/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>1604212

Pretty much. Most artists will get to a point where they stop being interesting, however sad it is.

I don't really care for her work, but it does serve it's uses for games and shit.

>>1604216
Do you mean in general, or on a personal level? (If it's general, then I guess ark career seems like a dead end..) I have many artist who I feel I've "outgrown" or grow tired of but who I still respect.. Sakimichan on the other hand..

>>1604218
I don't think I've ever seen a professional illustrator/concept artist who doesn't draw people from the waist down.

her art is bland

I've always loved Sakimichan's work and still do now probably more so. Every artist has room to grow and in a couple of years I look forward to seeing how much her work changes.

>>1604251
Hi, SC.

>>1604254
that's cute. I honestly like her work though

I remember when I was a young thing looking at her art and being blown away by it, but now that several years have passed, I look at her stuff and wonder what I saw in it. It doesn't give me the same feeling it used to.

It's still nice work.

>>1604260

>pleb taste
I bet your art is drowned deep in the animu waters ins't it.
And I also bet that you've never done a study in your life.(Mark Crilley how to draw tutorials don't count)
>dat glass skin and bland tones.
bland shit 101

>>1604212
>>1604212
She gets lazy. Look at the work put into the collar of the girl as opposed to the facial details on both faces. I don't dislike it, she just quits.

>>1604269
>dat broken neck
>dat tiny head on huge body
>dat candystroke rendering
>dat ugly as shit face

But hey, it's old and got some decent fabric rendering, so obviously plebs like you like it and probably even consider it a master painting.

>>1604212
At first I thought her art was pretty cool, but it got boring extremely quickly.

She also suffers from an extreme case of sameface syndrome.

>>1604381
>Veronese
>not a master

I know that anon was being a dick, but do me a favor and kill yourself

>>1604431
Sorry but I don't give a shit about the name of the person who painted something, if it looks like shit, it is shit. Does the broken neck, the tiny head, the shitty rendering and the ugly as fuck face somehow disappear because the name of the artist who painted this was Veronese?

>>1604381
Are you high? The neck placement isn't broken. Make the pose yourself.

Just because the image isn't of the most beautiful person ever doesn't mean the drawing isn't incredible.

>>1604269
That is not how heads work.
This would be a nice painting if the artist had just painted an empty bedroom.

>>1604471
The drawing is shit, that's why the figure looks like ass. The rendering is nice though, so plebs like you are easily impressed by it. Believe it or not, but a few hundred years ago, artists were as prone to polishing turds as they are today. This painting is the very definition of a polished turd.

>>1604269
Seeing if skill level equates with taste in art is a research study I would like to see. pic-related is one of the mark crilley studies that you think I do.

>>1604487

you would make for a great critic, you should start attending a critique school
because, too bad, you'll never be capable of making something half as good as that piece is, maybe you should lower your standards a bit

>>1604212
the fuck is sakimichan? Some gooky weeb garbage?

>>1604494
> maybe you should lower your standards a bit
The irony

>>1604494
You don't have to be a chef to know when you're served shit on a plate instead of food.
You also don't have to be a chef to say "This is shit. I'm not eating this, it's disgusting." even when every retard around you is happily gobbling down their turd porridge and calling it the best meal on the planet.

>>1604511
>you don't have to be smart to say something smart
>even an idiot can say something smart

>>1604512
That's actually true. Tons of stupid or average people have moments of deep insight.

>>1604490
>dat filename
>doing a Sergeant study just because it was a thread on /ic/
Do you even know why this is worth studying ? And If you studied him because you think he's good, what in That weeb's art makes you like it ? What aspect makes you go "yeah that's good"
I'm genuinely curious.

>>1604515
>reffering to SC

bait pls

>>1604269
you don't have to be a genius to figure out this is wrong.
but you sure need colored glasses to miss this,

look at these:
>her back is facing us almost directly
>she is turning her head, and we are actually able to see part of her LEFT EYE
this tells us: she is turning her head for more than 90°
and that's impossible.

and if you want to debate wether humans can turn their head that much, try to stand sideways in front of a mirror. from that position, try to look directly at your own face without turning your body, that would be 90°.
my guess is that at best you'll be able to reach 70°-80°.
and in the painting we have even more than that, possibly 100° or more.


not only is "broken neck" a stone cold fact here, the reflection in the mirror is wrong in every way too.
her nose is actually pointing BEHIND HER SHOULDER, but the mirror image shows her at a relaxing 50°.

