My point is the Blair cycles suit male figures but don't describe female figures. To draw an exercise based on female-oriented movement we have to do a little searching.
I found such an example in this exercise based on a video on Vimeo by someone calling themselves Felix Sputnik. Obviously Mr. Sputnik is an extremely accomplished animator... and probably a top notch teacher... as this is one of the best animation cycle projects I've ever seen. I don't know much - I'm just an amateur, after all - but I recognize excellence when I see it. And Mr. Sputnik's video is excellent.
There are no still pictures on which to base the exercise but I did notice numbers flashing by so I tried stopping the video at strategic places and I think I got most the "key" captures. Enough, at least, that I could proceed with the exercise.
After much agonizing and laboriously drawing the figures as best I could, I derived these rough sketches and decided they were my key poses:
|Not much more than a bunch of squiggly lines... but I think my shapes and proportions are fundamentally correct.|
Anyway, I then built these up into "final" drawings... rough sketches, actually; I try not to spend too much time on finished-looking drawings because, quite frankly, I think the point of the exercise is to show logical movement and anyway, I'm only so-so when drawing realistic figures:
Now here's an interesting thing. The orientation of the video for this sequence is right-to-left. Do your eyes resist following the figures? Mine do, albeit slightly. Culturally (listen to me! I'm an anthropologist!!) we're accustomed to reading left-to-right so the orientation of this exercise is a bit unsettling.
Here it is flipped the other way: