Bargue vs Reilly vs Loomis vs Asaro — choosing a head method
Four major systems for constructing the human head dominate figurative-art teaching. Charles Bargue (1860s) trained the eye through observational replication of master plates. Andrew Loomis (1930s-40s) built heads from a sphere using a few simple geometric primitives. Frank Reilly (mid-20th century) systematised the rhythmic curves connecting facial features. The Asaro plane head (1980s) reduces the head to its principal light-receiving planes. This guide compares all four, with strengths, weaknesses, and when each one fits your work.
Updated 2026-05-16 · By Sarah Chen, Founder & Lead Developer · Reviewed by atelier-tradition portrait painters
Contents
1. Why four systems? Why not just one?
Each of these head drawing methods answers a different question about head construction. Bargue answers "how do I see proportional relationships precisely?" Loomis answers "how do I construct a head from imagination at any angle?" using ball-and-plane geometry. Reilly answers "how do I integrate facial features into a unified rhythmic whole?" through rhythm lines. Asaro answers "how do I understand the head's structure well enough to light it correctly?" via the planes of the head. A serious figurative artist needs all four answers, so the methods coexist in atelier teaching rather than competing for primacy. The recurring "Loomis vs Reilly" debate online usually misses this: the two are stages in portrait construction, not rivals.
The methods also developed in different teaching traditions. Bargue is French academic from the Beaux-Arts era. Loomis is American mid-century commercial illustration. Reilly is American post-war atelier (Frank Reilly taught at the Art Students League of New York). Asaro is American 1980s figurative-art revival. Each carries the priorities of its tradition into how it approaches the head.
The pedagogical sequence also matters. Bargue was developed inside an institution (the Beaux-Arts) that controlled the entire curriculum and could allocate years of student time to a single discipline. Loomis was developed by a working illustrator who needed to teach the basics quickly to other working illustrators. Reilly was developed at a teaching atelier where students mixed working professionally with their study and needed a method that produced finished portraits within months rather than years. Asaro was developed for figurative painters who already knew construction but needed a shared vocabulary for plane analysis when painting in colour. The methods reflect the practical constraints of their teaching contexts as much as the personalities of their teachers.
2. Bargue — observational replication (1860s)
Charles Bargue, working with Jean-Léon Gérôme, published the Cours de dessin (Drawing Course) in three parts from 1866 to 1871. The course consisted of around 200 lithographed plates: master drawings of casts, anatomical studies, and figures, presented at increasing complexity. Students were instructed to copy each plate exactly, training the eye to perceive subtle proportional relationships through patient observation.
The Bargue method is observational rather than constructive — there is no underlying geometric system. The student copies what they see. The benefit is precision: years of plate-copying develops measuring skill that no constructive method can match. The cost is angle flexibility: Bargue plates show heads in specific orientations, and the method doesn't teach you how to draw heads at angles the plates don't include.
Modern atelier programmes (Florence Academy, Grand Central Atelier, Watts Atelier) all use Bargue plates in their first-year curricula. The method's revival in the contemporary classical-realist movement traces to Gerald Ackerman's Charles Bargue and Jean-Léon Gérôme: Drawing Course (2003), which republished the original plates with modern commentary.
Use Bargue when: you want to develop maximum observational precision, you have access to atelier instruction or a patient teacher, you're committed to long-term traditional training, you're drawing from casts or master studies.
Skip Bargue when: you need to draw heads from imagination, you work from photo reference at varied angles, you're a self-taught artist without atelier guidance (the plates work much better with critique).
The Bargue plates as a contemporary self-study tool
Even without atelier instruction, the Bargue plates remain useful as a self-study resource if you treat them with the discipline they require. The 2003 Ackerman edition reproduces the original 200 plates at usable size. The recommended self-study workflow: pick one plate, draw it as carefully as you can over a single 2-3 hour session, set it aside, then compare your drawing to the original side-by-side on day two — not while drawing, when you would inevitably correct toward the source rather than learn from the comparison. Note the proportional errors and the contour errors separately; these are different skills and improve at different rates. Move to the next plate only when you have done this comparison on three drawings of the current plate. The progression is slower than atelier instruction would be, but the eye does train.
