Just wanted to ask this, I'm not looking for shortcuts

[Anonymous No.3119465]

Not to complain nor whine but is it even possible to draw as well as this douchebag ?

I'm at least > 90% sure this guy is talented, his artwork looks too damn good, I don't really see any mistakes in his drawings.

He also acts like a complete dick every time someone asks him how he got this good at his Deviantart page and his Picarto streams.

>Inb4 stop being a bitch

All I'm asking is if it's possible to draw as well as this asshole.

[Anonymous No.3119470]

It's nothing special, typical uninspired glossy softcore porn.

[Anonymous No.3119482]

>>3119465
You have poor taste.

[Anonymous No.3119484]

>>3119465
your standards are too low if you're really that overly impressed by this guy. 95% of his appeal comes from very good stylized anatomy. Which is obviously possible to learn, moron. His rendering is mid-tier at best.

[Anonymous No.3120032]

>>3119484
Show me god tier rendering then

[Anonymous No.3120036]

>>3119465
His drawing isn't anything special. His rendering on the other hand is not too bad, he blends a lot to the point it's smooth like Sakimichan. It can be appealing that way. Overall, he's nothing special, it's just practice. Draw a lot, paint a lot. You'll eventually be as good too.

[Anonymous No.3120040]

>>3120032
see ruan jia.

[Anonymous No.3120044]

>you will never be this low level again
drawing must seem so magical to your naive dumb ass

[Anonymous No.3120047]

>>3119465
What the fuck is up with Tarakanovich's style? It's strange as fuck.

[Anonymous No.3120062]

>>3119465
yes easy, little bit of a time investment that's all, a few years if you're in the middle of the curve talent wise. that's for the technique only though, you may never be able to make a lively figure, or you may be way better at it than the op. perhaps more of a gamble than an investment lol

[Anonymous No.3120089]

>>3120032
u axed for me boi

[Anonymous No.3120117]

>>3119484
>he just draws appealing stylisation, his rendering is mediocre at best

>>3120036
>his drawing is shit, but he can render in an appealing style

[Anonymous No.3120145]

We can't help unless we see your work.

[Anonymous No.3120150]

>>3119484
>>3120089
Comparing cartoonish simplifed look to academic render style. Daim people on ic are strange.

[Anonymous No.3120154]

>>3120150
Comparing shit to gold, yes.

[Anonymous No.3120171]

>>3120117
Congratulations, you finally found out /ic/ is full of shit. Nobody knows what they're whining about here and if someone by chance actually knows what they're talking about they're likely to be giving you bad advice on purpose to stifle your competitivity.

[Anonymous No.3120191]

The people talking shit in this thread are never going to make money because they think every single piece needs to be some academic artistic elitism piece that takes 60-80 hours to render or else it's mediocre.

The level of rendering is dependent on the project and what's being conveyed you morons. For what he's doing this rendering is "good" and comparing it to stuff in an entirely different area with entirely different goals is retarded. It's like complaining that manga/comic art is too simplistic when it's a weekly fucking comic. You judge based on it's goals and what it's trying to do

[Anonymous No.3120203]

>>3120117
that doesn't mean both are wrong.

[Anonymous No.3120209]

>>3120191
>hurr durr being shitty is fine you guys

[Anonymous No.3120210]

>>3119465
I prefer the first one, desu

[Anonymous No.3120211]

>>3120191
>I'm not bad I'm just trying to convey something
Yeah, you're conveying that you suck ass

[Anonymous No.3120214]

>>3120209
>>3120211
post work

[Anonymous No.3120216]

>>3120214
You first.

[Anonymous No.3120230]

>>3120191
Nice try. I don't, and I'm >>3119484
his rendering is in fact mediocre, getting mad about it and screeching that I and all of /ic/ don't know what we're talking about won't change that. You don't have to be "academic artistic elitism" or Ruan Jia to be considered good at rendering, and I definitely never implied that you had to be in order to make money. but obviously you exaggerated to try to make your point sound valid. This guy's faces look like that of Michelle Hoefener, and he's sakimichan level when it comes to backgrounds. That's not controlling your level of detail depending on your project, that's just being mid-tier level at those things.

