/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6851070
Also all discussion outside of posted work MUST be about the definition of the word “finesse”

Discussions of your meth lab/crackhouse where you make zinc white paint are also acceptable

>>6851070
Anyone have advice for preserving a drawing made solely in Copic/Copic ink?

I didn't know Copics weren't lightfast but I wanna preserve the thing I made, as I put a lot of time and effort into it.

>>6851124
If Copics aren’t a tool working for you look for something that does what you need in the future. I’m sure what you want out of ink/markers is available, might even be cheaper than an established brand like Copic

>>6851174
I just bought a whole bunch to try out and do illustrations with. I know there are cheaper options (watercolor), but it's just really easy to take them out of the bag and color, whereas for watercolor I need a good amount of desk space (I am limited to a small desk, unfortunately).

The issue is that Copics are REALLY good at fading, which I have found out upon further research. Picrel is my work. Not sure if it breaks the finesse rule, but I spent ample time and effort on it (I struggled a lot to get the composition/linework right).

Would love to get into oils and whatnot. Not sure where to even begin. Could I get away with doing teeny tiny oil paintings on my desk? And how to avoid all the poison stuff involved with oil painting?

I will probably try to dip my feet further into the throes of watercolor-- I love trad too much to stop.

>>6851209
I’m completely with you. Markers are awesome. I wish they were taken more seriously. There is huge demand for watercolors all the time, if you’re a watercolor savant I imagine making a living is pretty easy. But I can’t. It’s so hard it’s like taking a math test every time. Trying to control water as your art medium??? Even when I type it out it sounds hard

>>6851209
Anon, with respect, refine your process. Your poses are not dynamic, your abs look like floppy water balloons, and you are rushing your line work. The color is ok, for what you are going for, too mamy grays imo, but you've got a ways to go.

Picrel is an oil painting of Kendrick Lamar. I am open to any suggestions no matter how harsh.

>>6851820
Holy shit, posting an image from Facebook, filling in the name line on your post. A picture of a black man. Just quit now.

>>6851070
>>6851072

Brian you’re sl fucking pathetic. So buttblasted over someone calling you out for your behavior and being a better painter than you. Go seek professional help, and I mean this sincerely. You’re your own worst enemy.

>>6851070
Anyone know any trad/books about removing old varnish from very yellowed oil paintings, and generally making very tired paintings look better. I'm only looking to try on very rubbish pictures, nothing high class, OFC. ? It seems to be a very closely guarded industry secret...

>>6851820
Thread tainted.
Abandon ship.

>>6851896

There’s a big youtube channel that shows and tells about the steps of painting restorations. It’s called something like Baumgarten restoration or something.

>>6851807
Thanks for the crit, fren! DESU I was working from imagination (it was difficult to get the composition for me since I was working from multiple refs and a mockup I made, so I had to really, REALLY wing it. I am sure you can already tell this though :C). I also had to work very quickly, since markers dry up stupidly fast, which made rendering in itself a troublesome endeavor.

A question I have is how to make my abs stop looking off? I've had that problem even with my digital work (I think the words one anon used were 'stiff' and 'blocky'). I've been trying to up my anatomy skills, so I'm hoping the fix to the ab problem (as well as all the other problems in my work) is just a matter of getting more drawing mileage in.

Here's hoping though >:{}

>>6851903
That stuffs so cool to watch. Also any channel that interviews professional counterfeiters is cool. Remember watching some former criminal that just made rembrandts and a few of his fakes made it to museums

>>6851903
Yep, but he doesn't actually tell you what he's using to clean the layers with, which is why I'm asking, beyond diluted turps, the internet doesn't seem to want to divulge it's picture restoration secrets to anons.

Recommend me some cool oil painting yt channels bros, i like marc dalessio, scott burdick, paul ingbretson (kinda had enough of him the guy just talks).

>>6852126
PaintCoach

>>6851209
I'd recommend Hogarth's Dynamic Figure Drawing to help with your abdominal anatomy. And How to Draw the Marvel Way for the poses, there's a section for both foreshortening and dynamic poses in it.

>>6852219
this guy is not so good

you can't draw and you never will, just give up

>>6853342
Bro didn’t even (You) anyone. This was just to the group.

>>6852126

Scott Waddell, Andrew Tischler, Nicola Uribe (ourpaintedlives)

>>6852126
not yt videos but there are podcasts with some oil painters in them like artgrind podcast. you might recognize some names, but it's more talking about their careers, journey, life, galleries. alphonso dunn, colleen barry, naturalpigments the company, graydon parrish, jacob collins

>>6853343
sexo, liked the nose

also crits for this one

Tell me what you think.

>>6853306
recommend something yourself

>>6851209
To preserve markers, scan your drawing immediately upon completion. It’s just park of my workflow now. The drawing will look different after the first hour, first day, first week, and month. I usually don’t color a drawing across 2 days.

>>6853306
He repeats the same stuff over and over but the advice is totally solid. What do you disagree with exactly?

>>6855026
Not that i disagree with him but his advice is cookie cutter. Also there are better painters on this board.

>>6853758
holy shit how horrifying

man, doing those bushes and grass is a pain in the ass... any advice?

>>6853343
nice

>>6855425
learn from shishkin

>>6855457
very nice, didnt know him. im a beg tier drawer tho, not a painter...

I like painting monkey

>>6855497
very cool, nice technique

>>6855425
it is man.. try to group your values. ive tried making drawings like these from life and it just takes a lot of time to get it to look like the thing.

>>6855613
yes, i draw too fast. guess im too lazy

>>6855497
Return to monkey

>>6855628
start slow so you can finish fast

Rendered this more

>>6856529
It’s so mean. Nah mean?

>>6856231
did this one in 20 min, didnt even finish it... yeah, i guess ill try your advice

i repainted the whole thing

>>6856880

>>6856881

>>6856881
I’m sure you’ve noticed at this point that color flattens images and values flesh out forms. Look at Picasso and all the greys he used to render form, then look at Matisse and see how flat his paintings look because they’re purely color. Fauvism and Cubism have the answer you’re looking for, find a color palette etc that fits the way you draw and how rendered or flat you want your work to appear. Could depend on the piece and your intent as well

>>6856885
I don't really see anything worth studying in both fauvism and cubism.
Sure Picasso used grey but the fleshed out form is based entirely on values as you said. Matisse' paintings also don't look flat because of his color but because of his limited values. You could make an argument for how things far back are more blue and washed out and things near us are more saturated but other than that I don't see how color affects the flatness of a painting.
As for my intent it is always to make a pretty picture no matter the subject. Fauvism and Cubism have other intentions i think.

>>6856880
>>6856881
i actaully like the first a bit better the whole piece seems cooler temperature than the revision also i think you lost some painterlyness by blending everything, the face proportions seem better in the latter but maybe adding a bit of color would break the monotony some redness to the cheeks and nose or something, otherwise its a very good piece
>>6856885
dont listen to niggers like this tho that have no fucking idea what they are talking about

>>6856897
Pure color is always going to have less value by nature of being chromatic and paint doesn’t mix like digital color. Mixing paint always reduces chromas. Listen to the idiot above me if you want I really don’t care

>>6857405
>Pure color is always going to have less value by nature of being chromatic
wtf does this mean you retard? pure ultramarine is a dark value and pure cad lemon pale is a light value every color out of the tube has a different value
>Mixing paint always reduces chromas
this is not a good or a bad thing depends entirely on what you are painting. what is the point you are making?

