/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.1592084]

study time ic. Dont fucking disappoint me

[Anonymous No.1592085]

Wow for once a master study instead of a photo study. Might participate later if I get bored of working on personal stuffs. Doesn't get a lot better than Sargent :)

[Anonymous No.1592086]

>>1592084
i find it disconcerting that /ic/ loves sargent's face so much. it has the air of worship about it. like the artist is more important than the art.

instead why don't we do a few figures from his magnum opus?

huge version>>
>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Sargent,_John_Singer_(RA)_-_Gassed_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg

[Anonymous No.1592087]

>>1592086
why not both ?

[Anonymous No.1592090]

>>1592086
I dunno, I think that his portraiture is much stronger than that painting. Much better brushwork, edges, and subteties imo, plus there seems to be a bit more impasto markmaking, which is always nice. Not to say the portrait OP posted is his best either.

[Anonymous No.1592094]

>>1592084

[Anonymous No.1592096]

boring monotonous color, it's like fucking brown school all over again.

[Anonymous No.1592099]

>>1592090
did you look at the big one?

[Anonymous No.1592104]

[Anonymous No.1592106]

>>1592096
I dunno, there isn't a lot of colour variation in indoor portraiture like that. Sargent was a master of colour, so I'm sure he painted this fairly faithfully to life. He might also have been using a Zorn type palette. Anyways, even though the colours are limited, there is some wonderful control of colour and saturation in tat image.

[Anonymous No.1592110]

>>1592094

[Anonymous No.1592114]

>>1592084
lol what a noob is painting is all craking

[Anonymous No.1592116]

>>1592086
soccer game going on in the distance, gets me every time

[Anonymous No.1592117]

>>1592084
^Fuck that
<Paint this with me

[Anonymous No.1592121]

>>1592117
im down

[Anonymous No.1592138]

>>1592117

to hell with you faggot. sargent is the unofficial king of /ic/. how dare you

[FiRez !!tndrCZJHE+I No.1592141]

>>1592084
This could be interesting with ArtRage oils and a rough canvas texture, unfortunately I'm already doing another study :/

[Anonymous No.1592163]

While not accurate in the slightest, this was still a great learning experience for me

[Anonymous No.1592169]

>>1592163
Focus on drawing for now - value too if you're up to the challenge. Take your time and measure proportions, spatial relationships, etc. Good painting ability stems from good drawing ability in situations like this.

[Anonymous No.1592180]

>>1592084

wipwipwipwip

dududundundun

wipwipwip

*tips fedora*

[Anonymous No.1592181]

>>1592084
that sucks, eyes don't match, nose is all fucked, boring old rip-off Rembrandt composition. 5/10 tops.

[Anonymous No.1592184]

>>1592181
not quite rembrandt though

[Anonymous No.1592185]

>>1592181
don't bring me into this k?

[Anonymous No.1592192]

>>1592185
Do people actualy think Rembrandt was good? or do they think he is just ok tier like Vermeer?

[Anonymous No.1592201]

>>1592192

are you fucking trolling m8 ?

[Anonymous No.1592204]

>>1592192
Are you trolling? Rembrandt is god tier. End of discussion. I don't know if any other artist has ever had such command over thick paint and the textures involved therein. His lighting and compositions are also extraordinary.

Vermeer is considered to be a true master as well (less influential though). He has the highest ratio masterworks to paintings as far as I know. Personally I think he is quite good but a little overrated.

[Anonymous No.1592214]

>>1592204
>>1592201

Know not trolling at all, personally when i first discovered both of their Art books at the library some years ago i was amazed by them,

However the more i got into the art world people sort of refer to there work as "eh"

[Anonymous No.1592217]

>>1592214
I don't think I've ever heard people complain about Rembrandt or say he was "eh". It is my understanding that out of all the great master painters throughout history he is perhaps the most universally revered. Definitely one of the greatest and most influential.

As for Vermeer, he is also held in pretty high regard. Take a look at this painting: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Johannes_Vermeer_-_Het_melkmeisje_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg

If you can't see why he is considered a master from that, then maybe you need to reevaluate your life a bit and start looking at more art and art history and start painting more.

[Anonymous No.1592220]

>>1592084
but i already did this one

[Anonymous No.1592225]

>>1592220
Do this one then.

[Anonymous No.1592227]

>>1592220

post it flapjacko

[Anonymous No.1592233]

>>1592227
b-but it looks like ass,
and that time i used this demonic tool called the eyedropper.

