I love Facebook and I found this artist,
I am kind of new but I would like to know how do you draw and paint like that?
Is there some tutorial around?
-take real photo
-take real photo
-draw manga head
-copy/past picture of eyes and lips
Here OP, take those lips seems similar than those used in this guy work.
Now please never post again about this shit.
This. Anyone who believes it is the same sort of tard who'd believe in
You just blur and smudge something and reverse it.
Granted, what he actually did still takes skill, but lying about the true process is despicable.
I got into a heated argument with him on facebook on a group called levelup where he regularly posts his garbage. I basically called him out and throughout the whole argument with him and one of his friends who has his head up his ass I learned that this is indeed a photbashed process. He said to me that he doesn't 'waste time on mindless rendering', but his work is exact photocopies, with variation using brushes and some different edges here and there and some color balancing. So yeah he is a complete tool, he uses fancy filters and smudge tool. Also note how in all of his process images that he uploads he always starts with an already established painting. He never starts from a sketch or a blocking or simple lay in, ever.
I wonder if he even traces, or just runs it through a filter.
Here's the original photo (taken from the gif) after spending 3 minutes applying filters to it in Photoshop.
>those buttblasted comments
>Jesus christ, who cares?! And you call them attention whores? The only one thats an attention whore is you, because you created this video so you could get all attention because '' you discover '' that they didnt draw from scratch?
>In what way this is fake? Even if the painter trace the picture she did paint it, she is talented, not fake at all.
Well, at least the end result looks prettier than the original photo.
Just curious, can this be sued? I was thinking that if I can hire a guy to get me a concept art much faster and cheaper by using this method, I'd be okay with it. After all, all I need is a concept art not the process, and not getting sued.
-then you blur the modified oiled one using blur tool on parts like the top tank and hairs.
-have the original photo under it.
-create a mask on the oiled+blured top layer.
-use black blurry brush with opacity at 30% to "erase" important part of the oiled top layer. Parts like mouth-eyes. So those have hard edges.
flatten everything, used filters/noise whatever.
This thread popped up a few months ago and it was apparent that the guy who makes those smudge 'paintings' reads this board frequently. It's himself making those posts and probably a couple of others using similar bullshit methods to scam money on Patreon with.
>mfw he attached a link to the painting process of that photo in artstation
ayy i remember this faggot truly an inspiration to all of us since he makes money unlike all of you, great thread.
Why doesn't anyone try to copy his success then?
Form the super secret Eye-See-Art Collective and become obscenely rich.
Honestly, the only thing I hate about this guy is that I didn't think of it and aren't swimming in cash like he is
1) type "suicidegirl portrait" on bing or whatever
2) download an image and rotate it 5-10 degrees
3) apply filters and repaint eyes either kronprinz or sakimichan style
4) (optional) re-size proportions to give shitty "cute" manga deviantart look
5) post in facebook group "level up" and create patreon
That's actually a great idea
We shouldn't strive to copy his success, we should flood deviantart, tumblr etc. with the same shit and make tutorials for how we do it until these cunts go back to the bread line where they belong.
We need a hero. We need Mr. Concept Art
Omg those comments
Also I feel like an idiot for not figuring out how to do that.
>we should flood deviantart, tumblr etc. with the same shit and make tutorials for how we do it until these cunts go back to the bread line where they belong.
Calling all neets, please do it.
check it out boys, he sounds legit 2 me
But seriously, this is a growing trend I think, we need to bring these "artists" down, is there anyone else out there that can do it???
I don't get what you guys are worried about. This stuff is just as legit as anything else done digitally. This could not paint something from imagination to save his own life, so what. If you are looking to compete with him for those digital instagram-model photoretouch illustration gigs, just do the same thing he does. It's not like he will steal your fantasy illustration gigs, because those require you to draw and paint stuff from scratch. Same with design / ca jobs.
tldr: why are your jimmies rustled? if you want to do what he does, what's stopping you from using his workflow?
