/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

Also, this made me realise that the biggest thing holding back digital art is simply image resolution.

Lower res paintings look like postcards, to be honest. Even the works of the old masters look unimpressive when looked at in a monitor. You can't fit a proper painting in your standard monitor.

4K can't become widespread soon enough. That'd be just scratching the surface of where art can be viewed properly.

>>2077736
>Then I showed him Ruan Jia. At first he was like "hey, that's cool". But I had super-high res pictures of his work, where every brush stroke is visible. So I zoomed in. His mind was blown the fuck out. He was so impressed, he went around showing it to his colleagues and then the students, telling us we should learn this "digital" stuff asap. He even started talking about arranging digital drawing classes somehow.
>So I gave him my tablet to try it out and he's been hogging it for the last three days. He sits there doodling away while we work.

Haha that is so cool.

>>2077736
That is one kawaii art teacher you got

>>2077736
Poor westerner guy's mind couldn't even comprehend the greatness of our Chinese overlord.

My teachers are not old men so they all use digital themselves.

>>2077736
>Needs a wider color palette and variation, etc.

As a primarely traditional artist myself, the thing that bugs me about most digital art is the exact opposite. Many digital artists seem to have never heard of color gamuts and restricted palettes and because it's so easy to mix every single pigment digitally, they have too much color variety and not enough harmony.

>>2077736
>impressed with mullins and jaime jones
I guess you didn't show him their high resolution works. No one in their right mind would put anyone over Mullins in the digital scene.

>>2077767

yeah. if he 'got it' when looking at ruanjias high res work, he would have equally 'gotten it' if he had seen mullins high res work.

i think that's the essence of the issue. when people see the flash work from afar in low res, it's easy to dismiss it as some computer-trickery where you have some software creating an image after you select options from sliders lol. i'm 100% sure that's what most people think of when you say 'digital art'. but show them the high resolution work, and it immediatly reveals itself how much skill and technique there's behind the images.

>>2077767
You are right, actually. I didn't have much high res mullins on me at the time.
I need to update my mullins folder.
>>2077765
He seems to enjoy using lots of colors in his work. Here's an example.
>tfw half of his work got destroyed in a fire before he even knew that you could digitalise it
Bad feel.
>>2077771
As I said earlier, image resolution is a huge limiting factor. It's such a pain in the ass to find a digital artist's work in original resolution, as it always ends up downsized by the clients for presentation.

>>2077736
That's cool man. I've brought my tablet/laptop to life drawing before and confused the fuck out of everyone there lol. You always get one nerdy dude in his 30's though who knows what digital is and tries to relate by talking about how he just loves making custom brushes and using layers, and his stuff is awful, then he gets disappointed when he finds out I use really basic brushes to paint. Always a different dude, but always the same reaction.

I once discussed digital with Jeff Watts, basically he wasn't interested in it at all and didn't really know any artists except Mullins who he immediately said was a master.

>>2077765
I think what the issue is has more to do with when you paint in a limited palette it suddenly becomes very limited. Use that same palette in oils and there is a lot more variation and depth to the colours even if you only use two pigments. It's the difference between using a fully opaque flat brush and painting a colour and it will be completely uniform, and using a brush with some slight hue/saturation jitters. It's "one" colour, but will be much more interesting. When you use oils this effect is even stronger that a brush with jitters.

>>2077776
Dude, your teacher's work is really good! Who is he? And seriously, should have shown him Mullins' hi res stuff, cause he woulda been mindblown. Do you have that folder of his SUPER hi res stuff? If he likes things less photographic and to have lots of colour like that, then he'd probably like Theo Prins and maybe Tom Scholes. Oh, and Min Yum! And I'm still surprised he didn't like Jaime, even without super hi res you can see his crazy brushwork. Maybe it's more insane when you try to do similar things digitally.

>>2077736
That sounds pretty awesome.

Where can I find hi-res digital paintings to add to my collection?

>>2077798
>didn't really know any artists except Mullins who he immediately said was a master

interesting, interesting. jeff is an absolute beast ubermensch of an artist so this reinforces my adoration for mullins. thanks for sharing that.

might sound overemotional but i LOVE reading real-life anecdotes like this, no matter how small, because it makes me feel like i'm somewhat part of the club. even though obviously i am not but i obsess over the industry, and it's key figures.

>>2077809
Oh man, you should go to a workshop sometime. Like a Massive Black one, or Trojan Horse Was a Unicorn or something. Find out what's nearest you. You'll shit your pants. I don't even get that obsessive over most artists (only a couple) and even I was overwhelmed when in the presence of all these big name guys. I couldn't even go up to Marko.

>mfw I once was in casual conversation with Eytan Zana and thought he was just some amateur kid until I clued in from how he spoke that he was a big pro, and I had to ask who he was...only to realize I had just watched his demo earlier that day and just didn't recognize him out of context

>>2077798
>>2077809
Is Jeff Watts really a master level artist? I know he trained Proko but I don't really like Proko's stuff.

>>2077816
Why would you judge Jeff's artwork based on Proko's? Anyways, Watts is a master by today's standards I suppose. He's got pretty darn good technical skills, though stylistically you either like him or not. Personally I think he's a bit hit or miss, and I do find him guilty of hiding behind his stylistic things sometimes. I don't think he holds up at all to the old masters. In terms of living oil painters though I suppose he's nearish the top.

>>2077767
> No one in their right mind would put anyone over Mullins in the digital scene.

I can see plenty of artists, especially traditional artists putting other digital artists over Mullins. His work is not that impressive to look at from a technical perspective. He rarely utilizes beautiful brushwork or interesting play with edges and colors etc. He's more of a painter who focuses on design, composition and value statement and everything else is just a means to an end. His sketches tend to be very messy and rough and his finished work tends to be rather boringly rendered realism combined with photobashing.

Not trying to put Mullins down or anything, he IS a master of composition and creating amazing mood pieces, but I can see why traditional artists in particular who care a lot about execution rather than design wouldn't be that impressed by his work.