3. Loomis — spherical construction (1930s-40s)
Andrew Loomis (1892-1959) was an American commercial illustrator and author whose books — Drawing the Head and Hands (1956), Figure Drawing for All It's Worth (1943), Successful Drawing (1951) — became foundational texts for self-taught figurative artists. The Loomis head method constructs the head from a sphere modified by a flattened side plane (the temple-to-jaw flat) and divided by horizontal and vertical guidelines that locate the brow line, ear line, and centre line of the face.
The method's appeal is angle flexibility. Once you can draw the basic sphere-plus-side-plane at any angle, the construction lines (brow, ear, centre, eye line, nose base) follow predictably. Loomis showed how to construct heads from front, three-quarter, profile, and steep up- and down-angles using the same underlying geometric primitives. The result is the most-used "from imagination" head method in concept art, comic illustration, and self-taught figurative drawing.
See our dedicated Loomis Head tool for a live construction surface and the step-by-step Loomis guide for the full 13-step construction.
Use Loomis when: you need to draw heads from imagination at any angle, you work in concept art / comics / illustration, you're self-taught and need a system you can learn from books and online tutorials, you're drawing many heads in a single project (storyboarding, character sheets).
Skip Loomis when: the construction's geometric simplification doesn't match your subject (very young children, the elderly, atypical facial structures), you need maximum proportional precision (Bargue is better), you're painting and need plane-by-plane lighting analysis (Asaro is better).
4. Reilly — rhythm and connecting curves (mid-20th c.)
Frank J. Reilly (1906-1967) taught at the Art Students League of New York from the 1930s to the 1960s. His head method emphasises the rhythmic curves that connect facial features rather than the isolated landmark positions. The brow line becomes a curve that flows into the ear line; the cheekbone curve connects to the jaw curve; the eye sockets are linked by a single rhythmic shape rather than treated as separate features.
The Reilly method's strength is in integrating the head with the body. Where Loomis treats the head as a discrete geometric primitive that can be drawn in isolation, Reilly's rhythmic curves naturally extend into neck and shoulder rhythms — the head reads as part of a continuous figurative composition rather than an attached object. This makes Reilly the dominant method in figurative oil painting and serious portrait commission work.
Reilly is harder to learn from books than Loomis because the rhythmic principles are easier to demonstrate in person. The Frank J. Reilly School of Art (founded by Reilly, continued after his death) and successor schools like the Grand Central Atelier teach it directly; self-taught artists usually approach Reilly only after they have Loomis under their belt.
See our Reilly method guide for the construction system.
Use Reilly when: you paint figurative work where head and body need integrated rhythm, you have access to in-person atelier instruction, you're working on commissioned portraits where each head is unique, you want to move beyond Loomis's geometric construction toward something more lifelike.
Skip Reilly when: you're starting figurative drawing (Loomis is the better entry), you need many heads quickly (Loomis is faster), you don't have access to teachers who can demonstrate the rhythms in person.
5. Asaro — the plane head for lighting (1980s)
John Asaro, an American painter and educator active from the 1960s onward, created the "Planes of the Head" — a sculptural model that reduces the human head to its principal flat planes. The Asaro head exists as a physical maquette (still sold by Speedy & Asaro and other plaster-cast suppliers) and as a drawing reference. The method's purpose isn't to construct the head from imagination — it's to understand how light interacts with the head's structure.
Each plane on the Asaro head receives light at a specific angle relative to a light source, so a painter who has internalised the plane structure can predict shadow patterns from any lighting setup before painting begins. The Asaro head is essential for painters working from imagination (concept art, illustration, character design) where the painter needs to invent plausible lighting without a reference photograph.
The Asaro head doesn't compete with Loomis or Reilly; it complements them. A typical figurative-painting workflow uses Loomis or Reilly to construct the head's proportional structure, then mentally overlays the Asaro plane structure to determine where light and shadow fall. The two systems together produce convincing lighting on a constructed head.
See our Asaro head guide for a full reference of the plane structure.
Use Asaro when: you paint (rather than just draw) heads, you work from imagination and need to invent lighting, you're a concept artist or illustrator needing convincing light on faces you can't photograph, you're studying anatomy for figurative work.
Skip Asaro when: you only draw heads (linework doesn't usually need plane-level light analysis), you always paint from photo reference (the photo handles lighting for you), you're a beginning figurative artist (learn proportional construction first).