It's more the deceit that people are annoyed with. It the dishonesty that gives digital a bad name. A lot of non-artists already have misconceptions about how digital painting works, and this just reinforces it and gives digital a bad rep.
most people are fucking idiots. what deceit? you want popularity/money? realize that 90% of people out there are dumb as fucking horsepiss sprinkled ontop of donkeyshit. spam mlp with traced ponies with gigantic dicks for a week and watch your paypal blow the fuck up overnight.
if there's one thing pursuing art has thaught me = people are fucking idiots, the core of business is deceit and exploitation of this fact.
i cannot overstate enough how little it matters that there's 'deceit' going on. nobody gives a flying fuck except for other artists who come across your work. and those will be 0.5% of the total audience your stuff reaches.
there's no value in being 'honest and genuine'. none, zero.
I'm a bit mad because back when I was (even more of) a pleb I thought people like this did this for real and looked for their "process" and "tutorials" and obviously was confused as fuck.
This is what I don't quite understand. Suppose you make it big like this guy using this method. I would imagine the point of having all that money is the freedom to now draw whatever the fuck you want however you want.
And yet, these people have made their money and continue their deceit.
This is how you know people like Saki aren't just pandering, they must genuinely enjoy their art. And you know what? Good for them. That's the dream isn't it? To draw what you like and still make money?
But the thing with these photobashers is that they are fundamentally lying. Not some moralistic bullshit like "this isn't real painting" but literally going out of their way to lie about how they make these paintings. That's just being an asshole.
horse-news dot com look for draw ponies on google.
nope. he's right.
dude you're fucking retarded, you realize the original image can be on a layer below the painted one right? thats kinda what tracing is? i mean holy shit dude, people like you need to bet fucking hit as a kid
Let's do this shit. I am going to do it. I'm going to do exactly what he has done, and then reveal the bullshit when I'm at the top. If any anons want to join this we can make up ficticious art schools and shit to make it more believable. It'll be fun.
I need an artist name, something eastern european or russian that sounds exotic. Any anons care to help?
I think it can be done if you own the original photo. Same as copying. There's plenty of stock sites that sell this sort of image for like 3 bucks each. Do it brah. It's certainly going to be cheaper and quicker than having a painting done.
why is impossible for this to be the actual process of a heavy referenced photostudy?
the guy could perfectly have started with a big soft brush mostly, and end with small soft and hard ones, as you do, and get those exact same steps (he probably color corrected and apply the same filter on every step when he joined them for consistency or something)
he could actually traced the contours, or whatever, but that doesn't detriment the utility of the study as a render practice.
It's possible to start with big soft brushes then add in sharp details on top. It's not a common method, but it is possible. Jana has done it legitimately several times.
But that particular example is clearly a fake process.
>clearly a fake process
why? i can't point at anything obviously wrong there.
also, the guy can render very good, and likes doing his photo studies. what reason he would have to lie in that particular case?
because he's lazy
in your example he used the mascara trick
in the other he outright threw effects into a pic and then blurred it backwards to call it a progress
those two pics are very different, one shows an increase in detail using smaller brushes, the other shows an increase in detail unblurring a pic
have you ever done a photo study on a digital platform?
they COULD be fake processes, sure, but the most simple explanation is that they are real
the guy clearly can render and knows his photoshop. no automatic filter can do that shit
you people need to calm down with the conspiracy theories and the envy of anything successful
here the problem: the haircut is a photobash from kron. He just changed few hair strings to make it his.
The lips are pictures he bashed and modified.(join exemple of lips you can use to bash in artwork)
The guy can t even draw without bashing Kron. Ironic considering Kron also bash.
>Ironic considering Kron also bash
Kron doesn't bash, he does copy poses.
Just look through his early work and you can see a evolution of his skill and style.
And there are plenty of other individuals who can match ilya.
Eg. http://guweiz.deviantart.com/ "He's pretty good for Kron clone"
As for Nadar it does seem like his creation are dubious in authenticity.
he doesn´t bash.
He explained himself here on ic. But the fucking trolls went apeshit on him. Fucking trolls...
You are all retarded as fuck... sorry guys.
