Speed painting

[Glo-Boy]

just practicing. anyone else like to speed paint?

 

[Geogaddi]

That's really cool looking.

 

[Glo-Boy]

Thanks duder. I made a tutorial for another board on my technique when asked, so I will cut n' paste it over here. This is the basic technique:

STEP ONE - block in your color.

STEP TWO - block in some more.

STEP THREE - add some rock texture. A big part of digital painting is texturing. for this, i just grabbed some rocky images from someone's flickr site and multiplied them over my painting.

STEP FOUR - dragon. It's pretty simple strokes to get the basic shape down. then i made a cardinal sin and color dodged the wings. sue me.

STEP FIVE - add some buddha light. nothing says pretentious dick concept artist like buddha light.

STEP SIX - color correct.

And you're done! Speed painting is all about being loose and having no idea where your piece is going. It's also not about worrying about your details. This is probably 30 minutes of work, tops.

 

[Raziaar]

STEP THREE - add some rock texture. A big part of digital painting is texturing. for this, i just grabbed some rocky images from someone's flickr site and multiplied them over my painting.

May I ask what you mean 'multiplied' them over your painting? What does that mean in photoshop terms? I have seen the color option multiply, but I have no idea what it does exactly.

Very awesome painting by the way.

 

[Glo-Boy]

Color options all change the way your layer or brushes color is applied. In the case of multiply it takes a look at your rgb values and multiples the base color (predominant one) with the blend color (secondary one). So it always sort of grills the colors it into the picture rather than just laying them on top. It doesn't really work on lighter colors as well.

Another method to try is turning it into a luminance layer. What that one does is take out all the color value and it replaces them with whatever color is underneath that layer. Great for texturing a cloth layer over a flat camouflage pattern for a character skin.

 

[Fliko]

What program are you using?

 

[nofx]

What program are you using?

photoshop

 

[Glo-Boy]

update

 

[joule]

You have talent. Great work.

 

[CrazyHarij]

too much photoshop factory effects..

the idea of speed painting is to establish sense of value and balance in the first strokes and block them out, however you do constant rework on the piece with colorisation et... it's about getting it right with your painting strokes, having enough knowledge of color theory, rather than endlessly re-rendering and layering effects and stuff like that. the picture is nice but it's not a good example of a speed painting. the end piece has no sense of perspective.

your brushes have way low opacity in the start imho.

i wouldn't say speed painting is a good thing to only practice for beginners. learn to do it right, then learn to do it fast. but it's always fun to do it occasionally, and you can learn alot about your technique with it

 

[Sebastian]

too much photoshop factory effects..

the idea of speed painting is to establish sense of value and balance in the first strokes and block them out, however you do constant rework on the piece with colorisation et... it's about getting it right with your painting strokes, having enough knowledge of color theory, rather than endlessly re-rendering and layering effects and stuff like that. the picture is nice but it's not a good example of a speed painting. the end piece has no sense of perspective.

your brushes have way low opacity in the start imho.

i wouldn't say speed painting is a good thing to only practice for beginners. learn to do it right, then learn to do it fast. but it's always fun to do it occasionally, and you can learn alot about your technique with it

Put your money where your mouth is.

 

[Crushenator 500]

Put your money where your mouth is.

He's absolutely right you know...


ps did this really need a tutorial, it's just some poorly thought out brushstrokes with some photoshop correction to make it look half decent and a texture overlay.. To learn how to paint you should know about values, colour theory, perspective etc, not some cheap photoshop effects...

 

[CrazyHarij]

Put your money where your mouth is.

what the hell is that supposed to mean?

