/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>1805273

15-20 years

Yeah, let's estimate based on an assumption like that

you dumb fucker.

Depends on how talented you are and how much you dedicate yourself to honing your abilities.

>>1805280

lets say you are decently talented, but still a newb. and dedicate a lot of time, 4-5hours a day?

>>1805273
about a year or two of consistent practice
If you are a total beginner
it'll take you another year before you fully understand where to take your studies.

Practice your fundamentals
Work at it every day.

It's not so much a question of how long.
I've put in my 2-3 years 3 times over and I'm still no good because I post on ic rather than actually drawing.

Also, after about a year or so you'll be pretty okay and it's fun from there on on.

It's not like you'll have to slave away at it for five years and on the day of your 5th year you're amazing all of a sudden. it's a gradual progress.

Also, fucking get to it.

>>1805284

thank you sir, that makes sense

>>1805284
>a year or two to reach old master level
This is what plebs who've been drawing for a solid month actually believe. Keep in mind everyone telling you this, mysteriously, is vastly inferior to the old masters.

>>1805284
I'll buy it but show me your art.

My "Old Masters" are fat Japanese men who draw little girls.

>>1805293

kek

you should absolutely assume the worst. especially if you already know yourself to be generally lazy.

i see it like this:
(assuming you can't draw anything at all)
2 years until very basic drawing skill
+ another 5 years until you can make something polished and genuinely decent looking
+ another 10 to 100 years until you are a "master"

>>1805296

why would you assume such a weird thing? art school is like 4 years and people who are 'okay' can replicate old masters after their first year ...get it together bro

>>1805298
>people who are 'okay' can replicate old masters after their first year
you have my toppest of keks.

but in any case, in my post i was talking about people who can't and never have drawn anything at all.
and yes, it looks rather pessimistic. but i think it applies to more people than not.

also, in that format you are already at a professional level after 7 years.

If every opinionated dbag post their art so we can pay them some credence that be great thx.

>>1805290
to reach old master doodle level.

>Keep in mind everyone telling you this, mysteriously, is vastly inferior to the old masters.

fuck you dude. keep telling yourself that's why you're shit at whatever it is you do.


Op I never said the church will ring you up after a year or so asking to paint frescos and shit.

But I do think it's possible to have a a solid foundation after only a couple months if you're serious.

>>1805305
not mine

>>1805305
>fuck you dude. keep telling yourself that's why you're shit at whatever it is you do.

bost some of your stuff then buddy. simbly brove it or get out.

>>1805305
>decent foundation
>old master level
Choose one. Just because I won the little league championship doesn't mean I'm ready for the World Series.

>>1805282
There's no set amount of time. Everyone develops at a different pace. You can hasten your growth by firstly by practicing, and secondly by studying, but nobody can give you a set amount of years.

>>1805314

so what do you think, 2-3 years?

>>1805342
They say it takes 10000 hours of practice to master anything... like others said it certainly varies.

>>1805345
10,000 hours to become the top of your field genius class tier.

You should have a good grasp of what your doing within 200 hours and within 2000 hours you can easily become pro.

That is, if you practice with your mind into it.

You see those sketchbooks with the 10k hour rule right? Lots of it is shitty mileage doodles because 'look I'm working so hard' But say your playing basketball and your practicing throwing hoops. 2 people. One guy gets a friend and has the other guy throw the ball to him so he only has to focus on the hoop itself. They write down all the misses and what went wrong and go into a review mode every 15 minutes. Another guy goes and throws hoops for an hour.

They've both practiced but I'd say the former's hour was much better spent, ya dig?

>>1805349
>You should have a good grasp of what your doing within 200 hours and within 2000 hours you can easily become pro.

this is more accurate ^
2000 hours is basically 8 hours a day for 365 days...that's a lot of practice, specially if you do it smart.

>>1805282
4-5 hours a day will get you there in 12-20 years depending.

>>1805377
>5hours a day 12-20 years

to draw like this, or OPs pic?? Are you drunk?