6. Direct comparison table
| Dimension | Bargue | Loomis | Reilly | Asaro |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | 1866 | 1930s-40s | 1940s-60s | 1980s |
| Approach | Observational | Geometric construction | Rhythmic curves | Plane structure |
| From imagination? | No | Yes (key strength) | Possible (harder) | Reference only |
| Self-teachable? | Difficult | Yes (book-based) | Difficult | Yes (maquette-based) |
| Body integration? | Separate | Separate | Integrated (key strength) | Separate |
| Lighting analysis? | Limited | Limited | Limited | Yes (key strength) |
| Time to baseline competence | 2-5 years | 6 months | 2-3 years | 1-3 months |
| Best for | Atelier students | Concept art, comics, self-taught | Portrait painting, fine art | Painters needing light analysis |
7. Which to pick: a decision guide
If you draw from imagination for illustration / concept art / comics: Loomis. The construction is fast, flexible at any angle, and learnable from books. Add Asaro once you start painting heads with invented lighting.
If you work from photo reference for portrait commissions: Reilly if you can access in-person instruction; Loomis as a fallback. The rhythmic integration of head and body matters for finished commission work in ways it doesn't for individual figure studies.
If you're committed to long-term atelier-tradition training: Bargue first (years of observational training), then Reilly (rhythmic integration), then Asaro (light analysis for painting). Loomis is helpful as a quick-construction tool alongside the slower tradition.
If you're a digital painter / concept artist working entirely in colour: Asaro and Loomis in combination. Loomis handles construction; Asaro handles light prediction. Reilly is useful but not essential. Bargue is rarely necessary outside academic training.
8. Combining the methods
Most experienced figurative artists end up using all four selectively. A typical workflow on a commissioned portrait: Loomis-construct the basic head structure to verify proportional accuracy from the reference photo; switch to Reilly's rhythmic curves to integrate the head with neck and shoulders for the unified composition; mentally overlay the Asaro plane structure to predict shadow patterns under the intended studio lighting; verify proportional details against the reference photo using Bargue-style observational measurement.
The methods compound rather than compete. Loomis gets the geometry right. Reilly gets the rhythm right. Asaro gets the light right. Bargue gets the proportions right. A finished painting that reads as "alive" usually has all four kinds of correctness; one without the others produces work that's technically accomplished in one dimension and weak in others.
Grid Maker Pro ships dedicated overlays for Loomis, Reilly, and Asaro (each with construction-specific guides), plus the square and custom grids needed for Bargue-style observational drawing. The methods overlap in the tool; you can switch between them per overlay without changing the underlying reference image or canvas setup.
9. Where these methods came from — the workshop lineage
The four methods aren't independent inventions. They're stages of a continuous workshop tradition that ran from the French academies of the 19th century through American mid-century illustration to today's digital ateliers. Understanding the lineage clarifies why the methods feel so different from each other despite all addressing the same task: drawing the human head accurately.
The 19th-century French academy as common root
Charles Bargue trained in the École des Beaux-Arts atelier system, which itself descended from the Italian Renaissance workshop tradition through Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres (1780–1867) and Jacques-Louis David (1748–1825). The Beaux-Arts method emphasized years of cast drawing (drawing from plaster reproductions of classical sculpture) before ever drawing from a live model. Bargue's Cours de Dessin (1866–1871), produced with Jean-Léon Gérôme, was the codification of this curriculum — 197 plates of carefully graduated drawing exercises designed for self-study by aspiring academic painters. Every student of the late-19th-century French school worked through these plates, including Picasso (who reportedly studied the plates with his father).
When the École des Beaux-Arts tradition crossed the Atlantic in the late 19th and early 20th centuries — carried by American painters who studied in Paris and returned to teach at the Pennsylvania Academy, the Art Students League, and the National Academy — the cast-drawing-first curriculum traveled with it. Robert Henri, William Merritt Chase, and Frank Vincent DuMond all taught variations on the Bargue-derived method to American students in the 1900s–1920s.
The American illustration industry as accelerator
The American commercial illustration industry of the 1930s–1950s created economic pressure for faster head-drawing methods. Saturday Evening Post covers, pulp magazine illustrations, advertising portraiture, and comic strips all required commercially viable production speed. The slow Bargue method couldn't sustain a Norman Rockwell production schedule. Andrew Loomis (1892–1959), who had himself trained at the Art Institute of Chicago and the Art Students League under George Bridgman and others, developed his "spherical construction" method as a fast-and-reliable shortcut for commercial illustrators. His textbooks Fun with a Pencil (1939) and Drawing the Head and Hands (1956) explicitly framed the method as production-ready: get the head right in 5 minutes, not 5 weeks.