With all the respect I feel to you. Don´t you realize Kron and Guweiz are the same guy?
2 patreons accounts = More money!
Just tweek a the style a little bit.
Don´t believe me. check the DRS code in both Patreon accounts, or even the old caches of da accounts...
You are all naive as fuck.
Trying to see how much you can do with filters in order to see if making an action of the entire process is possible.
Noise > Median and Pixelate > Pointillize can achieve interesting results for simplification and color variance when used with certain layermodes.
those look nothing like OP. you convinced me that irakli is really painting those portraits
this is beyond ridiculous man. go outside and get some air. i assure you you'll be happier when you'll let the anger go and drop your crusades against random internet guys
>is being given evidence
>"i-it's ridiculous! b-beyond ridiculous....! stop picking on random internet poor gruznian thieves with 20k views on artstation and 4 photo paintovers in "best of 2015" p-please, he didnt do nothin"
>Kron and Guweiz are the same guy
They're both too different with their own idiosyncrasy imho. But hey you're entitle to your own opinion, power to you.
this is a fake process some anon did to prove Irakli is full of shit
that proves nothing, retard. all this thread has show is some farfetched, borderline crazy theories about how the proccess MIGHT not be real, without a single conclusive evidence. Besides that, nobody has been able to give a photo the slightest appareance of Irakli's work, your example is the worst offender.
either if the proccess is real (as the author says, and i don't have any reason to doubt) or fake, the results are skillfull, clearly appealing to the public, and objectively of more aesthethic value that the references used. that's the ONLY thing that really counts.
I miss the days when I was a normie who could look at photobashed art and all I'd think is how cool it is.
I don't have the kneejerk disdain a lot of /ic/ has, but knowing the process definitely took a lot of the mystique and admiration out of it.
That said, there's usually an element of design and editing involved. It's not a pursuit that's completely without skill. It's also not a process that's as easy replicated as /ic/ likes to pretend, especially not to do it as efficiently as many of them manage.
bu-but that prubsnuffin!! i'ts totally a painting and objectively more aesthethic!
S K I L L F U L L
Since when was a consensus an objective metric on aesthetic value? The only thing that measures is popularity - and at that, popularity among a very specific group of people in a very specific time period. That is not "objective aesthetic value", just stop using the word objective to describe your fucking opinions.
You can say, objectively, that "Sakimichan has x views and x followers on deviantart." and then conclude that "therefore it's my conclusion that Sakimichan's art has high aesthetic value" but you can't say "sakimichan's art objectively has high aesthetic value."
I'm probably wasting my breath.
Also before it goes right over someone's head and they completely ignore my actual point to smugly point out "Ah ha! But we're not talking about Sakichan! Argument invalid!", I'm very well aware Sakimichan isn't the subject here. It's an example.
Because look at this shit >>2339057
Its pretty much impossible to get every detail to exactly line up like that if you're painting legitimately. Even if he were to paint it legit, he still just copied a photo anyway.
Like someone else said, the colors are actually really nice on his trace, but he's a faggot for lying about actually painting it.
thanks for your valuable opinion, anon, even if it goes against both classic and modern philoshopy
>David Hume, Four Dissertations, Part I, Essay XXIII Of the standard of taste, 1762
>Michael A. Slote, The Rationality of Aesthetic Value Judgments, 1971
of course he copied a photo. nobody denies that. he probably traced the contours, (or used a grid, or alt-tabbed like crazy): that's obvious. and yet, the process is most probably real, and the final result is great
no one paints like this. From step one he had the proportions perfect, the colors peferct, everything is exactly where it should be with the perfect values that don't change. There are no under drawings, anything. It's absolute bullshit.
nvm, googled it.
>that hypocritical critique at the end
>adjective UK US /əbˈdʒek.tJv/
>B2 based on real facts
if critical consensus isn't objective then neither are democracy, polls, stock market values, or prices of goods in a capitalistic system.
anyway, bringing the discussion to the field of grammars instead of ideas is a sure sign of shitposting. thankfully, is sunday and i've got nothing better to do.