>>1592225
saved for next time then

[Anonymous No.1592235]

>>1592233
add some textures to the study. looks like it wouldnt hurt

[Anonymous No.1592263]

>>1592192
Rembrandt is probably the best humanist painter, certainly as far as portraiture goes, anyway. and he handles paint sublimely, have a look at some detail shots, he uses so little to give so much texture and form, is amazing.

also he invented the white piece of clothing + face composition. which is what the troll guy talking about the op meant. (also seen here >>1592225 )

[Anonymous No.1592265]

Will continue later tonight. How am I doing so far?

>>1592180
Some construction is needed. The colours look good though. Keep going!

>>1592233
I would personally stay away from the eyedropper since you can't use it when painting from real life. But hey, to each to his own.

[Anonymous No.1592266]

>>1592265
>I would personally stay away from the eyedropper since you can't use it when painting from real life. But hey, to each to his own.
nah, i only used it that one time. and honestly it's not like an eyedropper is very useful for something like this. gotta use my eyes in the end, there's no way around it.

[Anonymous No.1592281]

>>1592263
i wasnt trolling look at those fucking eyes

[Anonymous No.1592288]

>>1592281

nigga you can't fucking claim motherfucking rembrandt is overrated based on the fact that the eyes of some dude in one of his paintings look weird in a crop of a photo of a painting you look at in your monitor. stupid nignog.

go to a fucking museum and be in awe. i held a presentation infront of pic related and the

[Anonymous No.1592289]

>>1592288

* people who passed by (was holding presentation for group of fellow students, art history class) stood in awe at the image. crowd started forming. it's the kind of painting that completely captivates you. the amount of emotion in rembrandts figures is unmatched.

keep in mind this painting is large as fuck

> also forgot pic

[Anonymous No.1592290]

>>1592288
not those eyes, the eyes in the op.

the Rembrandt ones are perfect, the rheumy look comes across so well

[Anonymous No.1592292]

>>1592289

>forgetting pic twice
>ISHYGDDT

fuck it. image wont post bc malicious code detected. none of you give a shit anyway you are all dumb low iq peasants

[Anonymous No.1592296]

Why are the high-res versions of master paintings almost always so desaturated? It kind of bugs me when I want to do a master study and there are dozens of different versions on the internet, all with different colors depending on the time of the day and the lighting that was used to photograph the painting.

Makes me feel that color wise you learn next to nothing from these studies because those colors are not the ones Sargent used.

[Anonymous No.1592300]

>>1592296
because that's how the paintings are..if you turn up the saturation you end up blowing out the colours.

high res pictures are for getting a good look, so raping the subtlety doesn't help much.

not to mention paint and monitors have a different gamut so you'll never ever get an accurate reproduction on a screen.

further, paintings are always under some light condition or other, there isn't a perfect light where you see the 'real colours' because there are no real colours.

that's part of the reason people are always telling you to look at paintings in person.

[Anonymous No.1592310]

>>1592084
I-i-is it weird that I want to suck his dick?

[Anonymous No.1592315]

>>1592310

perfectly normal anon, perfectly normal

[Anonymous No.1592566]

he looks so confident

[Anonymous No.1592580]

>>1592296
>>1592300
To add on to this, paint changes a lot with time. If you google around a bit you can find examples where people will test colours outand even in a couple years some whites and stuff will turn a very yellow colour.

Varnishes also change the colour of paintings a lot as they tend to yellow and darken with time. Many paintings as you know them today are vastly different from how they originally looked. Rembrandt's Night Watch is a good example, it in fact is not even a night scene, but was named as such at a later date because the painting had darkened so much it was mistaken for taking place at night.

Here is an interesting read on the subject: http://underpaintings.blogspot.ca/2012/05/lee-sansteads-dirty-little-secret.html

[Anonymous No.1592588]

>>1592580
linseed oil is mostly what makes whites and blues yellow over time

[Anonymous No.1592593]

>>1592588
Yes the oils yellow. But there are many other factors at play. Many pigments are also unstable for example. Some will crack, and some will lose their colour, and some will turn transparent. Then the varnish is a biggie.

[Anonymous No.1592663]

My attempt ! Help me make it better !

[Anonymous No.1592676]

>>1592663
How about doing some actual construction first before rendering it? You're supossed to have a likeness when you construct the forms, even before you even start shading in. If you don't have a likeness during that time, theres no reason to even finish it because it will suck no matter what, even if you can render to the point of it looking realistic.

[Anonymous No.1592724]

>>1592676

Some badass critique, thanks man I'll redo it low-poly.

PS : you should relax a bit though.

[Anonymous No.1592746]

>>1592084
>FUCKING LEFT HANDED IT
NO PAIN NO GAIN

[Anonymous No.1592753]

>>1592746
Think your good mate?