>>1604381
you can't even look past "muh anatomy" you are a fucking beginner

>>1604524
the compostion is pretty boring too

> 23 yo canadian girl
> Working as a concept artist at Bioware like for a year
> Still have time to make money using her popularity at Deviantart

I see why you people are jealous. She probably also has a better sex life that you.

>>1604526

>>1604527
Calm down Sakimichi-chwan It's all in good fun.

>>1604530
this is beautiful
thank you for posting this

>>1604513
that's implying it happens all the time.

>>1604521
>but you sure need colored glasses to miss this,
lol'd, i'm going to use that in the future.

>>1604212
I think she has technical skill at least. Even if I'm not personally attracted to it that much.

>>1604527
> She probably also has a better sex life that you.

How's highschool going?

>>1604487
> the drawing is shit.
forgive me, please elaborate.

>>1604536
Well, it's happening now. Though, there's no actual proof anon is stupid.

>>1604521
shhh. you are wrong. you need to draw more and stop getting angry at people who know better than you. i promise it's 100% more productive. this is my first post in the thread.

>>1604596
>shhh. you are wrong
then go ahead and prove me wrong.
:^)

>>1604530
Again, a perfect example of a polished turd. The gesture and movement in this is fucking ridiculous. That woman has a deadpan expression while a freaking sea monster is trying to eat her and that guy is falling from the sky in an almost comical, saturday morning cartoon way. Old masters hero worship is so fucking obnoxious when they are actually shit. Look at someone who is truly a master, like Repin, and how he paints actual human emotions and expressions and then look at this polished turd again to see the contrast. If this composition was posted in the draw thread minus the excellent rendering, it would get ripped to shreds for how shitty it was.

>>1604607
this is how /ic/ thinks

>>1604599
ok, here is my proof.
you spend about 60 hours drawing from life so you've got the minimum level of experience required to see you're wrong. or ask very politely for the model to take that pose for you.

>>1604515
Not him, but it's ridiculous to assume that because you know of great masters, that you can now only appreciate master paintings and every other artwork that shows competence, yet no greatness is automatically shit in your eyes. It shows that you are just a rookie with a stick up his ass, who constantly needs to prove to himself just how sophisticated and elitist his taste is.

It also shows that you must be very bad and that you think very little of your own art, because unless you are Tehmeh or Catbib, you sure as hell are not better than SC either, I guarantee you that much. Maybe once you get better and your own art improves to a point where you can see actual competence in it, you might be able to appreciate competence in other people's art too, even if they are no masters.

>>1604610
Not the guy you were talking to, but if you can't see just how fucked that neck and head is, then it is you who needs to study a lot more anatomy.

>>1604498
Glad it's not just me thinking this.

>>1604611
>let me see you do better argument
nice try but not really :(
I appreciate artists that aren't near the "sophisticated elitist" level that you speak of.I just don't see anything that's worth appreciating in that person's art.in Op's pick provided lighting is all over the place, skin tones are basically nonexistandt and lacks any sort of story aspect.It's an inconsistent mess with little to no direction.And that's out of purely technical standpoint.The character designs are bland and forgettable,eastern style armors and facial features that are as bland as dirt.

>>1604610
gr8 b8 m8, but next time you should suggest Loomis.

>>1604614
i like you slightly more because your not ranking so i'll give you a clue,

you are also wrong.

but seriously, you're not taking into account the effect of the tilt of her head on what planes you can see, and also her bulgy eyes. also it's possible that you and/or your ranty friend aren't properly considering the torsion in her body.

really this is why life-drawing is recommended, so you can understand a body well enough to play out the gesture in it's extremis in 3 dimensions. there is a reason she has a tense and contorted body while she looks in the mirror, she's effectively taking on a sort of myspace selfie pose. it's a not very subtle comment on vanity, it's a fun painting, but you have no fun because you're too busy being wrong about stuff because you're not very imaginative or knowledgeable.

just relax, and enjoy art. evaluating everything in terms of 'skill' and 'the correct way' is just going to turn you off art, my young friends.

>>1604622
>inb4 everything besides reclined nudes and portrets

a random pic from my fav folder off of DA.

>>1604610
yes, i suggest you do that, because you're a fucking joke.
>minimum level of experience
for fucks sake.

that long ass post i made? i made it exactly for this purpose. there is no point discussing this "lolpracticeexperience" kind of crap.
that post was already made with observations that are based on experience. so let's stay on topic.
now try again baby :^)

unless your point is
>i-it doesn't matter that she has an broken neck!

