/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4048494
I really hate his style but the info he teaches is useful. Nathan Fowkes' videos on environment and color are also useful if you can put up with his non-stop ramblings about Disney.

so basically just gray out everything.

>>4048494
It looks like when you compressed a jpg multiple times.

>>4048494
I don't watch his videos because I hate the "color notes" thing, it's like chromatic aberration.
He's good but I don't like his art.

>>4048494
I like his art and I like this approach to colors (which is independent of his style).

>Do you think there are better techniques?
Techniques? No. Explanations? Maybe. For me, it helps to understand a little bit of physics behind colors, but in practice I still take Marco's approach.

>>4048494
I don't understand. So you can pic whatever color you want as long as it's grayed out?

>>4048522
>>4049213
How can you possibly don't understand when someone explain to you un the simpliest way?
Absolute state of /ic/

>>4049218
He defines "color harmony" as a group of colors displayed simultaneously to produce a pleasing effect, he then proceeds to use whatever color he wants as long as it's grayed out with a few non-grays as highlights.
He never chooses 'harmonious' colors at all, just grays.

>>4049213
>>4048522
No, simply saturation increases contrast between hues. contrast is not bad.

>>4049213
>>4048522
these are same people who shit on your art in other threads

>>4049236
Good lord...you are so sooo lost, dude.
This is the problem with tutorials and courses, people seem to just watch them with the brain turned off, then blames the course is bad of the tutorial was useless, for fuck sake puta some attention.

>>4048494
Man, this video is like a nuclear blast in my brain.

TFW you introduced /ic/ to Marco Bucci.

>>4049248
Now he's gonna get shat on for his style just like proko.

>>4049251
I hooe people here arent that stupid, Marco is top tier to learn color from, you can basically just take the instructions and adjust to your own interest, i'm most sure the ones who keep shitting on Prokek are just fucks who don't draw and come here just to annoy people.

>>4049241
The guy literally chooses gray colors at random. Zero color palettes.
His color harmony definition implies that colors HAVE to be chosen carrefully. Explain that crap to me.
Also
>dude
lol

>>4048892
>I don't watch his videos because I hate the "color notes" thing, it's like chromatic aberration.

You should be able to look at any great (realist) painter's work and see color notes. It's not a gimmick or a technique.

>>4048892

Can you see the color notes in this painting?

>>4049248
Thank you then, I discovered him through /ic/, and my art has improved drastically because of that.

>>4048514
Am I the only one annoyed by his voice?

>>4049258
A lot of his lessons are just a "video" version of Loomis. Some people prefer to learn from videos of instructors explaining concepts to them instead of just reading it from books.

I don't know why so many NGMIs say proko is bad to learn from because he's not good from drawing from imagination. Most of my favorite artists always use references a lot. And often times artists who draw strictly from imagination can only draw a limited number of things from imagination well.

>>4049241
No need to call him a whore.
>>4049263
Why do you feel the need to out yourself as a girl when no one fucking cares, you whore?

>>4049290
which voice? Fowkes or Bucci?
Im guessing you reffer to Nathan, I used to the annoyed by his voice, way to calm and soft, but later I grew used to it and its kinda relaxing.
also, as a side note, Marco Bucci is the introduction to understand artist like Nathan Fowkes himself, since Bucci works is basically Fowkes work with characters on them and way more stylized.

>>4049299
Yeah, Fowkes. Motherfucker sounds like he's telling me a bedside story. Nigga, I just want to learn composition not sleep on your lap.

>>4049297
Oh look, the incel is bothered that a girl is in the boyz club. lol
You shouldn't have any problem with me being a girl if you're not an incel loser who hates anything female.

>>4049308
>using your gender to cover your lack of skills

>>4049308
I don't have a problem with you being a girl. I have a problem with you being a self-centered attention seeking whore. No one gives a fuck if you're a girl in an art discussion, you stupid bitch.

>>4049299
Marco's take on the fundamentals is from Richard Schmid, who was his teacher.

>>4049312
>>4049316
You sound like those losers who claim that the gender of the artist is doesn't matter.
Spoiler alert, jackasses: It does.
lol

BTW are any of you morons gonna explain the video or not.