I did this with my right hand (im a lefty) upside down standing on my head.

check mate.

[Anonymous No.1592755]

>>1592746
Think your good mate?

I did this with my right hand (im a lefty) upside down standing on my head.

check mate.

[Anonymous No.1592903]

>>1592265
Calling it done.

>>1592266
>gotta use my eyes in the end, there's no way around it
True dat.

[Anonymous No.1592974]

>>1592903
Not true at all. Using the eyedropper lets you pick colors which you couldn't identify with your eyes. You might see that there is a color, but you don't know how to mix it yourself and by using eyedropper, you cheating yourself out of that learning experience.

[Anonymous No.1592987]

>>1592974
Yeah, it's a more efficient learning experience using only your eyes, no doubt about it. That's why I wrote that I would personally stay away from the eyedropper. But I still think that anon isn't all wrong when writing that you still have to use your eyes to make it look good. The eyedropper can only take you so far. I was merely agreeing on that, but in no way advocating the eyedropper.

[Anonymous No.1593100]

well, I think this time is aceptable.
at least I didn't fail this time.

[Anonymous No.1593103]

Well, I think I didn't fail so hard this time.

[Anonymous No.1593134]

~40min

[Anonymous No.1593140]

>>1593134
Forgot to resize...

[Anonymous No.1593156]

>>1593140
Lookin' good.

They only thing I don't like is the vibrancy of the whites of the eyes. It looks a little flattened, and the forms of the eyelids and eyeball are muddled.

Looks good though!

[Anonymous No.1593198]

crits ? i tried

[Anonymous No.1593220]

>>1593140
what software did you use?

[Heretic !!O65RQvLvGXb No.1593229]

Started getting into this and then my tablet started acting up, I really hope it isn't broken.

[Anonymous No.1593234]

>>1593156
Yeah, very hard to figure out the real shape of the eye at this point. But didn´t wanted to waste to much time on the eye.

>>1593220
Photoshop Cs6

[Heretic !!O65RQvLvGXb No.1593262]

>>1593229
I think I might have made the whole thing too dark, might need to lighten up the more well lit parts.

[Anonymous No.1593284]

>>1592084

[Anonymous No.1593295]

>>1593198

More pink. Also yours is kinda squished and the angle of his eyebrows make him look pissed off

[Anonymous No.1593294]

>>1593284
>those soul staring eyes

[Heretic !!O65RQvLvGXb No.1593303]

>>1593262
proportions are off but I otherwise think this turned out bretty gud.

[Anonymous No.1593311]

>>1593284
holy mother of god what the fuck

>>1593303
nice job, but right eye shouldn't be so bright, and the angle of the eyebrow is not right.
the expression is just too different.

[Heretic !!O65RQvLvGXb No.1593313]

>>1593303
forgot the ear

[Heretic !!O65RQvLvGXb No.1593320]

>>1593303
forgot the ear (reposted becusae I edited an old version before)
>>1593311
What do you mean by the eye being too bright, you mean the highlight?

[Heretic !!O65RQvLvGXb No.1593323]

>>1593320
forgot image

[Anonymous No.1593363]

Atleast I tried..

[Anonymous No.1593446]

uuuughhghghh

[Anonymous No.1593465]

>>1593363
An admirable attempt it was, anon. Did you feel like you learned?

[Anonymous No.1593492]

>>1593284

[Anonymous No.1593494]

Quick n dirty

[Anonymous No.1593502]

>>1593494
thats what she said

[Anonymous No.1593504]

Been painting digitally for 3 days.
I think i did okay.
learnt alot.

[Anonymous No.1593508]

>>1593284

[Anonymous No.1593511]

>>1593494
you have good taste in sketchbooks. I don't love or hate the drawing though.

[Anonymous No.1593523]

1st attempt, ill try again tomorrow, had a lot of construction flaws in this one

[Anonymous No.1593527]

>>1593504

definitely. you are doing something right, don't changemethods!

[Anonymous No.1593538]

>>1592676
Fuckin literally everyone in this thread needs to learn how to construct before rendering. Christ. LOOMIS, BITCHES

[Anonymous No.1593539]

>>1593538
I stand corrected, everyone except
>>1592903
and MAYBE
>>1593140

[Anonymous No.1593584]

(not quite) Quick and (not quite) dirty 2

Proper construction aka I only wanna be the best aka unleash the kraken edition

[Anonymous No.1593593]

Any obvious flaws or tips are appreciated but yeah heres my quick go at it :)

[Anonymous No.1593595]

30 minute sketch cause I gotta go to bed
Didn't really capture his likeness but fuck it I'll try again after work tomorrow

[Anonymous No.1593598]

any obvious flaws or tips are appreciated but here's my quick go at it :)

[Anonymous No.1593599]

>>1593595
Fucking phone always oversizing and rotating my shit

[Anonymous No.1593611]

I give up, i seriously cannot get it right. I was fun though. :P

[Anonymous No.1593651]

>>1593584

You talk weird

[Anonymous No.1593753]

:c Idk what I'm doing.
"Just draw" they said.