Democracy/polls/etc are objective in this way:
The fact (disbarring corruption/cheating): A majority (or a certain proportion depending on the system) of voters have voted for the candidate. That candidate is now elected based on this formalized metric.
The opinion: The candidate is a good politician, and the most qualified for the job.
I wasn't trying to just nitpick, I just find it retarded when people apply the word "objective" to their opinions. You could, no doubt, do research and make an argument based on trends and objective data that we have preferences for certain aesthetics (on which people form theories like color theory), but that doesn't magically mean you're in any way qualified to say "x art is objectively more aesthetically pleasing" without providing some sort of criteria on what you're basing it on. Don't pretend your opinion is fact, it isn't.
Look at how shit the perspective on the necklace and clothing is. Literal noobtier.
He traced the face and tried to paint the necklace himself resulting in literal shit proving the point of this thread that he's a hack.
Also trying to get out of this lying mess by saying words as purist freaks lol. Pathetic as fuck
Basically admitting he's a hack but doesn't have balls so actually say it straight in the hope people won't notice.
It looks to me that at best they're filtering the details out of the photos and then painting them back in.
I don't have much issue with photobashing. I'm not going to bust anyone's balls because they decided to copypaste some lips into their drawing and them paint them over, but there's no value to stuff like what the guy was doing with OP's pic.
you are a retard.
Keep Lying to yourself Nad4r but the fact is YOU ARE A HACK, A DIRTY STINKY HACK.
How much money he gave you so you can suck his cum like that? It is still dripping from your mouth bro!
If you are not nad4r then please clean up nad4r cum from around your mouth
Dude, forget the whole picture and look at one simple detail: the light on top of her mouth.
Let's analise this little detail. He painted it with a soft brush on the rough sketch, blurred as fuck. Then he continued painting the rest of the picture, and at the same time he did the same brushstroke again, in the same place, only sharper.
It gets slightly sharper 2 or 3 times until the sixth frame where it gets sharper closer to the final version.
When you block paint you don't put in such a small detail and then proceed to redo it again and again until you get to the final version. No, you would paint that at the end of the proccess, after you got the colors and form of the face right. He kinda knows this, as you can see by the other light effects he adds on the seventh panel, on her cheek. And if the light on the top of the mouth was really painted on instead of blurred out, it would only appear at the same time as these other marks.
This one is tricky because it looks like he added some brush strokes on the second frame, to look more like a real sketch, but you just need to look at that other """"process"""" to realise this guy is only getting better at being a charlatan, not at painting, because he doesn't paint shit to begin with.
Except she draws human ponies, same target audience.
I actually cant believe there are idiots in here that still dont realize what that gruznian guy is doing even after multiple anons took time to explain it in detail. Like how dumb can you be man.
just get the word out.
I'm fine with the fact he's making money, not jealous, it's kinda inspiring how popular he is.
What I'm not fine with is the fact that people get the wrong idea about what digital painting is.
What I'm not fine with is people getting the wrong idea about what digital painting actually is.
We're on 4chan for fucks sake, if this isn't the place for conspiracy and to burn down people I don't know where else.
So I was poking through this thread and it doesn't seem like anyone answered your question. Yeah its a trace but you can learn in time to paint really well if you want too. As long as you have the drive and don't mind waiting a decade or 3 to have the skills to produce something with an amazing level of light and form. If you're brand spanking new to this start studying now. Find some good books on anatomy. Figure draw everyday even if it's just for 10 min or so. Some places to get started are: Any Loomis books of course (it's a common saying for a reason), Anatomy for the artist by Sarah Simblet (Great for breaking down how our bodies are structured), Joseph Albers interaction of color (you'll never see the world the same way again). That's all I can think of from the top of my head while on the shitter. Just work hard keep at it and don't be afraid to make a bad drawing. Do that and who knows maybe you'll be as good as this guy some day
is that marshennikov's?
well takeme 10 minutes, if i spend a hour on this maybe i can sucess lmao.
Both of these were done by anons in the previous thread about this guy. The base photo used here isn't even that good, but they still pulled it of rather convincingly and fast!