/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4349776
there's something really great in here. you've got the abstract part down, and that's enough for some people.
If you want something more specific, you're going to have to add more details/recognizable concepts.
You have to make some actual decisions, I think. Maybe put art aside for a day or two, and use that time to explore yourself. What are your interests? What makes you who you are? What are strong parts of your personality? What do you want in this world?

>>3277532
so i've struggled with this a fair amount, and here's my take on the issue of losing depth/energy during the "final pass" stage of artwork:
It's like you have two different brain modes going on. The sketch brain is creative, pulling something out of nothing. it's inventing as it goes. The second mode is a more robotic way of thinking. The finishing brain is trying to work with what's already there and refine. It's not being inventive, it's just following a guideline and often is focused mostly on consistency. Your sketch will have life to it because you were being creative while you made it, you were adapting in the moment and the raw energy is there. Because of a lesser emphasis on perfection, a lot of the drawing tends to be implied. Often times, when "finishing" a drawing, all of the drawing's details are spelled out in so much detail that the impressionistic quality is lost, this quality is the 'energy' you're talking about.

The way I've learned to keep that special je ne sais quoi about a work in the final image is this:

keep your sketch very basic, purposely ignore details and worry about major gestures/poses/shapes. That way, when you go over it a second time, your mind will still be "inventing" as you trace, preserving that sketchy energy but in your finished work.

TL;DR: don't just trace your own work, make sure the process of making the finished image is a creative process, not a mechanical one.