/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.1946639]

someone posted this a week ago. anyone got more examples like this??? and how did anon find this reference? i love seeing these comparisons because it shows something about how to extract information and channel it into something beautiful, without over-reliance on the reference image.

[Anonymous No.1946683]

>>1946639

bump. fuck your thread, my thread is more important.

[Anonymous No.1946690]

Why are the people so damn small? What the fuck was the artist thinking?

[Anonymous No.1946730]

>>1946690
He added people that size to convey the scale of the buildings. Are you new to art?

[Anonymous No.1946740]

>>1946730
It's most clearly a mistake. He put in these real world slums in order to convey a familiar environment. It's obvious that area is supposed to draw parallels from the real world, and we know how big people should look in that instance. It's like drawing a house and having people inside it be twice as small as they would normally be.

It's not bad design. The overall drawing is great. It's just a strange detail to overlook. It seems like the people should be two times larger to fit in.

You have an untrained eye if you can't see this.

[Anonymous No.1946866]

>>1946639
I collect images like this for Jaime. I like to put the ref next to his images. There's two categories I have found for him: ones where he steals bits of an image but adds or changes it, and then ones where it's just a straight up study.

I'll post the others I have.

>>1946740
Nah, he clearly intended them to be small to push the scale so the structures seem larger than life and have more of an impact. The building in the left bottom corner is ambiguous as to how far it is from the people so it still works. The buildings at the same depth as the people are the size of regular houses (which yes are larger than slum houses, but still fits within reason).

[Anonymous No.1946867]

>>1946866

[Anonymous No.1946870]

>>1946867

[Anonymous No.1946871]

>>1946870

[Anonymous No.1946873]

>>1946871

[Anonymous No.1946875]

>>1946873

[Anonymous No.1946876]

>>1946875

[Anonymous No.1946877]

>>1946876

[Anonymous No.1946879]

>>1946877

[Anonymous No.1946880]

>>1946879

[Anonymous No.1946882]

>>1946880
Okay now for straight up studies. This one I found a couple days ago, it's a screenshot from For a Few Dollars More. Great movie. I screenshotted at the wrong moment though, I was lining it up with the bottle as the guy picked it up to pour, but I got the wrong part of the motion because the guy on the right moved his head to a different position than the one that jaime painted it in.

[Anonymous No.1946884]

>>1946882

[Anonymous No.1946885]

>>1946884

[Anonymous No.1946886]

>>1946885

[Anonymous No.1946887]

>>1946886

[Anonymous No.1946889]

>>1946887

[Anonymous No.1946890]

>>1946889

[Anonymous No.1946891]

>>1946890
This is actually from a corner of a painting, it's a little piece from the bg of it. Jaime likes to find microcompositions.

[Anonymous No.1946893]

>>1946891

[Anonymous No.1946894]

>>1946885
He kinda fucked up that one.

[Anonymous No.1946898]

>>1946893
This one is a Leyendecker copy, but I can't find the original. If anyone has it please post it up so I can make another comparison image.

[Anonymous No.1946900]

This one I suspect he used ref from an Akira Kurosawa film, possibly Yojimbo? If anyone can find the ref he used I would love you till the end of time.

>>1946894
He was probably studying from a poor reproduction that was darker and looked more like his image.

[Anonymous No.1946902]

>>1946900
Not sure what this is from, could be any of a number of Western movies. And he may have changed hte face a bit, so I dunno. If people know though please chime in.

[Anonymous No.1946905]

>>1946902
If anyone knows this one too I would appreciate it. I thought it was Velazquez, but maybe not? Can't find the exact image. Or he maybe took the image from his Frying Eggs painting and changed the face a bit? I dunno.

[Anonymous No.1946908]

>>1946905
This one might be a Sargent study or maybe is an invented face using a Sargent value/colour structure?

[Anonymous No.1946910]

>>1946908
95% sure this is a from a scene in a movie, but I dunno what.

[Anonymous No.1946913]

>>1946910
Either a study or partial study fro ma film again...

[Anonymous No.1946916]

>>1946913
Another movie still, please help out if you know these things.

[Anonymous No.1946917]

>>1946866
>>1946866
Not that guy but what about the fact thay the guy in the distance walking along the houses? It looks like those shitty slums are two stories high at least.

[Anonymous No.1946920]

>>1946916
Forgot a study

[Anonymous No.1946924]

Jaime said himself that this image was based on a photo of a helicopter or something. Does anyone know the model so we can track down the ref?

>>1946917
Yeah. I don't see a problem with that. There looks to be multiple levels sorta. It's a slum.