Frank Reilly (1906–1967) taught at the Art Students League from 1933 to 1967 and developed his rhythmic method during this period — drawing on his own training in the Bridgman lineage but adapting for what he saw as the weakness of Loomis-style spherical construction: heads that were geometrically correct but felt static. Reilly's curve-and-rhythm approach integrated the head with neck, shoulders, and the rest of the figure in a way that single-method spherical construction couldn't. Students of Reilly include Burne Hogarth, James Bama, and dozens of mid-century commercial illustrators.
John Asaro and the digital-painting era
John Asaro's planar head model emerged in the 1980s–1990s from a different concern: the rise of digital painting and the need for a head model that predicted shadow behavior under arbitrary lighting. Where Loomis's sphere abstracted away the planes that catch light, and Reilly's rhythms abstracted away anything that wasn't a flowing curve, Asaro's faceted model made every major plane explicit. The result was a head sculpture (the "Asaro head"; widely available as a study model in art-supply stores) that painters could use to predict where shadows would fall under any imagined light source.
The Asaro head was particularly well-suited to digital painting workflows where artists invent lighting rather than observe it. Concept art for film and games adopted the Asaro method heavily through the 2000s. Today it's near-universal in entertainment-industry character design, while remaining less common in traditional portrait commissions where the lighting is observable.
10. Suggested practice protocols by method
Each method rewards a different kind of practice. Knowing the protocol that matches the method is at least as important as knowing the method itself.
Bargue practice protocol
Work through Bargue's Cours de Dessin plates in order. Each plate takes 4–20 hours of careful observational copying; the published curriculum expects 100+ hours of work per academic year. The protocol isn't optional — Bargue's method only "lands" through the volume of disciplined observation. Modern ateliers (the Florence Academy of Art, Grand Central Atelier, Watts Atelier) reproduce this curriculum directly. Self-study version: buy the Charles Bargue: Drawing Course reprint (Sterling Publishing, 2003) and work through Volume 1 (cast drawings) before attempting any live model work.
Loomis practice protocol
Draw 100 heads from photo reference using only Loomis construction, no observational corrections. Then 100 more from imagination. Then 100 in three-quarter view, then 100 in profile, then 100 from below, then 100 from above. The point isn't accuracy on any individual head — the point is to make Loomis construction automatic so it requires no conscious thought when needed. Aaron Blaise's online course and Stan Prokopenko's Proko videos both teach this protocol explicitly.
Reilly practice protocol
Best learned with an instructor (the rhythmic-curve flow is hard to self-correct from books). If self-study is the only option, study Burne Hogarth's Drawing the Human Head (1965) and Andrew Loomis's Figure Drawing for All It's Worth (1943) together — between them they cover the Reilly approach as well as any single book does. Practice protocol: draw 50 heads-with-neck-and-shoulders combinations as a single unified gesture, not as separate parts assembled together.
Asaro practice protocol
Buy a physical Asaro head sculpture ($25–60 from art-supply stores). Light it with a single directional lamp and draw the resulting shadow patterns from 8 different angles. Then re-light from above, below, and rim positions. The protocol trains the ability to predict shadow placement on any head under any light — the core skill the Asaro method targets.
11. How the four methods fit together in a working figurative practice
A common framing in online discussion is that the four methods compete — that you should pick one and master it. In practice, working figurative artists use all four at different stages of the same drawing or painting. The methods are not alternatives; they are tools for different problems within the larger problem of getting a head right.
The most common integration pattern. Start with Loomis to block in the head's orientation, tilt, and major proportions — the ball-and-jaw construction in two minutes establishes the basic placement. Switch to Asaro mentally to think about the major planes: where is the light hitting, where are the planes turning away, where is the cast shadow falling. Switch to Reilly to find the rhythmic curves that connect the features — the C-curve from the brow through the temple to the cheekbone, the S-curve from the eye through the nose to the mouth. Use Bargue's observational discipline for the final refinement of contour and proportional precision: compare your construction to the reference, find the proportional errors, correct them.
This sounds elaborate but happens fast once internalised. The four-method workflow is rarely articulated explicitly by working artists because it has become automatic; you can watch a master like David Kassan or Cesar Santos demonstrate a head from life and see each phase happen in real time, even though they would not describe their process in these terms.
