/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>5019807
Don't draw things you haven't ever really seen without a photo ref? At least, not while livestreaming it.

>>5019807
why wouldn't you want to end up like him? he can draw for shit yet makes a lot of dosh teaching useless nonsense in the photobash/tracing era of memes and porn

>>5019807
Big big chances are you'll never come even close to his skills and fame. Don't worry crabby.

>>5019809
Got it.

>>5019810 i want to draw something i envision in my mind immediately, instead if havung to lay out millions of bases and etc. (i can draw with bases)

>>5019813
Not looking for fame, fakefag.

Make sure your karma is good before you die and when you get reincarnated, coming back as that shit will not be a worry.

>>5019807
How do you not end up successful and skilled artist? Just keep doing whatever you're doing.

>>5019807
Think, drawing should be always half thinking.

you're ngmi anyways so just keep doing what you're doing

>>5019807
Draw from imagination.

Doesn't matter if you're /beg/. The artist that chooses to neglect his tendency towards the undefined creativity in favor of realistic accuracy will always end up with the death of their artistic soul. Many fall into this trap by thinking they can just "be creative" after their mastery of accuracy without realizing they sacrificed their imagination in order to attain it.

Every time you carefully copy a still life, precisely measure proportions with your pencil tip or grids, or methodically plot perspective in a perfectly calculated manner, you're killing the soul that would enable you to be creative in the first place. Whenever you do these things or similar, you are telling yourself "my mind cannot wander nor experiment as I must instead see what's before me, and only what's before me, exactly as it is; no more or less". And through the years of doing so that's exactly what you become: no more or less; An entity in the artistic limbo empty of any spark to create what is not there. You forsake the ability to be the god of your mind for the sake of being a mirror of your reality.

Accuracy and realism should support your imagination, and how you practice should encourage such. Any approach that would instead make these two clash will kill your soul eventually.

>>5019817
i want to draw something i envision in my mind immediately
just trace/photobash and say that you did
reality and truth are irrelevant when your identity is filtered through the screen
why do you even care that you "draw something you envision in your mind"? Nobody will care that you really did, and nobody will care about your ideas. You might as well quit drawing and just keep imagining things

>>5019807
>>5019809
>>5019810
>>5019813
Am I suppose to know who this is?

>>5019857
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4h4-2HRHaHI

>>5019857
kangaroo man
>>5019843
litreally nobody cares if what you draw is drawn from imagination or not, and nobody cares if you're drawing a subject that isn't widespread enough that you can just trace it

>>5019866
begone crab

>>5019871
How the fuck am I crabbing if I am literally telling people to be practical and stop wasting their fucking time?

>>5019866
>you can just trace it
Imagine thinking you can get anything truly great by just mindlessly tracing. Imagine chasing the easy way and willingly being a soullet.

>>5019882
>Hey I want to get better at drawing
>no, don't draw, it's a waste of time :^)

>>5019885
You can with a few terabytes of images and knowing how to apply all the fundies

>>5019895
Let's see it then.

>>5019896
Pay me a few hundred bucks before, I'm not wasting 20+ hours just to prove a point to nobody on the internet

>>5019885
Imagine anybody giving a fuck about the picture your posted or your "soul". You won't get hired with that, you won't get a dime from the public with that. Actually your "soul" is detrimental to your chances at getting anything in return for your work, so as I said you might as well lay in bed and close your eyes and daydream about the amazing art you want to make.
And you can simply use 3D models and paint over photos to achieve realism. It is completely worthless to learn to draw from "imagination" or to have any imagination to begin with. Pic rel works entirely with photobash and 3d, knock yourself out with his tutorials.

>>5019900
>Pic rel works entirely with photobash and 3d
Pic related doesnt. 3D is fine though, you can be creative and imaginative with 3D. Albeit the one you posted is not the best example because the obvious low quality bashing ruins it.

Craig Mullins

>>5019898
So you don't already have one laying around?

That's an odd amount of confidence to assume you can just make a soulful image by photobashing without having already done so before.