[Anonymous No.1946930]

>>1946924
>Not being able to recognize that as a goddamn Mil Mi-24 Hind

You make me sick.

[Anonymous No.1946951]

>>1946913
Not sure but maybe gangs of New York.

[Anonymous No.1946952]

>>1946910
Again not sure but maybe the godfather.

[Anonymous No.1946956]

>>1946902
Charles Bronson from magnificent 7.

[Anonymous No.1946959]

>>1946900
This reminds me of a scene in Rashomon.

[Anonymous No.1946962]

>>1946956
Cheers! I forgot about that movie...it's so bad compared the Seven Samurai.

[Anonymous No.1946968]

>>1946898
Bit more googling and I found a crop of the image. Would still appreciate if people could find hte entire thing.

[Anonymous No.1946978]

>>1946968
Okay with a bit of googling I think I found a new one. If you horizontally squish the photo you can see some shapes and stuff he took from it (I know he likes squishing or stretching things to change them). Pretty sneaky and smart way of using reference, just taking general shape and colours but then expanding upon it quite a lot.

[Anonymous No.1946981]

>>1946978
How exactly did you spot that one? Did you happen to have the ref and recognize it?

[Anonymous No.1946990]

>>1946981
Well I knew he used reference on that image, so I just googled "rice paddies" as a guess of what he might have used. Then I saw that image as being sorta similar, so I tried squishing it horizontally since I've seen him change ref by doing that before like in that Fuchs image he stole the shapes from for his Moby Dick pic (that one I found by complete accident though).

[Anonymous No.1946996]

Lol, I accidentally clicked this thread rather than the draw thread and I was scrolling up thinking "why is this fucker spamming this in the drawthread, he should just make his own thread"

Then I got to the top and felt like a goof.

[Ron Tower No.1947000]

>>1946639
the jig is up shut it down.

[Anonymous No.1947021]

op checking back in after a good nights sleep. glad to see an actually useful thread getting attention huehue.

>>1946978

man, insane job spotting this one. i don't even...

but it definitely is the ref. fantastic example. this is SO educational guise. seriously guise.

[Anonymous No.1947028]

Smells like samefag in here...

But I appreciate these comparisons.

[Anonymous No.1947115]

bump. stop making shitty threads you fucking peasants and get back in here to discuss this pressing, urgent subject matter.

[Anonymous No.1947122]

>>1946898
Is it me or is Leyendecker's stuff with decent resolution super hard to find anyway?

[Anonymous No.1947129]

>>1947122
There's a handful of hi res Leyendecker's out there. If you like his stuff though just do what the rest of us do and buy the book on him, it's a really quality publication.

[Anonymous No.1947293]

>>1946956
the movie the cap is from is "once upon a time in the wild west"

[Anonymous No.1947357]

>>1946968
I had an inkling that this was for Thanksgiving and I wasn't disappointed.

The Saturday Evening Post November 28, 1914.

[Anonymous No.1947372]

>>1947357
Nice find! And fucking hell Leyendecker was so good, I mean just look at those hands!!

[Anonymous No.1947375]

>>1947372
but look at his ears

[Anonymous No.1947438]

>>1946875
Why would he make the person so small?
Obviously a mistake.

[Anonymous No.1947606]

found another one that i'm not sure is really the corresponding ref, but there's definitely elements there.

also bumping the best thread on /ic/ atm

>>1947438

god is infallible you nonbelieving scum.

[Anonymous No.1947608]

>>1946740
You are most clearly new to art. He made them smaller than in the ref to make the huts and the slum appear bigger. It's was obviously a conscious decision

[Anonymous No.1947736]

>>1947606
did you just use google reverse image and picked the first photo that looks like it?

[Anonymous No.1947796]

>>1947606
Nice! He's probably used ref for all his pictures.

The demo he did with the lizard rider I remember seeing a lot of ref next to the psd.

Then again you'd be dumb not to use ref

[Anonymous No.1948001]

>>1947606
Definitely some similarities, but nothing in it is enough for me to say whether he used that particular ref for sure or not (no exact shapes taken). If not, then the image he used as ref must have been very similar.

The attached pic is another example of a possible but not certain ref. With a bit of squishing or stretching the photo here can match fairly close to the painting but I can't say for certain. The two trees there and many small things lead me to think he used this photo, but I dunno.

[Anonymous No.1948003]

>>1948001
Also a Corot study he did

[Anonymous No.1948007]

>>1947021
>>1947606
>>1948001

those last ones are bullshit

[Anonymous No.1948019]

>>1948007
Yeah a little. It doesn't take much to make it look the same, just a bit of cropping in and stretching. Again, not sure if it is the definite ref but it wouldn't be a surprise. A lot of stuff here lines up.

