brushwork thread

[Anonymous No.2848336]

alright icicles, brushwork thread.

i tried pic related and am wondering if i'm just incompetent. i find them uncontrollable. you find tons of brushes like these that make sweet juicy strokes, but you can't use them for anything, except juicy strokes. no blending, let alone rendering, is possible. how do these guys paint with these monsters?

[Anonymous No.2848339]

>>2848336
You can try painting with a less chaotic brush, and then once you have a shape how you want it go back over top with the artsy fartsy brushes. It's easier if you have a shape isolated, like on a separate layer with transparency lock turned on. Then you can go nuts on it with textured brushes.

[Anonymous No.2848340]

also, can anyone explain to me how to get brushwoork like pic related? sung choi, apparently works at bungie. sp smooth and soft yet at the same time so defined. how?

[Anonymous No.2848365]

>>2848336

i call it the /icup

[Anonymous No.2848368]

>>2848339
so isolate shapes first? ie do drawing then lock in shapes, then color, then brushwork?

>>2848365
pls go

[Anonymous No.2848379]

>>2848340
hngg this pic is so nice. I love this brushwork

[Anonymous No.2848390]

>>2848340
does anyone have this guy's brushes?

[Anonymous No.2849556]

>>2848340
Just experiment with the smudge tool and you'll easily get this effect.

Skill is a major factor too ofcourse.

[Anonymous No.2849595]

>>2848336

Draw a lot more with just lines. 97% of all art problems are really just drawing problems, to paraphrase Richard Schmid.

[Anonymous No.2849598]

>>2849595
Explain further

[Anonymous No.2849644]

>>2848336
All the time with, I need new brushes. Shit anon, it's not like a real paintbrush. You CAN make your own brushes for PS it's alot easier than making a physical paintbrush .

[Anonymous No.2849683]

>>2848336
Whats the point of using brushes that look like that? When doing illustration/concept for a client you wont be using them anyway since the product cant look like that, so the point is just to fuck around and pretend youre painting with a physical brush on a canvas? Why not just spend that time practicing the real stuff?

[Anonymous No.2849685]

>>2848336
>>2848340
It's all just skill, brushes won't make you any better, in fact they will make your stuff worse because you should focus on form and edges etc. before tackling texture. Git gud with round brush, then start with these and you'll find them very helpful

[Anonymous No.2849712]

>>2848336
>blending
Have you ever painted traditionally (from life)? Have you studied colour theory? Your pic alone demonstrates zero/VERY minimal blending. The rendering comes from the strokes, but also from the colour choice. Also layering. Lots of it.

>>2848340
>Smooth and soft at the same time so defined
Again. Mostly colour choice. Can't tell you how he achieves such softness in the clouds/ocean/sky. Could be a custom brush, could be smart use of the smudge tool. Maybe even using the gradient tool as a base and layering over that.

[Anonymous No.2849789]

>>2848340
Hard to say for sure, but it looks like a lot of it was done with the mixer brush tool.

[Anonymous No.2849800]

>>2848336

That's brush economy for you. Painting with dry brushes (i.e. brushes that are opaque and doesn't build up the strokes gradually with opacity) requires planning, experience and confidence. I would recommend you watch John J. Park's process videos who has a similar style.

>>2848340
He's employed by Shaddy and has been trained by him. Look up Shaddy's landscape tutorial on youtube, it covers the basic process in a lot of detail

[Anonymous No.2849807]

>>2849683

>you cant use painterly brushes for illustration

Try to be less of a retard, anon.

[Anonymous No.2849810]

>>2849683

>who is craig mullins

[Anonymous No.2850240]

>>2849712
This. People here often misuse the word blending. I've been asked endless times how to "blend" stuff and when I say that I don't blend at all they're just confused.

[Anonymous No.2850247]

>>2848365
kek, is this the new merc.wip?

[Anonymous No.2850255]

>>2849685
>The "round brush" meme

[Anonymous No.2850717]

>>2850255

>He's limited by his tools and not his knowledge

[Anonymous No.2851083]

dont want to make a thread just for this question
is krita shit?

[Anonymous No.2851087]

>>2851083
A tool can not be shit, only the wielder.

[Anonymous No.2851091]

>>2851087
so its not objective
could it be better than photoshop in a significant number of peoples opinion?

[Anonymous No.2851092]

>>2851091
No, photoshop will be better a majority of the time. There's nothing that can beat it. It's been around forever for a reason.

[Anonymous No.2851094]

>>2851092
is it because krita lacks tools? or the quality of those tools is lacking? or something else

[Anonymous No.2851142]

>>2851094
It has tools, a lot of the features are more buggy than photoshop though, and Photoshop has a very active community that makes god-tier plug-ins and scripts.

[Anonymous No.2851166]

>>2851142
thanks for the answers

[Anonymous No.2851173]

>>2851142
>>2851166
No problem. the people that really shill CRY-ta are folk that don't really know how to use mixer, smudge, and tool presets properly.

When I ask only about the tool presets, they fumble. I don't want to click things in the menu every god damn time I want a different setting.

[Anonymous No.2851186]

>>2851173
oh btw a tool can clearly be shit. have you tried giving a colonoscopy with a feather? its a poor analogy you made.

[Anonymous No.2851193]

>>2851186
I think you're replying to the wrong person there, buddy boy. I think Krita is shit compared to photoshop.

>>2851142
>>2851173
I only made these two posts and no where did I say tools didn't matter.