>>6856881
>>6856884
Very good, anon. Did you practice with an online course or was it in person?

>>6856861
Is that Copenhagen? Nyhavn? I like your composition.

>>6857465
I’m not responding anymore you’re asking answers in the form of questions. I’m not Alex fucking Trebek. Figure it out.

>>6857592
>gets absoloutely BTFO-ed because he doesnt know what he is saying and cant formulate a coherent sentence
>im not responding anymore
>posts trash art
fucking kek. >>6856881 please take this guys advice, you can clearly see by the quality of his art and knowledge of the subject he is a modern day master. this site is such a shithole fucking kek

>>6857595
Please report this guy with me. Idk if this is the same guy every time but he sure write “BTFO” every time I type something and it’s just not the point of trad threads is to Blow Each Other The Fuck Out in debates. So report this guy please, thanks. Just go to another thread and argue if u wanna do that

>>6857598
kek schizo

>>6857614
Get this guy the fuck out of here please

>>6857489
self taught mostly, the only course i watched was jeff watts' landscape master copies, after that i proceeded to spam even more master copies

I gave acrylic painting a shot recently but I had a lot of struggles picking out hues that'd fit the lighting of the scene. Can you guys recommend books that teach about lighting (i.e. local light)?

>>6857750
James Gurney’s Color and Light perhaps?

>>6857791
I've looked into it a bit in the /asg/ resources and I have to say holy shit. This man solves a lot of my questions just with his chapter overview. Thanks for the tip anon!

Am I NGMI?

>>6858073
i like it! a bit clumsy maybe but nice overall. try to shadow next time.
you should try doing these studies only by shadowing shapes and without lining, you will learn some new things on how objects "behave"

>>6857578
yeah i took it from a photograph, so the composition was already there

>>6858073
Its up to you bro

made this last night 4 h, acrylic 30x40cm

some sketches that im gonna ruin with watercolor some time this week
>>6858454
honestly for 4h and it being acrylic its pretty good the thing bothering me the most is the lips , if its glossy either really try hard to render the highlights or just ignore them and focus on the form also i hate compositions that dont have the whole head in frame, tho thats just my preference
>>6856884
the thumbnail looks great i really like it, it falls apart a little when enlarged but honestly a couple years more experience and youll be great

Started a new piece.

Sargent study

Oil pastels on paper

>>6859337
Beautiful. Pure soul.

>>6856881
Wow, scrolled past at first because I thought it was a photo.

>>6851072
Painter of OP image here. I specifically used lead white for the underpainting because it is toxic and I like to live dangerously. Also it's more translucent and better for grisaille, but that's incidental.

>>6851209
Your characters kind of look like skinny people with muscles stuck on them. Muscular people have this flow of muscle that crosses the joint from torso to limb. Picrel is an extreme example, but look how the arms travel through the torso muscles to the joint.

havin'

i tried to apply myself a little more this time. thoughts?

>>6859864
serious gourmet shit right there. love the ambience

>>6858887
good stuff. i like how you mixed techniques

>>6858887

You handled the medium well but you need to check your proportions, accuracy is important too. Define the ear a bit more.

>>6858887
Could refine the drawing a lot, sharpen your drawing tool as much as possible and try to make transitions and planes as even as possible, getting rid of all the lines.
With a kneaded eraser kneaded into a small tip you can lift some dark spots and clean up the drawing a fair bit. Just take it slow.

But the overall structure looks solid, good job on that.

>>6857834
>>6859864
Digging these, nice work.

made a new one last night, acrylic 30x40, prolly like 6h, was a total mess but with some wine it got close to finish, but a new project put it back for a few days.

>>6859864
fantastic, is this done with a sewing machine? if not I will try to do it some day :)

>>6852732
Thank you very much for the recs!! :)

>>6853842
Gotcha! Thanks for the tip! Tried it, and it's really nice how well markers scan!

>>6859711
Yes! I see what you mean-- and I have a lot of trouble drawing muscles right (even for as much as I try)! I am going to continue to work on it, anon! Many thanks for the crit!

Bump

>>6851124
scan it and have it printed desu
maybe some UV blocking lacquer/coating/glass but that might only help up to a point
or just store it in a folder away from light and only look at it once in a while

>>6858073
you can construct quite well, it's a good skill to have even when painting more organic things. Except for the left (picture right) arm of the chair which is a bit fucked, you should redo it giving more attention to the silhouette.

>>6856885
>>6857405
Or just look at Caravaggio, Rubens, Rembrandt, Ilya Repin, Ivan Aivazovsky, Jan Matejko, who had both fantastic values and colors.

>>6862294
You have the aesthetic taste of a bowl of bran flakes with water

Anyways I painted some shit

Just finished another shark one

>>6862306

>>6862368
Wow two shit paintings. Awesome.

>>6862368
Legit those two paintings look better next to each other than individually.

>>6862368
A million monkeys at a million easels will eventually remake starry night

>>6862387
brian are you legitimately retarded like whats up have you been tested? Do you hang out with 80iqs who will tolerate you or do you still live with your parents? What is your damage? you have black guy levels of ego copium

>>6862387
I thought you liked that guitarist painting. What is your favorite painting?

>>6862387
>shit painting

>>6862402
Not my favorite Picasso by a mile. I like his paintings that are more purely representational. He did plenty of those. This and the still life with pitcher are my favorite picassos

>>6862433
If you don’t like this Picasso painting you don’t like art. It’s perfect. There’s nothing to critique about it.

>>6862434
And this cardboard guitar he made is the most Spanish thing ever created. Idk man look at more art you guys post the same dumb Slavic illustration bullshit every thread. We get it. The fuckin guy with his son and the cane omfg who gives a shit. Get a personality.

>>6862435
It’s the same with Basquiat. I like maybe three of his paintings. But I like them a lot.

>>6862438
How do you not appreciate Pegasus by Basquiat. It’s fucking huge, it’s intricate, it’s terrifying. What don’t you like about this painting?

>>6862443
Maybe you just avoid thinking of death too much

>>6859936
>>6860879
>>6860896
Thank you guys, it really means mountains to me :) I hope to have more of this to show soon, despite my schedule, alongside the final version of this one with the story that accompanies it!

>>6862435
Sounds like slavic narrative art is more like beef wellington than bran flakes and water. It's easy for anyone to be impressed by it. Nobody likes bran flakes and water.

Personally, I don't think that my "personality" should have anything to do with art. I remember you saying that you don't need to prove that you can paint, but what does that have to do with it? Is the idea worth painting well, or not? Does the execution serve the subject? Nobody cares whether the artist can paint, except for jealous peers. The public just cares about how the painting was painted, no matter if it was sneezed out by a master or slaved over by a naive, and then they probably don't ever learn the artist's name anyway. So, to involve my personality in my taste, or to involve my ego in my execution, seems like a real overreach to me. Who cares what I think or if I can paint? Does the work serve the vision?

Picrel, my go-to favorite.

>>6862434
Incidentally I agree, this is a great painting. I want to do more of that dark tangential edge technique.