[Anonymous No.1948026]

>>1948003
clearly a pimp wid two hoes

[Anonymous No.1948167]

>>1948001
>>1948019

honestly don't think so. i believe i have several images in my ref folder that are more likely candidates. will post in a minute.

[Anonymous No.1948250]

>>1946639

aren't there images like this for other artists??? there has to be more. ruanjia for instance?? maybe some mullins??

[Anonymous No.1948254]

>>1948250
Yeah there must be some for others. I'm a Jaime fanboy though so only really collect them for him.

Here's one for Ruanjia that I have, but stuff like this is rarer for Ruanjia and Mullins I think because they both prefer to make stuff up more and noodle until things look good, whereas Jaime likes being very precise and definitive with his shapes in a couple strokes, which demands more reference.

[Anonymous No.1948283]

>>1948019
Another one that's a bit of a stretch. The basic shapes/composition are the same and there's a dog in both. But I dunno.

[Anonymous No.1948297]

>>1948254

gorgeous. thanks anon. god damint i want more of this. this is unbelievably valuable.

>>1948283
with this one i don't see any relationship.

bumping with what i promised here next >>1948167

[Anonymous No.1948299]

>>1948297
if you can't see the similarity between those two pictures then you're blind.

[Anonymous No.1948302]

>>1948297
Yeah it's a bit of a stretch. The problem is that Jaime is really smart about how he steals shapes and compositions, and I know he is very knowledgable in art history and likes taking things from old paintings, so there are a lot of things he may be borrowing from and you can't really rule it out. In that particular image there are a few things that lead me to speculate that it may have been a jumping board for the start of his image--the placement of the focal point, the giant mechanical shape (tank treads/bridge), the dog, and the triangular sky arrow in the top pointing down to the focal point. It's not a very common composition, so I wouldn't be surprised if he used it as inspiration.

[Anonymous No.1948309]

>>1948302

now that you mention it, yeah there's something there actually. also it's starting to catch my attention how often he has a triangular "arrow" shape, resulting from overlap of elements, pointing towards the focal point (sometimes subtle, in that picture it's pretty straight forward)... this is incredibly effective. definitely trying that out in the future...

wish we had more threads like this one. they are absolutely golden.

here's my misty-pine forest pics

[Anonymous No.1948322]

>>1948309
>it's starting to catch my attention how often he has a triangular "arrow" shape
He literally uses triangles EVERYWHERE. If you can tweak a shape to be more triangular it will usually improve it since it is a very simple elegant shape that also has a direction to it. If you want tomorrow I can do some overlays on his images showing just how often he uses it.

[Anonymous No.1948347]

>>1946866
>to make the structures seem larger
to me the structures don't seem larger at all, the people are just midgets.

[Anonymous No.1948455]

>>1948322
> I can do some overlays on his images showing just how often he uses it
Not that anon, but that would be interesting.

[Anonymous No.1948487]

>>1948322

please do. i used to analyze the crap out of jaime jones compositions and post analyticalish draw-overs on here but more often than not i was told they were made up bullshit, so i stopped posting them. didn't stop doing them though, and i think i learned a fuckton from doing that.

[Anonymous No.1948649]

>>1948487

post eggsample

[Anonymous No.1948669]

>>1948487
they were bullshit tho

[Anonymous No.1948751]

>>1946690
anon is right, people are too small, but overall it looks great

[Anonymous No.1948752]

>>1946882
what a nice thread <3

[Anonymous No.1948754]

>>1948297
composition

[Anonymous No.1948755]

>>1948322
post em please anon! Its already tomorrow :<

[Anonymous No.1948770]

>>1946639
Anyone knows what happened to Jaime? Non of his stuff is updated :( is he alive?

[Anonymous No.1948805]

>>1948770

Just busy working on projects probably.

When you're good and in demand you probably don't have alot of time to update your online presence either.

[Anonymous No.1948893]

Alright so since people requested it, I drew over some Jaime images pointing out the triangles that I see him using. I assume some people will argue/disagree with some things, so I will preface it with this:
1) These are just how I see him using triangles. I may have missed some, I may have included some that were a bit of a stretch or accidental. That being said, the vast majority of these were definitely intentionally designed by him.
2) Some of them are subtle...an edge of a triangle may be soft or almost completely lost, or the triangle may be done with texture or saturation rather than value, or the value shift may be subtle.
3) Obviously good shape design goes way beyond using triangles. But triangles are an easy nice shape--the have direction (depending on the type of triangle and how the edges are handled), are very clear and certain shapes and are easy to use and repeat throughout a composition.
4) Yes, some of the shapes aren't perfect triangles, but are shifted to be more triangular for the above reasons.

