/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3784115
I hate this guy’s accent.

who?

>>3784115
This guy's techniques will actually murder your brain and kill your potential, change my mind.

Learned so much from this guy. It's funny how 99% of stuff I've learned about digital painting is from traditional artists.

>>3784131
I think you’d have to be a real moron to come to this conclusion. His techniques are foolproof and better than 95 percent of paid content imo.

>>3784126
So do I.
>>3784131
>>3784392
>>3784400
Yes, there is some merit to his techniques for beginners, but only if you want to paint something carefully controlled in a specific light box. He never paints high key pictures, I don't think he'd be able to. And his landscapes are donkey ass, pic

>>3784638
dunno whats wrong with it, looks pretty good

>>3784638
I agree with everything you just said. Working like that has its place but there's also something dogmatic and cult like that turns me away from him. Some of his portrait techniques are on point but my bullshitometer goes off whenever he opens his mouth.

Why his paintings look like soulless photocopies ? You cant tell that about old masters

>>3784662
Because the old masters didn't have photocopiers you fucking retard

>>3784662
Contrary to things like the Vermeer controversy, most old masters never used tricks and devices to photocopy. He's using some half baked atelier nonsense instead of making art.

>>3784392
Same, but I also picked up traditional painting too. It’s a bit humbling when your traditional art is considerably worse than your digital (and mine is still bad). But the IRL communities are pretty comfy. Makes me wonder why the traditional only artists on this board are so cunty, but I guess that’s just an /ic/ thing.

>>3784115

I love his concept of "painting ugly" and how he stresses to paint without blending.

>>3784673
Trad work occupies a different space that /ic/ isn't suited for. I'm going to be a cunt in saying this, it's like a kids table compared to IRL groups for either medium. We don't have the same goals and have a very different conceptual approach that's almost adversarial. I do both and I have to say there's a perceived elitism (and some actual elitism) to tradfags that digifags shun. On the other hand, I don't feel like I improved until I did large format sketches and was physically painting. Critiques of trad work from digital only artists are pretty weak here too.

IRL nets you more people who can talk about art and have similar goals.

>>3784643
Oh come on, this is a good landscape.

>>3784673
I hope I'm not cunty.

>>3784664
This comment is a sleeper hit

>>3784822
Tree on the left strangely blends with the ground creating a weird tangent. The rest is cool.

>>3784859
I can't see what you mean.
But MD paints this in a few hours plein air, as opposed to a controlled environment over days/weeks, like MC.

>>3784822
It's very nice. Cozy little Italian town

>>3784822
there can be more than one good landscape.
this one being good doesnt make the other bad

>>3784891
I know.
But it is bad.
Good landscape, pic related.

>>3784895
and what makes this good and the other bad?

>>3784903
Composition

>>3784905
composition alone doesnt make a painting good

>>3784905
Can you expand on that?

>>3784903
>>3784905
I posted the landscapes. Yes comp, but also colour handling, tones, expressiveness, variety of brushwork. The Carder painting fails to conform to the rules of light/colour/saturation in actual nature, hence going down the route of 'muh style'. But all his other work explicitly maintain adherence to replication of what nature shows us.
So it's either intentionally bad 'muh style', or just bad.

>>3784912
No, but all good paintings have to be designed.

>>3784912
you can't have a good painting without it.

This guy taught me some brilliant stuff, but god is his style of painting tedious.

>>3784131
Care to elaborate? He got me back into oil painting, which I appreciate, but I decided not to keep strictly using his approach after a few panels.

I mixed up a batch of his medium, and stopped using it because I felt like it made the paint too slippery. I found I like a simpler medium, with just a little mixed in as needed. From what I've read it's better for the longevity of the paint film too.

He passes over stuff like transparent and opaque pigments, drying times, paint layers and so on, but that's appropriate for teaching alla prima to beginners.

I'm concerned I've been leaning on the color checker too much though.

I tried using a proportional divider for a while too, but went back to using a sighting stick.

>>3784638
IIRC he's mainly a portrait artist

>>3785235
>He passes over stuff like transparent and opaque pigments, drying times, paint layers and so on,
This was one of the big things I didn't like. Nothing wrong with skipping it, but some of his choices are a little odd.

>>3785302
You mean like choice of colors?

Permanent alizarin is really strong. I've also experienced the 'chalky' texture in burnt umber that I've read some authors talk about, and I'm trying to phase it out with van dyke brown.

I've also taken a more old fashioned approach of starting with a palette of earth tones for some subjects... I can see why Carder advocates using a palette of strong tinting primaries, but I find it's a lot less painful to mix colors when starting with an earth tone.

>>3784638
>merit for beginners
What’s the problem here? I can’t count the number of times Carder himself has emphasized the fact that this is a beginner method that nearly all of his students grow out of. The process is geared towards training your eye and mind for painting. It’s not a treatise on creativity or aesthetic.

>>3785374
The color choices are a little weird but make some sense. I find some things about it I just don't like at all, like a dull blue red paired with a dark red blue. Depending on the paint, van dyke brown is just burnt umber and lamp black.

I also prefer the old fashioned approach and find secondaries or a split primary around some earths is much more intuitive. Leaning that hard on blue, black and white for value control is a horrible way to paint.

>>3784131
I'm no oil painter and his techniques probably work just out of being incredibly autistic but things like using a color checker for every brush stroke sounds like absolutely brain numbing. It's impossible to have fun painting like this.

Also LMAO at his paintings from imagination, I can legit do better

>>3784638
>Chocolate raaaaaaain~

>>3784115
How long do you have to spend in a depressive state to sound as joyless and dead inside? 8 years and counting here, it's coming along kinda slowly.

>>3785605
A total lack of affect is really common in artists. It's probably some kind of autism.

>>3785605

He sounds normal to me. Maybe you're just a shitty zoomer who can't pay attention unless the guy acts like a duracell bunny on coke?

He seems like a cool guy. I don't know what criticisms you could really level at him. He even says his technique is mostly pedagogical and advises to try other things after having done several paintings with the technique. He doesn't hate on other styles.

I'm sure some autist will get mad about him selling paint though