I feel that a lot of people are just blind fanboys at this point.

hi-res digital paintings? Ruan Jia don't give a fuck about it

>>2077807

put any picture on google image search and choose largest option in sizes. some are harder to find but you can find many this way. the ultra high 10k-by-6k images which i guess is the size the artists worked in are extremely hard to find though. Which makes sense since you could go ahead and sell high quality prints with that file lol.

>>2077823
>He rarely utilizes beautiful brushwork or interesting play with edges and colors etc
U wot m8? Seriously his command of edgework is probably the most advanced out of any digital artist, and his colour are INSANELY good. And his brushwork isn't a flashy sexy type like Jaime, but it has its own kind of incredibly efficient beauty to it.

I also think his sketches aren't as messy these days, you're probably looking at stuff from like 2003. And I really don't think his finished stuff is "boring realism and photobashing". He actually uses a lot of things like broken colour and lost edges and so on. He also doesn't really photobash much except to save time. His really finished work is all manually painted.

where do you even go for Mullins' recent stuff? his "website" has had the same shit for years, I'm not even sure if it's not abandoned or what

>>2077828
>the ultra high 10k-by-6k images which i guess is the size the artists worked in are extremely hard to find though. Which makes sense since you could go ahead and sell high quality prints with that file lol.
It's also because most places you can't post an image that size, and even if you did they will just fuck up the page if you load it since it's so massive. And often images look like shit up close. I remember seeing some original size Kekai pieces (didn't save them and can't find them again) and they were so sloppy and ugly up close. Also some artists don't care about selling. Like Alberto Mielgo says on his site that you can email him asking for full files for any image and he will give you the original file and let you print it and stuff for free. He just don't give a shit.

>>2077736
>Today I showed
>hogging it for the last three days

Timeline checks out. Aside from that, I know it's definitely a good feeling when you can teach your art teacher something, so good job.

>>2077825
What am I looking at?

>>2077833
He just updated his website like last summer or fall or something. Not that long ago. He put up a TON of new shit there. It was all the internet talked about for two weeks, not sure how you missed it.

>>2077836
>Like Alberto Mielgo says on his site that you can email him asking for full files for any image and he will give you the original file and let you print it and stuff for free. He just don't give a shit.

Really? Damn that's badass. Probably the right attitude to have in this day and age though lol.

>>2077830
Well, the vast majority of his finished work portfolio is rather underwhelming. Again, it's not exactly a criticism because that's what he was paid to do, I simply can understand why a traditional painter who cares a lot about technical execution would put other digital artists over Mullins.

Alot of the conceptual digital paintings of Craig mullins are often not the most aesthetic. They are made fast, and thus it is necessary to use renderings tricks instead of actually redering. He uses textured brushes and texture from photos etc. Even though, in every aspect of his understadning, he is solid, his digital conceptual work is a bit sloppy and artificial imo understandably because he needs to work in a rapid pace.

>>2077828
There has to be a site dedicated to high-res of Mullins.

>>2077840
>What am I looking at?
Going to guess with the pixelated version being an original post and the clear one being the updated or whatever.

>>2077851
No, but people do somewhat secretly share the good files around through email and stuff.

>>2077736
You should try showing some stuff that doesn't try to emulate traditional looks. Try showing some Sparth (especailly his extremely digital experiments), some Vyle, some Mielgo, some Zedig, whatever.

>>2077736

>>2077837
Yeah, sorry. I wrote the first half of the post three days ago and the rest today.
On the first day I only showed him peleng and it was kinda spontaneous. We were looking at paintings on his laptop and I had some peleng on my drive, so I decided to show it to him.
He asked me to bring him some more of that kinda stuff, so over the course of two days I'd show him works of various digital artists.
I thought explaining all of that would be too verbose, so I shortened it.
Sorry for the confusion.
>>2077801
He's a bit of a big shot in our country's art community, but otherwise not known at all.

And thanks for the suggestions, everyone. I hope he keeps his current interest in digital art. It would be so nice if I could start showing him my digital stuff to be critiqued as well, haha.

>>2077845
I dunno, I'm still surprised. Usually Mullins is EASIER for traditional guys to appreciate given the fact that despite Mullins experimenting with techniques a lot, at his core he brings a lot over into his art from traditional people--Mead, Sargent, Wyeth, the Impressionists etc. Plus he freely admits himself that he is a very technical artist (almost to a fault).

>>2077960
Like damn, how can you not drool at these images?

>>2077887

>>2077961

>>2077963
Damn 4chan's max file size is stopping me from posting the big big files....

>>2077961
That piece looks incomplete as fuck and grosses me out. That big paint splotch on the rearmost conquistador's pauldrons for example is super disgusting and destroys the entire piece for me as do they other details that aren't rendered in the slightest.

>>2077965
Aw shit, do you have a link to a zip file of his high res stuff?

>>2077965
Like even his sketches are so efficient...

>>2077966
Doesn't bother me. That piece is a masterwork imo. The scale in it, the atmosphere, simply incredible. Love how he handles the crowd and how it recedes into the distance. The whole thing just transports me there, it feels magical. I actually quite like the simplicity of some areas vs the high detail density in other areas.

>>2077968
Yeah I do actually. First time i'm posting it publicly as before it was only being passed around quietly amongst people, but Mullins himself showed some of these images in person in TO recently, so I assume they are fine to share:
http://www.mediafire.com/download/32j8m38fj2i35yv/library.zip

I also have a big file of that reddish dragon piece, but it's not in that link. Not sure if I wanna upload a single file like that.

>>2077965
Post it on /hr/ and link it here

Also fond of his AOE stuff

>>2077972
>I also have a big file of that reddish dragon piece, but it's not in that link. Not sure if I wanna upload a single file like tha
Pls Anon.
And thanks for the link.

>>2077973
I just posted the link in the post above you. Not sure if it is worth starting a thread in /hr/ just for the dragon pic.

Hm. I think Mullins' work looks too concept-artey, I guess?
There's this quickness vibe in it, lots of things left unfinished. And honestly, some of those don't really warrant the super high resolution. There's not really enough detail to be appreciated up close, since so much stuff is not rendered.

