[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

View post   
File: 81 KB, 843x948, see_you_in_hel_by_alex_mars-d7hhal4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1750265 No.1750265[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Everything's in the title, really, I'd like to know if you think this is a real piece of art or a manipulated photo.

>> No.1750266

not your personal army ,,l,,

>> No.1750267
File: 809 KB, 780x1054, jodymills_by_euclase-d7hy6b9.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1750267

I have the same suspicion about Euclase's work. Something just looks off.

>> No.1750270

ITT: noobs discovering tracing

i remember my first time

>> No.1750273

>>1750270
I don't even think it's tracing, it's somehow worse than that if it's just blurring a photo and getting paid to do it.

>> No.1750275

>>1750273
Who the fuck is paying for this?

>> No.1750291

>>1750275
Stupid fangirls will pay for anything.

>> No.1750320

Celebrity drawings tend to be traced by 15 year olds
They're never any good but other 15 year olds go crazy over them

>> No.1750453

lol how is this not super obvious op?

>> No.1750455
File: 872 KB, 2495x784, justatadtraced.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1750455

>>1750265

>> No.1751212

>>1750265
>>1750265
Its shit none the less
smudging or painting a crappy actor portraying a shitty character

>> No.1751220
File: 26 KB, 202x208, 2014-05-31 12.51.27.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1751220

>>1751212
>take 8 year old nephew to Renaissance festival
>haven't been since age 10
>see where white trash and nerd collide in the perfect plebeian storm
>see girl with TATTOO of lokis helmet
>mfw entire time

At least my sisters kid had fun, but jesus christ.

>> No.1753019
File: 98 KB, 541x800, 1309096306_pictures_by_leo_hao37.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1753019

I like Leo Hao alot (he did a bunch of stuff for Blind Guardian) and I asked him about photobashing. He unapologetically admitted he sometimes just paints over peoples' faces. I've done that if I need to just get a piece done quickly.

>> No.1753033

>>1750265

Oh look. Some talentless schmuck on tumblr or deviant art obsessed with the shitty marvel movies and probably doing commissions.

>> No.1753109

>>1750265

Sauce, faggot.

Also yes, this dirty noob is doing zero work.

>> No.1754023

>>1753109
Sauce is http://alex-mars.deviantart.com

>> No.1754025

>>1750265
>>1750455
Probably just colorpicked and painted over the photo. It's annoying but good for them I guess for exploiting the fangirl market.

>> No.1754098

>>1754023

Wow. This bitch is full of shit. 90% of her submissions of hiddleston, and almost all of them are screen grabs.

>> No.1754101

It amazes me how everyone falls for this stuff. Anyone want to out this noob?

>> No.1754148

>>1754101

Just did.

http://alexmarsisfullofshit.deviantart.com/art/Calling-out-Alex-Mars-Liar-and-Cheat-461156598

>> No.1754178

>>1754148
>http://alexmarsisfullofshit.deviantart.com/art/Calling-out-Alex-Mars-Liar-and-Cheat-461156598

Kek

Youre fighting for a just cause brother anon, well done

>> No.1754181

>>1754178

omg look at the bottom of the pic.

>> No.1754190
File: 624 KB, 1024x1414, white_dragon_by_alex_mars-d7gjho8.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1754190

>Alex Mars with no photo to paint over

The ride never ends

>> No.1754192

>>1754190

You can tell she's a noob because all her backgrounds for fully rendered people are ambiguous and blurry pieces of crap and many times just pure white space.

#Mars2014

>> No.1754196
File: 566 KB, 1024x1190, abab.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1754196

>>1754181
>>1754178

TOP KEKEKEKEKEKE

>> No.1754247

>>1754148
Nice.

I don't get why people do that. Even people with actual skill of copying photos; I think that's the most dull thing you can do with art. I mean, what's the fucking point?

>> No.1754250

Theres gonna be popcorn to be had tomorrow.

>> No.1754261

>>1754247
Because creating art is hard.
So, bring me movie stills.
So, bring me screenshots.
So, bring me all the flipped images.
So, bring me filter fx.