 

[Hazar]

I thought the first image looked like a fairy or something praying or something, with the left dragon wing forming her head and the other one forming the wing on her back D:

 

[Hazar]

Put your money where your mouth is.

he already has

 

[Glo-Boy]

too much photoshop factory effects..

the idea of speed painting is to establish sense of value and balance in the first strokes and block them out, however you do constant rework on the piece with colorisation et... it's about getting it right with your painting strokes, having enough knowledge of color theory, rather than endlessly re-rendering and layering effects and stuff like that. the picture is nice but it's not a good example of a speed painting. the end piece has no sense of perspective.

your brushes have way low opacity in the start imho.

i wouldn't say speed painting is a good thing to only practice for beginners. learn to do it right, then learn to do it fast. but it's always fun to do it occasionally, and you can learn alot about your technique with it

Mr Harij, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. None.

I want a list of all these factory photoshop effects you are thinking of, because here there aren't any. There's one instance of color dodging on the wings, and one mult layer for the rock texture... if you even want to call those "factory effects". If you think for one second that finished paintings are not comprised of layers upon layers upon layers, you are severely misguided. I'm not sure who taught you your artistic skills (the likes of which I have never seen....) but they should be fired for filling your head with such stupid propaganda.

Also, speed painting should be practiced all the time, every day by any serious artist. It's like sketching in a sketchbook. Sometimes you make a sketch that you wish to fill out in more detail. Other times you leave it as a sketch and move on.

As for my linework being disorganized, well it's a big broken rock that is part of a work in progress. Excuuuuuse me for utilizing a chaotic method of creating texture. Like that's never been done before... Oh yeah, and it's a speed painting. Imagine that!

Oh and PLEASE point out how my colors are wrong so far? As far as I can tell, they work very nicely together. If you really want, I can prove why by explaining the interactions between them, and how the color space works.

Crushenator, first of all, way to jump on the bandwagon. You too are completely oblivious to classical art training, real color theory, and most likely, perspective. I can't shoot down your warrantless perspective comment because my painting doesn't have enough elements to demonstrate a vanishing point clearly enough. As for the tutorial, I was asked to show my steps in another forum, so I thought I would share. Sorry I offended you by offering help to those who might want it. Maybe both you and Harij SHOULD put your money where your mouths are and show me up because until then, you're both just whiners with nothing to back up your claims.


Pfff, factory photoshop effects.

P.S. I thought I should mention (again from another thread) that I love constructive criticism. Lay it on me, all you got. I get it every day from my professors. But I do not take kindly to people making false accusations, especially when they aren't even artists themselves. Complain about something valid, not something that just bothers you because you're a cocky high schooler in AP art, and you don't understand anything beyond your self-taught dillusions.

 

[Glo-Boy]

he already has

Where? That link takes us to an invalid search page.

 

[MorganFreeman911]

That was the POINT.

 

[Glo-Boy]

I guess the sarcasm didn't translate to me very well. Hah.

 

[Finger]

Wow.. the knives come out fast here, eh?

my opinion: (if anyone cares)
There's nothing wrong with filters and digital effects, as long as they aren't taking the place of solid construction, but are rather a means to an end. I personally don't see a problem using all the tools that digital offers, but there are trappings that people can fall into easily because they are so accessible. For example, in the world of professional concept art, alot of these tricks (plus photo useage) are used all the time, but the people weilding them use them just enough to speed up the process, and have enough classical training to sell the 'vision' and not the technique.

I don't see anything wrong with your picture - it's an ok speed painting. The only qualm I have with your tutorial is the misconception that you 'don't need to know where the speed painting is going'.. I would consider that a doodle. In my opinion, the subject of a speed painting should be very solid, and the focus should be capturing the emotion of said subject by focusing on the basics, with minimal effort.. i.e. composition, values, color, saturation. If you can get all of that with the help of filters and photo textures, more power to you.... just beware the 'cliche' of such techniques if they aren't serving a greater purpose.

 

[sinkoman]

My opinion is that with art, it's all about the end result.