>>1805282
>you are decently talented, but still a newb
translates to
>I'm absolute shit
I actually doubt that everyone can reach master level with time and practice, some artists just get stuck at a level somewhen which they can't come out of

>>1805273
>how long are we talkin, 1yr, 2? 3??

If it was taking only 3 years, there would be over nine thousands guys around the world with such a level of expertise.

>>1805483
>If it was taking only 3 years, there would be over nine thousands guys around the world with such a level of expertise.

there are even more, what is your point? Do you even go online? There's like a million artists who can do this.

>>1805487
There are a million artists, working right now, who match or surpass the old masters? Do you realize how retarded you sound?

>>1805499

it's easy to surpass them now, our techniques and training are vastly superior. The old masters are superseded.

>>1805506
>our techniques and training are vastly superior
k bro. haning out on 4chan is superior to apprenticing in a master's workshop, and Da Vinci has nothing on your digital painting skills.

Tell me another joke.

>>1805509
inb4 Leonardo*

>dude there are literally a million artists better than Rubens working right now. like, uh...

>>1805349
so, how do you practice smart?

>>1805487

If there's, and I quote, "like a million artists who can do this", then please explain why Genzoman was voted the best Fantasy artist in 2013.

> Pic related
> This is the level that your million of new Masters can't beat

>>1805527
to be fair, there are many artists working today who are better than genzoman, regardless of what one retarded poll says. but there certainly aren't a million artists who surpass the old masters, that's a statement only a talentless child would make.

>>1805527
Eh, I'd say that's a nice painting if it weren't for all the tacky digital effects. Obviously it's not on a par with old masters.

>>1805527

the best evidence is the amount of forged art we have now, grab any chinese art school grad and he'll draw or paint you a work that fools all the experts. Happens every day, it's a billion dollar industry.

>>1805544
>this is what plebs actually believe

The old masters were only impressive because they were working 500 years ago with primitive tools and didn't have the teaching, resources and internet we have. The truth is that almost every 20-something with a tablet is on the level of or surpasses the old masters.

you will grow up eventually

>>1805551
0/10

>>1805509
being deliberately obtuse doesn't make a proper argument. Anyone with a brain will know old does not mean good. the available material opporunity and knowledge is far greater than what old masters had. old masters are not infallible. There are many artists who are better than most old masters. The number of artists on a similar or greater level to the average old masters dwarfs the old masters. If you want to be a great artists you aim higher than old masters.

>>1805968
yeah keep sucking on feng zhus dick bitch boy, the old masters were 100% skill, they didnt take shortcuts with implementing photos into their work

>>1805971
Being ignorant doesn't change facts. Educate yourself.

What's so great about the oldmasters compared to modern talent?

>>1806292
thts wht I tht lmao

>>1805553
>You will grow up, stop trying to become like the old masters and get a real job

You mean give up

>>1805968
>Aim higher than the old masters

Top kek. Go masturbate to Crab Mullins some more.

>>1805978
Any examples of current artists on a greater level than old masters? Surely you can back up such a claim.

>>1806503

we're talking about drawings/sketches, not paintings.

Basically any artist making a living doing art today is on par or better, pic related

>>1806507
>Basically any artist making a living doing art today is on par or better, pic related
that statement is incorrect

>>1806507
why old masters paint fat asses so much

>>1806555
That's roberto ferri

>>1806555
no porn to fap to + chubby women are most likely healthy and clean unlike lowclass people

>>1806546

show me a pro fine artist who can't draw/sketch as well as the 'old masters'

>>1806563
absolutely-disgusting.jpg

>>1806589

>low testosterone beta detected

fat asses are for alpha men only

>>1806574
show me a million that can.

I know this is thread is bait but all the resources we have nowadays can be seen as a negative.

The personal practice the old masters developed were far better than the practices you read in a book and decide to do. It's either you get lost because you have no guidance or you stop thinking because you have so much material where people do the thinking for you.

The old masters had only very few teachings and opinions they could work with. They actually needed to be creative in the very essence of practicing art, creating individual mind and skillets instead of the mass produced shit we get nowadays.