>>2077980
Majority of Mullins works look videogamey like you said.
>>2077972
It just looks very unfinished and rush that it distracts.

I can share this folder of high res ruan jia.
Does anyone have anything else to contribute?

I'm desperate to get my hands on high res portraits of his.

>>2077986
>I can share this folder of high res ruan jia.
Please do

>>2077972
>>2077986
Isn't this illegal?

>>2077975
I just found it in google actually: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/88/1b/16/881b16f4453956082e1a1380fc93ddba.jpg

>>2077980
>>2077983
Well I mean he IS a concept artist. He's very commercial, no doubt. We'll have to differ on opinion for whether the size is warranted, honestly I think looking at full res stuff of his is super interesting, he handles things so loosely up close but makes it read so well from far away. And he always has interesting brushwork and textures up close. I dunno, it gets me excited, if it doesn't work for you then there's nothing much I can say really. Also, while some of his work does have a bit of a rushed or quick feel to it, I think you are dismissing some things as being lazy when they are intentionally left simple for stylistic reasons.

>>2077992
I don't think so. The images are all publicly released. Just we have the original filesize. It's not like we are printing them on tshirts and selling them, or claiming we did them or anything.

>>2077992
Why would it be illegal? The Ruanjia images can all be found on the internet. Most of it is GW2 promotional art hosted on some gaming websites.

>>2077991
http://www20.zippyshare.com/v/DTgTXnbH/file.html
Enjoy.

This is fucking insane, I tell you.

>>2078000
>http://www20.zippyshare.com/v/DTgTXnbH/file.html
Thank you!

>>2077994
Holy hell

>>2078012
There's a reason he's pretty much universally considered the #1 digital artist in the world.

>>2077994
Agree that we have different opinions. I honestly dislike that work you posted. It does get the concept through like his other stuff but personally fails to tickle my pickle.

>>2078018
Too bad. What stuff do you like then?

>>2078017
>>2078000
>>2077994
>>2077736
Gee thanks /ic/ you've just given me an Art orgasm.

>>2077972
>12000x6000
Sweet baby, Jesus.

>>2078017
There's no such thing. It's like making an argument who the "best" traditional artist is. There's just way too many great ones. Mullins was the best digital artist like 10 years ago when the medium was still young, but there's virtually no difference in fundamental knowledge and technical skill between Mullins and dozens of other top tier digital artists nowadays. At the top level, it becomes a matter of personal taste more than anything.

>>2077986
Don't think hi res of his portraits are online anywhere...also are you sure that landscape in the middle row is his? I don't think it is...

>>2078029
Hm, I'm actually not sure.
It was a high res ruan jia dump on some /ic/ thread, and I grabbed it from there.
Might not be his.

>>2078026
I mean yeah, it's obviously somewhat personal taste. Although it is easier to say there is a "best" digital artist than to say the same about traditional artists given that digital has only been around for a couple decades and really only has seen more popularity in the last 11 years or so (compared to centuries of oil painting). But if you were to ask every professional out there who they think is the most skilled digital artist, I'm willing to put money on Mullins winning by a landslide. There are things he is doing that others aren't able to pull off with a fraction of his success. He's also got more experience and a larger body of work with greater versatility than pretty much anyone else.

>>2078034

>>2078038
Yes, I'm fully aware of that. I was in the original thread when it all unfolded. Doesn't change the fact that it's an extraordinary painting.

One of my profs in college gave me a C bc I worked digitally. Of course, he didn't tell me it wasn't ok until AFTER grades were due and I couldn't change it. He said I was 'too commercial'

Only C I got in college. Cost me my magna cum laude at graduation. I even took it to the dean of faculty and they were like, 'ya, if he doesnt wanna change it, there's really nothing we can do.'

fucking fine art faggots with their heads up their asses i swear

>>2078047
>he didn't tell me it wasn't ok until AFTER grades were due and I couldn't change it
That does sound like the professor's fault.

>>2078047

No worries brah. Toiletpaperdegree with magna cum laude is still toiletpaperdegree.

>>2078060
I'm fully aware, but it was the principle

>>2078047
You should have told him that commercial work is more satisfying in a narrower way.

>>2077736

Holy crappers he actually made a 'millions of tiny dudes' brush. You dun did it again Craig. Blown my mind.

>>2078000
You know what... I know you guys are going to shit on me for this... but I actually think Ruan is legitimately the best in the world.

I had Mullins and Jaime ahead of him for a while, but seeing these up close, its just ridiculous.

>>2078128
Ruanjia is ridiculous, but I think he lacks the versatility of Jaime and Mullins. And a lot of the strength from Ruanjia comes in his incredible subtleties that come from fiddlign with an image for ages, whereas Jaime and Mullins get those same subtleties but also in their quick work they can effective convey some of the same stuff, whereas Ruanjia's early stages look like crap and and he basically keeps fighting it until it works out eventually.

Btw, did you download the hi-res Mullins files linked earlier here? Looking at them up close will give you more appreciation of him too.

>>2078140
I just did, and it's really close. I do think Mullins is more versatile. Honestly it's really close for me. But I do think now that Jaime is a clear 3rd place to them.

>>2078151
Sigh...unfortunately I don't have that many hi-res Jaime's, and they aren't his strongest pieces, but still...

>>2078154

>>2078155
Some are too big to post damnit

>>2078158

>>2078161
Think this is an early piece by him

>>2078162

>>2078163

>>2078154
You know, I think it is a matter of taste. Jaime uses a very restrained (but still really good) style of brushwork on his finished pieces. I'm a fan of Mullins/Ruan's use of very bold, obvious brushwork, and in particular Ruan's use of light & planes to describe form.

Jaime's stuff is super good, but just a little too smooth for me.

Another example of an artist who I absolutely fucking love is Yu Dehong. That style of pure, obvious brushwork is really up my alley.

I guess I'm a chinafag. I dunno.

>>2078167
Hm, Jaime's finished work is a little cleaner I suppose, but his sketches exhibit more of that brushwork you love.