>>6862443
Can you explain this one in more detail? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It just looks like a bunch of scribbles. What could possibly make it better than a heartfelt illustration?

>>6862443
It's thrillingly baffling for people who are content with not understanding it, and disappointingly shallow for people who search for any meaning in it, beyond "guy drew a bunch of stuff". Architecture serves the same purpose infinitely better.

>>6862447
I've come to terms with my inevitable death. Hopefully I'll leave some art worth remembering.

>>6862443
i literally filled huge pages with meaningless bullshit like this when i was 13. If he grew up with 2000's culture his shit would look just like this as well

>>6862468
Even in the pantheon of German Romanticism this one’s the most staid of all of them. That’s my point. You’re posting a painting that was done in the period Casper David Friedrich was working. You’re praising studio work (which btw everything /ic/ likes is studio work) to a guy who went to Antarctica to learn to paint glaciers. And it’s not just the story behind it, Friedrichs art itself is much more compelling

>>6862482
Congratulations on basically writing out the entire art historical criticism of John Singer Sargent. Thrilling to amateurs, vapid and meaningless to anyone with free will.

>>6862492
Okay? Monastery in the snow and contemplating the moon are two more of my favorite paintings. I love Friedrich, I love Hudson River School works. I don't really know what studio work has to do with it. It's not like any of them painted from photo reference. Fragonard, Freidrich, Cole, all looked at stuff in real life and then painted from internal vision. The Swing is a personal favorite though, as I really like the dreamlike composition, and the way the detail density seems to organically grow across the page.

>>6862498
I don't really care what artists say about their peers, as there's a clear conflict of interest.
I did not say that that Pegasus was thrilling to amateurs, I said it was thrilling to those who are content with not understanding it. That applies to professional artists and non-artists alike. Indeed, I would guess that Pegasus holds more sway in the art world than in the eye of the public. Like an anti-Kinkade.

>>6862492
Are you insane? Everything CDF painted was studio work. Read sometime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspar_David_Friedrich_in_his_Studio

>>6862521
How about you fucking read

>>6862526
PLEIN AIR DRAWINGS
STUDIO PAINTINGS
READ

>my bf daddy caspar david freddy invented plein air drawings and everyone else does their drawings of trees in the studio like shitheads
???????

>>6862498

Have you seen how Sargent can imply something with just one single brush stroke?

Stfu Brian. Your hateboner for Sargent always gives you away.

>>6862526
. . .I'm pretty sure Fragonard did plein air drawings of trees before painting the swing. Good try though.

>>6862532
>source?
>”I’m pretty sure”
Retarded

>>6862558
Okay, sorry. Fragonard invented trees in his bedroom, and drew them from photo reference off google images.

>>6862562
Post one single piece of artwork any of you have made that justify sucking the cocks of Russian realists and artists from the 18th century. I’ve been waiting patiently for 10 years. A lot of licking Sargents balls but nobody ever approaches his style. You faggots love citing the most idiosyncratic artists and then providing zero fucking evidence that you paint or draw like them. For how much you guys rail on Picasso for “drawing like a child”, most of what I see artists post on here is sub-Down Syndrome tier anyways. Maybe you’re projecting a bit? I’d say you should be able to draw better than a 3rd grader at 37 years old before you start making fun of Picasso. Dipshit no talent losers. It’s like a fat conservative retard going up to a Navy SEAL and trying to “talk shop” it’s so fucking pathetic.

>>6862531
Okay Sargent Jr.

>>6862527
Post some of your “anatomy studies” I wanna see them bro ur definitely the next Bougereau

>>6862567
>>6862568
>>6862571
This guy just picked an artist bad enough so he could plausibly pretend to be on his level before sucking him off, specifically as a point to make everyone else look like hypocrites for being humble enough to prefer art which is better than what they can make.
I wish I had that kind of devotion.

>>6862568
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14905316/

>>6862613
You say humble, I say pretentious and delusional.

It’s like a white kid saying Eminem is the best rapper ever. You know why he says it? It’ll make him fit in with the people he wants to fit in with.

>>6862631
Who the hell are you trying to fit in with if you say you like Bougereau? Those darn pretentious. . . normal people! Such a vainglorious lot!

>>6862633
You’re trying to fit in with art academia, and accepted notions in Western art circles that these are the good artists and those are the bad artists.

If you follow these simple steps, and respect the masters, and blah blah blah then you’ll be a real respected artist that gets to be around smart good artists.

So when your shit beginner art goes up next to another shit beginners art and they say they like Van Gogh you all can laugh and go hahaha well WE like Sargent!!! We like REAL ART!!!!

Unfortunately at the end of the day you’re both still shit at art. Doesn’t give a piss who your “influences” are.

>>6862638
Anon, I think maybe you should try talking to some regular people for a minute. If you just go talk to random people on the street, I guarantee you that you'll find ten people who know Van Gogh's name for every one who knows Sargent or Bouguereau. But at the same time, you'll find ten who would hang A Mermaid in their house for every one who would hang Starry Night. People want to paint like Sargent and Bouguereau (and Rockwell and Kinkade, though they won't admit it) because that's what people enjoy looking at. Van Gogh is the one everyone's heard of, but then you just go look at him in a museum when you want to look sophisticated.

>>6862638
Why is everything you're saying seemingly the opposite of everything I've heard? Van Gogh is thrice as popular as Sargent, and ten times as popular as Bouguereau. Starry Night is the most famous painting in the West, second to Mona Lisa. I've never seen Sargent or Bouguereau portrayed on a popular TV show, I've never seen them get special museum tours, I've never seen anyone dress as them for Halloween, and I've never even seen any of their work in a museum. I cannot say the same for Van Gogh. I'm American, so I'm not sure about Europe, but Van Gogh might be the most popular painter in America. I mean he comes up second place if you search "popular painter" on google.

Have you had a personal experience where your preference had you excluded from some clique or what? My impression the whole time I've been talking with you is that you've held the popular art aficionado position.

And no, I do not attach my preferences for painters to the quality of my work. I do a lot of different styles, and I'm fully aware that I will not reach the same heights as them in all of them.

>>6862649
here in my Western-European country that brought forth Rembrandt (and van Gogh but he was a mentally ill hack and really shouldn’t be mentioned in the same breath), all the normies I talk to just go glassy eyed when mentioning Sargent. Boog is just as unknown. Everyone and their grandma knows Vinnie though, and have most likely visited the museum carrying his name in Amsterdam.

>>6862638

Kill yourself Brian, no onenwants to hear your shit opinions, go fingerpaint some more deformed tits and thalidomide hands.

>>6862664
Van Gogh was a better painter than Sargent or Bougereau. It’s not a given that he’s bad, your entire premise for this argument is fucking stupid.

If they key to understanding your point of view is that obviously Sargent is better than not only do I fucking disagree, but so does almost the entire art history and art criticism community. You’re fucking wrong. Omfg

>>6862666
Kill yourself nameless fag #281638263 nobody even knows what your art looks like. Honestly. Buy a gun

>>6862667
>If they key to understanding your point of view is that obviously Sargent is better than not only do I fucking disagree, but so does almost the entire art history and art criticism community. You’re fucking wrong.

