Ne-valuing, but you also highlighted ground. Flag pole sticks firmly in the ground, and you added grass. It is true also though that images lack concreteness, except for clothes and flag. 

I think this is extraverted irrational, who looks dynamic.
ILE, SEE or IEE


----------



## To_august

OvalCat said:


> Ewe. Glad drawing skills are not being tested. Sorry the lighting is bad and thank you @_To_august_!


No need to worry about drawing skills. Yours are totally great.:kitteh:

Ethical ego. Thoroughly drawn human face with visible expression. Additional human elements as in a) human holding a flag, b) human with parachute and c) talking sun.

This is introversion, as objects are rather small and there's no indication of them possibly growing beyond limits of the page.

Lean sensing, because images are pretty much concrete with inclusion of details and inscriptions.

Not sure on the account of static vs dynamic. Seem static, but ghost of a horse is going upwards and flag is moving.

Ethical, introverted, sensing type - SEI or ESI.


----------



## To_august

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> I debated as to whether or not I would do this, and I decided to do it even though I looked at a few beforehand thinking that I wasn't going to do it. I don't think it affected anything much. The only thing is that I *may* have been lazy and drawn a smiley face for the human face had I not seen other drawings. Also, I was going to do these in order but I accidentally skipped the horse and had to go back and draw it. Whoops!
> 
> View attachment 349474


Clearly static type. Nothing moves. All the objects are totally still and motionless.

Images are small, hence introversion.

Lean ethical ego, because of the human face and a horse that stand out in comparison to other objects and having distinct ethical facial expressions.

Sensing vs intuition isn't clear. Tree is drawn in a sensing way - with roots in the ground, foliage and visible bark. Flag is concrete as well. Horse has hoofs. Sun and wash on a line, on the other hand, are more intuitive.

Drawing lines are more on the rational side of things.

EII or ESI, I think.


----------



## TruthDismantled

The rhino-horse was originally supposed to be a horse....then that happened


----------



## To_august

TruthDismantled said:


> View attachment 357650
> 
> 
> The rhino-horse was originally supposed to be a horse....then that happened


Lean intuitive ego type. Lack of details, objects don't have any visible ground and it seems like they are floating in space without any kind of support.

Drawing lines are closer to rational representation of this dichotomy.

Logical vs ethical is unclear. Lean logical, because of the lack of human element in the drawing. On the other hand, human face and horse are drawn more thoroughly than other images, so can be ethical as well.

Lean introversion, because objects are small and do not expand all over the page.

Static type, since I'm not seeing any motion.

LII or EII.


----------



## FM.

Sounds interesting.


----------



## AdInfinitum

@To_august I have been wanting to do this for a while. Here I am in hopes I might give this thread a little boost, love the idea.


----------



## To_august

NobleRaven said:


> @_To_august_ I have been wanting to do this for a while. Here I am in hopes I might give this thread a little boost, love the idea.
> 
> 
> View attachment 385618


Ethical intuitive -> Human face in the center of the picture. Also eyes... they are so eloquent. Ethical in a Fi way I'd say, with emotions contained inside rather than pouring out. 

Intuitive because there's total absence of the ground in the picture. Face, wash on a line, tree and everything else just floats in space. Images miss details and reach for the upwards (flag and tree in particular) -> this also means intuition - detachment from the ground.

Also, static. Tree and flag kind of move, but it seems to be a forced movement or movement that happened as a result of the way images are drawn. It doesn't seem like a dynamic movement to me anyway.

Not sure about rationality/irrationality and introversion/extraversion.

So: ethical, intuitive, static - EII or IEE.


----------



## GnothiSeauton

@To_august









Horses are just awful.

I can't say I follow any specific method. I tend to start drawing with just a general idea in mind, which often becomes something very different from what I expected. This is because I'm perfectionistic and kind of lazy at the same time, so I end up adding weird details on subjects that were supposed to be realistic, to make them more interesting and easy to draw.

I tried to keep myself on track this time, so I actually needed a pencil and eraser. Otherwise I would've just used a pen.


----------



## Cataclysm

I didn't get the idea to include everything in one picture before I had already drawn the face, sun, flag and tree, but I thought that idea was much better so I went with it instead.


