What you're supposed to do with references is see how things look. So if you wanted to draw something that you didn't know what it looked like exactly you'll look at a half-dozen pictures of that thing in different angles and create an image based on your new understanding of it. A painter might copy a reference directly from a photograph as well, at times. It's not really cheating, it's just boring, shitty and fucking retarded.
>>2347396 That 3D model will always be there in his work station and it's flexible with proportions. So what if you're cheating yourself. You skipped 10 years of being shitty. Those cars in the video aren't even drawn. Just use 3D models. Current animes use them for background characters and cars.
>>2347403 No mate I'm talking about what happens when you want to draw your own original stylization. And that can apply to anything. What happens when you want to design your own car or your own building or animal. The point is, tracing doesn't teach you anything, you will be forever copying what has already been created. It's a waste of time. Time wasted making cheat art that could be spent putting the proper work in to learn how to draw
>>2347409 Loomis won't help you stylize either. Design and visual rethoric do.
If you understand construction, have a malleable enough reference and know design, you really, literally don't need Loomis.
We've told you for years not to be so anal with the fundamentals, to study design and develop your creativity because eventually computers would obsolete autist knowledge of anatomy and perspective but you kept ignoring it as an excuse to not move forward.
>>2347475 Are you daft man? You can't draw accurate anatomy if you don't know anatomy. It's nothing about having autist tier knowledge it's simply having the knowledge in the first place at a marketable level. And even then, having autist tier knowledge will only take you further than your crutches which is the end goal for pretty much everyone here and being lazy about learning to draw will halt you in reaching that goal.
You are only cheating yourself and you will fail as an artist if you continue to do so. Stop being lazy and go learn your fundamentals
>>2347301 >>2347343 >>2347356 >>2347396 >>2347409 >>2347482 all that babble about cheating (by tracing, overpainting, composing photos or 3d renders, referencing pictures or whatever) is only really applicable to complete beginners: rigid technical knowledge peculiar to the novice must be transformed into practical knowledge. the transition from novicehood to proficiency is a transition from norm-guided to norm-free performance. a pro must use whatever means to get the required results, either in speed of quality.
>>2347519 Idiot. I've been drawing for a while now and while I'm not a professional, I've long since stopped using references. Especially for basic anatomical work. Yet my figures are now almost flawless. Having to limit yourself to a reference only shows how little you care about the actual creation of art and care only for the end result (so that you can show off).
>>2347482 >which is the end goal That you will never reach because you keep telling yourself you're not ready in a never-ending excuse to accept you're not cut for art because you're creatively bankrupt and useless as a human asset. Not because you need to polish your fundamentals a bit more.
Sakimi, Kron and Algen are way past the industry's minimum quality, but listening to idiots like you would make one believe they're not even amateur. Well guess what? The one that will never be more than an amateur is you.
>>2347594 You know he won't, little faggot is so analdevastated by this because he's wasted his time polishing a turd while OP can "cheat" his way through all that wasted time and start producing actual art.
>>2347591 Even accomplished artists (Loomis Vilppu etc.) won't ever say that their figures are 'flawless'. Just wait til you actually develop a better eye for art, then you'll see how much more you need to improve.
Also, using references is not 'limiting'. Taking information from real life doesn't 'limit' you. You're not some omnipotent being with infinite amount of imagination. So why don't you take and seat and be humble for a minute so you'd actually learn something valuable.
>>2347297 Purpose sets standards. Is your goal to sell illustrations and make bucks? Then go nuts, the sky is the limit and as long as you aren't breaking the law you can do no wrong. You want to establish yourself as some art master? Now you got some limitations. References are accepted, and as long as nothing gets into your painting by means other than you painting it in I think you're on the safe side.
I think it depends on your approach. If you are literally just tracing on top of other art or models then it's pretty hacky and you aren't actually going to develop the skill of 'invention' (drawing correctly from imagination) and you'll never develop a style of your own. But if you use other art or models - be it 3D or photographic life models - in terms of referencing it from the eye, or to "base" your original artwork off of, then i see no issue with that because you're still developing the skill through observation while also having the bonus of reference, especially for the tricky stuff like correct lighting, limb foreshortening ect, ect.
>>2352578 Why would you and how the fuck would you ever be able to use a live model when you get like three days to complete an illustration let alone having to actually pay someone to be a model.If anything youd use a photo of the model instead of being a retard and trying to use live reference while working.
>>2352699 From experience i can honestly say that using 3D models for the purposes of illustration - with the time it takes to set the thing up - is generally not worth it. It's only viable for certain things, like particularly difficult poses with weird perspectives or viewing angles, or maybe if you need need to sketch multiple figures.
everyone here implying that using refs is cheating, it's obvious that you're complete beginners. Everyone who works in realism uses refs. Many famous master painters used models and photos, and they still do today.
>>2347297 When you are no longer appropriating an artist direction and are instead using the works of others to bolster a minimalized artistic ego. I see this almost exclusively as creating a collage of other work and masking it with preordained visual effects you can find in photo shop or otherwise, and furthermore lying about the origins of the generated composite image.
Tracing, projecting, etc. Are fine unless you are cheating yourself of understanding. And the only person losing anything is the artist themselves - sacrificing knowledge & understanding for would-be social merit.
>>2347519 Troof. If you actually think using drawing over 3D models or even references. You can't photobash/trace you way to interesting design, good composition, and compelling storytelling. There is no cheating, only crutches. See: literally all the AAA companies and freelance studios that are worth anything. John Park, Shaddy Safadi, Eytan Zana, James Paick, take your pick.
If you think there is such thing as "cheating" your way to make yourself look better than you actually are, you just have an awful perception of what is good/bad and you need to up your standards because you are far behind from the rest of the professional world.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.