After all these years of lying,
I could've been telling the truth by now.
And I know that.
So, bring me my depression.

>> No.1754286

>>1750267

So agree. Her stuff gets thousands of notes, but it's literally just a realistic painting of a picture. Her art is so fucking boring regardless of painting over a picture.

>> No.1754459

>>1754286

Reverse image search, mah niqqa.

>> No.1754468

>>1750265
anything is art, little kids drawing turkeys from the outline of their hands is art. However, there is good art and bad art. Someone copied a photo or movie still for this digital painting. How fucking exciting. Not a bad way to study, but Jesus Christ, photorealism is such a fucking bore.

>> No.1754469

I'm trying to find the account but I can't. She did breaking bad stuff. really looked like paint-overs to me. Anyone know who I'm talking about?

>> No.1754476
File: 601 KB, 2054x2700, 0j8eZaK.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1754476

>>1754469
Found it.
http://imorawetz.deviantart.com/gallery/

Opinions?

>> No.1754493

>>1754476

I dunno, really. Maybe. I'll give a shit when I get some food in my stomach.

>> No.1754518
File: 97 KB, 450x300, navy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1754518

>ITT /ic/ focuses way too hard on other peoples artwork in order to make up for their own insecurities and shit art.

KEEP IT CLASSY IC

>> No.1754739

>>1754518

>implying

>> No.1754759

>>1754739
> Implying you know what Implying means

>> No.1754763

seriously, if you guys spent as much time painting and drawing as you do going on witch hunts I'm 100% your own art work wouldn't suck.

>any artist worth a damn does not give a shit about "cheating" artists

>> No.1754774

>calling out people for bullshit
>trying to keep some integrity in digital art

Oh my god I must be terrible at everything.

>> No.1754788

>>1754774

werd

I spend 30-40 hours a week training to go pro on top of working for my father and juggling schooling for bio-engineering. Who the fuck cares if you take the time expose somebody for lying and cheating like this.

>> No.1754792

>>1754774
>>1754788
>no proof for any of this "bullshit"
>even then, WHO THE FUCK CARES
>but but it makes us feeeeel better

>> No.1754809

>>1754792

>no proof

top lel. blind as a bat. in case you didn't know, a perfect overlay of an image means the image is the same image.

>> No.1754865

>>1754809
yeah; looking at more images, they are literal perfect overlays. the brushstrokes are done poorly in a few areas that would be obvious if they were just a perfect overlay.

>> No.1754884

>>1750265
>digital crap
>art

>> No.1755129

>>1754884
>defining art
okay, I'll stop. But why so much hate for digital art? if they actually apply real skill to it, whats the difference? its just a medium; do you look down on painters because they don't use clay?

>> No.1755131

>>1750265
This is not art. It is a replication of a photo. It has no value.

>> No.1755148

I've got a better question.

Who cares?

If the goal of your art style is to make your image indistinguishable from a mechanical photographic reproduction, then why do you even want to practice art?

You'd be better served by taking up photography or using a photo editor. Art is about expression, not reproduction.

>> No.1755149

>>1755148
Using photos to model and help you study proportion and anatomy, yes, but simply copying a image and trying to reproduce it faithfully, without adding your own personal style, is the same as taking a photograph.

We all perceive things through filters, part of the magic of art is to make those filters less transparent, to see things through your eyes.

Where do your eyes focus? Do they drift over the hem of her dress? Are they focused on light and shadow? Is your head swimming with lust or is it pure adoration for an innocent shade?

>> No.1755152

>>1755129
Because digitital art is objective, not subjective, it is grounded in measurements and fact, not intuition and faith.

I admire its crystal clarity, but you have to admit even a transparent lens will distort things when it is underwater.

>> No.1755153

>>1755152
>Because digitital art is objective, not subjective, it is grounded in measurements and fact, not intuition and faith.
>objective
>subjective

Stop using words you don't really understand the meaning of.

>> No.1755154

>>1755153
How bout you fuck off and not tell me the meaning of words I already know?

