/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.3338005]

What should I do specifically to get better at values? I've been doing studies with random pictures but I am still very bad at it, no matter how many times I do it.

[Anonymous No.3338033]

>>3338005
Work dark to light. Identify where your highest and lowest value forms and shapes are. If working in monochrome, remember that different materials, colors have different local values. Post an example of your work I’ll try and see what you may need to work on specifically.

[Anonymous No.3338041]

>>3338033

as the anon said, post something so we can see what are your flaws so we can tell you how to fix them.

[Anonymous No.3338047]

I don't necessarily work from dark to light despite many recommending that. One piece of advice I can give you is to not be afraid to go too dark when working with monochrome works like graphite, charcoal, etc.

[Anonymous No.3338092]

>>3338033
Working dark to light is unironically the best way always

Rome wasnt built in a day OP, you will get better

[Anonymous No.3338419]

>>3338033
>>3338092

not that anon, but could you explain why you think it's better to work from dark to light?

I usually start mid and then go both ways, but sometimes I really lose that local value, as well as color, and it all blends together a bit too much

[Anonymous No.3338427]

>>3338419
Working dark to light is the most realistic way to be sure. In life you don't start from light and add darkness, you start from darkness and add light. That said, it can be difficult to keep your values in check because you're going brighter and brighter and before you know it everything is the same value and you have to add back darkness anyway. I don't think any approach is The Best, try them all and see which you prefer.

[Anonymous No.3338431]

>>3338419
doesnt really matter how you start, as long as you can work the curves.
curves + transparent round hard is all you need and preferably a fast way to change brush size
but use curves, do it
curves, remember that
use em a lot
curves!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.3338433]

>>3338431
ctrl+m
^^^^^^^
!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.3338437]

>>3338427
> In life you don't start from light and add darkness, you start from darkness and add light

What are you talking about? In most traditional media you literally can't work dark to light because the light color will mix with the dark color underneath and it'll create a muddy mess. The most logical and most common way of painting is to start with a base color, block in the shadows, then add the mid tones and last add the darkest darks / occlusion and highlights. That way you also have the most control over actually designing and grouping the shadow shapes creatively instead of just doing a brainless form rendering.

[Anonymous No.3338444]

>>3338437
Well, not if you have a shadow scheme laid out for the colours to hinge on above, such as Leffel teaches. Depends what you're painting, i don't think that could work of course, if you were painting plein air landscapes, I work totally differently then.

[Anonymous No.3338448]

>>3338444
yea traditional painting is an entirely different game. in digital it doesnt matter at all how you approach it as you can adjust : D USE CORUVES!?!?!?

[Anonymous No.3338451]

>>3338437
I'm not talking about traditional media, I'm talking about literal light. If you turn off a lamp you're not adding shadows to it.

[Anonymous No.3338452]

Control value is easy.
see it as a range.
each area will have its own range
and best way to define range is to define the lightest/darkest.
But what is hard is how to use value to create forms.

[Anonymous No.3338453]

>>3338451
but u dont use literal light, u use a computer to make values on a bitmap.

CURVAS!!

[Jpb No.3338459]

>>3338005

Traditional bro with tmi incoming

Values can be a tricky bitch starting out, but just remember, whatever youre working on, the darkest-dark is a thing, which may or may not be black (even if it represents black) and the lightest-light is also taken into account within scale to that "black" (again, which might be "white" or not.)

That falls in line with whats called "relative values" and the pitch is imposed by 2 given extremes of dark to light. Each other value fits between the two and is compressed, until you decide to broaden the range by making your darkest dark darker.

The last thing here is to remeber there are usually 2 kinds of light in the "light", high-lights and the half-tones, and very little variation beyond the darkest shadows and their reflected light in shadow, which are always darker than anything in the light.

Cheers

[Jpb No.3338461]

>>3338459
Oh, also, its usually a good idea to start with darks.

Some artists dont/didnt and evolve to jump into half tones and tool everything after, but most modern ateliers advise darks first, since everything keys off darks anyway, it makes since.