>>5019926
I'm not posting work that you can easily trace me to even where I live

>>5019912
It's uncreative trash just the same, so I don't see the difference.

>>5019928
?????

>>5019928
Well to be fair that's beside the point anyways and unfortunately I've gone through an undesired tangent somewhere along the discussion. At which point does a collage stop being a collage and starts being a drawing after all. There's no real reason for me to doubt one could use photo elements to make something original and interesting provided they fit their tools to their imagination and not their imagination to their tools. Someone mentioned Mullins and that's a fitting enough example.

Regardless, I firmly believe to avoid falling into proko hell one has to prioritize their creativity above pure technical skill regardless of medium. That means drawing (or making collages, as seems to be your case) from imagination and using the techniques to manifest what you are imagining instead of adapting what you are imagining to the limitations of your techniques. Do forgive my redundancy, I just want to emphasize this latter point.

>>5019807
>>5019843

Worthless opinion, don't take this advice. Not because it doesn't contain nuggets of truth but because it fluctuates to an extreme instead of striking a balance between raw creativity and formulaic studying. Granted /ic/ in a general sense (there's exceptions) leans more towards the other extreme, endless formulaic studying with stylisation and creativity somehow perceived as the end goal and not part of the process. A lot of people here are taught to do endless studies and to draw what they want only when they have a firm grasp of the fundamentals.

In reality the best way to go about things is to pursue your studies of the fundamentals rigorously *along with* drawing plenty of your own concepts just for fun and to apply what you've learned. Draw from imagination, draw with references too, study and have fun tapping into the raw creativity the anon I quoted is talking about but with a set of guidelines and tools so that you don't feel lost and overwhelmed by your own shortcomings and ambitions.

>>5019963
>Someone mentioned Mullins and that's a fitting enough example.
Mullins is the epitome of meaningless unimaginative concept trash
In these discussions people constantly bring up artists whose art entices absolutely no feelings yet talks about "soul", it's nothing short of schizophrenic ramblings. You just look at successful people and dress up their art with these buzzwords.

>>5019964
Apologies but I believe there was a misunderstanding. At no point have I endorsed drawing from imagination at the expense of developing technical skills. They are not mutually exclusive and perhaps I should have emphasized this more. The real message was to never focus on the latter at the expense of the former, as some learning methodologies unfortunately tend to do.

>>5019966
crab

>>5019807
gesture and perspectives are the only two things you need to make it

>>5019966
>Mullins is the epitome of meaningless unimaginative concept trash
I will honestly disagree, albeit your opinion of Mullins is yours to have and not mine to contest.

>You just look at successful people and dress up their art with these buzzwords.
I suppose the very reason for ill-defined words such as "soul" becoming more often mentioned is because many people believe there's a growing disparity in what's considered successful in relation to what's actually very high quality and capable of evoking a lasting emotional impression. So I would argue you're mistaken and that people use these "buzzwords" not to reaffirm someone's success, but to emphasize that particular success' merit over all the other "soulless", although formally considered successful, examples.

>>5019996
forgot the pic.

>>5019997
I felt nothing when looking at this picture. It's a meaningless aping of academicist wankery except with crutches
>inb4 abstract art accusations

>>5019807
don't make any effort to provide a good art teaching course on Youtube, i guess.

>>5019809
He was trying to draw a dog. He was trying to draw a dog from imagination. Not a kangaroo. A dog. He owns dogs. He has dogs in his house. He's seen dogs in person before.

>>5019964
Pretty pictures distract from the awful lay out of those panels. Holy fuck. Zoom in on a hand some more, I could almost tell what was going on

>>5019885
God they look soooooo plump I’m gonna COOOOOOOOM

>>5019964
Is this Ayami Kojima?

>>5019997
concept art trash

Play more games and watch more anime. Pay close attention to their art direction and study it.

>>5020007
What crutches, that it's digital? It's not photobashed.

>>5020459
He SAID he was drawing a kangaroo you faggot.

>>5019807
Draw more shit from imagination