[Anonymous No.3120232]

The true indicator of skill is not how good your rendering or anatomy is but rather how consistently you can produce finished work. The artistic batting average so to speak.

[Anonymous No.3120233]

>>3120230
Yes u should render. And so what if that makes your kid artistic. That don't always mean he's gay.

[Anonymous No.3120237]

>>3120232
But DA artists can finish a ton of work.

[Anonymous No.3120238]

>>3120232
>not how good your rendering or anatomy
>but rather how consistently you can produce finished work
if i post a new piece like consistently every 2 days for a year, am I the best of all?

[Anonymous No.3120241]

>>3120232
i guess kodyboy555 is the winner here.
most consistent guy ever.

[Anonymous No.3120252]

>>3120238

Should have phrased that better, but your skill level is not indicated by your most polished piece rather by what level you can output consistently.

[Anonymous No.3120263]

>>3120191
It's not about time spent, true skill will radiate through a 15 minute sketch the same way it radiates through a 30 hour rendering.

Even more, I'm sure the OP pic is the second category, the one that takes inadequate amount of time for the result.. I don't understand why you'd want something like that to be your goal.

[Anonymous No.3120264]

>>3120089
why do the top artist in the industry always paint the most uninspired shit ever?

[Anonymous No.3120266]

>>3120241
damn you beat me to it

[Anonymous No.3120270]

>>3120266
kek . i knew someone was gonna say it so i tried to race to do it fast.

[Anonymous No.3120279]

>>3120264
That's a Really good question, I'm wondering as well...

Perhaps the fact that they need to draw the usual knight/space marine/waifu/samurai to appeal to the largest audience?

[Anonymous No.3120281]

im reminded why i stopped posting my art on this board

[Anonymous No.3120295]

>>3120032
Here's a dump put together for the purpose of this thread.
They are aligned from the first to the last image that came to my mind when you asked for a god tier rendering.
>http://imgur.com/a/Lungn

OP pic isn't bad, but.. it is when you're looking for inspiration or art goals.

[Anonymous No.3120301]

>>3120263
>>3120191
Though I should give an example.
This might have been done in under 45 minutes, but you can tell the fucker knows what he's doing.

[Anonymous No.3120372]

>>3120089
His work and that style in general really inspires me but really stylized "manga" style also really works for me and I'm not sure which one to aim for.

[Anonymous No.3120391]

>>3120295
fuuuu damn those are some nice edges, subtle crosshatching and construction. i notice all of these "render gods" have a specialty for edge control and when you zoom in you see crosshatching brush strokes around the forms

[Anonymous No.3120396]

>>3120089
The anatomy looks inconsistent. And the rendering, too. It's very detailed in small portions, but low resolution in others.

[Anonymous No.3120397]

I like cammys butt!

[Anonymous No.3120400]

>>3120391
Edges are often underrated, but they're just as important for a painting as values. Bjorklund knows his shit.

A good rule of thumb is that pen strokes = brush strokes.See the work of Charles Dana Gibson.
It's the same thing about direction of form Steve Huston mentions all the time, and it's the same thing about feeling the form that Vilppu mentions all the time.

[Anonymous No.3120401]

>>3120396
>It's very detailed in small portions, but low resolution in others
They're called places of interest and places of rest, and they're a good thing.

[Anonymous No.3120403]

>>3120396
A lot of summerfags here

That's essentially a speed painting by Jia's standards, and he makes it look so effortless

That prioritization of detail by points of interest is also intentional and a classic painter technique

I can assure you his deceptively loose blotches of color intrigue artists around the world ten times more than polished pieces by other industry professionals

[Anonymous No.3120411]

>>3120210
Word. I much much prefer the one on the left.

[Anonymous No.3120412]

>>3120040
Do you know what the fuck rendering is? Ruan Jia doesn't render.