>>4048514
I don't like his style from imagination but I dig his watercolor sketches. his work on the nutcracker was aight too. his knowledge and explanations are top notch tho. Bucci, Gurney, and Sinix are probably the trifecta of youtubes that I got the most worthwhile info from.

>>4049328
it does matter to an extent since usually a male artist is more competent but its not a huge factor.
As for the video its a simple tutorial about color harmony what further information do you need ?

>>4049328
Read what you wrote again. Really. See how nonsensical your rambling is. That's the best answer you can give? Stop being dumb and hiding behind your smelly pussy to win internet points.

>>4049335
>>4049336
Are you dickwads gonna explain the video or not?
Here we got mr. child scribbles making a video about color theory by picking colors at random and I just don't get it.
Males fuckin suck at teaching.

based crab-chan

>>4049328
>>4049340
Dude, stop baiting and fuck off.

>>4049340
Only if you blow me.

>>4049356
Post your work

>>4049340
>Males fuckin suck at teaching.
Yeah, that's probably why the best online teachers are all male.

>>4049279
I see no random neon colors thrown in, no
you know very well what I was talking about when I wrote that post
people who go full retard just to play antagonistic on this board are fucking sad

Why retarded users always spawn on good threads?

>>4049418
they catch the smell of content and rush to shit it up. they can't help it anymore than flies are attracted to dung.

>>4048514
same
i don't see how the near-liberal throwing around the colors really help with the composition, they don't blend enough, not even looking at it as a thumbnail

you can see some arrangement of cools and warms, but then you have water that has both of them in it, rather saturated, making it look almost like oil rather than shallow, clear water showing dirt

he also puts an incredible amount of emphasis on the importance of shapes - even mentions how simplicity is often key - yet the contrast is often completely lost when pretty much all of his shapes are too broken and complex

am i missing something?
i can usually tell what the appeal is to a style even if i don't like it and i can see pattern to the madness, but it's difficult to find the level of consistency in his color work that i feel he claims holds immense value to him

>>4048494
I'm not really a fan of the way he uses colors, his works are too busy and muddy for my taste, and the temperatures seem confused. Still, his method has some truth to it. It's not really for me, but I guess it could be helpful to others.
My biggest gripe with it is how limited it is, and I see a lot of people make works full of muddy greys after watching his video because "using greys" is the only thing they know about color theory now.
The Purplekecelon color tutorial has been the most helpful thing to me, though it covers similar material and more. I'd recommend it to beginners more than this, cause it helped me a lot when I was a kid and I feel like it gave me the basis to have good colors now.

>>4049510
>yet the contrast is often completely lost when pretty much all of his shapes are too broken and complex
What do you mean exactly? His shapes here are quite simple, and they communicate everything nicely.

>>4049535
Muddy? Do his pictures really look muddy or grey to you? Also, if anything, the tempreatures in his work are never confused, he puts a lot of attention to it.

>>4049541
I mean it looks muddy in the sense it feels like a kid's fingerpainting to me, there's colors spread all over the place with no sense to it, so when you look at them all at once they just seem like a mess. Like the blue and red highlights in the water, and the background.
It may be a matter of opinion, but I really disagree on you about the temperatures. The bridge, for example, is mostly warm but it has these very cold blue highlights, right next to warm purple splotches, next to patches of saturated yellow and green. You've got cold colors right next to warm colors in a way that neither really contrasts well, nor harmonizes well, and it just looks unpleasant to me.

Pic unrelated, I just wanna post art I think has nice colors if we're gonna be discussing them.

>>4049551
You are arguing with people who want to prove your stance of "I don't like it" is objectively wrong. It's no use. I think his colors look like vomit and hurt my eyes. These guys like it, and lots of people like it, just like a lot of people love chromatic aberration and Instagram filters.

>>4049570
you just dont understand color theory yet.

>>4049570
Yeah, I mainly just wanted to explain my viewpoint and have an excuse to post some pretty art with nice colors

>>4049535
>Purplekecelon color tutorial

I see a livestream about color from 2014 on youtube, is that the one?

>>4049577
Nah, this is it
http://stuff.veekun.com/pkcolor/

TFW when people just can understand Bucci manager of color is a really stylized and push one, you can tone it down and Will work the same, it depends on YOUR TAKE, and what fits you the most.
Pic very related.