The reason to learn all four is precisely that each one solves a problem the others handle poorly. Loomis handles orientation; Asaro handles light; Reilly handles rhythmic flow; Bargue handles proportional precision. An artist who only knows Loomis will get the orientation right but struggle with light. An artist who only knows Bargue will get the proportions right but struggle with constructed angles not present in the reference. The four together cover the full problem space.
This is also why the methods reward extended study rather than quick mastery. Each one is a craft tradition with its own learning curve, and the integration only happens after each has been internalised individually. The classical atelier system's three-to-five year curriculum is built around this — Bargue for the first year (proportional discipline), Loomis and Reilly added in the second (constructive flexibility), Asaro and full painted heads in the third onward (light and finish). Self-teaching can follow the same sequence at the artist's own pace.
12. Contemporary extensions and variants
Each of the four methods has spawned variants in the past 50 years, and several contemporary teachers have created hybrids that combine elements from multiple methods. A short guide to the landscape:
Stephen Bauman, Erik Olson teach what is essentially a Bargue-plus-Loomis hybrid — Bargue plates for the first year of observational discipline, then Loomis-style construction added in the second year for invented and reference-based work. Both are working portrait painters with substantial online teaching presences.
Glenn Vilppu developed his own gesture-and-structure method that integrates Reilly-style rhythmic analysis with figure construction drawn from animation tradition. His "Vilppu Drawing Manual" is widely used in entertainment-design schools.
Cesar Santos and Steven Assael are contemporary atelier-trained painters who use observational Bargue discipline with constructive Loomis as an overlay; their published demos show the workflow integration explicitly.
Marshall Vandruff teaches a structural-anatomy approach influenced by Bridgman and Reilly, with explicit Asaro-style plane analysis added for tonal painting. His perspective-and-anatomy intensive courses are a useful complement to any of the four primary methods.
The takeaway: do not feel obliged to study any single method in isolation. The contemporary teachers all combine the methods because the methods are complementary. Learn the named systems for their distinctive logic; integrate them by feel in your own practice.
13. Common mistakes across all four methods
The methods differ in approach but the early-stage failure modes are remarkably consistent. Five mistakes show up regardless of which system you are studying.
Drawing the features before the structure. The eye is drawn to the eyes, nose, and mouth — they are the most expressive and the most rewarding to render. Beginners almost always start there and only afterward try to fit the skull around them. Every one of the four methods exists to reverse this order. Loomis starts with the ball-and-jaw, Asaro starts with the eight major planes, Reilly starts with the rhythmic curves, Bargue starts with the overall outline silhouette and the centre-line. The features are placed last in each case. Build the wrong order in once and the proportions never come out right, no matter how much rendering you put on top.
Treating the head as a 2D outline. A head is a solid form viewed from one angle; the contour is what that solid form makes against the background, not a shape in its own right. Beginners draw the outline and then try to add features to its inside. The contour is a result, not an input. Loomis explicitly trains around this by starting from a 3D sphere; Asaro trains around it by giving you a 3D model to study; Reilly trains around it by basing the rhythms on muscular structure that has thickness; Bargue trains around it by emphasising the bony landmarks that the contour bumps against.
Skipping the centre-line. The vertical centre-line of the face (from forehead through nose to chin) is the single most important line in the construction. It establishes the head's rotation, tilt, and orientation in space. All four methods place it within the first few marks. Beginners often skip it because it is invisible in the final drawing — but its absence is the reason heads tilt wrongly or look "off" without an obvious fault.
Working too small. Head construction needs space for the construction lines to be legible without crowding the features. Working at 5cm head height on A4 paper buries the construction in feature detail; working at 15cm head height on A3 lets you see the construction lines independently of the rendering. The atelier tradition draws heads at near-life-size precisely because the construction stays legible.
Stopping at the construction. The construction is scaffolding; the finished head is what sits on top. Beginners who learn one of the methods sometimes get attached to the construction lines as an aesthetic in themselves — leaving them visible in finished work as a kind of badge. The masters do not do this. Loomis's published demonstrations show the construction lightly drawn and then almost completely covered by tone and modelling. Bargue plates show the construction lines erased and the contour rendered. The construction is a tool to get the form right, not the form itself.