----------



## komm

@To_august
Sorry for bad quality.


----------



## To_august

GnothiSeauton said:


> @_To_august_
> 
> View attachment 385658
> 
> 
> Horses are just awful.
> 
> I can't say I follow any specific method. I tend to start drawing with just a general idea in mind, which often becomes something very different from what I expected. This is because I'm perfectionistic and kind of lazy at the same time, so I end up adding weird details on subjects that were supposed to be realistic, to make them more interesting and easy to draw.
> 
> I tried to keep myself on track this time, so I actually needed a pencil and eraser. Otherwise I would've just used a pen.


Rational sensor.

Rational 'cause all the objects give an impression of finished images and have firm lines. Neat inscriptions near every image.

Also, images are detailed. Tree has visible and thoroughly drawn roots and branches. Helicopter has highlighted details as well -> sensing.

Static/dynamic is unclear. Flag is burning, which indicates action, but other objects are still.

So, yeah, I'll repeat that this is rational sensor and since the picture doesn't look like Fe base = LSI or ESI or LSE.


----------



## To_august

komm said:


> @_To_august_
> Sorry for bad quality.


Seems like logical ego, because human face doesn't have ethical expression, same goes for the cow - there's been more desire to draw the body, then make it resemble a more humanized entity. 

Not seeing any movement, hence static.

Lean sensing, because of the details on the flag and cow's highlighted hooves, but, on the other hand, tree is anything but specific, also - there's no ground - so can be intuition too.

Can be rational, since images are drawn in firm one-lines, but the whole composition is apparently irrational.

I'd say this is static, logical ego type - Alpha NT or Beta ST.


----------



## To_august

Kleop said:


> View attachment 385706
> 
> 
> I didn't get the idea to include everything in one picture before I had already drawn the face, sun, flag and tree, but I thought that idea was much better so I went with it instead.


Ethical ego - human drawn in full length, also the horse, lol, it has very much human-like expression. They both attract the most attention in the picture.

Static type - because nothing in the picture moves. Only flag flutters a bit in the wind, but that's about it.

Lean sensing, because there is ground in the picture that serves as a unifying element for all other objects, which are placed on it.

_Probably _extraversion, because tree grew beyond page limits and sun is pretty big, but apart this I'm hazy about introversion/extraversion.

All in all - ethical, static, sensing type = Gamma SF.


----------



## To_august

FM. said:


> Sounds interesting.
> View attachment 359234


This can be effect of the drawing style, but lines are pretty much clear and finished, hence rational type.

Lean logical ego, since human face doesn't bear any particular expression and the horse doesn't have any face at all.

Not seeing any movement -> static type.

Lean introversion, because objects are pretty small and there is no indication of desire to make them bigger or expand and stretch across the page.

Intuition vs sensing is unclear. Tree is very concrete and specific with roots and branches, horse has hooves, but washing line doesn't have any support and face is floating in space.

In total - logical, static, rational, introverted type - LII or LSI.


----------



## zenobia

@To_august

Mind giving mine a try?









_The process: _


* *




I had an idea of what I wanted to do with the face, tree, flag and sun. Started drawing the face, since it was the center of everything. From there I moved on to the roots and flag. When I went to do the tree limbs, I started getting frustrated because I was working with a mechanical pencil and I messed up the one tree limb pretty bad to where I couldn't fix it. After that I quickly rushed to finish it because it was already ruined in my eyes. I tried to make the horses face more noticeable by making the helicopter it's eye- but it's just all wrong. 

This was pretty fun though. It gave me a good excuse to draw again. Haven't done that in a very long time.


----------



## To_august

zenobia said:


> @_To_august_
> 
> Mind giving mine a try?
> 
> View attachment 386538
> 
> 
> _The process: _
> 
> 
> * *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had an idea of what I wanted to do with the face, tree, flag and sun. Started drawing the face, since it was the center of everything. From there I moved on to the roots and flag. When I went to do the tree limbs, I started getting frustrated because I was working with a mechanical pencil and I messed up the one tree limb pretty bad to where I couldn't fix it. After that I quickly rushed to finish it because it was already ruined in my eyes. I tried to make the horses face more noticeable by making the helicopter it's eye- but it's just all wrong.
> 
> This was pretty fun though. It gave me a good excuse to draw again. Haven't done that in a very long time.