>>4049582

Wtf? That's some of the worst colors I've ever seen

>>4049551
I really can't understand how can you not like taht bridge, I think it's the best part of the picture. Most colors in it are rather gray, with saturated highlights in the blue (the surfaces facing the sky). The gray warms are the surfaces lit by the light reflected from the grass, and the purples balance it all out nicely, making the whole bridge still appear in the shadow.

>>4049595

People seem to think that the point of Marco Bucci's tutorials is to give a guide how to paint just like him. They can't see how he teaches principles and not techniques.

>>4049596
Fucking this

>>4049572
>You can't say or know a food tastes bad unless you're a 5-star chef

>>4049595
Maybe we just have different artistic tastes, anon

>>4049600
That doesnt apply here, since you are pretty much being subjective sin e you can't make a technically accurate critique because you lack the knowledge requiered for it.

>>4049605
>Subjective
And we all know subjectivity has no place in art

>>4049608
there's surprisingly a lot of objectivity in art.For example if you see sakimichan's piece with 6 fingers it is objectively incorrect.Same for thinking a piece with harmonic colors muddy or noisy. thats now how muddy colors look like.

>>4049605
>you need to be a trained artist or curator to know if you like how a painting looks or not because every trained artist and curator likes the same exact things based on their knowledge of art.

>>4049614
so you hate artworks with good anatomy and like /beg/ tier art ?

>>4049618
>strawman
some people like macro bucci's work and some people don't. they don't need to be experts in color theory to form their own opinions about his work
get over it

>>4049624
we're not talking about liking or not liking his work. we are talking about if the colors are harmonic or not.I dont like his messy brushwork and his subject matter. that doesnt mean his color are wrong.

>>4049614
Yeah dude, whatever.

>>4049618
That's quite the jump to make, and for that matter there are a lot of people who do dislike realistic anatomy in preference of stylized works with widely stylized anatomy. We wouldn't have cartoons if that wasn't the case.

>>4049626
Let's take the definition Bucci gives us for harmony in the video:
>Harmony: the combination of simultaneously displayed colors to produce a pleasing effect.
Whether or not the colors have a "pleasing effect" is subjective, each individual person may find the colors pleasing or not pleasing. There seem to be serveral anons in this thread who do find them pleasing, and some who do not. Therefore, harmony is subjective by Bucci's own definition.
His colors aren't wrong, some people just don't like them.

>>4049626
>>4049624
training allows one to recognize skill and quality. liking something or not is an entirely different matter altogether. if you don't like sushi going to the best sushi place in the world won't help you.

>>4049634
He is talking about a pleasant effect on most people, if you take a sample of 100 people, most probably 85 or more are gonna like the colors, the rest maybe don't, thats why on animation films they use effects proven to he pleasant for the big chunk of public, if you like other options, thats ok.

>>4049635
Basically this, out there are people who just can't stand a Bouguereau, and look a this quality of work, theres almost nothing technically speaking you can critique, but the subject matter or the approach, same goes for Masters like Michael Angelo, Caravaggio, David, Etc.

>>4049626
Regardless of what theories are taught in western-based art schools, color harmony and other aspects of visual art are still mostly subjective. This is the reason why art developed differently all over the world and why there have been so many art movements in western art. It's strange for someone who keeps babbling on and on about theory wouldn't recognize this

>>4049639
it's not surprising this mistake is being perpetuated since most posters here are from third world countries. they lack even high school equivalency in education. hard to argue with these people when all they want is to sling shitty replicas of existing artists for dirt wages. they even argue or outright troll people giving them real information.

>>4049637
So art quality is determined by statistical analysis now? It just seems a little absurd to me to say that if a lot of people like something it MUST be necessarily good.

>>4049645
Holy shit man, I don't know it you are trolling or you just can't see something si fucking evident, going to tell you this maybe this way you understand
Some colors trigger certain emotions, on most of people, on the right circunstancia, like red for rage, green for jealousy and warms for love, it is built in us by nature and how se experience light and color, is not something statistically sterile, statistic are just to demostrate the point.