>>1604632
what's good about something like that is even if you've got no natural aptitude and even if you're pretty lazy you can go from scratch to painting that well in a year or so.

> reclined nudes and portrets

just happened to be looking at some newds so will share too, kamille corry, a fo reals master.

>>1604627
>torsion in her body.
i actually went out of my way to not consider it.
because if you look at the painting, her body is turning slightly to the left while her head is turning right, making it even more impossible.

and that image you posted: do you realize she is pulling her shoulder forward to make it look like her back is facing you?
learn some anatomy for fucks sake

>>1604622
>let me see you do better argument

No, I already know you can't do better so I'm not asking you to. All I'm saying is that once you get good enough at art that you can see a certain degree of competence within your own artwork, you will learn to appreciate other competent artwork for what it is, even if it is lacking in other areas.

>>1604647
if it makes it harder for you to understand than you are considering it wrong. but you are also a lost cause, i fear. so adiós mi armingo.

>>1604648
>oh shit he got me on the ropes,better repeat my previous argument since I can't back it up with facts

you're slipping Sakimichi

>>1604645
>what's good about something like that is even if you've got no natural aptitude and even if you're pretty lazy you can go from scratch to painting that well in a year or so.


Well in that case, why don't you post some of your work so we can see just how far you have come in obviously much more than 1 year? Oh, that's right, asking this is the highest taboo on /ic/, because how dare anyone ask you to back up your own fucking claims.

>dat anatomy
>dat incoherent render
>dat bland generic idea.

>>1604515
>doing a Sergeant study, it was a thread on /ic/
Yes it was, did you partake? I would like to see your work.

>Why are master studies worth studying? Sargent's good,what in art makes you like it ? What aspect makes you go "yeah that's good"

That's broad, there are many reasons to do master studies. I set goals whenever I study so it varies depending what I want to work on.

>I'm genuinely curious.
That's hard to believe.

>>1604653
sorry i shouldn't of said lost cause that was rude. i meant that you wouldn't be convinced with words, even if i were to carefully describe how it all works you wouldn't get it any more than you get the general description. but that doesn't make you a lost cause, it just makes you a beginner. really the fault is mind for not drawing you a diagram but i'm too lazy and i'd hoped you'd just go 'ohh the tilt of her head, ohh that shoulder is coming forward, i get it' but you know, young people. i might do you one later though.

>>1604669
Dude, just stop. You are embarassing yourself. That neck and head is fucked up beyond any question. Anyone with the slightest bit of anatomy knowledge can see this and I am now the (at least) 3rd person to tell you this ITT from what I can see.

>>1604671
the question wasn't about what you like about Sergeant.The question was about The OP artist.What exactly do you find appealing about their artwork.And please,be specific.

>>1604653
you're pathetic.
people like you just piss me off to no end.
the only point you managed to pull out of your ass is the "torsion of the body" have you used your eyes for a second to look at the torsion in said painting?
the fact that you even brought it up surprises me, since it doesn't help your point at all. there should be a limit to how clueless you can be.

seriously, have you even looked at it? how can you say shit like that when you have no goddamn idea what you're talking about?

>>1604673
I understood the question but I don't understand you. Anyway I would still love to see your work

>>1604672
but those people are wrong. because there are more of them doesn't make them right, it just makes for more wrong people.

>>1604679
>avoiding the questions like germans avoid talking about the holocaust...

c'mon anon...if you're not going to answer might as well not write at all..

A master study I started the other day.Hope that suffices you enough to answer ? :/

>>1604690
I have a question: why are we not including studies of contemporary masters in our studies?

I mean, would that not easily increase our spectrum and exploration of personal skill and aptitude?

>>1604692
there's no such thing as contemporary master.

>>1604690
Suffices fine, matter of fact I really like it but not enough for an answer. I'm not avoiding a question. You don't like her and I do. I don't think our opinions are going to change.

>>1604700
wrong answer bro.

>>1604704
how?

>>1604706
by not argumenting why you like the op artist you might as well admit that you like bland generic art.Not to mention you lose any credibility of any of your previous statements.

>>1604710
>argumenting
that's my point
>Not to mention you lose any credibility of any of your previous
Where is this rule book?

>>1604714
It's called "Common sense"

google it, it's a fine read.

>>1604720
oh I think I read that actually by Thomas Paine right?

>>1604212
>Do any of you share my dislike for sakimichan?

Sorry bro, I have better things to do.
There are just too many fishes in the sea, don't waste your time on her.

I've seen many young artists take that road, becoming way better technically but losing that special spark which made me interested in them. If she's happy like that, more power to her since she's far better than me when I was her age. Plenty of time to improve.

