/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

AI

>>6363640
The only thing I consider cheating is using a tool in replacement to knowledge rather than a guide line, For example someone who believes digital references means they don't need to understand anatomy.

>>6363640
Cheating isn't the right word. There are some things I'm not impressed by. Like people taking photos putting a draw filter on and then using them as the background in a manga. In that case I would much had preferred that the artist had just drawn a quick silhouette of the city line.

All of it. I kind of wish I never got into digital. Ruined the magic. There's a trick for everything.

>>6363645
AI was just the cherry on top.

>>6363657
The trick is to not use the tricks. You can pretty much use Clip Studio as a traditional canvas. It is more fun that way IMO.

>>6363645
This is #1 answer. Before that I would say layer effects.
>Ctrl+Z
I find myself use this because i was too lazy to pick the eraser tool, mainly when sketch. Almost never use them when doing line art or painting.

>>6363640
Unironic plagiarism.

>>6363645
That ain't digital art, that's basically photoshopping other people's art together with less steps.

I think the tool I find the cheapest is symmetry. That being said, I abuse the fuck out of it if I just want to shit out a character design

>>6366087
>symmetry
Is it cheating to draw half of a character, fold the page in half, trace it on the other side, then trace that half on the front of the page?

>>6366091
okay, i'll give you that, begrudingly.

>>6363645
Ai isn't a tool.

>>6363640
Theres no such thing as "cheating" and anyone telling you otherwise is a twat. These same people would be calling Camera Obscura "cheating" back in the 1500s.

>>6363663
>just discipline yourself into having more discipline bro
You use the tools you've got, all the remnant energy and focus needs to go solely to what's on the page. Ffs.
This isn't sports gtfo.

>>6366100
that's why its in quotations, anon
I use just about everything csp throws at me. but I thought this would be an interesting discussion

There are a lot of digital tools which can be emulated in traditional art, just with more effort and equipment.

Convenience ruined many things in todays age. Back in high school when some kids didn't have enough money to buy all the mediums the shame got peptalked out of them. You see, all throughout history artists were always restricted in many different ways. Be it due to products unavailability, expensive pigments or mediums, plein air, lack of choice in models or space..
Usually it was a combination of all of the above.
At my high school they already knew that the kid with the 200 pencil set was the one who got bored or indecisive the fastest thus the one slacking or giving up sooner. If your paper was crap that was great news because you would feel more free to fuck around with it, pour wallpaint and scratch in it with a pencil or whatever! There's a kind of play in there that ends up making you not give a damn, most of the time it would set you on a path to your project. No mulling over choices on what brush, which of the 7 blues, how big your canvas, all that shite just exhausts you before you've even begun. We'd have a small pool of options, 5 minutes to gather supplies and throw the selection on the table and now you've got two hours just with that, after that we'd add more material but by that time you're already familiair with the work in front of you there's barely any indicision.

I've played around with just about every traditional material in paints, pencils, charcoals, pastels whatever but digital feels like a hell because everything is there all of the time

Experiment without commitment, warm up like its a dance, that's how you'll get your control over your hand. The desire for cheap shortcuts isn't durable for creative drive

>>6366125
It is beyond retarded to Romanticize poverty.

>>6366130
You don't know what poverty means. Or you don't understand how expensive art supplies are. They weren't cheered because of it, they were cheered in spite of it. It's a fixed pattern, creativity gets stimulated by problemsolving. How old are you?

>>6366104
I agree. If it's there, you're going to use it, right? For better or worse, limitations yield intensity.

>>6366100
you drew it, i took a photo of it, we both drew it, no one cheated, good to know

>>6366167
Only in part, you should be weary of what things are 'there' to start with. I may have a room full of paints, but if each time I would set them all ready before painting that would lay an unnecessary amount of pressure on myself. You have to be selective and ignore the rest

>>6366104
>nooo! you are not supposed to have fun. This isn't a game. go awaaaay
faggot

>>6366130
atlest if i am poor i may remain alone so i can be at paece of mind.
if i am poor at least i can focus on keeping my house can be clean.

>>6367376
Rare is the man who finds pleasure in discipline. If that's you I raise my hat to you. if not, you're just a liar

>>6363640
Anything that requires significant skill is not cheating. Tracing and AI, in that regard, are both cheating.

>>6367388
>A poster said he hated starting to use digital because he doesn't find joy in it
>I advice him to do like me and use it as a traditional media like me because it is more fun
>You come and tell me that I'm doing it wrong
What are you rambling on about now with your "liar" crap?

>>6366125
Intentionally limiting yourself can create some interesting results, just by forcing you to make weird decisions that you'd not normally have to make when all limitations are off the table.
Pick a subject, grab 6 colors at true random, and draw.
Doodle a series of random shapes, have somebody give you a random list of animals, and turn each shape into each of those animals.

>uses free transform and liquify two minutes in

>>6367400
I might not be well versed in digital media, but I can appreciate it when the work is good. However, your method still has mental pitfalls in the long run.
It's nit dig vs trad either, every medium demands a technical step away from what you're used to (if you paint in oils, you'll have to switch gears when holding a watercolour brush). But it would be a different experiment altogether with different results.
The lie is hidden in the fact that the level of creative gain is the same when you just switch a couple of settings.
I couldn't care less what you do, it's just not of the same value

>>6363640
>Cheating

Nobody is going to care unless you try to pass AI art or a clear trace of someone else's art off as your own.

Nobody's going to care that you use the symmetry tool or whatever.

>>6366125
BACED

there are already people in the Clip Studio asset store selling machine-learning generated images for clippy.
as far as i understand, its not a currency that can be bought by money, but i guess it's "cheating" in a way, providing a material you didn't really create...

>>6363640
THERE ARE 12 THREADS ABOUT AI UP ON /ic/ RIGHT NOW

THERE ARE 19 THREADS ABOUT ELON MUSK OR HOW TO GET POPULAR ON TWITTER UP ON /ic/ RIGHT NOW

THAT'S A TOTAL OF 31 THREADS ABOUT 2 TOPICS

31

THIRTY-MOTHERFUCKING-ONE

XXXI

三十一

THREADS ABOUT AI:

>>6369226
>>6369059
>>6368525
>>6367635 (AND ABOUT TWITTER)
>>6367116
>>6367012
>>6366171
>>6364656 (AND ABOUT TWITTER)
>>6363640
>>6362886 (AND ABOUT PIXIV NUMBERS)
>>6357746
>>6357600


THREADS ABOUT NUMBERS ON SOCIAL MEDIA:

>>6369247
>>6368281
>>6367700
>>6367635 (AND ABOUT AI)
>>6367438
>>6367280
>>6366264
>>6365807
>>6364656 (AND ABOUT AI)
>>6364522
>>6364246
>>6363872
>>6362886 (AND ABOUT AI)
>>6362405
>>6360135
>>6356821
>>6356353
>>6348891

>>6366125
And here I am with hundreds of brushes in Clip Studio Paint. It is very very overwhelming.

>>6367623
What about tracing 3D models?

>>6369390
Not him, but for my own taste, the only "tracing" I do is drawing on top of my own work to refine and correct it. I tend to find 3D posing models more helpful as a visual reference for work I've already started, to help check pose details and rough anatomy.