So I did some lineart, and I'd appreciate any feedback you guys can provide.
[IMG]https://24.media.tumblr.com/eaa4920834dc11359ee011ab5280ec53/tumblr_n3ubxcbeyo1so6t5do1_1280.png[/IMG]
I was trying to convey a sense of the character being virtual and broken, but I'm not sure how well I achieved that.
Just a thought, consider making some of the actual linework on the guy a bit pixelated, it could add to the effect, as right now it's not incredibly strong.
Ok now I'm confused. Why is pressure opacity good but normal opacity bad?
I'm not disagreeing I just don't like being handed recommendation without reasons
[QUOTE=red_pharoah;44513103]Ok now I'm confused. Why is pressure opacity good but normal opacity bad?
I'm not disagreeing I just don't like being handed recommendation without reasons[/QUOTE]
Pen pressure is easier to get decent smooth blends between values/colours because you can manually adjust the opacity by increasing/decreasing the pressure you put on the pen, whereas with manual opacity control (using the 1 to 0 keys on the keyboard) you can only vary the opacity by set amounts
If you know what you're doing though it doesn't really matter
[QUOTE=Maloof?;44513146]
If you know what you're doing though it doesn't really matter[/QUOTE]
yes it does
[IMG]http://puu.sh/83Ppr/ed4215f466.jpg[/IMG]
upper: two brush strokes only.
[editline]10th April 2014[/editline]
it just looks better. just go with 100% opacity. and maloof before this becomes an argument send me a pm so we can discuss this like gentlemen and not pollute the thread.
[QUOTE=Lilyo;44513167]Pressure opacity mirros real life drawing and it gives you better sensitivity. The reason people tell you to keep the bruah at 100% opacity is so ypu wont be tempted to shade in gradient form with a 10% opacity brush and then wonder why your shapes dont look volumetric[/QUOTE]
yeah this.
Pressure opacity mirros real life drawing and it gives you better sensitivity. The reason people tell you to keep the bruah at 100% opacity is so ypu wont be tempted to shade in gradient form with a 10% opacity brush and then wonder why your shapes dont look volumetric
[QUOTE=MenteR;44513159]yes it does
[IMG]http://puu.sh/83Ppr/ed4215f466.jpg[/IMG]
upper: two brush strokes only.
[editline]10th April 2014[/editline]
it just looks better. just go with 100% opacity. and maloof before this becomes an argument send me a pm so we can discuss this like gentlemen and not pollute the thread.
yeah this.[/QUOTE]
It's okay, I think it's down to personal preference. In some situations I'd prefer the bottom one due to the more impasto texture. I'm not concerned with 'being right' or anything like that haha, I'm just making sure people know that there is no right or wrong way to do these things when the resultant HSV is the same
[QUOTE=Biscuit-Boy;44513067]Just a thought, consider making some of the actual linework on the guy a bit pixelated, it could add to the effect, as right now it's not incredibly strong.[/QUOTE]
Something like this?
[T]http://i.imgur.com/xaic2X9.png[/T]
[QUOTE=Maloof?;44513188]It's okay, I think it's down to personal preference. In some situations I'd prefer the bottom one due to the more impasto texture. I'm not concerned with 'being right' or anything like that haha, I'm just making sure people know that there is no right or wrong way to do these things when the resultant HSV is the same[/QUOTE]
i know that opacity can be used for good, you're an amazing artist & illustrator who proves your point.
it's just that like you said above beginners should follow a few norms before they dive into other techniques or else they're gonna be like most of us on our first 3 months of digital painting: confused, frustrated & spending 3 hours to achieve something mediocre :p
when u think ur in trouble with uncle menter
[IMG]http://i.gyazo.com/caaa73b61f4ffce23fbc0d6d76b7bee3.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=MenteR;44513221]i know that opacity can be used for good, you're an amazing artist & illustrator who proves your point. [/QUOTE]
genuinely thank you ♥
[QUOTE=MenteR;44513221]
it's just that like you said above beginners should follow a few norms before they dive into other techniques or else they're gonna be like most of us on our first 3 months of digital painting: confused, frustrated & spending 3 hours to achieve something mediocre :p[/QUOTE]
definitely
to me it's like watching two kung fu masters debate the proper fighting stance :v
So, with the sweet feedback I got from Mako and Asgard, I made adjustments to the drawing, fixing the left arm, adding the details of, basically, everything, give him a proper working bow and flesh him out a little more to have an early view of it.