>>6862638
>You’re trying to fit in with art academia, and accepted notions in Western art circles that these are the good artists and those are the bad artists.

You're trolling, right?

>>6862673

Unfortunately not, Brian is just as mentally ill as Vinnie was

>>6862673
It’s like you’re trying to get me to admit that human shit tastes as good as potato chips. You’re all so fucking braindead, it’s scary.

>>6862674
Feel free to post some of Sargents paintings of rich Jewish bankers hag daughters in his defense, seeing as that’s all that faggot ever painted. We can compare and contrast!

>>6862676
Hahahaha here I was, wondering "Is Brian going to try to rectify that seeming contradiction, and explain himself in any way, or ignore it completely and fall back to insults?"

Care to explain why it looks like you contradicted yourself? Is it an accepted notion in Western art circles that Sargent is a good artist and Van Gogh is a bad artist, or does almost the entire art history and art criticism community say that Van Gogh is better than Sargent? Or, have I somehow missed how these can both be true at the same time?

>>6862680
Almost as if art academia and art history and art criticism communities are entirely separate. Almost like all art schooling is absolute bullshit because it either falls on the side of insipid traditionalists like Sargent or complete horseshit installation art for rich kids that their parents need to keep busy.

You aren’t cut out for this.

>>6862679
I don't even like Sargent, jeez. I like Waterhouse, Bouguereau, Thomas Cole, Ivan Aivazovsky, Rubens, and a lot of other guys a lot more than Sargent. You invariably are the person who brings up Sargent, time and again, when people are talking about other artists.

>>6862683
Why do you paint

>>6862682
I wouldn't know. I'm self-taught, and usually avoid reading any critique, and only consume instruction from books made by artists. My opinions are my own. So all of this stuff you're saying kind of goes over my head. I couldn't tell you how criticism and academia differ, I thought it was the same people running the show.

>>6862684
Because I love the world, I love what it does and how it looks and how that makes me feel, and I think that I can shine a spotlight on the particular qualities of how things look which are worth looking at and feeling from.

You know who else I like more than both Sargent and Van Gogh? Frank Frazetta, Gustav Dore, John Bauer, Ian Miller, Mark Zug, Bernie Wrightson, Moebius, Oscar Chichoni, Paul Bonner, Victor Ambrus, and Arthur Rackham.

>>6852126
Cesar santos
East oaks studios
James gurney
Jared Brady
Jennifer Marie Keller
Masters academy of art
Patrick okrasinski
Ryan s brown
Sadie valeri
Simplify drawing and painting
Todd Casey

So now what? Is it wrong to like those guys because they care more about spending time on rendering than Van Gogh, and are therefore boring? Or is it right to like them because they paint/draw stuff that's imaginative and therefore not boring?
Oh shoot I forgot John Harris. Love that guy. Much better impressionist than Van Gogh, honestly.

>>6862682
why the fuck are you crying about art school not teaching how to paint in a style nobody needs to learn
you can't teach the part of van goghs art that makes it good

Reminder that whatever illness is festering in Brian's brain, his endless going back between nonsensical rambling mixed with pity parties and hurling insults at people is a ploy to get attention and responses. Don't respond.

>>6862435

I don't know why these threads always devolve into nonsensical argument.
Objectively the best painters of all time were Frederic Edwin Church and Ivan Shiskin

>>6863013
Because Brian is still assblasted from getting bad marks in a nice art school, for copying Van Gogh, even though Van Gogh was self-taught and has absolutely nothing to do with the techniques that art school is for. Yeah genius, Van Gogh. Paint like him on your own time, like he did.

>Frederic Edwin Church and Ivan Shiskin
I would name no artists as being better than them.

>>6862257
Nice, I think u should paint on smooth panels though

>>6863095
Thanks! People keep telling me that. I guess I should take it to heart. It's canvas glued to a panel anyway, so why not just paint on a panel?

Went on a walk and drew a swan in watersoluble pencil.
Was fun but next time i think I'll try using watercolours or gouache, this is very handy and convenient but I feel like I'd get better results with paint, and more fun.
Any tips for a kit for plein air painting? I was thinking just a box with paints, a palette, brushes, then a jar for water, a rag, and a board with clamps to attach the paper. But that'd restrict me to doing painting while sitting. Maybe I could attach a palette and a jar to the board, then I could hold it with one hand against my body and paint with the other? Not sure I'd want to lug an easel around.

>>6862695
>Frank Frazetta
lol

Hey check this out, if you smartblur away the brushstrokes, Van Gogh's stuff looks like advertising illustrations.

>>6863194
If you scroll through this category of James Gurney's blog, he's got a lot of interesting information on setups. http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/search/label/Painting%20Gear

>>6863306
Not a fan?

>>6863315

Get your eyes checked, you need glasses

>>6863845
I’ve always thought everyone he painted looked like manlets

I keep thinking I'm wasting paper, so I draw many small things on the same paper. But I get better results when I let things take up the whole paper. How can I unlearn only drawing really small? Any tips for how to let a subject take up more space? Maybe it's a stupid question. Maybe I'm overthinking too much

>arguing about taste
>>6862943
nice

>>6864109
buy cheap paper

anyone get a feeling of despair at thinking there's so many artists and some don't make money and are great skillful but others do and aren't skillful.

Or that a lot of pro artists look weak and ugly unlike the art they make, couldn't they bother to dress less like a child? like an artist perhaps
something about that idea is disheartening

something i did really fast. i tried to stay light on the pencil

>>6856885
You shouldn't give painting advice, just stop.

>>6864154
why is everyone on 4chan in all kinds of creative threads always so concerned with "making it"
no I don't get a feeling of dread at that because it's a hobby I do for personal enjoyment and satisfaction

>>6864109
Use your elbow more, and sit further away from your paper.

Oil practice sheet.

>>6864617
that's pretty good anon, did u use underdrawings? What paints you used for skintones on the girl?
t. complete oil beg

>>6864712
I sketched with pencil, then did a value sketch with thinned burnt umber. When you do that, you can also kind of push around the graphite with your thinner, and it becomes a sort of paint.
The girl was painted from imagination, as kind of an exercise in using classical pigments. I used lead white, vermillion red, naples yellow, and lamp black, plus the burnt umber, which are all really gentle colors which play nicely together and create subtle effects. Same pigments for the space marine too.

If you're a total beginner, I'd recommend going on ebay and getting a used lot of paints, since you can really round out a collection that way. Then buy specific tubes individually as you need them.

>>6864617
damn nice

>>6864712
Here I'll send some links I found useful.