Btw, the fullsize image for hte one in this post is too big to post on 4chan, so I'll just link it:
https://analogaddiction.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/destiny-concept-art-6.jpg

Fuuuuckign sexy!

>>2078167
Oops, forgot to post an image of Yu Dehong's stuff as an example. Here's one.

>>2078169

>>2078170
God, what's up with the chinese and having very similar rendering styles?

>>2078170
Eh, I don't much care for Yu Dehong. His stuff is too derivative of Ruanjia, and it lacks the draftsmanship of Ruan (which is saying somethign considering draftsmanship is Ruanjia's biggest weakness). Like that image you posted, it just falls apart once you look at it for more than a couple seconds. Things are really sloppily handled, he's clearly never seen a horse before, perspective is wonky, edgework isn't fully realized etc.

There's better Asians out there, pic related.

>>2078169
>https://analogaddiction.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/destiny-concept-art-6.jpg

Your daily reminder of just how fucking high the ceiling is. and here we are, barely learning to crawl on all fours. Jesus fucking christ.

>>2078179
More Asian goodness

>>2078183
Yeah...yeah...;_;

>>2078185
Another dude

>>2078186
'Nother guy

>>2078191
Wish I had hi-res of Min...

>>2078183
Good thing you don't have to hold yourself to such standards at all to be a successful illustrator.

>>2078199
But why wouldn't you hold yourself to the highest standards? I mean, you can settle for mediocrity...but why? Like, illustration is a job you only get into if you are passionate about it, so I dunno why you would put limitations on yourself or try for anything other than the best.

>>2077749
Agreed on this, pretty neat. Would you by any chance have a few hires Ruan pics to post? Ive been looking for that one of Deionarra for ages but cant find a decent res.

>>2078196
>>2078191
>>2078186
>>2078185

guys asians are cute but maybe stick to ultra high res stuff? i think we all know those pieces.

>>2078206
Did you even look through the rest of the thread? There's tons of hi res stuff that's been posted in the thread itself as well as several links posted to download even higher res stuff.

>>2078216
The problem is a ton of ultra hi res stuff's been posted already, and the images of that size are really pretty rare, at least for digital paintings (Google Art Project makes access to giant oils more commonplace).

>>2078155
>>2078154

Were these actually done by Jaime? There was one artist who worked on Destiny whose work looks a lot like that of Jaime. Pic related.

>>2078221
Yeah, Ryan's work isn't on that level. Neither is Dorje's (though for landscapes I consider Dorje equal to Jaime).

If you set your google search to Search Tools> Size> Larger than 4 MP, then you get stuff by Jaime, Dorje, etc at ridiculous sizes. Can't post all of it here cause it's too big.

>>2078233
Forgot to mention, it's when you google "destiny concept art"

>>2078236

Most, if not all, digital concept painters these days are not that inspiring. They aren't creative enough to push the envelope. They don't bring anything interesting to the table.

Conceptually, they all look a like. These artists are magpies. And they aren't ashamed of the level they take that to either.

It's all kitsch as fuck. The characters are portioned like they belong in a comic book. Everybody is sexy, even the monsters. And the monsters are always a mishmash of random stuff. You just know nature wouldn't slap shit together like that. Environments are even worse than the monsters. Random architecture is tossed around without any sense of civil engineering or community planning.

Basically the concepts aren't thought out as much as just thier appearances are. Ironic given that the purpose of a concept is to have substance so that things can produce interest with each other.

I haven't seen a digital painter make a unique contributions nor pass on genuine knowledge. Mullins, Jaime, Ruan all borrow excessively from old masters. It's absolutely depressing to hear them talk about thier craft. You can tell that all they've done is collect these little tricks over the years and honed THAT. There is no deep questioning or strong experimentation. They aren't even sure about the essence to those tricks, they just know they work. Very practical. Very simple minded.

>>2078259

The fuck are you talking about. Collect little tricks? No sense of civil engineering or community planning in conceptart architecture? Everything too sexy?

If they make the tits too small the art director goes 'uh hey, that's cool that you try to keep it tasteful and stuff, but uuuh... you know we are launching this title when company XY launches their new title, and they'll have really big tits to reel in the 16-24 year olds. So uh... we need bigger tits. So if you could just go ahead and do that, that'd be great'. The bigger the better, mkay?

You cannot put on your hip fine artist glasses and judge concepart by fine art standards.

>>2078259
I agree with you on many points, but some things I think you are taking a bit far. For example concepts in relation to the entertainment industry are meant to have form over function. The building doesn't need to be structurally sound, it just needs to look kinda cool for the 2 seconds it flashes on screen.

>I haven't seen a digital painter make a unique contributions nor pass on genuine knowledge. Mullins, Jaime, Ruan all borrow excessively from old masters. It's absolutely depressing to hear them talk about thier craft. You can tell that all they've done is collect these little tricks over the years and honed THAT. There is no deep questioning or strong experimentation. They aren't even sure about the essence to those tricks, they just know they work. Very practical. Very simple minded.
Hm, you can argue the same for the vast majority of oil painters today too. Who right now is doing truly groundbreaking work? I can't think of any examples off the top of my head. And does something even need to be new? Art history tends to favour the people who do new things, sure. But just because you aren't breaking free of conventions and pushing the envelope doesn't mean the art is worthless. Is Sargent a crap painter because he didn't do too much new stuff? No, he's one of the most talented of all time. And he borrowed most of what he knew from people like Velazquez, Hals, Thomas Lawrence, Monet, and others. I don't think it decreases how his art should be viewed.

Anyways, Mullins/Jaime/Ruanjia all have distinctive styles, it's not like they are pure copycats like you imply. And Mullins HAS passed on a shit ton of knowledge through his sijun posts.

>>2078270
So, shit concept for a shit audience. Why give them great art when all they respect is a titty show? Ain't that the truth!

>>2077966
why the fuck does that even matter? hes not the subject matter.