[Anonymous No.3120414]

>>3120412
rendering isn't a real art term anyway, whatever weird niche definition you use

[Anonymous No.3120420]

>>3120089
because it's messy it's god tier? Just looks like different styles really.

[Anonymous No.3120444]

>>3120171
>... if someone by chance actually >knows what they're talking about >they're likely to be giving you bad >advice on purpose to stifle your >competitivity.

Wtf? who does that???

[Anonymous No.3120447]

>ITT: Butthurt tarakanovich fanboys cannot stop sucking dick

Remember to Sage and hide

[Anonymous No.3120628]

>>3120447
is sage still a thing?

[Anonymous No.3120672]

>>3120447
where is this scene from?

[Anonymous No.3120681]

>>3120032

[Anonymous No.3120682]

>>3120032
Pic

>>3120396
>I have no idea what I'm talking about.

[Anonymous No.3120684]

>>3119470
>>3119482
>>3119484
THIS

The OP is such an uninspiring boring piece of shite

[Anonymous No.3121258]

>>3120281
Why?

[Anonymous No.3121261]

>>3120682
her nick name was actually booty t when she got older. sargent describes her as 'enough ass to make me me question my confirmed bachelorhood'

[Anonymous No.3121348]

>>3119465
In the last year or so her faces all seem to be the same...specifically the eyes. I suspect she may be starting out with a 3D model which would explain it. If thats the case she needs to start making different looking models for variety.

[Anonymous No.3121595]

>>3121348
Artist is a woman?

[Anonymous No.3121606]

>>3120396

I can tell that you don't do art.

[Anonymous No.3121611]

>>3121606
He isn't wrong. The detailing is very inconsistent and imbalanced.

[Anonymous No.3121618]

>>3121611
Samefag or not, you're only embarrassing yourselves further

[Anonymous No.3121655]

>>3121611
>>3120396

>hes only detailing the points of interest!!

every time I come to this board I am blown away by people who don't even know the most basic of painting principles but still feel like they can critique rendergods like RJ. Just shut the fuck up, get off this board and go check out Creative Illustration or something from your local library

[Anonymous No.3123103]

>>3119465
The way he renders skin makes it look so flat. It almost looks like satin lol

[Anonymous No.3123323]

>>3119465
Of course it's possible. There's like ten million clones on deviantart who draw this way, after all.

I tried it out in small scale and it isn't really hard to emulate. It's basically just a lot of blurring while maintaining crisp edges/details, and adding an overall "glossy/shiny" look (those hard highlights)
Soft shadows and crisp edges in combination is the main thing.
To create the smooth look, it helps to use a hard brush, and then smooth/blur it on one side, so that the other side keeps the hard edge.
If you learn enough about making digital art, it should become easier to figure how other artists do what they do.

Personally I kinda hate this style. The way they do the skin looks like plastic to me. Skin just does not look like that. The characters seem stiff, awkward, and lifeless, like weird soulless toys with glassy eyes. The sameface doesn't help.
Plus, this style gets spammed a lot, so it doesn't feel genuine to me.

You can certainly draw this well if you work at it anon, but you can also do much, much better.

[Anonymous No.3123534]

>>3119465
where are the green marks on her legs?

[Anonymous No.3123536]

>>3123323
i present to you the dunning-kruger

[Anonymous No.3123580]

>>3123323
>unblended eyeshadow
>bigger nose
>wrong hairline
>bad shoulder perspective
>wrong highlights and badly drooping boobs
>totally disproportionate arm muscles
>wrong shape and perspective armor
>bad perspective braid
>using black to paint lips
>wrong edge control everywhere

>>>>it really isn't that hard to emulate
except where you fucked up every shape and fundamental.

[Anonymous No.3123584]

>>3123536
>>3123580
I think it's pretty good; obviously expecting him to recreate it pixel for pixel just to make an ephemeral smart ass post on /ic/ is a tall order.

[Anonymous No.3123585]

>>3123580
there is a lot more than what you point out, i wouldn't even begin

[Anonymous No.3123589]

>>3123584
you don't need to copy pixel for pixel to know OP has no clue what an arm looks like even with reference. but he sure made it sound like he had the whole thing figured out. anon is right, classic case of dunning kruger.