Who gives a shit about how you got to the end result, so long as you didn't kill anybody, steal anything (or at least use it without permission), or didn't lie to your viewers? Hell, even if you did do all of the above, that doesn't mean that your end piece can't be original or thought provoking. It just means you did a whole bunch of bad things allong the way

I mean, you wouldn't enter something you used digital effects on into a contest based on originality, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the piece you created looks good (or hopefully looks good :upstare: ).

 

[CrazyHarij]

I want a list of all these factory photoshop effects you are thinking of, because here there aren't any. There's one instance of color dodging on the wings, and one mult layer for the rock texture... if you even want to call those "factory effects". If you think for one second that finished paintings are not comprised of layers upon layers upon layers, you are severely misguided. I'm not sure who taught you your artistic skills (the likes of which I have never seen....) but they should be fired for filling your head with such stupid propaganda.

multiplying, color correction, colorisation, layer effects, color dodge, etc etc. ctrl + m much? color burn for the ridiculous shadows below the cliffs

the difference between your painting and the finished paintings that you talk about is that they actually put skill and reason behind those layers, not a bunch of bullshit effects to cover up for their artistic flaws.

Also, speed painting should be practiced all the time, every day by any serious artist. It's like sketching in a sketchbook. Sometimes you make a sketch that you wish to fill out in more detail. Other times you leave it as a sketch and move on.

matter of opinion. it's more imperative to learn detailing and the whole process of building a painting from start to finish for a beginner, then learning to do it fast. speedpainting is a very difficult thing to do.

As for my linework being disorganized, well it's a big broken rock that is part of a work in progress. Excuuuuuse me for utilizing a chaotic method of creating texture. Like that's never been done before... Oh yeah, and it's a speed painting. Imagine that!

don't ****ing prance around imagining you're some bigshot artist then. your "linework" isn't linework, it's a bunch of randomly splattered on bits of color that hasn't been shaped at all in the end product.

Oh and PLEASE point out how my colors are wrong so far? As far as I can tell, they work very nicely together. If you really want, I can prove why by explaining the interactions between them, and how the color space works.

be my guest. if you know as much as you claim to do, try inverting the picture.

I can't shoot down your warrantless perspective comment because my painting doesn't have enough elements to demonstrate a vanishing point clearly enough.

the water is ****ing ridiculous and isn't part of any perspective. another bullshit effect. there's no vantage point at all, at least none followed. the cliffs don't make sense in relation to the horizon.

P.S. I thought I should mention (again from another thread) that I love constructive criticism. Lay it on me, all you got. I get it every day from my professors. But I do not take kindly to people making false accusations, especially when they aren't even artists themselves. Complain about something valid, not something that just bothers you because you're a cocky high schooler in AP art, and you don't understand anything beyond your self-taught dillusions.

let me just say that you're not going to learn alot in art if you're going to respond like this to every piece of criticism or advice that's not buttkissing. the reason you're getting so much praise here is because people here don't know jack shit about technicalities of art, and just look at all the pretty color effects that you've applied to the painting.

basically, this is what your painting is without the effects, texturing, repeated colorisation bullshit:
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c372/facemypunch/step2.jpg

that pretty much counts as abstract art. even in the final product, there is NO sense of perspective, no clear blocked out fields, the light effects don't even make ****ing sense and are completely amateurish in nature

want me to put my money where my mouth is?

this is me taking a crap on your shitty art ego

i've always thought art education is worth dick all in the real world, and you prove my sentiments even more.

 

[marksmanHL2 :)]

oh you just got owned.

 

[blck_prod]

I dont know I he got owned...

I think the both of you have good examples.
CrazyHari is right about the colours, water and shadows in the final composition.
First one is waaaaay better...Sometimes you need to leave things as they are...I know its hard. And also flipping your drawing and inverting them. If the composition is fine in both directions then you have a good one.