For getting your bases covered for any colorful work:
https://mikkisenkarik.wordpress.com/2012/09/02/our-color-mixing-system/

For doing classical-style works:
https://oldmasters.academy/old-masters-academy-art-lessons/essential-oil-paints
https://oldmasters.academy/old-masters-academy-art-lessons/earth-colors-for-oil-painting

For research if you really want to nail down a pigment:
https://www.artiscreation.com/Color_index_names.html

For further reading into the history of use of important pigments:
https://www.jacksonsart.com/blog/tag/pigment-colour-index/

My personal essentials list would be:
Titanium white - Very good covering power and luminosity, the oil paint you will use the most
Vermillion - I think it looks better than Cadmium in most mixes, but honestly the two are nearly interchangeable to me. I guess Cadmium is better for mixing orange.
Hansa Yellow - You need it for those bright greens and warm highlights
Naples/Ocher Yellow - I would pick Naples, but it could be I've never owned a high quality Ocher
> No essential green pigments. Too much variation in its applications, just mix it
Cerulean Blue -
Ultramarine Blue - These two are both essential, totally different pigments with totally different mixing results, and the two of them together make very robust blues
Burnt Umber - Important for browning stuff and mixing with Ultramarine blue for rich blacks
Any black paint, I'm not good enough for it to matter

Non-essentials which I personally like:
Lead white - Good for grisaille and glazing
Indian Yellow - Beautiful color, good for glazing
Prussian Blue - Cool color, good for glazing
Sap Green - Convenient color, good for glazing

Picrel uses Prussian Blue and Sap Green.

>>6860887

>>6865100
Wow that looks really funny now.

>>6859932
I fucking like it. The thumbnail looks amazing, it's got depth and everything. I would urge you to sharpen your pencil and try to do cleaner lines though. And maybe try to make your dark values even darker to get more tonal range.

>>6862306
Your painting looks like a bowl of bran flakes with water, Bri

>>6851209
Soul. Keep at it and you'll be great one day.

>>6865100
>I don't get it
>filename
>ooooooh

>>6864796
>>6864842
Thanks anon. I got most of my pigments advice from Harold Speed's book which basically just says get all the earths and use them as much as possible before anything else so that's what I did. So I got yellow ochre, indian red, and green earth (terra verde) since they count as earths. Other than that I have cobalt and ultramarine for blues (but I see a lot of recommendations for cerulean so I might get it too), madder lake red (I feel it's a bit trash though it was useful for purple/pink, might get venetian red at some point) and I've got azo yellow which I got at the start because it's a primary without thinking any further and haven't really used it yet.
>https://www.artiscreation.com/Color_index_names.html
very nice
also nice birb with all the shades of white
thanks again for your tips

Also Speed says the following about viridian green:
>Mixed with rose madder or mineral violet it makes the loveliest pearly greys; and with a dash of cobalt blue it gives a useful range of colours for soft blue skies, such as you get in the evening away from the setting sun. A most useful colour, but much care is needed in using it.
And about mineral violet:
>Useful in landscape for modifying other colours and for shadows.
Which makes me eager to get both of these, though maybe I'm getting ahead of myself.

>>6865441
thanks a lot. i like to do sceneries where the layouts are clearly defined. i'll try to clean up my shapes as you suggest, thank you the hint

>>6865525
>>6865545
That is very interesting. I haven't read Harold Speed's book yet, though I have it downloaded. I'll have to check that out. Maybe it's my particular tube, but I found Cobalt to be a disappointingly grey and opaque pigment that doesn't mix as well as Cerulean, and is too close to Ultramarine in hue. It's easy to mistake Cerulean for a 'light blue", but really it has much longer green wavelengths, and doesn't reflect as many short violet wavelengths, so it's further green in the spectrum, whereas Cobalt really is just a lighter shade of Ultramarine. And there's basically no such thing as a primary blue pigment, except for that brand new one they synthesized a couple years ago, so I think the Ultramarine/Cerulean mix is important for that, and Cobalt won't cut it.

Thankfully, if you're good at mixing, you can't really have the 'wrong' pigments. You'll just have a limited gamut, and there's nothing wrong with that if you're good at creating contrast. You could make a career just with black, white, and burnt umber.

Regarding earth pigments, the full spread of raw/burnt sienna/umber is also nice to have. I think lake pigments are only good for tinting and glazing. All the other pigments you're naming sound like some kind of oddball stuff. I suppose Speed was writing about the wonderful world of recently available pigments of his era. I'll need to read the book and give his methods a try.

Hey, can anyone sugest a course, book, or any resource in general for somebody getting into watercolor? I'm interested in portraits and plein air, but right now I'm looking for something that cover all the basics and fundies.

>>6864842
Sap green isn't really a color you can recommend easily, since the exact pigments and hue depends on manufacturer. It's a mix. Original sap green was a highly fugitive natural green from plant extract.
Indian yellow also varies a bit by manufacturer, although tends to be a single synthetic pigment. The most common variants nowadays are probably those based on PY83 - diarylide yellow. I am a fan of this one.
Vermillion is frequently a mixed or substituted hue as well, due to the toxicity and mixing/impurity issues of genuine mercuric vermillion. There are still some manufacturers of genuine vermillion, however. For example it used to be available via Rublev and will probably be restocked some time.
Naples and Lead are often considered dangerously toxic as well, with many paint brands offering various naples hue mixes instead in their product lines. Generally some dulled down yellow mix using titanium white that doesn't really approach the authentic naples hue. If you're willing to use genuine vermillion, most likely you're talking about true naples as well, but even with the genuine stuff there is a fairly wide range of hues that all fall under the singular pigment considered to be naples yellow.
Technically you could argue almost every pigment suffers this issue of manufacturer variance, although with certain pigments the range is much wider than others.

>>6865545
Buy the colors you think you’ll like, and then as an economic and efficiency tip pay close attention which colors you’re left with, and which colors you use up almost immediately. Any color that overwhelms your interest is arguably not good for consistent work (you’ll either have to order it constantly or buy insane bulk of it).

Buy what you need not what you want, and odds are anything you’re using so sparingly that it’s the last tube of paint you have is something you need. As long as it’s something normal like Yellow Ochre and not some nonsense pink/purple/coral pigment.

Most peoples color palettes are extraneously complicated when they only truly efficiently use a few of the colors. The rest is just vanity.

>>6868781
I suppose you're right about Sap Green, but my use case for it is pretty limited, just glazing in dark green areas, like the background of that bird painting.

The inconsistency of Indian Yellow does really bother me, but man is it beautiful. My tube is PY150 which. . . is. . . Azo Yellow. Huh. Okay, change my recommendation to Azo Yellow, beautiful stuff. Thankfully Anon already has it.

I've got the real deal Naples Yellow, PY41. It mixes great, and looks warm and creamy. Old lots of used paint on ebay are great. I got a tube of Manganese Blue from one once.

Honestly I am not that concerned about toxicity. I'm not eating the paint. People still use Cadmium. I wash my hands after painting, or after getting a significant amount of paint on my hands, and I don't anticipate having problems. I might start wearing gloves, since that's easier than washing.

>Most peoples color palettes are extraneously complicated when they only truly efficiently use a few of the colors. The rest is just vanity.
Well put. Five pigments per painting is my usual.

acrylic on canvas, thoughts?

>>6865100
you slept threw atonomy class?

found an onlyfans model on omegle, she did a whole series of poses for me over a few hours and we've been chatting every night since, she lives me drawing her while we chat and I love jacking off to her while we're on camera. then drawing her durring my post nut clarity, she's wonderful.

>>6870342
Poor cow, if her teeth were that far forward, I'd hate to see her smile.
>>6870305
Are you frightened of colour?
>>6870963
Biggest cringe of the thread, what an achievement.

some random fun sketch because I was going trough a n art block. Heard it's a good time to rest and to draw something simple you like. Capcom designs are always a great thing to draw.