>>1806598
>The old masters had only very few teachings and opinions they could work with. They actually needed to be creative in the very essence of practicing art, creating individual mind and skillets instead of the mass produced shit we get nowadays.

that's a good point, self-teaching and figuring out your own techniques is really important. People now just want to be spoon fed everything and their brain never develops autonomy and self-reliance

>>1806593
fat asses are for weirdos and plebs

>>1806598

Didn't they work under apprentices and lightboxes?

>>1806628
youre a pleb
I'LL KILL YOU

>>1806595
it's a figure of speech. Either you are retarded or you're just pretending to be.

>>1805517
take a look at how vulillpi (butchered this fuckers name) draws, and figure out the how and why, than try and draw keeping that shit in mind.

if you are 0 on the 10000 hour scale, than it may go WAY the fuck over your head, but the one thing you need to do that will help you immensely, is take note on how he holds the pencil thing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa_2rL1K1mg

the one thing you are told to do is draw loose and from the shoulder, holding it like that forces your ass to move from the shoulder.

once you understand that you are drawing forms, not lines, you learn to draw like you would paint, that you aren't drawing the shapes but the shadows, than you put what you learned to practice.

do figure drawings, 30 seconds - 1 minute, 2-5 minutes, 15-30 minutes, and 2 hours sessions.

mix in with that some drawing from your imagination, and you are set.

also, don't bother rendering past a point, you will learn what that point is once you start... rendering is largely easy to learn but fucking time consuming, and that time is better spent drawing more figures.

>>1806657
you will do me a favor. maybe in heaven i will redeem myself as an artist.

>>1805547
only reason they get caught is because of the way we make paint now.

take a look at currency, lets say the dollar, its all fucking hand made, and etched in metal, by many different artists working on one plate for security reasons, and coins are reliefs done by people and translated smaller... what more do you want that masters walk among us?

>>1805551
oh for fuck sake. no they aren't. the teaching has nothing to do with it, and honestly today we have schools that teach "what is art" or "what is good" where a concept artist who shits in a can and closes it is good if they say their concept is disgust.

no, teaching today is worse, but we do have more resources that are good that the old masters did not have.

ill argue that old masters were the pinnacle or at least damn near when it came to oil... but just drawing... no... they werent. the drawing is a level that anyone with time and will can achieve...

any 20 something with a tablet... go fuck yourself, you take it to the same retarded extreme that the jackass you are arguing with takes it to but in the opposite direction.

>>1806292
they were all based in skill, while modern talents... well...steal stuff, eat stuff, shit it out said stuff, and put it on display.

not saying there aren't good artists in modern times, but jackassery like above is taken seriously and thats a problem.

>>1806602
>>1806598
they had art academy's back than... its where the term modern art came from, throwing out all the knowledge that came with time in art schools.

>>1806666

Good vid.
If you have a natural predisposition,
I can train you in the basics for of how to draw well in 3 months.
If you practice on improving over your former intents, you can become a good amateur
on 6 months to a year.
If you want to become a pro, two to three years of constant practice and adjustments
might be enough..
It is all about of what you can understand, your comprehension capabilities and what you can
deduce as result of your own practice.

>>1806659
so it's just a hyperbole that means a huge number of artists are better than the old masters? How many have you shared with us so far? Maybe one? Roberto Ferri, who is hugely inspired by the Old Masters?

>>1806712
holy shit this painting

dude is just like, "yea, i got gud. do you?"

>>1806712
This shit is ridiculous I can't even conceive how it would be humanly possible to achieve this level.
Who the fuck is this guy even? I never heard his name before and this looks better than like 90% of old masters painting I've ever seen in my life.
Have some more craziness.

wow bump, so what's the estimate

>>1807324
the question is flawed and this isn't a math equation.

>>1807325


1000 hours should get u there

>>1805487
yea there are. but what's the point?

painting like the masters is pointless now a days. no one gives a shit about realisim. conceptual and abstract art are what matter. even that might change in 2-5 years

as art we have to advance it in different aspects. Art isn't a photorealisitc rep of reality. just get a camera if you want that.