[Anonymous No.3123602]

>>3123323
>>There's like ten million clones on deviantart who draw this way, after all.

serious question. watexactly makes someone a clone? how different of a style of painting would somebody possibly need to come up with for this or any other animu shit besides "tumblr style"? It's like saying anyone who paints portraits is a davinci clone , how many ways can you paint a realistic portrait? the more I think about it there's really only like ten possible ways of delivering "realistic digital paint style" is there another totally original way to paint this shit that i'm missing which would still look nearly as appealing?

[Anonymous No.3123604]

>>3123589
Even if that's true, he's points are right, this style is very hacky.

[Anonymous No.3123605]

>>3123323
You don't have the skill to be schooling anyone anon.

[Anonymous No.3123609]

>>3123602
It all depends on how you use your brushes. But the standard, lineart to base to overblend, is a typical Digital style.

[Anonymous No.3123618]

>>3123602
it's not that deep, anon. there are many people whose style all look vaguely similar because most artists are heavily influenced by other artists that they idolize/admire. or because that style has a name, like semi-realism or anime, and therefore anything in those categories are going to share similarities.

in order to develope a very unique style, you would probably have to experiment for years without letting anyone influence or inspire you.

[Anonymous No.3123868]

>>3123323
dude chill, fucking hell

[Anonymous No.3123910]

>>3121655
I know that feel.

Then I relax and feel comfy some people get it, and I will be working while they are amateurs.

[Anonymous No.3123920]

>>3123323

Is there a dunning kruger-chan for these kind of posts? If not, there should be one

[Anonymous No.3123929]

>>3123920
He didnt achieve the exact same outcome but his description of the procedure is on point desu.

[Anonymous No.3123938]

>>3123929

Not on point at all. He says it is "not hard" to emulate the style, yet fails completely to do so - clearly he is years away skill wise from the original artist. It's aking to someone drawing a crude figure with a brush pen and because some of the marks looked okay he thinks he succesfully emulated Yoji Shinkawa's style.

[Anonymous No.3123955]

>>3123938
*I* am years away skill-wise from emulating this style but i understand how he achieved it and he described it. Maybe >>3123323 will do a better job defending his post but anyways heres my 2 cents:

Hes off of the style by details which take up a lot of time at the end of the process.
The face is almost perfect, only he emphasized the rim glow instead of a desaturated / colder edge as in the original.

The arm is rendered the same way as in the original except for again the last bit of time needed to blend the highlights stronger (rimlighting on top of the shoulder).
The passive lighting from her red glove gives a saturated highlight on the original whereas the reproduction is a bit less saturated.

The glossy look of her suit (especialle on her breasts) just needs a stronger highlight (ie going more into white).

The hair (not the braid which he didnt finish) has the same plastic look as the original.

Obviously he didnt finish it all, but even so her leg can be rendere just the same as he described it - big evenly blended shapes with one hard edge and one soft blend into the next soft shape
>Soft shadows and crisp edges in combination is the main thing
And the usual way of achieving this is a soft round brush which one eraeses with a hard round brush at one side (or vice versa as he described it)
>To create the smooth look, it helps to use a hard brush, and then smooth/blur it on one side, so that the other side keeps the hard edge.

He didnt touch on colour but its the most basic way of chosing colour: Highlights warmer and less saturated, midtones most saturated, shadows colder and slightly less saturated than midtones. Pic related.

Try to reproduce the exact image in question and you will see it for yourself.

At this point i feel autistic defending another anon and spoonfeeding you...

[Anonymous No.3123959]

>>3120089
is that a motherfucking Ruan Jai reference?

[Anonymous No.3123962]

>>3120047
Wow he ruined that picture super hard, the left looks way better

[Anonymous No.3123965]

>>3123955
>defending another anon
Or sounding like you're him.

still completely oblivious to the anatomical, perspective, and proportionate errors, huh? it's not just your rendering that's bad.