Glo_boy...you're right about the textures and strokes and stuff..Altough the textures are for enhancing, setting a mood...pointing out what material it is. My only concern is that I fear you want to enhance it to much...leave it be . Its a speedpainting.
And please ppl leave the ego at home...thats why I hate 'artists'
You say you can take criticism.... You've clearly shown you cant. Come on...man...he has a point. Why the attack like you know better. If thats your reply to all the critic you get then you'll not advance... Listen to them. Of course they arent always right. But learn from the critiques and comments you get...


Here's some of my speedpaintings....as you can see I dont like the gimmick of using texture overlays...Maybe we can start up some speedpainting treaths and discuss our different techniques and learn from each other instead of stabbing each other...

Keep on drawing, and keep your eyes open..
Grtzz

 

[Raziaar]

Quit pissing all over each other.

 

[Hazar]

Where? That link takes us to an invalid search page.

it should have taken you to a page of all harij's art threads

 

[Krynn72]

this is me taking a crap on your shitty art ego

Your post put me in a bad mood until I read that. Then I smiled.

I think your ego is pretty high up there also though. You should try being a bit more modest because someone else who has more experience could come in and take a shit all over your ego also. :thumbs:

As for filters and effects... as long as they aren't blatantly obvious I dont think they matter. If people enjoy the final product... then who gives a ****? Well, aparently some... but most people dont.

To most people, art is about the image and ideas that the painting conveys. To others is about the technical processes that went into it. I knew a girl who was slightly more extreme in this sense than Harij because she would unjustly rip apart any digital art whatsoever just because it was digital. She would make her arguments about how it isnt art because you used a medium that could make it easier than using real paint and canvas. She was saying it wasnt art because of what tools you used. Part of Harij's argument is doing the same thing, only hes focusing on a couple tools (filters and such).

To each his own, but please for the love of god dont say that someone's art is shit because of what tools they used.

@ Hazar: The link doesnt work.

 

[CrazyHarij]

i'm very modest in most cases but i felt like i needed to emphasise the message in case like this, and glo-boy is being abit of a narrow minded prick to be frank. i've been through the whole ego thing, when it comes to art it's a must to disregard how you feel when reading critique and take the message itself. you can learn a whole lot when you get through it.

i'd also like to point out that i am not being elitist in the classic sense of the word, i like digital effects and use them myself very frequently (the above pieces were more ridden of them than usual to prove my point), but i think it's wrong to overuse it and then proclaim technical supremacy over others. there's a place for everything, and what's important is balancing opposites.

overusing digital effects, or in glo-boys case, relying entirely on them, it looks nice, sure, but you're going to get other artists pointing this out and barking back proclaiming your artistic supremacy is only going to get your ass kicked.

there's even worse examples of stuff like this, the typical beginner response is "it's not my style so i don't have to learn anatomy or perspective"

i'm not saying his art is shit, but his art ego is shit, the way he's responding to things i write with the ridiculous elitistic "i've been to art school, don't tell me how to paint" argument. i've seen him displaying this behaviour in earlier threads and it's seriously hampering his potential. he's a good artist and i don't think he should let it go to a waste, and most of all i think he should lay the ****ed up attitude down.

i'm definitely not a good artist by my own definition, but i try to learn as much as possible from the great artists on the net. with sites like www.conceptart.org around, the internet by far surpasses art education when it comes to becoming a good artist.

 

[Crushenator 500]

You too are completely oblivious to classical art training, real color theory, and most likely, perspective. I can't shoot down your warrantless perspective comment because my painting doesn't have enough elements to demonstrate a vanishing point clearly enough. As for the tutorial, I was asked to show my steps in another forum, so I thought I would share. Sorry I offended you by offering help to those who might want it.

I wasn't saying that you had shitty perspective or anything, i said that to learn how to paint you should know about the basics, perspective being one of them.

What makes you think I'm ''completely oblivious'' to classical art training? Just because I haven't studied at somewhere like the angel academy of art in florence doesn't mean I don't read and observe. I may not be a master at colour or perspective etc, but it doesn't mean I'm completely clueless...