>> No.1755156

>>1755152
>>1755154

Amazing how different you sound between posts.

>>crap
>>I admire its crystal clarity, but you have to admit even a transparent lens will distort things when it is underwater.
>>fuck of m8

The fact that you called a medium of all things objective is fucking precious.

>> No.1755189

>>1755152
how...how is it objective. It's just a fucking medium of art; that's not even what this thread about, its about some hack with a tablet that's tracing over pictures and people think the "paintings" are a fucking masterpiece. Anyone can trace anything dead on and pass it off as art with little to no skill applied...I guess that's something that makes art shitty and hard to define, also why I find photo realistic artwork a little pointless.

>> No.1755203

>>1755152

HOSTILE SHITTER SPOTTED

>> No.1755211

>>1750455
Yeah, not showing any steps in between "original, blurry, and less blurry", means its fake.

>> No.1755214

>>1755211
Alex Marsis pls go

>> No.1755320

>>1755214

He's agreeing that it's fake you boob.

>> No.1755331

>>1755320
>you boob
sik fukn burn

>> No.1755333

>>1755331

>2014
>not calling people harmless names

Nigger what are you doing?

>> No.1755340

>>1755333
Well done.

>> No.1755474

>>1755333

Kek

Nice trips.

>> No.1755554

LE READIT ARMIE IS HEAR

>> No.1755593

I'm happy that bitch got what she deserves, I just can't believe she give people advice like "KEEP WORKING HARD LIKE ME AND YOU'LLS EE THE RESULTS."

What a cunt.

>> No.1755598

>>1755593
I wonder what's psychologically fucked up with these people, really.
To actually and consistently lie over prolonged periods of time about something as trivial as being able to draw to what extent?
Escapism? Real DSM-worthy stuff?
I mean

What the Fuck?

>> No.1755606

>>1755598
Maybe they believe that this is how all digital art is made, because noone can be crazily talented while they suck, so it has to be how it's done by the masters.

>> No.1755608

>>1755606
Seriously, this sounds perfectly nuts.
Instead of watching a digital artist actually draw on video they deceive themselves into believing this.

>> No.1755610

Oh man. This thread was a great read. I'm still laughing my ass off at the "git gud nigga" hidden at the bottom of the pic. Thanks for the laughs, guys.

>> No.1755618

>Some more info.

>When two images laid over top of each other match up pixel to pixel, that means it is the exact same image. It is near impossible for someone to recreate a photo (by hand painting) and be so accurate, let alone do it again and again so quickly.

>More proof.

>Ice: by Alex Mars: http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2014/073/0/7/ice_by_alex_mars-d7a4cea.jpg

>Source image: http://www.imvu.com/groups/group/BloodStigma%2BFeelings/

>She used a tom hiddleston photo to replace the face and head of the original. Notice how the anatomy is completely borked as the middle of Tom's jaw doesn't align with his throat and the size of his neck does not match his head.

I WANT TO GET OFF MR. BONE'S WILD RIDE

>> No.1755627

>>1755598
Some people just like attention and compliments, some take it too far

>> No.1756222

http://www.reddit.com/r/Drama/comments/28f69r/drama_on_4chan_over_whether_or_not_a/

this was posted on leddit by http://www.reddit.com/user/IAMAStripperAMA

someone ought to find their real username because they're an obvious sockpuppet

>> No.1756253

>>1756222
>going to rebbit

Those wasted trips

>> No.1756254

>>1756253
>>>/b/

>> No.1756257
File: 5 KB, 239x251, 1337292710803.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1756257

>>1756254
>goes to reddit
>tells me to fuck off to /b/
Suck a fat one m80

>> No.1756258

>>1756257
not me

>> No.1756263

>>1754476
looks like a filter, sometimes with digital stuff because of the paint-overs and shit the drawing is good but the brush work sucks because they suck, and it ends up looking like a filter. is hard to tell.