>>6856881
saw it on IG, really great painting man.I love what you did with the bg, specially the water reflection. Was this entirely from a photo?
for critiques, her right hand stands out too much, and I suspect it might be because it's contrasting too much with the black of the leg.

I do watercolors and ink. I'd do comics but I'm fucking lazy lmao

>>6870963
Living the coomer dream. Godspeed.

>>6871926
still, getting a gf is miles better, and less pathetic, and something you can brag about somewhere that isn't 4chan

>>6871934
Well yeah, but that's the grass-toucher's dream.

>>6871934
Nobody has a girlfriend anymore, you’re either a weird dude with a million friends with benefits or a guy with a gf getting cucked by the weird dude with a million friends with benefits. It’s an L either way.

Grow up and stop forcing yourself to be around women unless you want to spend the rest of your life in therapy

>>6871982
No offense anon, but you could draw better tits if you were around women and tried to be at least likeable enough to get laid lmao

>>6871888
some more watercolor art

>>6871217
yeah, I got scared by blue when I was a kid so now im color blind.
or since im a beginner at putting paint on canvas I try to keep it simple

>>6872027
thinking about getting in to watercolor, what is your setup?

>>6872021
You don’t get it that’s fine. You’ve in all likelihood missed thousands of chances to get laid. If you’ve ever been alone in a room with a woman, she would’ve had sex with you. It’s not rocket science

>>6872041
the dumbest possible setup. I use a Pentel water brush pen, a bunch of watercolors in a tin thingie that I can carry around, and a tich sketchbook with a nice texture to it. I use tissues and random pieces of paper to clean the brush, and let the watercolors dry when I'm done. I mainly paint when I'm at work lmao

>>6872091
keep huffing copium bro, or just go outside and talk to people IRL

>>6872099
fuck I mispelled thick. sorry m8

>>6872099
what brand of watercolor?

>>6872102
About what. You’ve never said no to sex before, that’s your problem. You’ll learn a lot, try it sometime. Maybe you’re just so starved for pussy that that isn’t a feasible option.

>>6872118
Just use whatever to practice. I started at around 2016 playing around with kuretake ones but I don't like those anymore. Anything over $15 should do the trick. Personally I love pentel watercolors, but I know I'm a filthy cunt who wont spend hundreds on high end pigments

>>6872150
alright, I was looking at some Mungyo, and they seem okay. Thanks buddy

>>6871982
>>6872091
>>6872137
Strangest Brian opinion.

>>6872137
>Yeah man, women are all whores. If you aren't getting laid left and right by those bitches, it must be because you're an idiot. But only an idiot would want to have sex with women. Glad I'm not one of those weird people who has sex with a bunch of women, cucking all of us regular people. I have better things to do with my time, like trying to convince people online why I'm not a loser.

Please tell us how bad of an idea marriage is. I bet it'll be funny.

>>6872605
It’s cute you think I can get women to pose naked in front of me for paintings but apparently I wouldn’t be able to have sex with them. Literally me in private with a naked woman painting her. But nah. I just can’t figure it out dude. Surely I’m not just focused on my career and finances.

>>6872660
Accepting this is of course predicated on you thinking I’m a better painter than you, which has proven impossible. So whatever. Think what you want dude.

>>6872660
I'm confused by your response. Do you or don't you think that being able to have sex with women is something worth bragging about?

>>6872729
It’s not. It’s embarrassing. It’s like bragging about being your masters favorite slave.

>>6872737
Okay that's what I thought your opinion was. So why would you base your retort on the fact that you can have sex with women?

>>6872741
Not a discussion worth having here, or really anywhere. Live your life how you want to, I don’t care.

blue

>>6872544
Debatable

Hi i asked in other places but nobody replies.

How do i paint and color and stuff?
I only ever used pencils and mechanical stuff.
Now i want to get into colouring.
I found this channel that is amazing and want to do stuff like this.
https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSNLxMv89/

I feel like i can do the pencil sletches fine but i have no idea how to get started coloring it period
I bought markers, blurring stubs, colored pencils but am not sure where to go or where to learn.

>>6873258
well i tried
cant do it
cant blend
cant do shit
i give up

I got shat on for some details when I uploaded this one a few months ago but you seem like an okay bunch. What do you think?

>>6871243
thank you Pedro and yes all from photo, you've really been getting better and better. I miss your oil paintings though :(

>>6873474
The face is too thin for the head i think

another practice piece, using watercolors and colored pencils. Getting better results since I applied Hayo Miyazaki's advice of not over rendering things.Essentially, load up the brush with paint and only go over things once or twice, never more than that because the watercolor will loose it's freshness.

>>6875033
thank you brother, likewise!
>I miss your oil paintings though :(
Yeah I want to to do some, I even have like 3 canvas and boards primed up ready to go, but I haven't gotten around to it because oil makes such a big mess and I mainly work in my bedroom lol. I'd love to get someone to sit for me for a couple of sessions but that's hard to come by.

>>6873474
the anatomy has proportion issues but the colors are dull and grey.
The design is simple which is good, but think about how these parts would actually work, for instance the arrow belt is very impractical and makes up for an awkward pose.
Try not to go over 3 main colors for a character.

>>6876651

>>6872980
really nice anon

>>6873474
you should definitely try comics (get a good writer though) and at list full illustrations planks

some studies. need to improve at hands and feet.

crap from last week, please critique

>>6878428
i love the proportions on this, keep it up

>>6879268
It's really good! Is it a copy or just from imagination? Just a few comments to get you thinking about some things:
- I would try to push the dark values even more, to give you more range to play with halftones a bit more.
- Maybe related to the previous one: remember that the lightest dark should not compete with the darkest light. So your reflected lights on your shadows should still be darker than everything on the light side. I feel like the reflected light beneath the chin, or the reflected light on the left cheekbone, are too light compared to the rest.
- The nose feels a bit flat. This is again due to your values, but I can't say exactly what it is. I think the bottom plane on your nose, including the bottom plane of the nostrils, needs to go much darker.
- Your glabella should be darker as well, I feel. it should almost bridge the eye socket shadows.
- I think you shaded the wrong side of the nose? The light source is coming (slightly) from the right, but the right half of the nose is darker than the left.

Anyways, these are just nit-picks. The overall impression your drawing makes is solid. Keep at it!

>>6879871
A few more things:
- I see your structure lines of the skull, great job!
- Your left ear is much lower, and way smaller, than the right one. Not sure if you're trying to do human anatomy, but the right one is positioned properly, the left one is not. The ear canal lines up with the cheek bones: the top line of the zygomatic leads directly into the ear canal.

Does anyone here have experience with gouache? I've been meaning to try it and would like to hear any tips or advice

Drew someone today not gonna post the whole thing though cause people stalk me on here

>>6879871
thanks for the reply, i wasn't even paying attention to most of those things

>>6880270
brian no one stalks you on here, people just dislike you. also there is no point in not posting the full thing since you draw so poorly no one could tell who the person you drew is

>>6880900
>immediately knows who I am
Okay

>>6880972

NTA but did you consider you are instantly recognizable in these threads because you always post the same tired shit of badly drawn tits in various media? That or muddy oils and bad samefaces.