Sorry that you got so mad at what I had to say, but I hope you at least acknowledged it...

As for the whole art school thing, just having a degree doesn't make you a good artist. Look at Marko Djurdjevic, one of the big players out there atm. He never went to art school, yet look at the kind of work he's able to churn out

http://sixmorevodka.com/uploads/Starfish.jpg
http://sixmorevodka.com/uploads/XmenFC7-Coverfina-previewl.jpg

 

[Glo-Boy]

i'm very modest in most cases but i felt like i needed to emphasise the message in case like this, and glo-boy is being abit of a narrow minded prick to be frank. i've been through the whole ego thing, when it comes to art it's a must to disregard how you feel when reading critique and take the message itself. you can learn a whole lot when you get through it.

i'd also like to point out that i am not being elitist in the classic sense of the word, i like digital effects and use them myself very frequently (the above pieces were more ridden of them than usual to prove my point), but i think it's wrong to overuse it and then proclaim technical supremacy over others. there's a place for everything, and what's important is balancing opposites.

overusing digital effects, or in glo-boys case, relying entirely on them, it looks nice, sure, but you're going to get other artists pointing this out and barking back proclaiming your artistic supremacy is only going to get your ass kicked.

there's even worse examples of stuff like this, the typical beginner response is "it's not my style so i don't have to learn anatomy or perspective"

i'm not saying his art is shit, but his art ego is shit, the way he's responding to things i write with the ridiculous elitistic "i've been to art school, don't tell me how to paint" argument. i've seen him displaying this behaviour in earlier threads and it's seriously hampering his potential. he's a good artist and i don't think he should let it go to a waste, and most of all i think he should lay the ****ed up attitude down.

i'm definitely not a good artist by my own definition, but i try to learn as much as possible from the great artists on the net. with sites like www.conceptart.org around, the internet by far surpasses art education when it comes to becoming a good artist.

I displayed this behavior in another thread because YOU chose to enter it and tell me the anatomy was wrong, and the color was wrong... when it was just set up in a way that wasn't to your liking. So instead it was uh, shit.

Your examples were poor. Not because I didn't like them, they were of some cool subject matter, but because your sense of perspective just doesn't exist. Your sense of weight and form is very poor too. I'm not sure how you've come up with your colors because some work and some don't. This leads me to believe you have eyedropped colors from photos to use as your palette. Big no-no.

And what the christ are you talking about? I made the ocean with about 5 different custom brushes and the color correct blew it out. Oh and, IT'S NOT DONE. Most of those "factory photoshop presets" you mentioned I haven't even used. Not only that, they are supposed to be used and DO quite often. The only thing I stand against are filters. I hate filters and never use them.

But as far as the other methods go, Dusseault does it, Mullins does it and so does every character and environment artist at every visual effects house and game company on the planet. Not to let my "ego" out here, but I know a lengthy list of people who worked for DD, R&H, ILM, Pixar, Konami, Midway, etc. who would disagree with you. In fact, ILM has a special scanner that they use to scan all sorts of crap like dirt, mud, leather, guts, solely to use as textures. No one has the time to painstakingly dot each pixel of detail. In fact, it's not possible. I'll trust these guys over you any day. Especially because you think having an education in art is worthless. That's actually great, because the art community is just fine without someone like you.

Moving on, here's another update on the painting. It's coming along and I've got more details fleshed out. I'm not happy with the dragon, but that's alright because I've planned to completely paint a new one. I just need it there as a place holder.

I repainted the ocean because the last one was too bland.

And Harij, I'm not sure why you wanted me to invert the image. No one ever does that. It doesn't help with plotting color. It does look kinda cool though.

Okay bottom line, constructive criticism is good from someone who knows what they are talking about. Harij has told us he doesn't listen to art instruction and instead copies the artists at conceptarg.org. Fine and dandy except for the fact that you don't know WHY things look the way they do. Can you tell me the tonal relationship between lights and shadows? Can you understand push and pull, line weight, atmospheric perspective, the different color schemes, how and why they relate to each other? What the different types of lighting and shading there are? How to put them together? And most importantly, can you do it without reference?

