/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.2196086]

>that bg

[Anonymous No.2196096]

Man, this card looks way ugly up close. I never realized. I had to google it to be sure I wasn't being bamboozled.

[Anonymous No.2196100]

>>2196086
Hm I never know how to feel with his stuff. Algen is super skilled, but for some reason seems to make a lot of strange and arguably bad choices. I disagree with people like >>2196096 who immediately start insulting it, because it's not bad per se, it's just got some odd choices with stylistic things and proportions. He's also going pretty heavyhanded with his soft brush.

[Anonymous No.2196111]

>>2196096
what card does this belong to? the lighting is well rendered but the anatomy on the hands gets a bit lost and broken. shoulders look kinda big and ya what the other anon said, too much soft brush

[Anonymous No.2196264]

Algen isn't bad, though he's leagues below people like Chase Stone.

[Anonymous No.2196265]

I noticed the exact same thing the other day in facebook holy shit

Looks like I'm going to illustrate magic cards sooner than expected lol, do you guys know how much they pay for one of these?

[Anonymous No.2196285]

>>2196265
>Looks like I'm going to illustrate magic cards sooner than expected lol

If only talking trash about professional artists would translate to your ability to create superior work.

[Anonymous No.2196292]

>>2196285

I SAID HOW MUCH DO THEY PAY

[Anonymous No.2196295]

>>2196292

600$

[Anonymous No.2196297]

>>2196100
he's trying to be more painterly/ less of a renderwhore. but he uses these smooth brushes that make everything look artificial

[Anonymous No.2196298]

>>2196086

[Anonymous No.2196301]

is >picrelated
chase tool? how is this trash being bought by wizards?

>>2196298

algen samefagging confirmed. i'm sorry nobody noticed your little easter egg algen.

[Anonymous No.2196334]

>>2196292
>>2196295
Actually they pay more like 1k nowadays if I'm not mistaken. Might vary a bit by artist.

[Anonymous No.2196337]

>>2196301
Chase Stone is genuinely very solid. I don't much like that aesthetic of photoreal stuff a la Rigney and Komarck, but they are still all very good.

The image you posted is a WIP he knocked up quickly for a fun challenge years ago. Look at his new work and stop trying to cherry pick his very worst sketches. It's obvious why Wizards hires him.

[Anonymous No.2196376]

>>2196086
Algen's proof that being an autistic rendermachine doing endless photostudies will eventually let you down. There's not much wrong with this image on a technical painting level but the stylistic choices (elongated limbs, squashed face, background straight out of Wakfu, overly-realistic face in a sideways-egg-shaped head, etc) are really jarring. There's something off about the proportions just in relation to one another too, I'm sure one arm's too long.

Beginning to see why Olly stressed working from imagination so much, I don't want to end up like this...

[Anonymous No.2196383]

>>2196376
this. it also feels like he had problems with the art direction, as a renderfag i feel that his style would have worked better with more lighting in a more comic style like garner since it works better with story telling.

[Anonymous No.2196387]

>>2196265
dont let your dreams be dreams.

[Anonymous No.2196388]

>>2196301
That pic is from a long long time ago. Check out his recent stuff (from last 3 years).

[Anonymous No.2196405]

>>2196376
>Beginning to see why Olly stressed working from imagination so much, I don't want to end up like this...
Algen works from imagination more than most artists. I think the bigger issue is the contradictory stylistic choices he makes in his images. He has dedicated so much time and effort into his rendering skills and knowledge of light that he is afraid to abandon them in favour of more stylized representations which he seems more interested in at the moment. So he gets an awkward blend of the two. If he just picked one he would have much stronger work.

I think the better way to avoid this is not just "work from imagination", but it is to take a step back from your art and ask yourself some important questions. Why are doing art? What do you want to achieve with your art? What appeals to you in art and other artists? Why? What type of workflow do you want to you? What do you want to show in your art? How can you be yourself with your art rather than follow trends or in the footsteps of another?

Reading books like The Art Spirit, as well as the notes of Pyle and Dunn would help too. Schmid has a long list of these types of questions to ask yourself, and his book is also a great wealth of information.

