Jaime Jones new art

[Anonymous No.1821979]

So I was flipping through the new National Geographic that came in the mail today, and stopped and noticed the illustrations seemed familiar. Checked the artist credit: Jaime Jones. Pic related is the only one on their website, but if you buy the issue there are several other paintings he did. None of them are overly exciting to me though, even as a Jaime fanboy. I feel like he is playing them overly safe as images--uninteresting composition and colours, and a fairly tight finish so no exciting brushwork. The one posted with this thread has some issues too imo, but whatever, still nice to see. At least he is getting some good work.

Figured there are probably a couple other Jaime fanboys/girls here who would appreciate this.

[Anonymous No.1822269]

>>1821979
I think it makes perfect sense given the client. They probably didnt commission him to do high contrasty painterly pictures, the context is more historical, so he was probably asked to paint it from a more informative point of view :)

[Anonymous No.1822275]

>>1822269
this.

it looks exactly like something i would expect from neogeo

[Anonymous No.1822282]

The face looks pasted on, then again it's Jaimes Jones, so I guess he can get away with that

[Anonymous No.1822296]

>>1822282
yea it looks awful
as a JJ fan I wish I hadn't seen this

[Anonymous No.1822385]

Well it is after all scientific illustration. It's supposed to be as easy to read and understand as possible. Adding any flashy details or using a more dramatic composition would just be distracting. Seeing an artwork in the right context is always important.

[Anonymous No.1822426]

>>1822385
Yeah that's true, but there is still room to add interest to the image. I've seen interior stuff for National Geographic by Jon Foster that looks more interesting than this.

[Anonymous No.1822438]

>>1822269

Well, he did do this one for National Geographic as well a long time ago and many people seem to consider it one of his all time best digital paintings.

[Anonymous No.1822448]

>>1822385
Kill yourself

[Anonymous No.1822486]

>>1822438
>many people seem to consider it one of his all time best digital paintings.

i certainly do. it's mindblowingly beautiful and technically proficient.

[Anonymous No.1822537]

>>1822426
>>1822448
this is why ic is full of shit

[Anonymous No.1822539]

>>1822486
I think its great too

It must be difficult to make my brain think that pink river its blue
its incredible

[Anonymous No.1822547]

>>1822537
Because we recognize when he does a weaker painting than usual rather than be blinded by fanboyism? Okai der

[Anonymous No.1822571]

OP here, I took some photos of the other stuff

[Anonymous No.1822572]

>>1822571

[Anonymous No.1822574]

>>1822572

[Anonymous No.1822576]

>>1822574
This one's got some nice brush handling actually, but it's hard to see in the photo

[Anonymous No.1822596]

>>1822438
I knew I recognized that mountain texture in the back

[Anonymous No.1822615]

>>1822596
INTO THE THRASH IT GOES

[Anonymous No.1822622]

>>1822596
REAL

[Anonymous No.1822643]

>>1822596
One that I found

[Anonymous No.1822644]

>>1822643
One that another anon found

[Anonymous No.1822645]

>>1822644
Another one I found (just stretch it horizontally and switch which side the foreground bubbles are on)

[Anonymous No.1822648]

>>1822645
This one is a much looser connection, more like he used Sargent's quarry paintings as inspiration rather than a direct copy, though some of the compositions are remarkably similar. And maybe there is one out there somewhere that is much more similar, who knows.

[Anonymous No.1822649]

>>1821979
So this is what he can do with no ref/photobash, uh.

[Anonymous No.1822779]

>>1822644
i found this, or maybe someone else also found it.. anyway thats irrelevant, i think what i said back then, was that he essentially took a working composition he liked, and did what you could call an extended study of it, trying to understand why it work, and trying to alter it or change the composition but still having the image work as a whole, to be honest i don't mind any of these pictures, a lot of people on this board would benefit from trying to do stuff like this. Borrowing compositions is something people have done for ages, its nothing new really, and i certainly still admire JJ's ability to compose, draw and etc. :)

So, instead of us trying to get to the point where we can say "HA! he's a hack, he's not really that good!!!" just to account for our lack of skill, i think we should acknowledge that most of these were early in his artistic development, and also more homages to orientalism, sargent, and other things he is influenced by.

JJ for prez

[Anonymous No.1822790]

>>1822649

has nothing to do with it 414

>>1822779

this. i would still suck his dink 24/7 in hopes of some of his DNA transferring skills over to me as i swallow every drop of his nectar. no homo.

[Anonymous No.1822809]

>>1822571
>>1822572
>>1822574
>>1822576

thanks for posting these anon. they are clearly more lifelike and scientific, and give him little room to be awesomely creative and 'impressionist', but still showcase his skills.

[Anonymous No.1822833]

>>1822779
I didn't post those to show he's a hack, though I suppose people are free to take whatever stance on it they want. I posted them because they're interesting to me. It says something about him, his influences, his approach/thoughts etc. It also shows he is human and not just pulling his images magically out of thin air.

[Anonymous No.1822842]

>>1822649
The whole notion of art derived from the divine "purity"(lol) of your imagination; no reference, no inspiration, no nothing, is perhaps the most naive and immature idea one can take on.

[Anonymous No.1822845]

>>1822779
it's fine if he gave credit to original when he posted them. if not, then may he burn in hell for his lies. if you don't give credit, you claim everything is your own.

[Anonymous No.1822851]

>>1822842
please stop, this is silly. it's one thing to get inspired and the other is to copy composition or whatever. he is giving a bad example. ask yourself, then, why are you making thumbnail sketches, why are you designing your characters or painting mountains, if you can just steal it from another source? why are you putting in the effort?