>>2078271
>The building doesn't need to be structurally sound
And it takes less than a second to know it doesn't fit the story or the scene. Most concept artist today have extremely low literacy. They can't seem to paint the scenes like they were written by the character's cultures. There is blatant dissonance.

>Who right now is doing truly groundbreaking work?
Freud, Jasper Johns, Phil Hale. There are new and wonderful things happening in art now if you look. I've looked into concept painters and wasn't impressed. Look a illustration today. Artists like Watterson and Thompson literally reinvigorated the entire art form.

>>2078288

well at least we now know how utterly divorced from reality you are, so your opinions can be safely discarded.

Man, is this what's consider "master level" today? some generic looking video game illustrations?

>>2078302
stop samefagging, go wank off to some jackson pollock bullshit you talentless pleb.

>>2078038
I don't get it, is there supposed to be some controversy here? He's clearly those as references.

Why do amateurs love snooping out non-existent fraudulence?

>>2078302
Feel free to post stuff that you think is better than senapi Jia and enlighten us.

>having art teachers

>>2078302
Yes. the tragic part is that 80% people today wanting to make a living drawing aim at shitty careers like that, thinking that concept artists are some kind of paragons of the modern fine arts prostitution, gifted with refined taste in design and technicalities.
its tragic because most of the poor fellas that "awesome my first job in design!" will get dumped in a professional deadend faster than the fresh graduated tards from 3D and animation schools in america
all those hours on Loomis and dreaming about being a prolific artist will fall down the drain and land in begging to draw shitty characters for cellphone apps.
even flipping burgers would have been a better ending.

>>2078311
Please feel free to post a student of your "senpai" that doesn't paint exactly like said "senpai". We're all dying to see the unique and diverse styles of your "senpais"

>>2078322
If a person can paint with anywhere NEAR the technical skill of Mullins/Ruan/Jaime, they will never be jobless in the commercial illustration fields, ever.

>>2078324
Does ruan jia have students?
He's not a tutor.

>>2077736
This post makes me want to go to some kind of art school.

>>2078337
OP here. From all the stories I read on here, I wouldn't recommend doing that if lots of money is involved. I lucked out massively with my teacher.

If you decide to go to an art school, do lots of research beforehand.

>>2078302
I remember you. You are the same autistic retard who was shitting up the original Ruanjia high res image thread that we had. You really need to learn to deal with your insecurities, because the artists that were posted ITT are better than you will ever be, that is a fact you can not change.

>>2078362
Thank you for telling it to me straight bro. I will proceed to ziptie my my throat. Please remember /ic/ i tried to save it, i tried. God Bless you all.

>>2077825
where did you get that? do you have any more high res pictures from that painting? or just the whole thing? or any painting?

>>2078324

Is there something incorrect about students emulating their superiors/teachers in the early era of their work? I don't understand the point you're trying to make here other than to shitpost.

>>2077771

Also hilariously awesome and depressing how you can literally take any cropped out snippet from a Jaime painting and you have a perfect composition. That is just unreal.

>>2078402
Clearly Rockwell is a hack and his entire body of work is shit because his early work looked like Leyendecker. And Cornwell too, his early stuff was just a ripoff of Dunn. These dumb artists, how dare they look at other art and learn from it!

>>2078406
It's pretty intentional. Apparently in his demos he talks a lot about building microcompositions into his images, basically any crop you take should still have interesting shapes and be able to stand on its own as something interesting.

>>2078402
Oh I don't know, it's just in this day in age where standing out gets you the job, you would think forging another man's style to not be a good idea. I mean I could be completely wrong to assume that it should be the ones with unique contributions that should get praise and not the brat that paints exactly like the artist he brown noses and white knights for on /ic/. Maybe I'm old fashioned to worry about the integrity of the art across the entire field rather then waste time justifying mimicry born out of laziness and stupidity. I don't know.

>>2078406
That's the easiest thing to do in art. Never heard of dynamic symmetry?

>>2078417
Well the thing is it is both difficult and takes many years to develop an original style. By taking heavily from one or two people you can "jump start" your art in a way, and I think actually it makes you more likely to get hired. Do you think the hundreds of artists aping Frazetta back in the day ended up starving? No. They got hired because publishers would be like "ooh this Frazetta guy is great! His art sells! But he's too busy--who else can do something similar? We need something like this."

>>2078422
Today kids don't take, that flat out copy. There is a difference.

Old school illustrators became original on the job. Frazetta innovated while on the job. They gave something back for being given a chance to earn people's praise. Today it's:

1. Paint a picture, be all formulaic about it cuz your ultra "busy" with stuff.
2. Turn it in and then say, "Pay me and praise me, now!"
3. Then Facebook and tweet about all your personal struggles as an artist.

>>2078428
I don't think there is that much difference in terms of people now vs the past with taking things from famous artists. It always has happened and it always will.

The main difference, as you point out, is now there are platforms for praise and to boast. But even the people who do that are in a minority, you just don't notice the other people because they're not posting everywhere screaming for attention.

>>2078417

Doing that is the most normal shit in the world though, and part of every artists journey.

>>2078448
He doesn't seem to get that yet, which means he probably isn't even at the skill level to study & imitate a style successfully.

So he bergers out of control on /ic/ all day about "originality" without the faintest clue as to how artistic development works.

>>2077972
>>>2078000
Thank you anons that's awesome.

>>2078302
hey, i just came from /fit/ where i discovered that there is a movement against athletic and bodybuild types by obese landwhales and slobs. come here and there are people upset at beautiful creations. guess what connects you both? the same jelly mentality that you're probably aware of but don't want to admit.
it's really pathetic. you're pathetic.

>>2077972
>library.jpg
Holy shit that fucked up anatomy on the girl torso and arms. "Master" my ass.

>>2078428
>Today kids don't take, that flat out copy.

worse is that they aren't copying quality work.
someone brought up rockwell. yeah he copied leyendecker, but guess what? leyendecker knew his shit, he had atelier training and worked as an engraver for years. rockwell also had strong training. people today are to wrapped up in copying styles and trying to commercialize their work as soon as they know how to draw a circle instead of spending the time necessary to become excellent draftsmen.