[Jpb No.3338462]

*sense (autocor.)

[Anonymous No.3338463]

>>3338005
One way I started to do is to break the values in two major sets. One for light and one for shadow, and then you break each set with smaller contrasts until you have the whole range on the image.

[Anonymous No.3338466]

>>3338427
>>3338437

thanks for both your advices

[Anonymous No.3338467]

>>3338451
this, there are no shadows without light

[Anonymous No.3338469]

>>3338005
I think learning to use charcoal helps a lot

[Anonymous No.3338470]

>>3338005
squint ur eyes

[Anonymous No.3338480]

>>3338427
but how to differentiate between darker and lighter objects, how do you know how light you can go on dark objects, and how dark on light objects. Any tips would be really appreciated

[Anonymous No.3338487]

>>3338480
CURVA!=!=!=!!=!=
ppl dont listen!!! ok, maybe im overemphesizing i dont use curves that much but you can always go lighter and darker but making the image less constrast in the places u want and more constrast if u want it narrower.
its a good idea to have an adjustment layer to play around with to see how it looks in different constrast, makes it easier to see where its too dark or light.
working from light to dark or v.v. or from gray, u can combine it anyway u want, no need for a method, just brute force it. paint a lot, paint fast, using a semi-transparent brush is more forgiving and creates a sort of memory in the painting
peace

[Anonymous No.3338506]

>>3338487
Please stop trying to give advice, you know nothing about painting. We get it, you just found out curves and level adjustment functions in photoshop, that doesn't help you in any way create a good painting.

[Anonymous No.3338512]

Not OP but when is a good time to start colour if you're only used to values? Any tips on this?
>3337802 is me

[Anonymous No.3338515]

>>3338512
I mean >>3337802

[Anonymous No.3338524]

>>3338506
my example isnt good? : ( not finish of course

[Anonymous No.3338527]

>>3338512
when u feel like it really, but if u got a lot of part next to each other with same value but supposed to be different colors, i think that a good time. so it doesnt get confusing

[Anonymous No.3338534]

>>3338480
There are no set rules for something like that because it entirely depends on the local value of the object, what kind of material it is, what kind of light is being used, etc. Something made out of obsidian will have shadows that are almost black but can have highlights that are almost white. Use reference.

>>3338512
no time like the present

[Anonymous No.3338538]

>>3338524
no, it isnt good even if its not finished. You clearly put more than 2 hours on this and it doesnt even have proper value structure. The face is just a mess of the same value. You added a warm yellow thinking that it was a different value but it isnt. Its bad, really bad.

[Anonymous No.3338545]

>>3338538
why would it be bad if the light levels are similar?
i know, painting and photography inst the same but, there isnt a rule that says it has to be like an illustration or something. it isnt bad in the way you describe it

[Anonymous No.3338547]

>>3338545
this is a famous example of the same thing

[Anonymous No.3338558]

>>3338545
>>3338547
no, the light levels are not similar, monet used the same range over the whole painting making only the boats a darker value. Yours has a super dark background that is almost the same value as the cloathing and hair and then jumps to a super bright face where youve added super dark features. You just added simple anatomy features (eyes, nose and mouth ) and ignored other facial features. If you want to create excuses about your mistakes go on, but it still looks like trash since you didnt create any value range. You can call " its my style " and so on, but its bad. Erase that and redo thinking of how your values should interact if you want to archieve the same aesthetic that monet had, wich in this case is compressing everything in the same mid value.

[Anonymous No.3338562]

>>3338558
nevermind the background, its placeholder. the light levels are similar
im beginning to suspect that u are not very good at painting.
heres another image to show i know what im what talking about.
post ur work :d

[Anonymous No.3338572]

>>3338547
I think I saw this or a similar one in Moscow. Monet is a genius. I used to underestimate his work, because it was praised by housewives in that painting course i attended as a kid.