 

[Glo-Boy]

Okay, you know what? I like blck_prod's idea of starting a constructive crit speedpainting/sketching thread.

Harij, I'm sorry for being so quick to snap at you (again). In the future I will try to be more accepting of your comments. I believe this probably stems from the fact that we both feel the same way about each other's art work. I'm not gonna go back and edit my old messages, but I'll take the step to stop doing that. Perhaps you really can teach me some stuff, and perhaps I can teach you as well.

Now, you're a moderator. If you want to close this thread so we can begin a new thread in a new direction, I'm all for it. Harij, will you start it, and if it takes off, is it possible to sticky it?

P.S. Where is fenric?

 

[CrazyHarij]

I displayed this behavior in another thread because YOU chose to enter it and tell me the anatomy was wrong, and the color was wrong... when it was just set up in a way that wasn't to your liking. So instead it was uh, shit.

wasn't to my liking? no, because it was wrong. plain and simple. if the anatomy is incorrect it's suddenly set up in a way not to my liking? face it, the relations of proportions were laughably wrong. your response surprised me because i had no ****ing idea someone with that kind of work could respond in that manner.

And Harij, I'm not sure why you wanted me to invert the image. No one ever does that. It doesn't help with plotting color. It does look kinda cool though.

lol.. i have no idea why i'm even arguing with you on this, it clearly went over your head

first of all, everyone that i know of does it, for a simple reason, establish that the relationship between shadow color and light color is reasonable, the colors being the opposite of eachothers. yours are from completely different spectrums. it "works" to the untrained eye, but is technically incorrect and unrealistic and is one of the earliest things you learn about color theory.

also, dishing out comments like that, you should know that you don't use pure black in your shading, especially not when the light source is so ambient and extreme as in your painting. it looks completely unrealistic.

I'm just going to laugh because (here we go!) you would have a very difficult time at art school. You are terrible. Not because I don't like it, but because your sense of perspective just doesn't exist.

come again? i posted speedpaintings that i've made to demonstrate what speedpaintings are, i don't put much thought with perspective etc but I definitely have a sense of perspective. you're welcome to critizise my work as you please but you're not in the position to tell others that they have no sense of one thing or another.
i do make perspective drawings pre-painting but i usually disregard them while painting. they're far more prevalent in my drawings.

your pieces, mirroring the argument, have no perspective at all, the vantage point seems to be just chosen at random post-painting. this is obvious from your early stages

Your sense of weight and form doesn't exist either.

please elaborate. i'm really curious what you mean with this.

I'm not sure how you've come up with your colors because some work and some don't. This leads me to believe you have eyedropped colors from photos to use as your palette. Big no-no

i do what everyone else does basically, i pick a basic spectrum to work with and work with values, follow basic color theory. i'm a worse painter than drawer because i haven't done it as much, but i try to make an effort to work with existing rules rather than establishing rules from pure imagination.

some of these paintings are from photos which is why they mimic their colors, but i pick the colors myself.

And what the christ are you talking about? I made the ocean with about 5 different custom brushes and the color correct blew it out. Oh and, IT'S NOT DONE. Most of those "factory photoshop presets" you mentioned I haven't even used. Not only that, they are supposed to be used and DO quite often. The only thing I stand against are filters. I hate filters and never use them.

the ocean was a texture just splattered on, doesn't follow perspective.