14. Atelier instruction versus self-teaching
All four methods can be self-taught from books, but they reward atelier instruction differently. Bargue is the most atelier-dependent: the method works through structured progression from simpler plates to harder ones, with a master correcting each drawing before you proceed to the next. Self-teaching from the Bargue book is possible but slow, because you lack the corrective feedback loop that makes the method efficient.
Loomis is the most self-teachable. The books are written for the working illustrator who has no time for atelier study, and the construction is explicit enough that you can self-correct by comparing your construction to the demonstrations in the book. This is why Loomis became the dominant method in 20th-century commercial illustration — it scaled to artists working alone.
Reilly sits between. The method was developed in classroom instruction at the Art Students League and was passed down through Frank Reilly's direct students (notably Jack Faragasso, who codified it in writing). Self-teaching from Reilly source material is possible but the rhythmic system rewards seeing it demonstrated; many contemporary atelier-style schools (the Art Students League itself, Grand Central Atelier) still teach it directly.
Asaro is the easiest of the four to learn without instruction because the source material is a physical 3D head — you can examine the planes from any angle, draw them, photograph them under different lighting. The method demands more from the artist's eye than from any teacher's correction; the head model itself is the teacher.
15. References
- Bargue, C. and Gérôme, J.-L. Cours de Dessin. Goupil & Cie (1866–1871). Reprint: Charles Bargue: Drawing Course. Sterling Publishing (2003).
- Loomis, A. Drawing the Head and Hands. Viking Press (1956). Reprint: Titan Books (2011).
- Loomis, A. Figure Drawing for All It's Worth. Viking Press (1943). Reprint: Titan Books (2011).
- Hogarth, B. Drawing the Human Head. Watson-Guptill (1965).
- Aristides, J. Classical Drawing Atelier. Watson-Guptill (2006). The contemporary atelier-tradition curriculum that integrates Bargue with later methods.
- Bridgman, G. Bridgman's Complete Guide to Drawing from Life. Sterling (1952). The mid-20th-century American figure-drawing textbook that influenced both Loomis and Reilly.
Frequently asked questions
Which head method should I learn first?
Loomis if you're drawing portraits from imagination or photo reference for illustration/concept work — the spherical construction handles any angle. Bargue if you have access to atelier instruction and want maximum proportional precision from observational drawing. Reilly if your priority is integrating the head with the body in a unified figurative composition. Asaro for understanding light, shadow, and plane structure when painting in colour. They're complementary; serious figurative artists eventually learn all four.
Is one method "better" than the others?
No — they solve different problems. Bargue is observational training (look at the master plate, replicate it). Loomis is constructive (build a head from a sphere). Reilly is rhythmic (find the curves that connect features). Asaro is structural (reduce the head to its core planes for light analysis). The methods overlap and reinforce each other; experienced figurative artists shift between them depending on the specific problem at hand.
Can I use all four with Grid Maker Pro?
Yes. Grid Maker Pro ships dedicated overlays for Loomis, Reilly, and Asaro (each with construction-specific guides), plus the square and custom grids needed for Bargue-style observational drawing. Drop the relevant overlay on a reference photo or sketch surface and the construction guides appear at the appropriate angles.
Which head drawing method is best for beginners?
Loomis is the usual starting point for beginners. Its spherical, ball-and-plane construction is explicit, learnable from books without a teacher, and works at any angle, so it gives the fastest route to a head that sits correctly in space. Bargue and Reilly reward atelier instruction and longer study, and Asaro is most useful once you are already painting. A common order to learn head construction methods is Loomis first, then Reilly or Bargue, then Asaro.
Loomis vs Reilly: which method is better for portraits?
For finished portraits, Reilly tends to win because its rhythm lines integrate the head with the neck and shoulders, so the portrait reads as one continuous form rather than a head attached to a body. Loomis is faster and more flexible from imagination, which is why many artists construct with Loomis first and refine with Reilly's rhythmic curves. The difference between Loomis and Reilly head construction is geometric primitives versus connecting rhythms — most portrait painters end up using both.
What is the Asaro head used for, and is it good for construction?
The Asaro head is a faceted maquette that maps the planes of the head, and it is used mainly for lighting: once you know which plane faces which direction, you can predict where light and shadow fall under any light source. It is less suited to building a head from scratch — for that, Loomis or Reilly give better proportional construction. In practice the Asaro head complements those methods rather than replacing them: construct with Loomis or Reilly, then read the planes with Asaro to place the shadows.