[Anonymous No.3124088]

>>3123955

I wouldn't have any problem with the style analysis as long as it wasn't claimed it was easy to do. The basic rendering formula might not be too advanced but it's the drawing and subtle application that pulls it all together. The devil is in the details.

[Anonymous No.3124133]

I blame Sakimichan

[Anonymous No.3124144]

>>3119465
>is it even possible to draw as well as this douchebag ?

uh yes. in fact it's possible to draw 100x better. but he is definitely good. i think it's unusual for artists who do porn to put this much effort into porn, which is why you don't see much high quality smut. but it's totally doable.

he acts like a dick because he's tired of people disguising 'what's the trick?' in a more innocent question.

[Anonymous No.3124149]

>>3124144
>in a more innocent question
like?

[Anonymous No.3124459]

>>3123536
>>3123580
>>3123605
>>3123585
>>3123938
>>3124088

Well, I made it in 30 minutes, naturally it isn't perfect. The original image was made at much higher resolution and probably took a few hours to complete, and I only eyeballed it and drew it at the resolution of OP's pic.

The point was not to recreate it exactly or "school" the original artist. The point was just to figure out how to emulate a similar "smooth effect" (not sure exactly how to describe it), since that seems to be the main draw to this style. That's literally all I was talking about.
I didn't claim it was "easy to do," either, I said it "isn't really hard to emulate," meaning it was not that hard to figure out how to emulate the smoothness once I was looking at it closely. I could have been more specific about that I guess.
Execution, now that's the hard part lol

I didn't mean to come off as smug or anything, just sharing my observations.
If you don't like what I did, don't take my word for it.


>>3123602
Well, I was exaggerating a little with "clone."
if you DON'T want to be a clone, you won't end up being one. To truly be a clone you'd pretty much have to do it on purpose.

[Anonymous No.3124565]

>>3123965
Not him, post work. True dunning krugers are ones that think they know, but don't. He gave an example, you didn't. It's not rocket science.

[Anonymous No.3127113]

does anyone have any guides to rendering or is just trial and error to you get it.

[Anonymous No.3127122]

>>3123955
>And the usual way of achieving this is a soft round brush which one eraeses with a hard round brush at one side
so half of the brush like the circle (or whatever shape other people use) is half hard brush and half soft brush.

[Anonymous No.3127152]

>>3127122
>>3123955

I feel like a retard, but I don't get this "hald hard brush hald soft brush" thing.

[Anonymous No.3127521]

>>3127122
>>3127152
ctrlpaint dot com slash videos slash hard-and-soft-shadow-edges
1:30

[Anonymous No.3127539]

行くぜ、スピンドライブスマッシャー!!

[Anonymous No.3127735]

>>3120191
Why are you raging, shouldn't you be relieved that OP's picture actually isn't that high of a skill level so you can actually imagine yourself being there at some point?

[Anonymous No.3128836]

>>3127521
Thank you mate.

[Anonymous No.3130317]

>>3123536
fucking tool, i bet you've never had an art job in your life. keep on bringing others down loser

[Anonymous No.3130321]

>>3123605
neither do you, you buttmunch

[Anonymous No.3130341]

>>3119465

If you can render a sphere you can do this. Of course you need to be able to draw.

[Anonymous No.3130352]

>>3120264
It's because concept art by nature is commercial. It may require a decent skill level but its purpose is to help develop a commercial product whether that be a game, movie or tv show. Because so much money is invested in these things and because consumers demand a certain level of quality and familiarity, you get a lot of amazing digital artists who make work that is not necessarily incredibly unique or inspired.

[Anonymous No.3130415]

>>3120295
>doxy
delete this

[Anonymous No.3132359]

>>3127521
Thanks. Wouldn't the lasso tool do the same thing for the hard edges?

[Anonymous No.3132394]

>>3119465
Just trace bad photos and play dolly dress up, then colouring in, too.

[Loaf No.3132529]

>>3119465
Not to complain but I much prefer the flat one