But as far as the other methods go, Dusseault does it, Mullins does it and so does every character and environment artist at every visual effects house and game company on the planet. Not to let my "ego" out here, but I know a lengthy list of people who worked for DD, R&H, ILM, Pixar, Konami, Midway, etc. who would disagree with you. In fact, ILM has a special scanner that they use to scan all sorts of crap like dirt, mud, leather, guts, solely to use as textures. No one has the time to painstakingly dot each pixel of detail. In fact, it's not possible. I'll trust these guys over you any day. Especially because you think having an education in art is worthless. That's actually great, because the art community is just fine without someone like you.

saying that everyone does it is taking it quite far..

i never said texturing is wrong, but you obviously have no knowledge of how to do it without.. mullins uses lots of texturing but he knows how to apply it to reinforce an existing piece, not hide sloppy work. also, ILM etc use concept artists who are essentially slaves, they don't have time to not use textures etc, even though they are capable. it's something relatively new in the art community. but it's possible. it's not about dotting pixels, it's about establishing the sense of something. art is about illusion. the extreme time pressure of concept art forces the artists to use methods like this.

you seem to barely know a thing about painting yet use shortcuts as the whole of your work.

I enjoy the art community every day, but I don't let shit like whether someone has an education or not be more important than the art itself. i see people who have no education who are miles better than people with, and they are usually more humble. I think having an education in art as weight in an argument is pointless. In the industry, only one thing matters and it's portfolio, portfolio, portfolio. If art education can help you improve that portfolio, great, but on it's own it's worth dick all.

In your case, it seems to have removed your capability for objective observation completely.

Harij has told us he doesn't listen to art instruction and instead copies the artists at conceptarg.org. Fine and dandy except for the fact that you don't know WHY things look the way they do. Can you tell me the tonal relationship between lights and shadows? Can you understand push and pull, line weight, atmospheric perspective, the different color schemes, how and why they relate to each other? What the different types of lighting and shading there are? How to put them together? And most importantly, can you do it without reference?

copying? I've been drawing for 7 years, painting for 2. I study more than i paint myself, but I definitely don't copy other artists. I listen to advice from the people you list as your heroes. I've chatted with personal friends of mullins, had chat sessions with most of the people on conceptart.org who make a living doing what they do. i haven't used that as my only source of learning, but i'm doubting they are that unaware of how things work.

and most importantly, most of what i've learned is from my older brother who went to art school and currently works with concept and other forms of design.

your last quote is just laughable. talk about parroting your teachers. I know everything you listed, yes. it's very basic stuff. you can at least mention things like different types of perspective (ever heard of ortographic perspective? the perspective in your painting resembles that more closely than proper perspective). can you develop your own style from the stuff your gods, sorry i meant teachers, dish out, rather than just employing souless techniques and shortcuts?

 

[Glo-Boy]

I completely and whole-heartedly disagree. I think you are wrong. I think you've missed most of MY points, and I think you are lying when you said you know what I am talking about in my last paragraph - if you wanted to sound believable, you might have outlined some of those fundamentals. Pop quiz: You have a pale green light shining on a blue object over a matte white floor. What color is your shadow?

Now, do you want to turn this around to a positive situation or not?

I'd go further into this and start the new art help thread on my own right now, but I've got to keep working on my final projects. I'll probably do it next week.


EDIT: Okay, one more thing. The ocean really bothers me a lot. Reason being, I spent hours making custom brushes to paint it. It took a long time and looked nice. Here was the test render.

However, I'm deeply saddened because after color correction, it turned out looking like noise with motion blur and dodge. It does look kinda crappy, but it did take forever to do. Lesson learned. Repaint and set extention are on the agenda for this evening.

 

[Vegeta897]

Pop quiz: You have a lpale green light shining on a blue object over a matte white floor. What color is your shadow?

Trick question, shadows are the absense of color and therefor do not have color (light)!

D:

Actually I have no idea, but I'm leaning toward Harij's side with this.

Attempting a serious answer, the shadow should be the same color as the floor (darker obviously) because the green light is not shining in that spot so it is irrelevant. Unless there is some sort of ambience created by the reflecting off the blue ball.