>>6881050
Okay

>>6881056

how the fug did sargent do it? I feel like it took him 5 minutes to paint a face like this it looks so effortless, so subtle but detailed do you know any modern day artists I could watch who can paint this way in watercolor?
>>6879985
gurney is amazing, watch him for gouache tips

>>6881221
forgot pic

>>6881221
>>6881227

>>6881221
Very practiced internal eye. The way you can attain that is by practicing both drawing on top of sketched guidelines, and drawing straight with no guidelines, to internalize mentally placing things on the page. I heard Sargent would look back and forth between his canvas for five minutes before making a single stroke.
Deliberateness, foresight, mindfulness. Twitch once and you've got it made. Twitch twice and you're lost.

I'm pretty new to /ic/ and I know two names. Tableguy and Brian. Tableguy because people seem to like his work, and Brian because everyone keeps telling Brian to shut up.

>>6870963
This hurt to read

>>6881252
They just hate talent

>>6881391
>They just hate talent
I thought you were referring to Brian until you posted Brian stuff and revealed yourself to be Brian. Hopefully writing your name three more times was enough to bring you to orgasm. Glad I could help.

>>6881252
people think tableguy's work is gross because he went from stylization to grotesque exaggeration and his nasty fetished bleed into his art and Brian is a legitimate egomaniac who is a beginner painter of 6 years.

>>6881559
Oh really? I've only seen his life drawing studies. What flavor of degeneracy has he descended into?

>>6881559
12 years*

>>6881563
farts, shit, snot, piss, etc

>>6881565
Damn, disturbing. His life drawings are great.

>>6881564
it would genuinely be sad if you weren't such an insufferable cunt to everyone. You could actually have that validation that you crave so desperately if you just admitted to yourself that you're not a very good painter and impressed everyone here by improving.

This will not happen because you've sunk so much time into painting and can't bear to think that all that time was wasted. I've seen multiple people go from total /beg/ to pro on this board and make a good living on Patreon in 2-3 years.

>>6881573
Holy projection

>>6881573
Also kys

>>6881564
This might be the single worst painting of yours I have ever seen.
You know what else slaps down random junk until it starts looking like something? AI image generation. There's just no intention behind what you do. I swear there must be some fear aspect here, or a hopelessness. I tend to think that our work is a metaphor for our lives, since our approach to creating a piece is shaped by our deepest habits.

What does it say about you that you
- Overcomplicate everything (clear skies full of smudgy strokes of multiple colors, noisy strokes in areas of unimportant detail, colors daubed in that you clearly aren't seeing)
- Paint before choosing what it's going to look like, and then rework it until it looks like something
- Continue messing it up with contradictory strokes and colors to make it look less like the thing

It's just such a faithless, neurotic approach to rendering. You don't trust what you're seeing in nature, you don't trust what you see in your mind's eye. Like somehow slapping paint around is going to save you.
At least you're good at mixing colors, I consistently appreciate that in your paintings. They're almost always spot-on, until you throw some weird color in on top that didn't belong. But you have such a busy, self-defeating brush.

>>6881582
This is great. Maybe the best of yours I've seen. Actually stylish and natural looking.

>>6881208
Man this one actually looks really good when it's only about three inches wide on my screen and then I back up. You know what your paintings remind me of, is when someone is telling you something interesting or entertaining, but they keep interrupting themselves to say stuff like "I'm sorry I must be boring you" or "God I must sound so dumb right now" or "It was funnier at the time". No the story is fine, I'm enjoying it. It's you who I can't stand, letting your neurotic personality get in the way of the presentation. The painting looks great from a distance, and then when I zoom in all I can see is you and your stupid decisions. The painting doesn't look like it's for me to enjoy looking at. It looks like it was just rage therapy for you. And it isn't even impressionism. It's just messy and obnoxious. From a distance it looks like some really great realism work. All your stuff is like that, realism that a guy puked on because he was mad.

>>6881610
Hush

>>6881587
Deranged critique

>>6881728
What do you like about your art?

>>6881740
That there’s more for me to learn, and that what’s been done before me propels me forward because I do not think I am better than any artist that died before I was born. I have never made a single painting as good as one by Claude Monet, but that’s not something that fills me with dread, because i always feel as if I’m getting closer. If there’s any delusion in my work, it’s that I always trying to reach into the past. I find the present tedious, and the future pointless, but the past fascinates me, and that feeling only gets stronger as it gets farther and farther away.

>>6881783
The idea of having the opportunity to be a part of the past excites me more than anything about my “future”. I can’t be bothered. That obviously doesn’t make me a hit with the ladies, but children tend to find me funny, and other men enjoy my company.

I painted a little tree from imagination. I wanted to test the little plein air kit I made, using some random cotman and van gogh watercolour pans, and a tube of white gouache. Not overly fond of waterbrushes so I'll have to try some sort of little jar to keep water in when I ring it outside.

>>6882742
looking good

>>6881783
>>6881784
Well, there we go. I asked you what you like about your art, and you didn't write a single sentence about it. You just talked about yourself. That fits with what I said earlier about your art, that from a distance it looks like a good painting, but when I look closely at it all I can see is neurosis, because you don't care about the scene you're conveying in the piece, you only care about yourself and your story.

Can you actually name things that you like about your art?

>>6882742
That warm-to-cool contrast in the greenery looks awesome. Value/chroma contrast within the trunk would really set it off.

>>6882940
I don’t know what you want me to say can I just post my work in here without getting investigated for war crimes. They’re paintings dude I don’t fucking know what you want me to tell you about them. If you have a critique about the art then go for it but “your brushstrokes tell me you kill hookers and steal from homeless people” is really fucking retarded

>>6883010
>I like my art because me me me
>Dude why are you making my art all about me me me me what do you want me me me me to say? Just talk about the art dude

If someone asked me what I like about my art, I'd cite something like the tastefully selective attention to detail, or the realistic rendering that still manages to give way to human softness. I'd talk about the art, as I would when talking about any other piece by any other painter, because I don't give a damn about the artists I care about their work.
Can you actually see your art objectively? Can you give an objective description of it?

>>6883086
Not Brian but I’d say he likes the part where there’s tits. Is it that complicated dude

>>6883086
>If someone asked me what I like about my art, I'd cite something like the tastefully selective attention to detail, or the realistic rendering that still manages to give way to human softness
Sadly no one is ever going to ask about your art, because you haven't posted shit.

>>6883961
Indeed, because I know that the moment I provide anything to latch onto, you will divert to insulting me. I was trying not to say anything at all about myself to stay on point, because I knew you would do this, but you proved so dense that I had to give an example of how I would answer my own question, and the moment I did you redirected to insults.

What do you like about your own art, when you look at it? If you seriously cannot answer this question, I'm going to have to assume you do not like it.

I know you're not just being humble, because you never shut up about your superiority as an artist. But you never talk about your art. Can you actually quantify anything superior about your art?

>>6883978
>the moment I post my work you’ll critique it
Okay shut the fuck up then, since that’s exactly what you’re doing to me because I’m posting my work. Fuck off retard, we don’t even know wtf your work looks like, why are you here

>>6883978
The thing I like most about my art is that you should kill yourself

>>6883981
Shut the fuck up

>>6883010
damn nice tittays! u fuckin this bitch?