>> No.1756420

Why is it ALWAYS Hiddleston?
Found another one: http://0-marimo-0.deviantart.com/gallery/

>> No.1756549

>>1755156
Not the same person, tard

>> No.1756588

>>1756549
>Not the same person
>Responds with personal "don't tell ME"

You fucked up nigga.

>> No.1756693

>>1756588
bruv I tutor maths and I've been doing a week-long review session after work every day, I haven't had any time to come to this shithole.

Some cheeky cunt decided to reply for me.

>> No.1756788

Well just look at her line work. Its just fucking chicken scratching. So obviously she traces pics and overpaint photos

>> No.1756806

I think if you're painting from a photograph, you must have a good reason to do so. You're making a replication of a replication of reality. And a camera depicts reality better than a painting made from that photograph.

>> No.1756817

>>1756806
>And a camera depicts reality better than a painting made from that photograph

Actually, the problem with using photographic reference is camera distortions.

The field of vision is different from how we see, various lenses can have different FOVs which the artist may or may not be aware of, the value range in photos is much narrower, et cetera.

Photographic reference can be a fine aide, but you need to be aware of its issues and be willing to diverge from the ref to correct forms or adjust values and such.

>> No.1758364

what about this guy:
http://gregory-welter.deviantart.com/gallery/

>> No.1758385
File: 185 KB, 500x718, loki_scetch_1_by_gregory_welter-d7lq0vu[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1758385

>>1758364
Holy fuck, I'm shit at drawing but christ this is ridiculous

>> No.1758394
File: 443 KB, 970x598, white_nights_by_gregory_welter-d7n3wcr.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1758394

>>1758385
He's not that bad

>> No.1758397
File: 223 KB, 500x768, portrait_1_by_gregory_welter-d7l3u2w.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1758397

>>1758394
but it all looks traced as fuck doesn't it?
pic related looks like he just applied some photo filter over a photo

>> No.1758402

>>1758385

Are you retarded, anon?

>> No.1758415

>>1758402
no but ur mum is

#rekt

>> No.1758417

>>1758397
that's pretty much what most traces look like.

i really dont get the point. it's like color by numbers and it's nowhere near as much fun as construncting and actually drawing something from imagination.
>tfw your construnction doesn't look off

>> No.1758424

>>1758417
that's not a trace, it's basically barely above phone filters. no painting going on there.

>> No.1758426

>>1758424
welp. my point stands

>> No.1758840

Here's a simple rule: if it looks like a shopped photo (even if it's legit) treat it with the same respect as one.

What's the value in it otherwise? So you painted honestly painted something that looks like it could have been made with photo manipulation software in about 15 minutes? Why didn't you just do that then?

Maybe that won't be a popular opinion, but it seems that's what would run through my mind if I ever considered digitally painting a realistic copy of a reference image.

>> No.1759031

>>1758364
it gets better
http://forum.deviantart.com/jobs/services/1977180/
he calls himself proffesional
and apparently he can do the paiting in 1-2 hours

>> No.1762059

>>1759031
And they ask $250 for that bullshit.

>> No.1762093
File: 96 KB, 450x639, in-my-phone.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1762093

>>1750267
>>1750265
>>1758397
>>1759031

This shit makes me realize that if someone made a robot that could turn photographs into painterly fan arts that looked like this and started charging people to comission it, they would pay up the ass for it and not only that they wouldn't even bother going to other artists because they just want fan art. and then the robot will do the drawings for cheaper than a real artist would and- fuck

>> No.1762123
File: 70 KB, 825x393, 000000000000.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1762123

hm

>> No.1762144

>>1762123
He never said it was for commercial use, so..

>> No.1762395

>>1762123
He's in Russia?
He can't be touched then, I assume.

>> No.1764432

>>1750267
Well, they deactivated all of their accounts today, so I guess someone managed to prove they do photo-manipulation instead of eyeballing/painting as they pretend.

>> No.1764468
File: 91 KB, 482x239, black man laughing.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1764468

>>1754023
The non-traced drawings.

>> No.1766343

>>1756817
Know of any guides for this or does it become intuitive as you progress?