[Anonymous No.1948894]

>>1948893

[Anonymous No.1948896]

>>1948894

[Anonymous No.1948898]

>>1948896

[Anonymous No.1948900]

>>1948898

[Anonymous No.1948905]

>>1948893
>>1948894
>>1948896
>>1948898
>>1948900
Really cool observations and notes. Thanks OP, I'm going to look into this myself. Definitely appreciate you putting the effort through. We should get a thread up on artists styles that use things like this and just include our examples and notes.

[Anonymous No.1948911]

>>1948894
>>1948896
>>1948893
>>1948898
>>1948900
autism

[Anonymous No.1948932]

>>1948911
Yeah I figured some people would think it's bullshit. But if you look through his images or those of people with good shape design (a lot of AC grads) then you will see triangles over and over.

[Anonymous No.1948933]

>>1948900

Thanks a lot OP! :D <3

[Anonymous No.1948937]

>>1948932
Jeez, no there's no uncertainty about it at this point. Whether or not Jaime is doing it intentionally, the triangles are there. Would you mind posting all the other stuff you've analyzed OP? Maybe in a .zip or uploaded somewhere? This thread is probably one of the most helpful I've ever seen on /ic/.

[Anonymous No.1948949]

>>1948937
Yeah his early images especially are filled with blatant triangles. His newer stuff has more complex shape design going so it is not as obvious in every image.

And uh, usually I just analyze it in my head. The triangle stuff I just posted I did just now because people wanted it, so I have nothing else to post unless I make it.

[Anonymous No.1948953]

>>1948949
Forgot to mention, if you want to see other artists use a lot of triangular shape design and use that to lead the eye within an image I suggest studying Thom Tenery and Ross Tran (both Art Center trained).

[Anonymous No.1949231]

>>1948669

[Anonymous No.1950151]

>>1948911

Well a side effect of autism is being able to more easily recognize patterns. So yes, he way incredibly autistic, in a good way.

[Anonymous No.1950154]

>>1948893
>>1948894
>>1948896
>>1948898
>>1948900
>>1948932
>>1948949

I think the basic principle that this stems from is that dynamic compositions are created by lines that are unparalleled

[Anonymous No.1950360]

last time i'm bumping this thread. promise.

[Anonymous No.1950376]

>>1950151
Haha are you dumb, directing the eye with repeating shapes is an obvious idea. Once you know it you can see it in a lot of paintings.

Try and look at Harold Speeds book on drawing, the segment on rhytmn is amazing actually the book is amazing

[Anonymous No.1950412]

>>1950376
nonono, look, akira is using triangles too.

jokes aside, is unconsciously seeing simple patterns part of a good illustraton ? I dont really think so but where are you people getting this from ?

[Anonymous No.1950417]

>>1950412

[Anonymous No.1950454]

>>1950417

No. Honestly. It's fucking retardedly overanalytical.

[Anonymous No.1950457]

>>1950454
Ok ok

I agree with you, but there is one rule of composition. And that is when you find a rule you should make a pic that breaks that rule, this way you can find out why it is even called for in the first place.

Then you realize there is no such thing as composition and art becomes much more interesting.

[Anonymous No.1950563]

>>1950457
That's completely wrong though.

[Anonymous No.1950574]

>>1950563
Feel free to prove me wrong

[Anonymous No.1950617]

i found triangles too!

[Anonymous No.1950618]

>>1950617
i just love triangles

[Anonymous No.1950636]

>>1950574
What's there to prove? "there is no such thing as composition" is flat out wrong. End of story. If you really can't tell a good composition apart from a shit composition then you have no hope to ever get good at art.

[Anonymous No.1950638]

>>1950636
Pretty sure Mullins discusses the concept of no composition in the Mullins pdf.

[Anonymous No.1950645]

>>1950638
Stop being such a mindless parrot and start thinking for yourself. Just because Mullins said "hurr I keep getting worse at composition the more I read about it lel!" doesn't mean composition doesn't exist. Composition is not just vague concepts that losers like you hope don't matter. Composition is the value structure itself.

You see that shit all the time in the work of noobs. They can't group values, they don't understand how composition works on a fundamental level. How to break a painting down into a clean 3-4 value structure, how to help the eye move through the image instead of leading it out of the image. How to use an appealing number of small, medium and large shapes. How to create focal points through contrast. How to arrange the focal points so they don't compete with each other. You can delude yourself as much as you want into thinking that stuff doesn't matter, but it doesn't change the fact that this is the single most important aspect of painting.