Ethical ego I think, since human face is the central and unifying element of the whole picture. Also, I think face expression is done in a Fi-ish way. Also such unification of objects by a single idea may mean Ne valuing.

The sun is shining, but all the other images are still, hence lean static.

Except for the face none other images are specific, so -> intuition.

I'm less sure of other dichotomies. Composition is rational, but lines are more irrational. Extroversion/introversion is also unclear.

EII I think.


----------



## sinaasappel

me please  i couldnt pass up this opportunity







ohh this seems fun (should be doing homework)
i drew the tree first roughly sketched it
(oh wait did it say i could use pen checks) whew
trunk first then branches and leaves
(i wonder what everyone else got) *peers at post below original*
oh no its a spoiler 4 realz
draws the face (im happy so imma draw a smiley face)
drew flag (i want a pointed flag)
draws the horse (hahaha its pretty poor... imma make unicorn cause theyre horses too)
draws clothes rack eh theyre clothes 
draws helicopter (badass!) Now that i look at it it kinda looks like a submarine
takes a picture of it
(okay now i can fully read the second posters analysis)
*forgets the sun* oh shit i forgot the sun
(lets make the sun cute! draws face and triangle flames)
grammar need not apply


----------



## sinaasappel

its crooked and tiny


----------



## To_august

GIA Diamonds said:


> me please  i couldnt pass up this opportunity
> View attachment 419714
> 
> ohh this seems fun (should be doing homework)
> i drew the tree first roughly sketched it
> (oh wait did it say i could use pen checks) whew
> trunk first then branches and leaves
> (i wonder what everyone else got) *peers at post below original*
> oh no its a spoiler 4 realz
> draws the face (im happy so imma draw a smiley face)
> drew flag (i want a pointed flag)
> draws the horse (hahaha its pretty poor... imma make unicorn cause theyre horses too)
> draws clothes rack eh theyre clothes
> draws helicopter (badass!) Now that i look at it it kinda looks like a submarine
> takes a picture of it
> (okay now i can fully read the second posters analysis)
> *forgets the sun* oh shit i forgot the sun
> (lets make the sun cute! draws face and triangle flames)
> grammar need not apply


Intuitive ego. The pictures lack concreteness and there's no particular details highlighted - face is floating in the air without any support, all images are rather schematic-like. Yup, I don't see any desire to add details to objects so as to make them unique and specific.

Clearly static. No objects are moving. Probably tree foliage can be interpreted as being in motion a bit, but that's about it.

The rest is less clear, but with intuition and statics it's already narrowed down to Alpha NT and Delta NF. So, I think you one of those :kitteh:

If choosing b the two options Alpha NT seems a bit better of a choice, since smiley sun and face are drawn in a way that implicates valued emotional expression, but it seems weak and non-nuanced. Kind of - it just should be there, because smiling is nice. Also, ethical ego would likely put more emphasize on face and horse, make them bigger or something, and not choose the tree as the center of the composition.


----------



## EricLoveShipMakedo

http://imgur.com/rFAAGkt


----------



## Cosmic Hobo

@_To_august_ :

This was FUN!
















Only problem is that the picture is too small to see properly.

I've put a few scans of the picture up on Imgur: http://imgur.com/a/4zMVb.

This should give you the full picture:
http://imgur.com/Vzy3U4n (although might be missing some of the young man in the right hand corner's ear)

Oh - and ignore the attached thumbnails; they're the first scans I tried to upload.

(Gosh, isn't this complicated!)


----------



## To_august

Cosmic Hobo said:


> @_To_august_ :
> 
> This was FUN!
> 
> View attachment 424738
> View attachment 424746
> 
> 
> 
> Only problem is that the picture is too small to see properly.
> 
> I've put a few scans of the picture up on Imgur: http://imgur.com/a/4zMVb.
> 
> This should give you the full picture:
> Imgur: The most awesome images on the Internet (although might be missing some of the young man in the right hand corner's ear)
> 
> Oh - and ignore the attached thumbnails; they're the first scans I tried to upload.
> 
> (Gosh, isn't this complicated!)