[Anonymous No.2196407]

>>2196388
http://chasestoneart.com/image/101226502559
This pic would have been a better example as it's basically what that other image is but actually finished and with his current skillset.

My favourite of his is this one though: http://40.media.tumblr.com/404ef9775cdb8d19bca539598148f61f/tumblr_ne6qd9jLJ61qjvigio2_1280.jpg

[Anonymous No.2196427]

>>2196407

Man. Am I the only one who thinks that that is absolutely terrible? Epitome of generic, everyday, digital art. Literally nothing to it. Paintover background, completely white light from one corner, textbook case of generic dragons, attempts to include SSS but obviously has no fucking clue how it works or what it actually is, there's absolutely no knowledge of light in the image, and not the slightest attempt to make the scene look dynamic or have flow, other than the awful diagonal cutting the composition in half. This is the most generic shit in the history of digital illustration. Don't even get me started with those weird blue rays coming from god knows where to try to make it look 'cool'.

[Anonymous No.2196442]

>>2196427
Well you're exaggerating, but essentially yeah I agree. It's not terribly interesting from a stylistic standpoint. I would say Chase has the least interesting artwork out of him, Rigney and Komarck. None of them are doing anything that is particularly meaningful though, they are playing it a little too safe and by the books, and just going for a tight finish. Occasionally though they do some interesting things compositionally or design-wise.

But I do think they are well executed for what it is. To say that they have no knowledge of light is ridiculously silly. They probably have a better understanding of light and form than 99% of pros.

[Anonymous No.2196461]

>>2196427

>Am I the only one who thinks that that is absolutely terrible?

Yes, youre the only one. That artwork is an example of godtier fantasy illustration.

[Anonymous No.2196466]

>>2196427
Thats illustration for Game of Thrones rulebook or something like that. Not much room for making it not generic. Aside from the subject matter, composition, rendering etc. are really good in this one and I like it.

If you actually find it bad please post something you consider good, I'm legitimately curious.

[Anonymous No.2196477]

>>2196461
>Yes, youre the only one. That artwork is an example of godtier fantasy illustration.

Now everyone knows you are shilling yourself on /ic/ Chase.

[Anonymous No.2196498]

>>2196405
>I think the better way to avoid this is not just "work from imagination", but it is to take a step back from your art and ask yourself some important questions. Why are doing art? What do you want to achieve with your art? What appeals to you in art and other artists? Why? What type of workflow do you want to you? What do you want to show in your art? How can you be yourself with your art rather than follow trends or in the footsteps of another?

Guy you're replying to. I had this exact revelation a couple of months back myself. I'd been doing nothing but photostudies, relying on reference, etc - aiming for photorealism or somewhere close. It would take me days or even weeks to finish a piece, and not all of that time was spent solidly working, but beating my head against the rendering until I was sick of it and would be putting down maybe a few brush strokes every few hours.

Then one day I realised that wasn't who and what I wanted to be. I got into art through comics (American and European), I love old manga and anime from the 80's and all the artists I looked up to and respected worked in a looser, more stylised mode.

I've been working to try and adjust to doing more stylised work with some success and suddenly I actually enjoy painting and drawing again. More importantly I now do far more work from imagination than I do studies. I'm not going to pretend I'm on someone like Algen's level yet but I've given myself a year to do nothing but study solidly before I go out and get a job to support myself again. Not even going to consider taking commissioned work or looking to make money from art in that time.

Hopefully I'm going to make it eventually and I guess the tl;dr for this blog post is that you're right on the money and people really need to pay more attention to the idea of analysing why you're even trying to be an artist in the first place.

[Anonymous No.2196505]

>>2196100
>algen
wow. didn't see this coming when i opened this thread.
i mean i knew he was going downhill, but damn.

he is obviously trying to go for a certain lighting situation, but he just can't get it right. does he still have problems with his hand?

[Anonymous No.2199423]

>>2196427
>mentioning flaws:
>completely white light

Seems like you need to study from life more rather than photos. One of the things that digital cameras dont catch is how bright the highlights are to the human eye, a lot of stuff during the day appears to be pure white. Thats how you achieve realism in your pieces, see for example how uncle Mullins uses it.