And you also have to realize the people like Mullins, Gurney etc who make these controversial statements about composition are not noobs like you, they actually understand it on a fundamental level and THEN decide to break the rules.

[Anonymous No.1950650]

>>1950645
>assumptions
I was just giving a bit of background on where his statement probably came from and where you can read up more on the idea behind it. But I guess it's more fun to insult people and assume they are noobs.

[Anonymous No.1950671]

>>1950457
There are no rules to composition, there are only ideas. Ideas that may contribute to good composition. Not using these rules, disproving these 'rules' is a waste of time. You can break all of them.

Composition exists through these ideas, but also through intuition. There are also elements of composition, stuff like harmony, rhythm, that are not rules but characteristics of composition that an artist may strive for. That is my take on it. It is important to recognize when your composition is accomplishing something you don't want it to. There are also ideas that are not rules, but more like equation. Blue is cool and calm. Red is warm and chaotic. There is no rule that you can't paint a chaotic painting in blue, but you would obviously need to create that chaos in other ways.

[Anonymous No.1950678]

>Thar be tri-angles
>No u be auh-teest

I doubt that Jamie Jones had the intention to design everything with triangles but that doesn't mean the pattern doesn't show up or that it can't be a useful way to analyze things.

If an artist sees triangles in Jones' work and decides to direct the eye with triangles, then they'll be approaching composition in a mindful and useful way.

It's like arguing about saying to-may-to or to-moh-to.

>Compositions are an illusion
Naw, they're there whether you want it or not. Composition is just the way marks or values or colors or whatever are arranged and how they relate to one another, as long as you've got a canvas there's going to be a composition.

Dunno what Mullins said, but the idea of no composition is obviously wrong.

[Anonymous No.1950848]

Posting an image with lots of triangular shape design for those that still are nonbelievers.

>>1950154
>I think the basic principle that this stems from is that dynamic compositions are created by lines that are unparalleled
Yup, that's a big part of it. The shape will always have no parallels, often points or has a direction, and always will have at least one diagonal, making it more dynamic.

>>1950376
Yes it has to do with repetition, but the use of triangles goes deeper than that.

>>1950412
You joke, but take a look at the images and the things that are highlighted. It's not just random triangles overlaid like in your joke example. I put the original next to each so you can compare.

>>1950678
>I doubt that Jamie Jones had the intention to design everything with triangles
I beg to differ. Just take a look at this image--nearly every shape in the entire thing is a triangle.

[Anonymous No.1950864]

Triangles are optimal because they can show agiltiy, flow, stern direction, and intense action.
These triangles some of you guys are doing are correct in a way. Composition and Colors are both theries. Meaning its not wrong or right. A man could draw with Boxes or circles, doesnt mean its wrong.

Also the planes of the face come in triangles, circles, and boxes. Stop trying to cherrypick everything guys.
It must flow through you, take a step back and breathe.

[Anonymous No.1950867]

you heard it first at /ic/ here folks, spamming triangles are secret to art.

[Anonymous No.1950906]

>>1950864
>Triangles are optimal because they can show agiltiy, flow, stern direction, and intense action.
Yup.
>These triangles some of you guys are doing are correct in a way. Composition and Colors are both theries. Meaning its not wrong or right. A man could draw with Boxes or circles, doesnt mean its wrong.
Yes, Da Vinci for instance really like using an oval shape for most of his forms.

>>1950867
No, it's just one type of shape design that Jaime often uses. Here's a pic of his where he uses a certain gentle curve frequently throughout the image. Each image will have it's own shape language to best convey a certain thing.

[Anonymous No.1950909]

Possible pose/armor steal he did. I know he is familiar with the original and there is a lot in common. The legs and arm of Jaime's image are clearly made up so support this idea more fully.

[Anonymous No.1950912]

>>1950848
>I beg to differ. Just take a look at this image--nearly every shape in the entire thing is a triangle.

Sure, but I doubt he sat there and thought "Imma make everything out of triangles".

As long as there are converging lines of any sort, you're gonna end up with triangles. Especially when he tends to favor linear strokes, I can find plenty of rectangles too simply from the brush shape.

It's a fine enough way to analyze the composition, could even work as a basis for design, but I wouldn't confuse a method of analysis with a deliberate procedure on Jones' part.

[Anonymous No.1950917]

>>1950909
Another possible inspiration one. Noticed it after I did a study of the zorn pic (you can see it in the draw thread). Lots of similarities again--the big bold red mass (an unusual choice, and one that has stood out to me ever since I first laid eyes on the Jaime piece), the dark mass above the right shoulder and the lost edge there, and the big dark shape extending down the right side.