[t]http://puu.sh/83Zky.jpg[/t]
Keep in mind, it ain't the final sketch. I might redo part of it (or all of it if necessary) if weird stuff is pointed out. And anyways, it makes practice on my tablet a little more outside of college work which is always welcome in my book.
What would you guys recommend for learning anatomy for drawing? or who?
[QUOTE=thefreemann;44513678]What would you guys recommend for learning anatomy for drawing? or who?[/QUOTE]
Lilyo made a good post on this a while back : [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1258652&p=44386500&viewfull=1#post44386500[/url]
Links to the Loomis books as well, which is what most people here recommend.
[QUOTE=alpha00zero;44513607]So, with the sweet feedback I got from Mako and Asgard, I made adjustments to the drawing, fixing the left arm, adding the details of, basically, everything, give him a proper working bow and flesh him out a little more to have an early view of it.
Keep in mind, it ain't the final sketch. I might redo part of it (or all of it if necessary) if weird stuff is pointed out. And anyways, it makes practice on my tablet a little more outside of college work which is always welcome in my book.[/QUOTE]
I'd do the sketch again. The pose as is seems a little unnatural; it could be improved by miles if you'd better reinforce the line of action. Her legs are especially confusing with respect to the pose: is she standing on a wall facing us, is she falling, did she jump and then tilt sideways?
I suggest you use more references for this, especially from archers, since the face and arms are where most of your anatomical mistakes are.
You've added a little bit of shading under the clothes as though the lighting is top down, but you have missed a few spots with that, like the bottoms of the legs, the bandana, the brow, etc.
In terms of your workflow I think you should avoid too much detail until you've worked out which part is darker than average and which is brighter, that is to say, you should get some basic shadows laid down first. Otherwise you have all these belts and straps all over the place and it gets kind of difficult to see the big picture while you want to go in and refine this particular belt or this piece of the walkman.
[QUOTE=thefreemann;44513678]What would you guys recommend for learning anatomy for drawing? or who?[/QUOTE]
Loomis is great but I reccomend just getting a mirror and drawing your naked body. But if your studying muscle groups and such then Loomis.
[QUOTE=Krinkels;44513732]I'd do the sketch again. The pose as is seems a little unnatural; it could be improved by miles if you'd better reinforce the line of action. Her legs are especially confusing with respect to the pose: is she standing on a wall facing us, is she falling, did she jump and then tilt sideways?
I suggest you use more references for this, especially from archers, since the face and arms are where most of your anatomical mistakes are.
You've added a little bit of shading under the clothes as though the lighting is top down, but you have missed a few spots with that, like the bottoms of the legs, the bandana, the brow, etc.
In terms of your workflow I think you should avoid too much detail until you've worked out which part is darker than average and which is brighter, that is to say, you should get some basic shadows laid down first. Otherwise you have all these belts and straps all over the place and it gets kind of difficult to see the big picture while you want to go in and refine this particular belt or this piece of the walkman.[/QUOTE]
I see. The leg problem could easily be solved by lining up the right with the leg one, respecting the line of action and the right hand should be further back towards the BG so it follows the angle of the left arm and the bow orientation.
As for shading and the detail, I just made it to have a reference to what I want it to look like and, in this case, to redo it. Shading needs a bit more work from my part and I know it ain't my forte but it ain't impossible.
Will redo it just because I don't feel like editing this one out. I'll add a proper line of action and rework the whole bust part along the arms orientation.
Thanks. It might have taken me a while to figure out this on my own without help.
If any of you are interested in more advanced/ fine tuning anatomy books (for developing a more concrete style, understanding the figure, reference use, and inspiration) I strongly recommend Giovanni Civardi's books. I've been skimming through them in anatomy and I love his style so much because the figure and pose is much better dramatized and stylized than in traditional classical posture (Renaissance figure drawing).
He has 3 good books I've looked through, female, male, and human anatomy.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/2o6xYMP.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/mCYJD1g.jpg[/IMG][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/D3nsNa3.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/jIVcCXD.jpg[/IMG][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/oOzbJnM.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=cardboardtheory;44514098][t]http://th06.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/i/2014/078/6/d/fear_no_man_by_cardboardtheory-d7avgg9.png[/t]
Crit?[/QUOTE]
Refer to the post directly above yours ^
But seriously, study some anatomy. your dude's legs and arms and shoulders all all buggered up
[QUOTE=omarfr;44513782]Loomis is great but I reccomend just getting a mirror and drawing your naked body. But if your studying muscle groups and such then Loomis.[/QUOTE]
You won't learn a whole lot doing this, it's a very VERY limiting method. Buying books isn't just for those who want to delve really deeply into the subject, you should know proportions and basic simplification (starting with ideals, most people don't have bodies close to an ideal form either) without interference from perspective and that initially. Books provide orthographic views and breakdowns of stuff so that you can really understand what you're drawing rather than trying to feel it out posing in front of a mirror.
