/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

fuck i hate symbolism. Try and evoke an emotion, failing that draw porn. At least it will do something for someone.

>>2859547
yeah other anon is right. youre painting those dumb ass fb political comics. technique is okay though.

i guess what needed to be said has been said OP. symbolism is out. Hemerroid is in.

>>2859756
>>2859577
Agree with these, except i do like the one with a bunch of guys looking at their phones.

>>2859761
if you cant tell the difference between a cup and a phone youll never make it.

the first one is actually pretty good, the rest are cheesy as all hell. its like banksy trying to be magritte.

>>2859547
Seems fine to me. Don't think there's anything wrong with symbolism, as long as it's not too obvious, or presented in a unique way. The third one (guy having his brain removed) is neither a unique message or presentation. I personal like the second, and a couple others, even if similar stuff has been done before.

Not sure why some of the backgrounds are so messy compared to the main subject, because it could be part of the symbolism (neatly presented people in a messy/chaotic world) but it just looks unfinished, and the texture draws attention away from the center. This is mainly referring to the 7th and 8th painting (first two light-bulb heads) as some of your backgrounds are a more solid colour.
Also, I think you should have taken more care with the 2nd pictures background, as all the straight lines are off.

>>2859762
if you keep meme-ing, you'll never make it

>>2859779
ignore this advice

>>2859785
if you keep giving him (You)s, he'll never go away

oh who am i kidding let him shitpost instead of actually draw his /abeg/ tier shit

>>2859811
>>2859785
please. i already have it made.

abeg?

>>2859547
you need to work on your backgrounds.
they are complete dogshit. Don't rush them, they are as important as the actual subject

>>2860335
Those are backdrops not backgrounds...

>>2860335
You really should study a bit before giving advice.

>>2860350
that image only proves my point.
you cant compare that with his messy, rushed, shitty backgrounds

>>2859820
blog?

>>2860355
No it doesn't stop acting like a backdrop texture is a thing

>>2860369
>stop acting like a backdrop texture is a thing
Where have I said they were a thing?
Have you looked at the OP? most of his paintings have a clearly rushed backdrop texture. If you are going to do them, spend time on them and do them right.

it would've looked better if he spend twice as much time as I did on this shitty MSPaint edit

>>2860380
Who fucking cares either of those? You have a backdrop ocd if anything

>>2860384
I care

>>2860380
The left one looks better, desu.

>>2860386
Well stop, you have a problem

>>2860384
>who cares about something that occupies 50%+ of the canvas
a bunch of people do

>>2859547
The only one that doesn't hit you over the head with the symbolism is the Rubik's cube one. It's got a few extra layers that keep it from being plainly obvious. Even though they're simple layers, just by having the functional background along with the connection between the figure and the reflection keeps it from being an instantaneous "capitalism bad" type of message. By engaging the viewer by just that slight amount it keeps from being patronizing.

Then, on the other hand, there's the stack of guys holding cups. It's similarly "not obvious", unlike say, the guy getting his brain removed, but its message is not only unclear but its symbolism is simplistic and hackneyed (coffee/starbucks/wageslave/etc). I like that it engages the viewer with its unusual imagery, but there doesn't seem to be much being said, and that's only exacerbated by the empty background.

The lightbulb-head symbol has some potential too I think, from just the three pieces it seems too obvious as symbolizing "ideas" or "intelligence". I feel like you could do a lot more with them, adding layers of nuance and humor, like a Christmas light getting into an argument with an eco-friendly bulb or something.

The rendering is legit, but you don't seem to be taking full advantage of it conceptually. The green money and yellow bulb dripping seem to say little more than "wouldn't it look cool if this was dripping?"

>>2860380
The one on the right is more distracting. The hard gradation by his elbows is distracting. The original on the left feels more naturalistic and feeds back into the figure -- well, at least somewhat. I do agree that it needs more work, but clean background isn't inherently better than messy.

>>2860413
>The hard gradation by his elbows is distracting.
well, its a shitty edit on Paint, I just wanted to show the difference between a simpler bg vs OPs ( i would include gradients and shit if I had that kind of skill on mspaint). Im not going to spend more than 5 minutes on it.
>I do agree that it needs more work
thats my point, it needs work.

>>2859547
bad for oils, waste of money if you can do the same with acrylics

>>2860398
Nope just you