>>2077736
any chance do deliver the high res Ruam Jia pics?

>>2078462
My sides. That elongated as fuck forearm.

>>2078462
Can't tell if you're trolling or not...

>>2078464
Hm, yeah I think the level of draftsmanship is slipping a lot in our generation. Digital is partly to blame for it I think since linework is a nightmare on it, and even with a cintiq it's not great. But even just general draftsmanship isn't really taught today, even in most schools.

>>2078467
>boob attached to the middle of the chest

>>2078467
>long forearm
>"master"

>>2078460
>i just came from /fit/ and have no idea about the history and lineage of what and who is consider a master. Rather i'd judge piece on my own ignorant opinion that's no more refined or important than a fart from a dry asshole.

Video game and fantasy illustrations are a dime a dozen. you could hire nearly anyone in India or China to produce the junk you see in this thread

>>2078460

our brothers from /fit/ coming over to say!

hugs to the wife and kids brah! i miss chilling on /fit/ back when my lifes goal was to look like zyzz. now i'm fat, pale and eat pizza all day but it's all cool because i'm good at art!

>>2078465
It's already been posted in the thread silly.

>>2078467
In the context of the whole image though it's not that noticeable. Even in the thumbnail of what you posted I don't see it as an issue. Mullins has spoken of this before where you don't really need anatomy to be perfect. Pic related is a painting he did like a decade ago where he talked about it, like hte legs if you work it out are fucked up so bad, but it's still a cool painting and the anatomy doesn't really detract from it.

>>2078417
>>2078417
Have you ever thought that these artists want to paint the world in which they see in their head? That whatever they paint is exactly the image they wanted to depict? How dare you say, "omg this painting is so unoriginal and dum the artist is jus doin this for moneys."

The artists depict a world, a people, a setting, a mood, whatever they'd like, magnificently.

>>2078475
Don't make excuses just because it's mullins. If some anon posted that garbage in the draw thread you fuckers would tear him to pieces

>>2078475
>H-he did this while his kids were playing with this tablet probably, i-it's not his fault if the anatomy is wrong, if anything it's a selling point!
My sides are gone even farther away.

>>2078475

Yep. Same as the people sperging out when they spot a cast shadow that is not in the proper angle. They feel like they are so superior for spotting a physical error when in reality the artist is absolutely aware of it, but made the decision because he thought it enhanced the image. Tasteful stylization, you could call it.

>>2078478
It's not just excuses, it's just people are shitting on him to try to rile people up. Yeah, the proportions on the forearm in that painting are not correct. It looks weird as fuck when you have only that on your screen fullsize. But honestly in the context of the whole image, it's barely noticeable at all. If you look at meeting.jpg then you will notice the boy scout dude is missing a hand. Obviously it's a mistake, but you won't notice it right away and it doesn't ruin the image or undo the other amazing things happening in the painting.

And the gladiator image is an interesting one, because the anatomy is fucked up, but if you try to "fix" it then the pose and image loses a lot of energy and just looks like crap.

Anyways, Mullins is human and has mistakes in his paintings, so does everyone. Doesn't stop him from being the best digital painter in the world.

I really like Sergey Kolesov. I am not in an art school and I've yet to have a teacher. But, I'm in the process of learning how to paint digitally. However, I'm drastically bad at it. I watch and read tutorials and try to study artist I like. But, i end up failing over and over again without any signs of improvement. Does anyone have any tips or can point me to where I can find some helpful notes? Would really appreciate it. Thanks.

>>2078473

>>2078485
>But honestly in the context of the whole image, it's barely noticeable at all.
Whoever pointed that out obviously noticed it.

>>2078477
>The artists depict
Your idols regurgitate. If it wasn't painted before, if it can't be painted by formula, then they don't have the imagination nor the inventiveness to do the work justice. But why should they? They guy commissioning the work isn't truly imaginative either.

>>2078428

You're equal parts pretentious and ignorant.

>>2077736
>>2077845
this is a mullins piece as well?

So, what's funny is my art history teacher for this last semester is a painter, so he's really into 19th century painters.

Beyond that, though, at the end of the course today he brought up slides on digital paintings, and there were like 4 Craig Mullins pieces! I was like, "yep, craig mullins again." ..
"craig mullins." It was freaking hilarious! He didn't know who he was, so I emailed him craig mullins' site, and Jaime Jones stuff, too. He also asked me if there are any art sites I know of besides deviantart. I emailed him artstation, drawcrowd(which is meh). I'll get back to this post when he responds back to my mail. Maybe I should send him over some hi-rez digital paintings too!

>>2077972
>http://www.mediafire.com/download/32j8m38fj2i35yv/library.zip

Anon where did you get these from? Is there more? My mind was blown and I feel like I learned a fuckton from just looking at these. I have a ton of super high res images, by all the good guys (nothing that wasn't posted here though) but had never seen those Mullins pieces (not even in low res).

I would kill for more.

>>2078489
Barely noticeable doesn't mean it can't be noticed.

>>2078501
They were being passed around amongst pro circles. I reuploaded them cause the original link stopped working after a while. Dunno how they originally got out. Mullins talked about the images a bit when he was in Toronto though, basically said they were private commissions from a rich guy (got rich selling buying comics off stores going out of business then selling them online) who is writing a fanfic combining things from Edgar Rice Burroughs stories, so like Tarzan and John Carter are shaking hands in meeting.jpg for example. I think he said the guy published his book and is charging hundreds or thousands for each copy. My memory is a bit hazy on exact details, and I'm not even sure how much Mullins knew of all the details. Anyways, that's all there is for the images, sorry.

>>2078511

Crazy story. Anyway, thanks for sharing what you have!