It's really important not to have a methodology that consists of trying to remember how the exterior form looks from a billion different angles with homebrew tips (See: pharaoh's elbow-lining-up-with-waist thing). You don't need to learn every single muscle but you should begin with a good comprehensive knowledge of the body structure. Building upon a good foundation will augment your anatomical memory to the point where you'll almost have a posable mannequin in your mind's eye that gives you a starting point. Of course you won't be able to hold images in your head like photo reference, but you can take a gesture from that and then supplement it with your knowledge of form/function/proportion and so on.
Started a thing today but had to finish early for the day because of RSI stuff, which is rubbish
[IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/83454840/Images/gfsdfsdfsdf.jpg[/IMG]
If we're gonna recommend art books I think Gottfried Bammes does a wonderful job at breaking down the body into simpler shapes that are very easy to read and comprehend. Check out his book called "Complete Guide to Life Drawing" - Alternatively get the German version with more art and exercises titled "Menschen zeichnen Grundlagen zum Aktzeichnen". It's honestly the best book I've ever bought on the subject.
And really guys, check out the Artistic Anatomy lectures by Robert Beverly Hale. If you Google them you can easily find a place to get them and otherwise just PM me. He's lecturing professional artists and the drawings he makes and the things he says are incredibly useful. I took notes and made some color coded sketches based on what he said and it's some of the most useful information I've ever acquired. You'll have to pause the videos every now and then because the lectures are pretty high intensity, but seriously I can only recommend them.
The only downside to the videos is the quality and file size (11 GB for all 10 lectures). The videos are in black and white and sometimes the light reflection on the paper he draws on is too great to properly make out his lines. But really if you have nothing better to spend your Easter with, this is definitely a good recommendation.
Welp, I went through the tutorials and tried something pretty simple, please tell me I improved :v:
[img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/Ag7yXgw.png[/img_thumb]
[url="http://www.wilsonsfruit.com.au/media/uploads/reddel.jpg"]Reference[/url]
Maybe set down a rounder object in front of you - preferably with only one light source hitting it (an orange will do). This is pretty good, but I suspect you're a little confused with what's going on at the bottom half of that apple. Also try and work in black and white and focus on values. You'll have a much easier time comparing the values of the object with those on your drawing if you only have to focus on light and shadow. Squint your eyes more too and zoom out or even physically walk away from the monitor. A lot of artists forget this (I do as well) but it's a very useful habit if you feel there's something fundamentally wrong.
I knew there was a reflection in the bottom half, I just couldn't convey it correctly.
[QUOTE=MenteR;44512046]pen pressure is obv okay. but anything lower than 100% opacity is one of the main reasons people (mostly beginners) get muddy values.
[/QUOTE]
I use low opacity sometimes. It's not about opacity itself obviously, it's about your sence of volume and colours imo.
[QUOTE=MenteR;44512046]pen pressure is obv okay. but anything lower than 100% opacity is one of the main reasons people (mostly beginners) get muddy values.
[editline]10th April 2014[/editline]
exactly :p
[editline]10th April 2014[/editline]
disagree 100%.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Lilyo;44513167]Pressure opacity mirros real life drawing and it gives you better sensitivity. The reason people tell you to keep the bruah at 100% opacity is so ypu wont be tempted to shade in gradient form with a 10% opacity brush and then wonder why your shapes dont look volumetric[/QUOTE]
Feng Zhu recommends the exact opposite, that you vary the opacity manually to whatever you want and that you keep pressure sensitivity for size only, specifically to avoid muddy values and keep better control of value.
[url]http://youtu.be/eaH_WlD_rP4?t=11m59s[/url] (go to 11:59)
I personally find pressure opacity unbearable. I would much rather control it manually.
Except that you can use the same technique with oil paints since you're painting on a wet medium. If you paint in one shade and then come with another color and paint another next to it and you want to have a smoother transition between the two you can light go over the first shade and it will create a small gradient effect between the two. Whether you use manual opacity or pressure sensitivity is completely irrelevant, the only reason your colors will look muddy is if you're not applying colors properly.
rare footage sun very close to earth lol
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/FDkamQh.png[/IMG]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.