>>1807397
Abstract was huge in the 60s and 70s and remains popular today, but figurative art has also had a big revival. Also there are exactly zero old masters who worked in a photo-realistic style.

>>1807397
>abstract art are what matter.

abstract is dead

>>1807443
when i said abstract i meant the modern version of it. more conceptual than abstract

something like lucien smith, oscar murillo etc

>>1806680
So fucking ignore that stuff. There were insane people and lazy people back then too. This doesn't answer the question. *Why were the oldmasters unmatched compared to modern TALENT*

>>1806693
6 months to a year of well used practice can net you close to 1000 hours, that is low level pro/employable. you won't be the best, and probably will be close to the bottom of your field, but low level pro nonetheless.

if you can go pro, well there you go, you now have a drawing job, which will give you another 8 hours of practice a day, on top of the already 4-6 in freetime. you could probably cut freetime practice down a bit at this point but i wouldnt without good reason.

that 2-3 years, at 4 hours a day, that puts you at 4300 hours, and that is half way to top of the class master level there... its the reason i say pro starts far sooner than that because we all see pros who make massive fucking mistakes that they shouldn't have done...

if you made work a full time job after 6 months of 4 hours a day, that would be 8 hours of practice + an extra 2 hours a day, at the end of that 3 year window, you would bank 9800~ hours, close enough to master level.

the only thing you have to avoid is complacency, its something that many people fall into and just stop improving.

>>1807451
the simple answer is they aren't unmatched, the long answer is people have things to do, back than all these fuckers did was further themselves... the internet is a prime example of something the old masters did not have access to... its why so many reached such peaks in the same time and when you go to more modern civilization, you see less and less reach that same peak...

just looking at some old masters works... im honestly not impressed there are many who can or could do what the old masters did, but there is little market for them anymore. you have more people chasing the dream of picasso money than trying to master their work, and why would they when skill doesn't dictate what you are payed?

>>1807458

>employed after 1 year of good practice

is this realistic? who/what would employ u?

>>1807397
>Art isn't a photorealisitc rep of reality. just get a camera if you want that.

Are you a retard? The masters did not do photorealistic copies of reality. Classical painting is a craft that will never die. Fads like postmodern art, abstract art, conceptual art etc come and go, but skillful classical art has endured hundreds of years and will outlive any of the "artforms" that are purely done for shock value and to be edgy and different.

Funny how shitters like you always go for the whole "hurrr just get a camera" strawman.

>>1807460
no, it's fucking bullshit.

that the kind of time frame you expect when you're new and you're not hip to the geometric learning curve yet.

>>1807458
i mean for fuck sake, /ic/ openly mocks hyper realism...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dvy8DRaU62s
mother fucker, what the hell did you think the old masters were trying to do (minus the bible influences)

here, "hyperrealism no photo reference" google that, i'm not sure how many dont use photo reference but i know damn well there are some in there and every one is impressive.

>>1807460
depends on what you want to be employed for, many people see card pictures as a decent way to make money, and there is always illustration (my understanding of this is you are making a commercial work that tells a story, now how many old masters paintings do just that? tell a story that is?) but like i said, it really depends on where you want to go with it because there is always a bottom level.

>>1807466
rob fucking liefeld, your whole retarded "you need to be an absolute master to into money making" argument is struck down by that fucking retarde being what... is he a millionair... without being able to draw feet in a field that demands anatomical knowledge.

for fuck sake you don't need to be a master to get work... hell, if you are willing to draw porn for furries you barely need to be out of ms paint to get commissions, though being good helps their frequency.

>>1807468
The old masters were trying to do a lot of different things because the term applies to different artists from different countries, eras, and art movements. Claiming they had a single goal is simplistic- did El Greco try to make 'hyper-realism'? Of course not.

>>1805551
Kek.

>>1807450
>oscar murillo
>lucien smith

what's there to like about that garbage? at least guys like kandinsky and klee had some interesting geometric/color creations.

>>1807544
>Picking a deformed human as reference
He totally fooled me into thinking he went no-ref there, gotta give him that.