I think, extraverted type, because of how you used space of the page. It is visible that piece of paper was not enough to contain everything you planned to draw. 

Not seeing movement in the drawing. Only helicopter seems to be a bit in motion, but all the rest objects are still. So this must mean static type.

There's a lot of people in the picture, wearing different attires, emerging from behind unexpected places, but they don't give me ethical vibes. Something about the way they are drawn or their facial expressions... anyway, I lean logical ego.

Images are drawn with many details. Palm tree stands on an island and has very thoroughly depicted trunk and leaves. Tree has roots and is highlighted with mushrooms. People have lots of details, and there is a general desire present to make objects unique and specific -> sensing.

Probably SLE.


----------



## To_august

EricLoveShipMakedo said:


> Imgur: The most awesome images on the Internet


Ooh. Was it done on computer?
Eh, drawing in pencil or pen is required for this thing to work. Anyway, I'll try.

Probably ethical ego, since both horse and human face look ethical to me. Horse's facial expression in particular looks human. And there's also someone sitting in the helicopter.

Static/dynamic is hard to judge for obvious reasons (as all the other dichotomies tbh), but tree looks kinda moving and clothes on a wash-line flutter a bit. Something is leaking from the... ball? orb? ... from something in the upper row to the right. Thus, maybe dynamic.

Intuitive for the lack of details.

Introverted for small images.

Must be way off, but I ended up with ethical+dynamic+intuitive+introverted = IEI.


----------



## Cosmic Hobo

To_august said:


> I think, extraverted type, because of how you used space of the page. It is visible that piece of paper was not enough to contain everything you planned to draw.
> 
> Not seeing movement in the drawing. Only helicopter seems to be a bit in motion, but all the rest objects are still. So this must mean static type.
> 
> There's a lot of people in the picture, wearing different attires, emerging from behind unexpected places, but they don't give me ethical vibes. Something about the way they are drawn or their facial expressions... anyway, I lean logical ego.
> 
> Images are drawn with many details. Palm tree stands on an island and has very thoroughly depicted trunk and leaves. Tree has roots and is highlighted with mushrooms. People have lots of details, and there is a general desire present to make objects unique and specific -> sensing.
> 
> Probably SLE.


Aha! Thanks for this - I've been leaning towards SP for a while, so this is more confirmation. And interesting to see how a drawing shows the artist's personality. (What about cultural influences, though? Was everyone in Ancient Egypt a static personality with weird ideas about angles, or was that the result of living in a society where nothing changed for centuries?)

Some of the drawings, though, are meant to be in motion - the witches in the top right are swooping, and the horse is galloping.


----------



## To_august

Cosmic Hobo said:


> Aha! Thanks for this - I've been leaning towards SP for a while, so this is more confirmation. And interesting to see how a drawing shows the artist's personality. (What about cultural influences, though? Was everyone in Ancient Egypt a static personality with weird ideas about angles, or was that the result of living in a society where nothing changed for centuries?)
> 
> Some of the drawings, though, are meant to be in motion - the witches in the top right are swooping, and the horse is galloping.


You're welcome 

Maybe ancient Egyptians were lazy in terms of experimenting with various forms, when old ways worked just fine? I mean, in the beginning there should be some smart guys who found out basic principles of geometry and figured they are useful for building stuff. Constructions of Ancient Egypt were rather simple in terms of regular geometrical shapes usage, and since their architecture was pretty much about being massive, colossal, strong, impressive and steady, they might not want to risk losing these important features by experimenting with more fancy architectural forms. I'm not an expert of course, and not so familiar with Egyptian art, except for hieroglyphic writing, that I'm currently trying to study:kitteh:.

If we replace static with dynamic, it'll be LSE, but to be honest, comparing to other "dynamic" drawings in this thread, the way you drew it seems static to me. I also had a theory that Pe base and Pe subtype types may seem dynamic.


----------



## Szebora

Ok, my turn.








