/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>1794530

The technical aspect of art isn't for its own sake, treat it as a vehicle for something else. It's like an extension of your own interests to improve at it, to support the ideas you have and the things you want to say.

Take it with small steps at a time, find what you need to improve on to make the artwork you want to create, and then work at it slowly. It's a lot more motivating when you know you're working towards a greater goal, instead of just mindlessly going through the motions you think you should be going through.

Not to say that beautiful technicality can't be the end goal, though. I think Leyendecker is a good example of making that work out wonderfully. If it turns out that it isn't your cup of tea, though, just push at it knowing that it's necessary to deliver your ideas successfully.

>>1722127

The further up you climb the bigger the mountain gets. You start to chase subtleties and nuances that are the distilled results of a master's experience that you would have brushed off as ordinary a year or two ago.

>>1722132
Never stop believing you could be so much better, but how else will you get there if you don't start by not being good at it? It's riding the fine line between not being satisfied with your work and not being satisfied with yourself. You're not your work, you're the reason why your work will be worth it one day.

>>1722165
>>1722170
Might as well just post the color wheel.

>>1722187
Does it truly matter? I suppose in a manner of self-critique, just see how it sits with you.

>>1719726
It's paying for a community and guidance that only last a few months. You can do yourself way better and save that money by just searching online for a bit for a study group.

>>1721946
>>1722153
>>1722179

Ah, don't put me in with folks like Catbib, Apples or Tehmeh. It's flattering, but I haven't put in enough hours for that kind of likeness yet. Still gotta do the doodles.

>>1721989
This is good advice, as much as I wish I found golden /ic/ gem threads more often I can't exactly convince myself that it's worth weeding through every day. The old CA threads are kind of guaranteed goodies, though.

>>1722160
>>1722153
>>1722179

I post anonymously most of the time too, just because I can't be assed to put my name in, apparently. Also as fun as it is to get questions on the internet, I'm definitely not someone to look up to. Not even from a sense of attempted modesty, but look at who your favorite artists look up to, and go a step further, even. Look at Sargent, then Carolus-Duran, and then Frans Hals and Velazquez, for example.

>>1722181

:> Aww. Well it doesn't make you elitist, it just means you have opinions. I'll flounder my way to the success, then.

>>1722183

best advice.

>>1717753
Also another color sketch for the night.

>>1717628

If you have any favorite master painters, try to look up how they did hands. I'd recommend Leyendecker's hand studies, and from what I remember Polenov had a few hand studies too. Look at how their brushstrokes define the forms you're looking at, and then see how you can bring it into your own representation.

>>1717682

Neat.

>>1717695

If you're doing a Sargent then try to research his methods of painting first, which were largely unchanged from his tutelage under Carolus-Duran. I think your trouble is in not working from a large midtone mass - like Malle Babbe by Frans Hals, or Serov's self portrait.

>>1717718

What were you working from? And was there a specific purpose to the study?

>>1717729

How dare you make a painting for fun?

>>1717754

It looks good, you're paying some attention to your edges. There's a few drawing subtleties that would have helped, but I can't say for sure. Also, there's something about the back - which I think would lie in the separation of light and shadow - that's problematic. I think you may have used a dark on a light plane that is as dark as a shadow plane, which makes it feel like a really deep indent.

More sketchy doodles. I've been a bit too indulgent with doing these and gestures, I'll probably be getting back to drawing studies again.

>>1717007

Ah, I'm afraid we're not the same person. Yet.

I do think our styles differ a bit, but it may be more pronounced in my finished work. Or my judgment could be way off. Who knows.

>>1717220

I think it was that they had a piece to be finished in a separate room from the model, but could bring a sketchbook into the room with the model to jot down notes, or make quick sketches. That would then be translated to their final work.

I've tried something similar, which is essentially a variation of it combined with some advice I found on here a long time ago. I draw from reference for a minute or two, hide the reference, draw in as much as I think I know, and then bring it back up again and see; 1. What I got straight wrong, which is very important to rectify, and 2. What I didn't remember at all, despite having put it down in shorthand.

It's fun, but I try to mix up the way I study things just so it stays interesting. Especially with the human figure, which is essential for me to know but doesn't interest me beyond its necessity.