>>2078485

no it simply doesn't look professional. for someone with the skillset and education he has this is very low and i bet if you asked him for an opinion on it today he wouldn't be holding it in such regard as you are. i shouldn't have to zoom out to appreciate it, especially as a digital artwork. if you post something at that resolution it should look good at that resolution. as said before, if some anon posted this in the draw thread you would not be stringing together excuses like you are now

>>2078324
>I was never popular in high-school so popularity as a concept is bad >:(

>>2078514
that image is way better than anything recently being posted in the draw thread. Either people wouldn't give a shit, people would tell the guy to finish it because it has potential, or people would like it how it is. If you actually posted in the drawthread you wouldn't be making such stupid statements.

>>2078514
I mean given his skillset and experience, yeah it is a bit odd I suppose. You're right in that if you pointed it out to him he'd probably agree it's off and maybe go back and fix it. If it was posted in the draw thread, well probably there would be a shitstorm since it is obviously a Mullins painting, and if Mullins posted on /ic/ it would be a huge deal :P

That being said, I don't think it is such a horribly detracting mistake to ruin the image. I didn't even notice it until the anon pointed it out, and it doesn't irk me when looking at the entire image (her face is such a strong impact your eye goes there and skips over her arm), it only is really bothersome when isolated. I guess just because it is Mullins people are hopping on the mistake and yelling and screaming moreso than usual. Fact of the matter is, it's not a huge deal in the image, and getting caught up on it is a bit silly.

>>2078473
You're saying that nearly anyone in India or China could paint as well as Ruan Jia / Mullins, if their subject matter is video game or fantasy illustrations.

Holy fucking shit. You are actually autistic. And you'll never, ever succeed.

>>2078587
>taking things this literal
>calling others autistic

>>2078594
Go ahead and explain to me how what he said isn't retarded. I'll wait.

>>2078601
>>2078587
different anon here, youre coming off like a major sperglord right now fyi

>>2078620
so the guy who has been shitting up the thread with "video game and fantasy art is all unoriginal and takes no skill" is fine, but the guy calling him out is a sperglord? lol

>>2078623
what stops them from both being retarded, anon?

>>2078623
One's a shitposting troll, the other is a sperglord. Not hard to follow.

>>2078219
>that photobash
Disgusting.

>>2078473
> you could hire nearly anyone in India or China to produce the junk you see in this thread

You couldn't paint anything of that quality even if your life and the life of your entire family depended on it.

What noobs like you don't understand is that the subject matter doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things when it comes to technically great executed art. it's a bunch of geometric shapes, colors and light and different materials. None of that is influenced by the fact that it's a fantasy illustration or a video game concept art. Just like none of Leyendecker's or Rockwell's work is technique wise any less good because it's some fashion magazine and newspaper illustrations, even though the very same type of uneducated morons like you were desperately trying to convince others of exactly that back in their days.

>>2078270
You are a fucking retard, stop playing strawman, he made good points, and I agree with him, they have basically everything at bay with their computers and yet they resort to high resolution polished video game art, it's just boring. Ruan Jia has pictures up his website of traditionally drawn and painted stuff and it's much more grasping than the weirdly looking fantasy shit he puts out digitally.

I'm not a concept artist but I can hardly imagine someone going like what you just said, if needed, bigger tits and ass are so fucking easy to make in the game engine later that you would not pay some Mullins guy a few thousand a pop for some over polished pair of tits.

They do refined and finished paintings and yet they still don't look overly impress, at least in my opinion, I don't have problems with kitsch, but I don't like most of the pictures.

>>2078475
So you vigorously masturbate to this guy? I don't know how you can be so far up someone's ass, this looks like shit, regardless of the fucked up anatomy, the only good thing in there is the shield and I bet he photobashed that.
Open your eyes, fucked up anatomy is not bad per se, but defending someone for not doing it properly just because "muh idol" is fucking retarded and only goes to show why you don't amount to anything as an artist, but in fact only as another follower on his Facebook page.

>>2078485
Why do you think he's the best digital artist? Because he does overrated concept art? I can understand love for Jia but Mullins brushwork and construction, also the amount of detail in his "high quality" portfolio are all cheap-he sells art to people who really have never educated themselves on the topic, never developed a taste for it, therefore he gets away with doing this shit.

Get your head out of his ass, digital at the point it's at this point is a fucking shame and I really doubt that it will ever take the lead in producing real fine art, it just lacks the person who pushes the boundaries. Also no one will ever pay more than their concept artist pay for that "art", nobody buys digital art in the first place, because it's not unique in a sense of a traditional painting, they are divided completely.

One of my art teacher makes top notch art yet his taste in art seems so weird to me. He dislikes frazetta, and although he liked what he saw of mullins, out of all the ones in google images he seemed to be mostly interested in pic related.

>>2081318

Funny. That is actually one of the Mullins pieces that are most memorable to me, because ages ago when I was first starting with digital art I spent a ton of time admiring it, and trying to study it even. Sort of unsuccessfully.

>>2081176
Not him and I'm by no means one of the Mullins worshippers who thinks he's beyond criticism and the best ever, but the fact that you think this is shit says a lot about you and your complete and utter lack of knowledge. It's a quick sketch full of minor mistakes, but what it does, it does very well. It quickly establishes a scene with great colors and light and a very strong value statement.

>the only good thing in there is the shield and I bet he photobashed that.

That sentence right there shows just how incredibly weak you must be as an artist. Both when it comes to actual skill and theoretical knowledge.

Who's better then Mullins then ? :/

Mullins for Art God Emperor.

>>2081176
>the only good thing in there is the shield and I bet he photobashed that
If you took that part out I would have thought you were serious, but that line makes it too obvious you're trolling.

>>2081318
Weird, I don't think I've really met anyone who dislikes Frazetta. The only ones who don't like him are people who don't like his subject matter, but even they admit his art skills were really good.

And like that other anon mentioned, that Mullins piece is a memorable one for me. It's just so perfect in every way, and manages to succeed at many things within one image. great mood/atmosphere, colour, lighting, composition, a variety of textures and materials, and enough weirdness of design and stuff to stand out and not feel generic in any way. It's also in a really nice level of finish, like it's kinda tight but also loose in a lot of areas, jsut a very nice balance of finish everywhere.