>>6884099
I have $100 in my bank account the whores disappeared about 6 months ago bruh

>>6883981
Bitch boy

"post your opinion of your own work" is the new "post your work"

>>6884668
Also there’s no right answers, your opinion of your own work is somehow wrong.

>>6884695
Brian actually thinks he posted an opinion of his work
pyooyow beg

>>6851070 - Meaningless
>>6851174 - Hard to make out
>>6851209 - Maybe a future in comics
Likes Monkey Art:
>>6851820
>>6853758 - How WOKE are you? Not edgy
Paint a black woman sad she's fat now that'll get attention
>>6855497 - Decent but who cares
>>6852046 - Worthless chicken scratch
>>6853343 - Worthless chicken scratch
>>6853670 - Disturbed maybe from a horror movie
>>6855425 - Worthless chicken scratch
>>6856529 - She's too fat to immortalize
>>6856642 - Weak definition
>>6856861 - Kids drawing
Decent but you lack good detail in the face to bring it to life
>>6856880
>>6856881
>>6856884
>>6857592 - Puuuhlease
>>6857750 - Maybe a future in comics
>>6858073 - Puuuhlease
>>6858454 - Decent but meaningless
>>6858472 - Keep up the art classes
>>6858827 - Give Up
>>6858887 - Interesting, it almost made me feel something then no
>>6859337 - Child art
>>6859864 - Interesting technique but ultimately meaningless
>>6859932 - Worthless chicken scratch
>>6860838 - If this isn't for an art class you are a joke
>>6860887 - Decent but what is the point?
>>6861462 - Give Up
>>6862306 - Decent but meaningless
>>6862355 - Another wierd drawing from a nightmare maybe
>>6862392 - Very decent but I think I am sure I seen something like this before
>>6862402 - Very decent and even made me feel something... meaningful I give you an S tier like this one >>6862392
>>6862404 - Very decent skill... Now I could try to intuit what the fish is for but why? Who cares
>>6862433 - Sad lady but very decent technique I don't like the feeling I get off it
>>6862434 - Good techinque but amatuerish simplicity was you forced to paint it?
>>6862438 - Give up
>>6862443 - A brainstorming session...? LOL
>>6862447 - Good techinque but it sadens me...
>>6862468 - Good technique but too busy but I like how it makes me feel other than the poor guy having to swing miss princess
>>6862482 - Good technique very dark
>>6862486 - Maybe a future in comics

>>6862492 - Very decent technique but ultimately meaningless
>>6862511 - Very decent technique but ultimately meaningless
>>6862521 - Very decent technique and I can even grasp a feeling from the painting...
>>6862567 - Give up
>>6862667 - Decent technique but on the sloppy side ultimately meaningless
>>6862676 - You really strained the techinque there but ultimately meaningless
>>6862679 - I can make it out... sloppy, but ultimately meaningless
>>6862683 - Very decent techinque but disturbing would you look upon this much?
>>6862701 - Decent technique better watch out they are coming this way ...
>>6862908 - Very decent techinque and though it sadens me it also comforts me
>>6863194 - Keep up your art classes
>>6863315 - Weak
>>6863845 - Very decent techinque but trying to hard to be cool the viking with a bloody axe was enough give him emotion
>>6864165 - Give up
>>6864617 - For practice good but crispen your technique its too blunted
>>6864842 - Nice try but whats wrong with his feet?
>>6868837 - Weak
>>6870305 - Nope
>>6870342 - Already posted above
>>6870963 - Weak maybe go back to deviant art ultimately meaningless except for spanking oh wait its not good enough for that
>>6871243 - Weak
>>6871888 - So so technique be more accurate but I like that you give it meaning through all the scars
>>6871982 - Weak maybe go back to deviant art
>>6872027 - Sloppy but his face makes me smile
>>6872670 - Give up
>>6872980 - Worthless chicken scratch
>>6873104 - If it wasn't so sloppy I could tell if she was mad
>>6873336 - Give up
>>6873474 - Decent but a red head with freckles carrying a bow is she some boss lady?
>>6875558 - Keep practicing maybe just get a hot chick and take a photo at least we could use that
>>6878428 - Keep up the art classes
>>6879268 - Very decent techinque except how you made him cross eyed if you hadn't messed that up hed look scary
>>6879985 - Decent technique but ultimately meaningless
>>6880270 - Weak

>>6881056 - Give up
>>6881208 - Give up
>>6881227 - Sloppy
>>6881230 - Decent techinque but ultimately meaningless unless there was a child in the water or something
>>6881391 - Give up
>>6881564 - Give up
>>6881579 - Give up
>>6881582 - Give up
>>6881587 - AI is dumb still
>>6881616 - Give up
>>6881728 - Give up
>>6881783 - Really Give up
>>6881784 - Give up
>>6882742 - I painted a little tree from imagination. I wanted to test the little plein air kit I made, using some random cotman and van gogh watercolour pans, and a tube of white gouache. Not overly fond of waterbrushes so I'll have to try some sort of little jar to keep water in when I ring it outside.
>>6883010 - Give up
>>6883999 - Give up
>>6884001 - Maybe a future in anime
>>6884129 - Give up
>>6884340 - Give up

>>6881587
More of the dog with the bike please.

>>6884129
dang son! You got goth bitches laying all splayed out being turned into paint and she don't at least let you nut in her ass?

>>6884129

Lol brian i remember you blustering about how you made thousands off ebay... gee, were you lying?

>>6882851
Thanks!

>>6882954
Thanks!
Do you mean a darker and less saturated brown, more a brownish grey/black on the trunk for the shadow?

>>6884846
Why did you just copy what I wrote in my post?

>>6878428
Very nice! lovely proportions and style. Are these from imagination?

>>6879985
I use gouache a bit, I'm still a novice, but one neat trick I found is that you can paintwhite gouache over something dark, then when it's dry, glaze some colour over it, otherwise if you mix white and a colour it tends to look a bit chalky depending on the colour.

>>6881587
>I tend to think that our work is a metaphor for our lives, since our approach to creating a piece is shaped by our deepest habits.
so it's good then?

>>6885132
I think it would be the light part that would be less saturated, actually. More of a brownish light grey. Since the part that's in the sun would be giving off some silvery specular reflections.

And yeah, color mixed with white is cool, and color painted over white is warm.

>>6885161
Not an indicator of quality or lack thereof, just a window into his reasons and methods, as anyone else's work would be.

>>6885015
Weed might be legal but it isn't cheap.

>>6885015
thousands? hundreds of thousands my friend. but that business model was too much work. selling that many paintings was not super awesome it was okay when i was in my 20s but now I don't wanna sell stuff that way anymore. the novelty has worn off.

>>6885228
i don't do drugs or drink

>>6884843
Appreciate the feedback, thanks. I'll post an update in the next thread.

>>6885234
dude last time you posted a picture of your face your eyes looked like snoop dog and there was smoke in the frame

>>6885250
those are cigarettes, i have been a smoker for 12 years bro

New thread
>>6885258

>>6885234

Where the fuck do hundreds of thousands bucks go in just a few years with nothing to show for it Briguy? You're still not convincing me you're not full of shit.

>>6885314
Taxes and women

>>6881516
this is really cool, one thing I notice though is the way the foliage and the roof of the building at top left sort of merge as one value shape, makes the composition a bit awkward