>>1807475
>Greco
he may not have tried for hyper realism, but looking at his shit, you cant see he was going for realism more often than not?

take a look at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Greco

and influences on other artists...
thats why you dont see modern masters works often, because crap like that is what got popular,

now i just did a wiki on old masters, and found out they encompass a fuck ton more than i realised,

Gothic/International Gothic/Proto-Renaissance
there are many better than them already.

Early Renaissance
i would say when it comes to paintings, we see better today in many places, but when they weren't painting, apparently they leveled their skills right the fuck up... for sculpting, there are people who do stone sculpting today, and they are pretty damn good at it to, but most of todays sculpting is done small scale and digitally... here is one example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fF5Obw5KCX8&list=UUj3Rx2ZL5tP7pRd2qjbVYCQ

High Renaissance
here is were painters and draughtsmen start getting really impressive, and i believe the height of sculpture too, that we may never see again from humans just because of how much a bitch the material is to work with... that said, we still have many today who touch and surpass many of the ones in this category too.

Venetian painting Renaissance
here you get people who are hard to match, and one of my favorites in titian

- side note - why did they make jesus look like a zombie more often than not?

Sienese School
not much there, but some generally good things.

ok, im looking through Northern Renaissance and came across this
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5b/Hans_Baldung_-_Stehende_Hexe_mit_Ungeheuer.jpg

is that a woman fighting a sea creature and stabbing it though the mouth with a stick up her ass? seriously what the fuck with this one...

comming to 1900 characters so splitting post

>>1807463
> Fads like postmodern art, abstract art, conceptual art etc come and go, but skillful classical art has endured hundreds of years and will outlive any of the "artforms" that are purely done for shock value and to be edgy and different.
I'm not the guy you replied to, but I think almost all master art has abstract aspects to it. Also, your assessment of modern art done solely for attention is too generalizing. Whether one or other style will outlive the others is not a fact, so stop pretending it is. Popularity of styles comes and goes and it doesn't have much to do with pursuing expression as an artist.

>>1807628
Northern Renaissance
a few really good ones, but wow... ill probably have more to say after i look though this all

Spanish
same as above

Mannerism
same as above

Baroque painting
apparently when i think old master, this is largely what i think of with a select few from earlier

Dutch Golden Age Painting and Flemish Baroque painting
mix in some of these guys to the ones i think of

Rococo
a few of these too

for brevity go to wiki and old master and thats the list i went down...

ok, have to admit i'm wrong, they weren't going toward realism at least in the early ones, toward the later thats where realist was a thing and even a few that would be close to hyperrealism...

can anyone tell me what the fuck is up with so many of the old masters having fantastic drawings, but than throwing out all that skill when it came to painting? hell, i have to apologize to >>1805551
as far as painting and rendering go, there are a shit ton of people who can do it better than the old masters, but because its not an oil painting, dont get the respect they deserve... when i origional bitched at you, i was only thinking of the best of the best apparently, yea, allot of people can do better than them. granted, you went to a retarded extreme but its not to horribly far off.

drawing wise... hell, anything besides painting... no... you are wrong. hell, i know i said somewhere in here something to the effect "its just the sketch, not the painting" i would like to revise that to you could probably paint as good as them before you could sketch to there level. fuck, these guys... if they did anything but paint it was immaculate, but like i said, the moment they pick up paint its like a retard in them takes over and this is more prevalent the earlier you go.

>>1807463
>abstract art
http://wallpeperhd.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Abstract-Art-Painting.jpg
i believe art like that will live on for a long time,

basically, there are gems in every movement... but sadly, the gems aren't what get latched onto most of the time. its absolute shit...

>>1807397
when that camera can take a photo of whats in my fucking head, thats when i will see that as a valid answer... till than, photo realism mixed with unreal elements rendered real is what appeals to me the most and what i would love to create.

and if there were some way for me to make this bet, i put up my body for being your sex slave that any photo or piece of shit conceptual or abstract art would be forgotten or a laugh at the retarded for liking this shit foot note in a book 1000 years from now, but if any large scale hyper realism survives, regardless of medium, it would be looked at in aew.