/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4127025
>how do you blend them? do you need a gradation of all the colors you want to use and lay them down within a second one after the other? it's terrible.

Alcohol based ink reactivates very easily. If you pull a lighter marker through darker ink it will blend the darker ink into the light. Having more gradations makes it easier but it's not necessary. You can get by with a set of five greys rather than the full twelve, for example.

>this is not true, the markers I bought go through low weight paper and even bristol. They warp thin paper as well, though not as much as watercolors.

They'll bleed through paper but that doesn't matter. I've never had thin paper warp under marker.

>it's literally one color, one chroma, one value per marker

This consistency is an advantage. You can hit the exact same color any time you want.

>you can't, but so what? what you save in paper you spend on markers, why would you use shitty paper anyway?

Because why would you waste good, expensive paper on sketches when printer paper works perfectly well in this specific scenario?

>why would you use shitty paper if you're delivering "professional illustration"? I see way more acrylics, gouache or even oils than copics in professional illustration, unless you count sketches like your picture as professional work

Of course I count that piece as professional work, it was a published cover. Professional illustration isn't just finished, published work either. If you needed fifty color mockups on a concept drawing you weren't going to do it with watercolor.

And for finished work, if deadline is an issue (as it very often is), it's much faster and easier to get that kind of modeling with marker than with watercolor.

Again, I'm not really stating opinion here. This is fact. Markers were invented to replace watercolors in professional illustration, and that's what happened.