[Anonymous No.3338577]

>>3338558
why do you argue so? you're clearly new to the subject

[Anonymous No.3338585]

>>3338562
you cant say that your background is a placeholder anon, thats dumb. The background is part of your painting, even if its just a flat value. Another bad painting, a mess of highlights on the character without mentioning the bad pose, bad shapes and anatomy and after all that its not appealing at all.
pest ya werk >>>>3338562
you cant say that your background is a placeholder anon, thats dumb. The background is part of your painting, even if its just a flat value. Another bad painting, a mess of highlights on the character without mentioning the bad pose, bad shapes and anatomy and after all that its not appealing at all.
pest ya werk
>>3337947

[Anonymous No.3338588]

>>3338585
i really dont know what happened to my post but it happened, looks super retarded wut

[Anonymous No.3338590]

>>3338585
inane, man. this is pointless

[Anonymous No.3338596]

>>3338590
of course its pointless, youre too dumb and blind by your "ohhh ima genius painter" brain that you can spot your mistakes. Be a humble beginner please.

[Anonymous No.3338619]

>>3338562
could you post some more of your stuff i sort of love it

[Anonymous No.3338621]

>>3338431
Never really thought of using curves in mid-process rather than for finishing touches. Sounds like a interesting way to work

[Anonymous No.3338630]

>>3338621
It's always nice to use curves, i use them a lot

[Anonymous No.3338635]

>>3338562
You're a beginner through and through. Instead of wasting your time playing around with the curves tool, try to think about the forms and planes you are trying to paint.

[Anonymous No.3338638]

>>3338619
cheers, made some in the fill in the shapes thread, the painting octupus : }
dont wanna post too much stuff before its finished and i never finish stuff

[Anonymous No.3338643]

What books will help me get better at values? I find drawing on my own useless.

[Anonymous No.3338647]

>>3338562
this looks trash, I can't tell where the main lighting is coming from, the pose is stiff, the weight distribution is all fucked up, how on earth is he balancing? also all I can really see is a bunch of terribly valued cylinders and spheres which you would call limbs, with no shape of defined anatomical musculature. Part of me hopes this is bait, because if you think you know what your doing, you are wasting your time on shit.

[Anonymous No.3338655]

>>3338647
>>3338635
>>3338596
ok, sameperson.
but, seriously. the pose is meant to be clumsy, its a troll. it not really in balance because its moving.
yes, the light from the fire needs some work, i will probably change and the arm to the right, the rest i dont agree with.

[Anonymous No.3338663]

>>3338655
even if It were moving, the weight distribution would still make cause him to tip over and regain balance on the other foot. The pose doesn't look clumsy either, it just looks stiff. And for disagreeing on my comments on the anatomy, I can't see any defined muscle or form (you can't disagree with that, because that is what I see), which means you have failed as an artist at creating a satisfactory depiction of a imagined creature.

[Anonymous No.3338724]

>>3338655
Not same person at all, I'm the one who posted my art when you asked and I just tried to avoid the bait of calling out your anatomy cause I knew that you would "It's a troll maaan, it's supposed to look ugly!!" . Stop being stupid anon.

[Anonymous No.3338728]

>>3338724
That's why I tried to only talk about the values, since that's what this post is about. But then you came and just started be a dumbass and tried to prove your points with super bad paintings.

[Anonymous No.3338749]

>>3338487
this would be good if you were going for that been dead for about a week look

[Anonymous No.3338755]

>>3338487
this would be good if you were going for that been dead for about a week look
>>3338545
>>3338547
I know you were going for monet, but yours looks like a stringy dead piece of meat.

[Anonymous No.3338756]

>>3338547
>>3338545
it's not bad to have similar light levels but if it always happens and you can't control your values, that's bad.

[Anonymous No.3339084]

>>3338643
Someone answer this please

[Anonymous No.3339093]

>>3339084
>>3338643
https://conceptartempire.com/best-light-shadow-art-books/

[Anonymous No.3339097]

>>3339093
Alright thanks

[Anonymous No.3339213]

>>3338638
>Never finish stuff
Need I say NGMI?