>>2077736

>>2077736

just bumping to upload these here so i can look at them when i move over to my laptop in my bed

> But I had super-high res pictures of his work, where every brush stroke is visible. So I zoomed in. His mind was blown the fuck out. He was so impressed, he went around showing it to his colleagues and then the students, telling us we should learn this "digital" stuff asap. He even started talking about arranging digital drawing classes somehow.

My 58 years old art teacher can't be this cute.

>>2078487
copying and tracing isn't bad for the beginning but for usual people round here would recommend to start from the beginning by working yourself through the sticky and loomis aso.

>>2077736
>He was so impressed, he went around showing it to his colleagues and then the students, telling us we should learn this "digital" stuff asap. He even started talking about arranging digital drawing classes somehow.
Was not expecting that good end.

Best reaction I've got (outside of someone assuming my painting was made with acryllic or oil) was begrudging admittance that the work is good.
There's still this stigma that digital art is somehow cheating or artificial, and with that comes animosity from traditional painters.

You did good, OP.

>>2077738
Holy shit yes.
Any amount of detail you put into your paintings is just totally lost at 72 DPI unless you either
1. print it out and sacrifice some of your colors
or
2. upload it in such a way that people can zoom in
Neither of which are ideal.

>>2083012
I think he might have been worried about our employability somewhat.

He knows most illustration work is done on a computer these days, but the school teches only traditional. There's no program to integrate graduates into the modern industries, so some people end up at KFC, lel.

>>2083044
Well Hell, if he's worried about about employability, he should invest in silkscreening equipment, since that's what's trendy in all illustration that isn't concept art right now.

>>2078288
> Phil Hale
to me, this dude looks like how a traditional Peleng might look like. Pretty cool stuff.

>>2081345
why do most of his images available online have all of these horrible sharpening artifacts all over them? is it because he uses the bicubic sharper option when reducing them? i really wish that wasn't the default option for reducing image size in ps.

>>2087269
It's his style. He spends too much time messing around with the images in the most stupid ways "experimenting" he calls it and by the end of his deadlines he doesn't have enough time to work on his edges, so he just throws a sharpening filter on them and calls it a day.
It's because of this "experimenting" that he got almost fired from multiple jobs too. And before someone calls bullshit on this, he said as much in his Sijun posts.

>>2087289
Ye it's cool tho

>After these 3 pics I was fired

Then you hear accounts from Alberto Mielgo when they did Tron togethor that he's perfect and you as the AD don't have to change anything, but you do learn a lot

>>2087289
well it looks bad and he should stop doing it. a slightly soft looking image is preferable to an artificially sharp one.

>>2087314

That's just like, your opinion man.

>>2087316
which one of these looks better to you?

>>2087317
bottom one

>>2087317
Top

>>2087317
it's shit.

>>2087317
Top.
Bottom is making me want to squint my eyes.

>>2087327
but why can't mullins see that?

>>2087317
The third one that doesn't exist, the one in which he actually worked on the edges instead of resorting to cheap filtering.

>>2087317

different anon, but IMO the top one is too sharp and the bottom one too blurry, a combination of the two would be ideal, reserving the sharpness for the focal points.

>>2087337

maybe something like this

>>2087333

it's not filters cunttits, it's the compression algorhytm

>>2087341
>he dindu nuffin
>m-muh algorithms

>>2087339
this

>>2077960
This image is abusing scale so much, windows on the castle are bigger than windows just by the water

>>2087405

>'lord of the rings was so unrealistic. dragons don't exist and neither does magic'

>>2087269
>>2087289

Almost every good digital artist uses sharpening when they are done. It has nothing whatsoever to do with not having time to work on their edges or dumb shit like that. You can know exactly where to put sharp edges, but unless you make them with the lasso tool, every brushstroke gets a little washed out and blurry when resizing the image. Muillins does overdo it sometimes, but generally, sharp images that are sharpened in the right places do look good and you are a noob and a hipster for claiming otherwise.

>>2087417
>You can know exactly where to put sharp edges, but unless you make them with the lasso tool
So unless he spends time on them the picture will look blurry. You don't say!
>Muillins does overdo it sometimes
It's not like that's what I said or anything.
>but generally, sharp images that are sharpened in the right places do look good
And where did I say they don't?

>>2087417
someone's is a noob for not liking huge, disgusting sharpening halos? just look at this shit.

>>2087426
You can't argue with Mullins fanboys. Even if you point out objectively wrong anatomy, they will pull out excuses out of their ass such as "the pose wouldn't look cool if he used correct anatomy" or "it's not the focal point so it's ok". You stand no chance arguing over edges.

>>2087407
>lotr had dragons and magic. Therefore, the windows of a fantasy castle don't have to follow perspective.

>>2087441

Not him but why cant the windows of a fantasy castle just be ridiculously hyooj?

Wouldn't that look pretty cool?

Of course its probably more likely crabmullets made a mistake.

>>2087441

who says they are windows you fat fucking cunt? i immediatly assumed they were either banners or some shit, or gigantic room sized windows like this anon assumes >>2087445

only a mental midget like you would immediatly assume a mistake in somebody elses work because you recognize something as a specific thing.

>>2087445
>>2087447
>room sized windows
Nigga look at the houses at the feet of the castle. Those windows are as big as two fucking multiple (3+ going by their window sizes) storey houses staked on top of each other.
>why cant the windows of a fantasy castle just be ridiculously hyooj?
Because that's Rapunzel castle, which isn't inhabited by fucking giants.
>i immediatly assumed they were either banners or some shit
I'm sure you did you damn fanboy. Banners that light up in the shadow exactly like windows lit from the inside.

>>2087454
>Because that's Rapunzel castle, which isn't inhabited by fucking giants.

Shit If I could I'd have huge fucking 3 story windows in my castle overlooking my baller waterfountain city.

>>2087441
>...the interior contains three floors of accommodation.
>The entrance façade has a doorway that rises almost to the height of the columns emphasising the monumentality of the building – even though it is entered through a door that is half the height of the outside door. This change is scale between exterior and interior allows the Casino to contain many more rooms than it would appear from outside.