>>1716911

Not that poster, but even if it did work for them, why would it work for you? We all learn in vastly different ways, which can be harrowing at times when some people improve in leaps and bounds with some methods while others stagnate. It's also immensely rewarding, though, when you experiment enough to find your own way of going about it - a way that doesn't drain your motivation but still pushes you along.

Just do both; draw from life and see if it helps, then draw from reference and compare what you've picked up. I would heavily recommend drawing from life as I feel drawing from reference constantly wasn't as helpful, but that's just my opinion. The only common thread is work ethic, critical observation, and recollection of what was learned.

>>1705543

Yes, that one. Look at how he draws in shadow shapes, keeping separation of light and shadow in mind as well as modelling out the features, and then washes over it and defines the biggest planes. It's like the middle-ground between drawing and painting, and if you pushed it more in that direction then you might be able to get better painted portraits out of it.

>>1704892

Needs more consideration as to its value structure, patterns, and shapes.

>>1705505

You know, as a thumbnail this looks really awesome.

>>1705499

Lookin' good, but I'd question if the top priority for this is the edges on the face. It all depends where you're going with it, but try putting in some opaque, considered strokes in there to compliment up the transparent loose work you have.

>>1705491
Watch your separation of light and shadow. Colors and drawing are looking lovely, though.

>>1705515
There's something in your drawing ability that's missing in the painted portraits. There's an interesting bit about Harold Speed taking a drawing into a painting, if you google "harold speed drawing method" it should be the first image that comes up.

started doing more sketches again.

>>1705500

Still overthinking it. Instead of going super-duper overnight instant work ethic, why not just build yourself up to it? Draw and paint as much as you can; and when you start to tire out, make careless errors, and get frustrated, stop. Take a break, manage your motivation, then get back into it as soon as you can.

You don't need to set arbitrary times of how long you can play vidya or read, just trust your sense of satisfaction to kick in after you've put in a hard day at it.

>>1700276

You're not thinking it through, the image you posted is already an amazing reference for what you're trying to accomplish. Take the information that it's giving you, gesture in a figure with that in mind, and then adjust.

Look at how the bow is embedded against his palm, how the force of it is pushing his hand back in a bit, how the bow bends, how he's holding the bow and the arrow, how he's lining it all up. It's all there, you just have to find it.

>>1700188 Here,

>>1700189
First, have you been studying your studies? So many people study as far as their blessed little hands can take them, but for all that effort they don't DO anything with it. Look over your studies again, write down what you learned, wait a day, see what you remember - take breaks while you're doing other pieces, flip through your notes, make sure you're not forgetting what you learned. You're not passive about critiquing yourself, don't be passive about learning, either.

As far as the piece, you're not rendering in forms and you haven't created a clear separation between light and shadow. Remember, planes in shadow and planes in light need their own very distinct set of tones - read Pyle's notes on Light and Shadow.

Also, find more reference for your drawing, and watch your edge quality.

>>1700168
>>1700187
>>1700202
>>1700259

Teach yourself to figure it out with reference, then. You won't learn as much by asking us every step of the way.

>>1700188 Here,

>>1700189
First, have you been studying your studies? So many people study as far as their blessed little hands can take them, but for all that effort they don't DO anything with it. Look over your studies again, write down what you learned, wait a day, see what you remember - take breaks while you're doing other pieces, flip through your notes, make sure you're not forgetting what you learned. You're not passive about critiquing yourself, don't be passive about learning, either.

As far as the piece, you're not rendering in forms and you haven't created a clear separation between light and shadow. Remember, planes in shadow and in light need their own very distinct set of tones - read Pyle's notes on Light and Shadow. I did a really basic (poor) paintover, but hopefully it gets across what I'm trying to say.

Also, reference, and watch your edges.

>>1700168
>>1700187
>>1700202

Teach yourself to figure it out with reference, you won't learn as much by asking us every step of the way.

>>1686339

We can't critique it proper without knowing exactly what you were going for. What were your intentions with the image, what were you trying to say with it? Or how is it supposed to feel?

Don't get me wrong, you're hitting some targets with it, but I want to know what you wanted.

If I had to guess, I'd also think immediately that you were trying to say something like Shishkin's painting, >>1689569, how it feels absolutely majestic and spacious.