 

[Glo-Boy]

Good guess, but shadows work in an interesting way. It's pretty simple though, you take the color of your light source and find the compliment. In this case, it's pale green. This immediately should tell you that your shadow will be maroon with a hint of blue (as pale green will likely have a bit of yellow in it) and use that as the base color. Then if desired, take into account the diffuse light of the blue object and fade it into your shadow. Here's a super shitty mspaint.

Next time you're outside during the golden hour (5 o'clock or so) take a look at the light. If it's a nice hot orange, you will see rich, saturated blue shadows, because it is the absence of the particular light's color, leaving what is left.

So the way this translates to my painting is through the fact that I have an orange light hitting reddish rocks. Simply put, the shadows will be a deep sea turquoise with nuances here and there.

 

[Vegeta897]

I always thought that only had to do with our eyes and how they deal with contrast, not literally the light being different. Are you sure it's the latter?

 

[Glo-Boy]

I always thought that only had to do with our eyes and how they deal with contrast, not literally the light being different. Are you sure it's the latter?

Well that's all relative, because the world appears only as our eyes perceive it. However, I can definitely tell you that our eyes pick up shadows as the opposite color of the light.

http://news.uns.purdue.edu/images/+2005/EPICS-color.jpg


I guess that part of my argument was to illustrate how learning these fundamentals by in depth teaching and application does loads more than just replicating existing images and palettes. Harij, seriously, before I went to art school, I thought I was the shit. I was exactly who I have come to roll my eyes at when dealing with art. You have some good basis knowledge, but jesus man, don't shun art school because you think you're too good for it. You would have a very humbling experience if you went - but you would improve enormously! Look into it. I mean, that's the whole reason I get so god damn pissed off when people tell me my properties are wrong. They may not please everyone, but the principles are correct. It would be like telling Rockstar that Max Payne was made incorrectly. You might think the game isn't fun, or just a pile of shit in general... but it was written and compiled properly.

 

[CrazyHarij]

I think you've missed most of MY points, and I think you are lying when you said you know what I am talking about in my last paragraph - if you wanted to sound believable, you might have outlined some of those fundamentals.

i'm not going to bother, because of the simple reason that i think you're an idiot and that this is a pointless debate. i have nothing to prove to you.

Pop quiz: You have a pale green light shining on a blue object over a matte white floor. What color is your shadow?

purple basically. the blue will reflect in the shadow as well.. is this supposed to be what they teach you in art school?

if you know this stuff you should know why you're supposed to invert the image in photoshop for instance..

by the way, if you read more closely i just called you on your own bluff, your own painting doesn't show accurate complement color in the shadows compared to the light. yellow light, green shadow. how does that work out?
the only thing that results in green shadow is purple light

edit: just noticed you demonstrated it perfectly well yourself.

I mean, that's the whole reason I get so god damn pissed off when people tell me my properties are wrong. They may not please everyone, but the principles are correct.

if this is what they teach you, you should have chosen a better school. i don't have anything else to go on because your art dumps shine with their absense, so i'm going to have to go with the little you have displayed which definitely does not match the amount of skill you proclaim yourself to have.

 

[CrazyHarij]

here's some of my drawings to give you a better idea..

 

[Glo-Boy]

Oh my god. I had this long post written out, but I just deleted it all. You... oh man. Nice drawings bub. Love your proportions, are we in the eleventh dimension here? I never knew people had outlines, or hands the size of their heads, or no sense of light direction at all? Not to mention I think they might be aliens, as I can't really pick out any correct human anatomy. Ever hear of the kidney bean method of life drawing? Of course not. No one ever taught you.

Here are some four year old drawings I had on my photobucket site.

I mean, these are really pretty bad. The shadow blending is lazy in the second one, and well, her arm looks chrome in the first one. But dude, don't f-cking lecture me for a one second if you can't do anything better yourself. EDIT: have no idea why half of the second drawing is black. Like I said, these are four years old. I bet I thought I was being a super artist when I put that in. Ugh.