[Anonymous No.1593820]

>>1593753
>"Just draw" they said.
It should say "Just draw a lot...a fucklot."

[Anonymous No.1593850]

Tried it a bit, kept up until I felt like I was getting bored and without flipping it, was very useful.

[Anonymous No.1593871]

>>1593753
read loomis.

[Anonymous No.1593888]

>>1593753
Visualize and think in three-dimensional forms, and check out Proko's videos about the human head. Then you "just draw". A lot.

[Anonymous No.1593942]

>>1593284
Dont listen to everyone else, this was a good try. Use more darks, especially around the eyes. Also try some less textured brushes to cut down on the fuzziness.

[Anonymous No.1593978]

Bleh, this scanner really does my hatching no favors.

[Anonymous No.1593981]

hey

[Anonymous No.1594070]

[Anonymous No.1594078]

I started in ms paint then got thinking about terminator.

[Anonymous No.1594081]

>>1593978
lelnochin

[Anonymous No.1594090]

>>1594070
Nice trace faggot

[Anonymous No.1594111]

>>1593871
Why would Loomis help in this situation?

[Anonymous No.1594112]

>>1594111
>Why would Loomis help in this situation?

[Anonymous No.1594115]

>>1594111
because loomis advocates a 'production line' type of draw where you take steps. each steps increases the accuracy of the following step. as long as you are sure each step is accurate you will end up with an accurate representation of you reference (even if it's an in brain reference).

what you've done is eaten a fine-liner and tried to poop it out in a way that made it look like faces, loomis will tell you this is the wrong approach//

[Anonymous No.1594118]

>>1594115
Thanks for the explanation, instead of posting a stupid reaction image, but I did not draw that picture.

[Anonymous No.1594119]

>>1594115
While Loomis can indeed be used as a step by step process, the real value in it is the fact that it is a system based on construction/drawthrough. That 3d approach to it will help make the drawing feel more correct and solid, as well as aid in your understanding of the forms as you draw.

[Anonymous No.1594128]

>>1594119
that is the step by step process. you basically paraphrased me.

[Anonymous No.1594130]

>>1594128
No, I emphasized the construction factor. Other systems (such as sight size) employ a solely 2d shape analysis of things, but also can be followed through step by step.

[Anonymous No.1594176]

>>1593523
2nd attempt, help plz

[Anonymous No.1594178]

>>1594090
are you stupid?

[Anonymous No.1594235]

>>1594176
You're not observing carefully enough. The original head has an upwards tilt that you've minimized. The eyes are the wrong shape and are missing the stern expression, the jaw is underdeveloped, and there are several plane changes on the head that you're missing.

Slow down, measure out spatial relationships of as many landmarks as possible. Construct the 3D forms of the head while double and triple checking all the previously established spatial relationships. Once the drawing is correct, add values. It helps to first divide shadow from light, then further refine each while keeping that distinction in place.

[Anonymous No.1594271]

[Anonymous No.1594283]

>>1594271

who dat? i want to know. srs. post your da. you are one of those unmotivated loser phaggots aren't you?

[Anonymous No.1594385]

>>1594235
thanks!

[Anonymous No.1594924]

WIP

[Anonymous No.1594949]

>>1594283
not that anon, but I can't tell if this is ironic shitposting or actual illiteracy

[Anonymous No.1594957]

>>1594271
what brush/brush settings did you use here?

[Anonymous No.1594961]

>>1594283
u srs mang? Like >>1594949 said, I can't tell what your deal is. Anyways, I don't have a DA. Or I haven't posted there since I was 17, I never use that site (so no, not part of that unmotivated loser group). My website though is http://andrewsonea.com/ if you are genuinely curious about my art.

>>1594957
I use Jaime Jones' set. You can google and find it easily I believe. Basically on this one just tried to use the brushes that had more of a hairy/natural look to them. And just used on the normal settings at 100% opacity, sometimes turning off transfer in the brush panel to make it more opaque. In that area I'm not sure what brush it is specifically haha, just try his set out and you can find it though, it looks like I may have used one of the hard round brushes that has a bit of a speckly texture to it.

[Anonymous No.1595797]