Since we're talking about bland generic stuff, this pic is sexist. Guy's clothings are covering him while she's showing cleavage, despite the horrible weather.
I wouldn't normally care about it but this is bait and you'll answer it anyway.

>>1604212
Jesus tittyfucking Christ, what is even going on with that hand in the bottom right-hand corner?

Some kind of tribute to Liefeld?

>>1605384

>>1605414
Yes, very good. Now compare the pinky finger in your photo to the painting.

Also consider that this gesture is not something anyone in real life does with their hands, ever.

>>1605418
the hand in the painting has a bit different angle, it was just an approximation. the hand is not completely wrong, definitely not liefeld tier. you are baiting too hard.
as for gesture, some people swing around their arms when they talk, it's called body language.

>>1605431
What the fuck kind of body language do people in your world exhibit?

>inb4 Italian

>>1605450
everyone who isn't a social misfit does it. get out of the house once in a while, why don't you

>>1605485
>example for the stupid

>>1605488
But you're proving my point.

Yes, people move their hands when they talk.

No, people don't make them into weird-looking spreadeagled claws. It's totally unnatural body language. Unless you're a pianist or a guitarist, for example, it would even hurt your hand to put it in that pose. You'd actually have to think about posing your hand to get it to look like that, certainly you wouldn't make that gesture as a natural reaction to anything. Except maybe being set on fire, or stabbed.

>>1605521
i imagine she cast that flame, that's why it's like that.

>>1605525
...then how are the marshmallows already toasted?

Also why do they even have marshmallows?

>>1605564
>why do they even have marshmallows?

Pic related. It's magic, it ain't gonna explain anything.

>>1605615
>Tim Hunter

And the makers of this haven't sued JK Rowling for a gorillion dollars yet because...?

>>1605627

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Hunter#Comparisons_to_Harry_Potter

>>1604692

study whatever you find interesting

>>1605645
I will. The future will be fun for me.

>>1605645
not everything a person find interesting makes it good for studying, tho.

>>1604666
bet shes listening to some epic dubclash hypestep

>>1604216
for me this is true of phil noto

when i first saw his work, i was blown away. But as time went on, the work just exhausted me. I don't have any right to say he's bad, he isn't. I just see his work in a period of stagnation.

>>1604212

>Do any of you share my dislike for sakimichan?
I used to dislike her (because of heavy same face syndrome), still not a fan but I started following her some time ago. I do like about 1 out of every 20-30 image she submits.

But I really think
>soulless reproductions of her technique only for faves
is holding her back. Making a quick buck with generic fantasy/scifi/music themed prints, fanart and commissions. I'm not sure if I can blame her much, who would want to be a starving artist. If you have the technique down and deviantards ready to buy commissions, just slap different hair and clothes on that generic face and it's done. Next!
As long as it works I don't think it's easy to break from such a safe zone, but I'm hoping she will do it, eventually... She is pretty active and seems to draw a ton, spending some of that time on learning more - I think there's a lot of good potential. If I had to say one good thing, I'd say her style is easily recognizable, but that certainly doesn't compensate for all the problems.

>>1604607
>If this composition was posted in the draw thread minus the excellent rendering, it would get ripped to shreds for how shitty it was.

That's probably true actually.

>>1605564
this is why we can't have nice things

>>1606225
then either they should pray they don't have shitty taste in what they find interesting, or they could make a small list of shit they like and ask /ic/ if there are better versions of it out there that are worth studying

>>1604212
forms seemed flat weird light source, lack of interesting comppsition or intention of composition, bad usage of detail to emphasize depth, just an oddly flat drawing. reminds me of kinkade

lighting is bad and undramatic, just reminds me of really bad HDR photography

>>1604212
Is it just me or can you actually chart the increasing degrees of fucks she didn't give about finishing her rendering the further outwards from their faces you get?

I know that giving paintings a 'focal point' like this is regarded as a legitimate technique but here it looks lazy.

>>1608631
seems weirder than that, faces are probably smoother but I wouldn't say more detailed, like they look like over processed air brush from a theme park T-shirt stand. so there's a all around shit quality to it, from poor handling of texture and lighting on armor and clothes to lazy skin rendering.

theres so much that is so god awful, in that piece. I don't pretend to be familiar with her but the closest thing I could think of is a veneer of gild built on shit when looking at it.

>>1604212
My toughts exactly, I was considering removing her because of it. I don't really feel anything when I look at her newer works anymore.