1. The tree. At first I wanted it to look like Yggdrasil, but I've changed my mind. That's willow obviously.
2. The helicopter. In my opinion it ruins the whole thing, so as punishment I made it crash. Sadly, the pilot and his crew survived.
3. "There is no sun" you'll say. Wrong. The sun is hiding behind clouds. Can you see its glorious light?
4. The girl. I like to draw portraits, so creating her was pretty pleasant. But wait. Is she that big or maybe the horse is that small?
5. Wash. It's male victorian swimsuit. Don't ask.
6. The horse. It was little hard to draw. I didn't know where should I put him. So he's looking from the corner and tries to kill you.
7. The flag. I almost forgot about it. I put it near helicopter not without reason. The crew capitulated and now they're my slaves.


----------



## Agniete

Can you do this?


----------



## bruh

>It's late night
>goddamn sleepy and on my phone on this forum
>wants to upload a drawing on this forum
>Forum won't upload bc image too large
>visits an image hosting website and uploaded image
>image took a fine 10 minutes to upload
>had to keep the screen on by poking screen each 10 seconds or so
>image finally uploaded
>half asleep by now
>website will redirect me to image
>finger accidentally swipes downwards
>page refreshed
>had to upload this fucking shit drawing image again
>another 10 minutes, done that
>copied link to clipboard
>realized can't fucking paste on this new phone yet
>typed in link from scratch
>a novel by me

Please accept a piece of my tears, sweat, blood, flesh and hardwork... http://s17.postimg.org/ggq9qhjy7/Screenshot_2015_11_20_00_23_51.png
(What.. did I have to do with a pencil? Sorry.. I kinda just went ahead and did it. I never really use pencils in my drawings ••)


----------



## Captain Mclain

Agniete said:


> View attachment 429282
> 
> 
> Can you do this?


a lot of motion is happening. Maybe some Ne type?


----------



## Kerik_S

_*[Beta Quadra] What are you listening to right now?*_

(shameless plug for my own thread-- I'll change my little message here so it's not blatant spamming:

above pic: probably an inuitive...? I see no aesthetic coherence. Not a lot of people subject matter, so. No anthropormpizing of the horsey, either.

L<-->I, introvert.)


----------



## karmachameleon

View attachment 479874
@To_august


----------



## karmachameleon

do me


----------



## To_august

Ah, my long forsaken thread, I almost forgot about you!



karmachameleon said:


> View attachment 479874
> @_To_august_


Introversion is very apparent. Such minuscule objects  

Rational type because of the hard, confident lines without retracing.

Lean intuitive. Objects are pretty unspecific and lack details. Only flag can be interpreted as a "sensor" flag, but the rest ones, not really. Also objects are sort of floating all over the page and lack grounding -> intuitive. Oh, by the way lack of composition like that can be a sign of irrationality too, so possibly you're not a rational type after all.

Logic/ethics is unclear. Horse is kinda smiling and you've added human shooting water, but... unsure. The balance tilts to the ethical side just a bit, because human face is the most thoroughly drawn object, whereas helicopter, which represents logic, is placed at the bottom, lone and deemphasized.

So.

Introversion + rationality/irrationality+intuition+logic/ethics = LII, IEI, ILI, EII.
Taking into account that ethics seems to be a tad stronger -> IEI or EII.


----------



## karmachameleon

To_august said:


> Ah, my long forsaken thread, I almost forgot about you!
> 
> 
> 
> Introversion is very apparent. Such minuscule objects
> 
> Rational type because of the hard, confident lines without retracing.
> 
> Lean intuitive. Objects are pretty unspecific and lack details. Only flag can be interpreted as a "sensor" flag, but the rest ones, not really. Also objects are sort of floating all over the page and lack grounding -> intuitive. Oh, by the way lack of composition like that can be a sign of irrationality too, so possibly you're not a rational type after all.
> 
> Logic/ethics is unclear. Horse is kinda smiling and you've added human shooting water, but... unsure. The balance tilts to the ethical side just a bit, because human face is the most thoroughly drawn object, whereas helicopter, which represents logic, is placed at the bottom, lone and deemphasized.
> 
> So.
> 
> Introversion + rationality/irrationality+intuition+logic/ethics = LII, IEI, ILI, EII.
> Taking into account that ethics seems to be a tad stronger -> IEI or EII.