>>4049645
some 'artwork' is designed based on market projections. how are you this retarded? literally every corner of the economy has this stuff.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bliss_point_(food)

>>4049535
It's too bad people don't recommend it more to other people because of the bad reputation the artist has. Even if the artist is a nutjob, it doesn't mean their tutorials isn't still helpful.

>I'd recommend it to beginners more than this, cause it helped me a lot when I was a kid

When you think about it, purplekecleon's color tutorial was pretty much one of the only color tutorials truly made for beginners when it was released almost a decade ago. The only other "good" in-depth color tutorial was from that handprint website. Despite having this autistic level knowledge of the science and physics of colors, the colors in the artist's own personal work was shit.

PK's tutorial really helped a lot of artists at that time whose really popular today.

>>4049593
Purplekecleon's art was the best around 2011-2014. At least when she was doing Pokemon art. I know now with the proliferation of modern social media amazing fanartists are now a dime a dozen so a lot of her art looks shit in comparison. But when DeviantArt was still King and the most popular social media site for artists, purplekecleon was one of the best Pokemon fanartists.

>I still have a soft spot for this predator nutjob because she was one of the first artists I looked up to when I was a teen. Too bad her art degraded so badly over the years ;_;

>>4049510
Bucci is just going through his "ive learned everything i can and im still not satisfied with my work since no matter what i do sargent still looks better" phase and is trying to push all the rules he knows to extreme in search of his own break throughs since he thinks cant learn from other painters anymore. (And maybe he cant)
Im sure the masters plateau is well studied im just spouting what ive observed in good teachers like watts, nathan fowkes, richard schmid. At some point great painters get philosophical and start looking everywhere and anywhere for inspiration to push beyond stagnation, and their work gets worse before it gets better. Or maybe its just the ones who teach since thsts all i know about.

>>4049572
Kill yourself

>>4050304
not him but kys unironically

>>4050305
>"I don't like this artist"
>"NO YOU ARE WRONG, YOU'RE NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO APPRECIATE IT"
is retarded in visual arts
especially when I said I think he's good, I just don't like his shit
so fuck off imbecile
I fucking HATE this board, it's literally 100% keyboard warriors

>>4050307
pyw faggot

>>4050280
>Bucci is just going through his "ive learned everything i can and im still not satisfied with my work since no matter what i do sargent still looks better" phase and is trying to push all the rules he knows to extreme in search of his own break throughs since he thinks cant learn from other painters anymore. (And maybe he cant)

He always gave me vibes of a guy who wants to do more "serious" work but is locked into doing kid's stuff. This video he made about how he lost a huge job for a film director confirmed my suspicions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW3jkUM_lSM

>>4049551
Dude, the image you posted is like a perfect example of the concept Bucci explains.Just look at those wings and the splotches of warm vs cool colors there. Bucci doesn't execute it nearly as well as that artist does, but it's the exact same concept.

>>4050317

What do you mean by "kid's stuff " and "serious stuff"? Working on a animated Hollywood film would qualify for both, for instance.

>>4050317
He doesn't want to do more "serious work", he loves doing kid's stuff more than anything else. He actually wants to make a kids book with that green monster character, but he doesn't have the time to study writing properly. He enjoys painting like a kid, and translating that feeling of childish fun through his work. He's done lots of stuff in various styles throughout his career, and now he's focusing on what he loves.

>>4050347
Hi Marco

>>4050398
Hi Mark.

>>4050316
>post work
>"pyw faggot" anon doesn't reply with his work
eat dick

>>4050317
that's funny because he struck me as the opposite. i love his lessons but always roll my eyes when he chooses to demonstrate with that big, green blob. i thought he must love children's illustration if he's always doing it, even in his youtube vids

>>4050453
The answer to all these "why"s is: it's part of his branding. He made research and decided that he needs to stick to that, maybe he can deviate a little but he needs to stay within that genre.
Not dissing him or anything, but radically shifting subject matter or mood or style can be a career killing move.

>>4050398
He talks about this in his paid courses.

Anyone else really annoyed with the "intern" stuff in his videos?

>>4050520
Yeah, even though I love both his art and his videos, the intern and some other gimmickas are annoying. I hope he doesn't go further with them. The character design series is promising in this regard.

>>4049279
this is more of an example of why you have a limited color pallet