/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4164314

>>4164315

>>4164316

>>4164320

>>4164323

>>4164327
Aaaand that'll be it, hopefully something tickles your fancy.

Everything you posted was shit.

Anyways OP, here's a video to get you started on how to think about lineweight. There are many ways to go about it and you'll find something that pleases you eventually, but this video should be a good kickstart on how to THINK about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0zl5NnEAyU

So, I've been wanted to know who the artists are behind some of the drawings that have been posted. Since there will be other people looking for them:

>>4164314 imizu
https://gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=3091927

>>4164320 oshake
https://gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=1910875

>>4164390 space jin
https://gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=3707706

Does anyone know who the artist behind >>4164323 is?

>>4164418
>I've been wanted
My brain. Short of sleep. Deterioration in progress.

>>4164418
It's also by oshake.

>>4164327
Why this though? It looks like no line variation, and then a shitty uniform border outline

>>4164433
I just posted all artists I remembered whose lineart I like for some reason. This one's very clean and has comfy curves. I'm not even a furry and had to save a bunch of naked cats and tranny Raditzes.

>>4164430
>It's also by oshake.
You're right. It's on oshake's twitter. To bad the artist in question doesn't seem to be very active anymore.

https://twitter.com/namajake/status/1049192337270665216
https://twitter.com/namajake/status/1048973565721112576

>>4164448
I counter with my own "not a furry but..."

Holy shit this examples sucks, weebs don't know shit they just post whatever crap they like.

>>4164484
Please bless us with your knowledge tastemaker-sempai

I get the logic behind thicker lines for closer objects and what-not. But is there advice somewhere on making cleaner, smoother lines? I'm unsure if I'm just not confident enough or if it's the way I hold my pencil, perhaps even the fact that my desk is a bit too high for me to properly move my arm around.

It feels like some artists are able to draw a beutiful, perfect curve with seemingly no blemishes on its smoothness. And control it's weight on top of that, it's almost superhuman. When I try it, it's not horrible, but clearly much more wobbly. At one point I get tired of CTRL Z-ing all the strokes and I just decide to tweek it with the eraser tool and filling up the gaps.

>>4164499
If You use PS thats the reason, it sucks for lines, using CSP improves your lineart by orders of magnitude, if you don't believe me just try.

>>4164503
I use Krita, and lately it has been lagging a lot more. Is CSP easy on your computer? I get the impression part of the problem is that my computer can't handle drawing software sometimes.

>>4164504
If thats the case go SAI, almost as good as CSP and less CPU intensive, also has cool stabilizer options.

>>4164508
Yeah, but it's missing a bunch of features. Dammit, I guess I could use SAI until I get a better PC.

>>4164269
This is mine and I only used lineweight.

How about some examples of bad line weights?

These look nice but i dunno what makes them good.

>>4164519
It's actually really easy. Lineweight has TWO components to it. First one is LINEVALUE (I.E. how dark the line is) Second is THICCNES.

Basically the darkest and thicker a line the closer it appears.

Why does it matter... well, if you use colour or shadow or light value, it really doesn't.

But if you are doing a figure, it's important NOT to contourn all around it in a line with the same darkness and thickness because it will confuse the eye and it won't be able to interpret depth.

Look what I made in five minutes. Which one of the following pops forward more. Nevertheless the key here is subtelty.

Other thing to notice. If you are doing a light value drawing, what matters is not the strenght of the line but how much LIGHT the object is recieving. And colour adds another dimension. The most important thing for most is to realize where the volume is the most forward and the most backward. If you can see volumes well, you can linevalue, and Lightvalue well.

>>4164538
Now that I pondered on it, the OP drawing prolly based of a dummy draw have bad linevalue. For example notice the knee bone. It's suposed to be more foward than the thigh, yet the thigh has a higher lineweight. That drawing did what I was talking about the contourns. Don't unnecesarily add contourns around a figure.

>>4164499
https://youtu.be/2IBMBhv5-os

and

https://youtu.be/NBE-RTFkXDk

Draw bigger.
Draw the same line: rotate the canvas or paper.
Practice.

I posted the first link because you can see how some lines don't look really smooth when you look closer. And that's actually the norm: most of the time when you look at an illustration you're looking it at 50% 25% the original size.

>>4164499
Don't confuse lineweight technique with Clean up. They are totally different things. Most artist have to cleanup their sketches. With practice you make beautiful lines over your initial sketch.

>>4164679
I guess my problem is too small tablet (13HD) and i usually draw with only 300dpi. Also i can't get my lineweight to feel consistent, they always feel too thin so i switch to bigger and then t becomes too thick

>>4165194
What software do you use?
If it's CSP try a brush that doesn't change with pressure, but add tapering.

>>4164315
Do you know the artist

>>4165454
Not for this one, sorry.

Unironically tradd moore.

The crabs of /ic/ hate him but its only because his mastery of precision linework is too based.

>>4165482
his style is just very strange, he's one in a million type of person if we're talking technical prowess but his entire clean up routine makes for something really unorthodox which I personally love

Scott robertson has a lecture on this subject and it's on cgpeers.
It's called "Lines, Lines, Lines", or something like that

>>4164402
This image is too gay for me, I can't look at it.