I love this thread haha
idk if "wash on a line" is a real term but i just imagined clothes on a line and someone washing htem hence the person shooting water lol


----------



## To_august

Agniete said:


> View attachment 429282
> 
> 
> Can you do this?


Beautifully dynamic, warmly ethical, adorably irrational and magnetically sensing type.:kitteh:


----------



## Agniete

To_august said:


> Beautifully dynamic, warmly ethical, adorably irrational and magnetically sensing type.:kitteh:


Thank you. 

Do you have in mind ESFp, ISFp?


----------



## To_august

Agniete said:


> Thank you.
> 
> Do you have in mind ESFp, ISFp?


SEI/ISFp. Yes.

(ESFp is not a dynamic type.)


----------



## Psithurism

@To_august










Could you analyze this work of art? I believe drawing this was the highest point in my life.

Anyone who doesn't think it is superb will have a special place on my ignore list. :happy:


----------



## To_august

Verglas said:


> @_To_august_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you analyze this work of art? I believe drawing this was the highest point in my life.
> 
> Anyone who doesn't think it is superb will have a special place on my ignore list. :happy:


Who can seriously dislike this adorable piece of art?:kitteh:

Introverted type because of the small objects and vast free space between them.

No details, no highlighted ground, no specifics -> intuitive type.

Lean logical type, because of bigger proportions of the helicopter in comparison to human and horse. I also don't see desire to add human elements to other objects.

Lean rational, because objects are drawn in single lines without retracing. There's also overall composition logic in the picture, hence rational.

Picture looks clearly static. But, this can also be the effect of the drawing skills (sorry). Tree crown sort of leans to the side, helicopter sort of tilts its nose down as if it's flying, and sun sort of shines with curvy beams, so if there was an intention to make images look as if they were in motion that would be dynamic, if not, then static.

In sum:
Introverted + intuitive + logical + rational + static = LII
Introverted + intuitive + logical + rational + dynamic = error
Introverted + intuitive + logical + irrational + dynamic = ILI

LII or ILI


----------



## Psithurism

To_august said:


> But, this can also be the effect of the drawing skills (sorry).


Your words wound me. 
Or maybe you meant they were so impeccable that the beauty had to be forcibly preserved in static form to last the ages. That must be it.



> Tree crown sort of leans to the side, helicopter sort of tilts its nose down as if it's flying, and sun sort of shines with curvy beams, so if there was an intention to make images look as if they were in motion that would be dynamic, if not, then static.


There was no such intention, no. One exception being the helicopter which provided me a sense of it possibly going in the direction of crashing into the tree. I mostly blame my sense of humor for that one though.



> LII or ILI


Going off this specific analysis, LII seems fairer I suppose. Thanks again for your time.


----------



## To_august

Verglas said:


> Your words wound me.
> Or maybe you meant they were so impeccable that the beauty had to be forcibly preserved in static form to last the ages. That must be it.
> 
> There was no such intention, no. One exception being the helicopter which provided me a sense of it possibly going in the direction of crashing into the tree. I mostly blame my sense of humor for that one though.
> 
> Going off this specific analysis, LII seems fairer I suppose. Thanks again for your time.


Yep. LII then.

Rationality/irrationality is slippery category, so there's always a fair chance to mistake on it. But if static was right, then rationality makes sense too.


----------



## Shadow Tag

@To_august 

Oh this looks like so much fun. Kind of went all out with mine, oops!









The image was too big to host locally, hope you can see it just fine! 

Anyway, I started with the tree, then did the sun/face, then the flagpole, followed by the helicopter, wash on the line, and last but not least the horse. I started with the tree first because it would probably take up the most space. Plus it was first on the list so I thought about drawing it first. The reason there are so many birds is that I like birds... Also, the human face is in the sun. Can't tell you why I did that, guess I felt the sun needed "more".


----------



## To_august

tenefix said:


> @_To_august_
> 
> Oh this looks like so much fun. Kind of went all out with mine, oops!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The image was too big to host locally, hope you can see it just fine!
> 
> Anyway, I started with the tree, then did the sun/face, then the flagpole, followed by the helicopter, wash on the line, and last but not least the horse. I started with the tree first because it would probably take up the most space. Plus it was first on the list so I thought about drawing it first. The reason there are so many birds is that I like birds... Also, the human face is in the sun. Can't tell you why I did that, guess I felt the sun needed "more".


Very obvious sensing. Images are very detailed and each object has a touch of being unique and specific. Tree has roots, horse - highlighted hooves, flag firmly sits in the ground. Yep. Sensor it is.

Ethician. Sun is smiling (as well as T-shirt), animate elements are added everywhere (birds on the flag, owl peering from the tree hollow, bird's nest), etc.

Firm, confident lines. Presence of an overall composition in the drawing - > rational type.

Lean dynamic, because helicopter's blades are visibly rotating, bird is shown to be singing and an acorn is also shown in motion (I guess it's about to fall, or maybe swinging, or.. shining?).

Lean extrovert. There is free space left in the page, but all objects are pretty big, and tree overgrew the left-side border, so I think extraverted type.

Combined this leaves only one possible option.
ESE :sun-smiley:


----------



## oblivion7

@To_august 
Hi, I love the idea behind this thread. I know its late but could you please, analyse my art.








I wish I could have drawn a headless horse:blushed:


----------



## oblivion7

@To_august Please respond


----------



## To_august

oblivion7 said:


> @_To_august_
> Hi, I love the idea behind this thread. I know its late but could you please, analyse my art.
> View attachment 490154
> 
> 
> I wish I could have drawn a headless horse:blushed:





oblivion7 said:


> @_To_august_ Please respond


Sorry, I'm sort of here and not really here...
Anyway.

Lean ethical type, because woman's face and horse are thoroughly drawn with distinct desire to emphasize facial features, unlike helicopter for example (object that mostly responsible for showing attitude to logical side of things), which is small and unremarkable. 

Sensing vs intuition is unclear. The drawing lacks ground, but tree and horse have roots and hooves respectively, so... could be eather way.

Introverted type, because of proportions of the images comparing to size of the page.

Seems static, cause I don't see motion in your drawing.

Thus, ESI or EII.


----------



## To_august

I wanted to make this for quite a while. Leaving here the basic key to the method used for anybody who wants to have fun with analyzing drawings.

* *







*Extraversion**Introversion *- Big objects
- Objects tend to occupy the entire space of the page
- Inclination to expand objects all over the page
- Gives impression as if the sheet were broader, objects could be even bigger
- Tends to make objects bigger, wider, broader and occupy all the page area so that they end up lacking space
- “Tree” frequently is the object that “overgrows” page limits- Small objects
- Tends to occupy less of page space
- Drive to expand objects all over the page or make them bigger is absent
- Leaves a lot of free space between the objects*Logic**Ethics*- “Humanization” or “anthropomorphization” of objects is absent
- Lack of expression in human face
- Omission of human face
- More attention is given to inanimate objects (they are drawn bigger, are highlighted in some way or placed at the center of the drawing) as compared to animate ones
- Helicopter is frequently highlighted in particular
- Drawing style has an angular quality to it- “Anthropomorphization” of inanimate objects
- More attention is given to animate objects (they are drawn bigger, are highlighted in some way or placed at the center of the drawing) as compared to inanimate ones
- Emphasis on objects with human elements
- Horse drawn with an expressive human face
- Inanimate objects gain human facial expression
- Deemphasized helicopter 
- Drawing style is characterized by roundish soft lines*Sensing**Intuition*- Tendency to add details so as to make objects look more concrete and specific
- Detalization of objects
- Frequent focus on the “ground” (depiction of tree roots, legs that firmly stand on the ground, highlighted base of the flag pole and horse hooves, as well as depiction of ground as a unifying element on which all other objects stand)- Concept-like objects
- Lack of details and inclination to draw objects as general ideas about the objects
- Absence of ground
- Impression that objects are floating in space
- Absence of legs (can be particularly notable for a horse) 
- Depiction of objects from an unusual angle*Rationality**Irrationality*- Presence of order in the placement of objects
- Even placement of objects on the page (with even spacing between them)
- Placement of objects in lines or rows 
- Numbering of objects
- Tendency to make objects the same in size
- Clear, firm and finished lines
- Objects are drawn in a way that gives the sense of finishedness
- Objects are drawn without additional strokes or lines placed one above the other and side-by-side- Lack of system or “logic” in the way objects are placed
- Random arrangement of objects
- Uneven, fuzzy lines
- Objects give the sense of being unfinished, incomplete
- Tendency to use strokes, shading and draw lines several times over the same place*Static**Dynamic*- Lack of movement in depiction of objects
- Objects give the impression of being frozen, motionless- Objects are depicted as if they were in motion (flag flatters in the wind, horse is prancing, sun is shining, helicopter blades are spinning etc.)


----------



## FlaviaGemina

This is fun. 
Here's my drawing.... fail.
I think it would be more whacky if it was based on my own ideas.
@To_august










Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk


----------



## FlaviaGemina

My husband's hilarious drawing.
@To_august



















Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk


----------



## To_august

FlaviaGemina said:


> This is fun.
> Here's my drawing.... fail.
> I think it would be more whacky if it was based on my own ideas.
> @*To_august*


Your fail is my gosh-wish-I-could-draw-half-as-good-as-this. Honestly, these are good drawing skills. To me, at least 

I think dynamics represented very clearly in your drawing. Water is dripping from the clothes that waves in the breeze. Horse is walking, sun radiates energy, helicopter is flying.

Lean sensing as the objects are more concrete. Fore example, flag is that of a specific country. Tree has roots and horse has highlighted hooves, which speaks in favor of sensing.

Drawing lines seem rational - firm, without additional strokes - there is shading used, but they don't give an impression of being incomplete or unfinished. So I lean rationality.

Logic vs ethics is unclear. Face is the biggest object in the drawing and it draws attention, but except for a horse and a face, which supposed to be "alive" by default, inanimate objects are not "humanized" in any way, so I'm unsure.

All in all - dynamic, sensing, rational type - LSE or ESE.



FlaviaGemina said:


> My husband's hilarious drawing.
> @*To_august*


In comparison to the previous drawing objects in this one are pretty much stagnant. Nothing moves. I can't see any intention to depict objects in motion, at least. Lean static type for that reason.

Introversion - since object are rather small and there's a lot of free space in between. 

Other dichotomies are less pronounced. Rationality vs rationality - can be either way. The way objects are drawn is clearly rational with firm one-line contour, but they are scattered all over the page, which usually mean irrational lead. Sensing vs intuition - also can be either. Objects lack ground and only wash on a line has a bit of grass underneath, which makes it closer to intuition, but on the other hand, tree is a specific kind of tree - baobab - and not a conceptual one, flag is also that of a country.

Logic vs ethics. I tentatively lean ethics, just a tiny bit, because face and horse have such peculiar focus on facial expression. I like horse's Weltschmerz expression in particular. It reminded me so much of Hemulens 









So it's an introverted static type that I narrowed it down to. LII, LSI, ESI or EII then. I leaned ethics so the last two are more likely.


----------



## ondes Martenot

I didn't think I'd participate so I read some comments beore making my own. Then I wanted to draw the helicopter since it's something I've never drawn before.








So naturally I drew the helicopter first (I didn't remember what helicopters look like in detail so I improvised and that's why it might not look like any real type of a helicopter). The second thing I drew was the tree. At this point I noticed that I'm already running out of room. Next I drew tiny flag and because it seemed a bit boring I wanted to add something to make it more interesting. First I thought some national flags but since I'm not really that patriotic, I decided to make it pirate irate: After that I placed the sun up in the sky. The wash in the line was the next thing I drew because I wanted to get rid off it. It's a mess because I found it hard to memorize what it looks like and, as it says in the picture, I couldn't find my eraser. Then I did the horse behind the tree so I didn't have to draw the harder parts. I realised that there's no room for a proper human and I didn't want to draw random head floating in the air above the helicopter so I had to add smiley face to the t-shirt. 

I noticed that the tree was looking a bit lame so I fixed it. After that the helicopter started to look lame too so I added some shading and that's pretty much it.


----------



## Aridela

Type me please


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

How does one do drawing analysis? 

Also, I wish I could post one up. I do not possess a means of doing so at this time. -_-


----------

