Archived threads in /ic/ - Artwork/Critique - 1137. page

>>2389139


Use it for reading Loomis and other art books

Don't use it for drawing, you already know yourself why

>>2389139
Mmmm... look, I can sort of see what you're after but, to be completely honest, you would be wasting your money.

Tablets like the Kindle Fire don't have pressure sensibility, and an artist-friendly stylus would cost a lot. So I highly reccomend you to get something else.

A good begginer's tablet is the Huion 610.

https://www.huiontablet.com/all-products/graphic-tablets/h610.html

I've had mine for a couple of years and it's still working pretty well. It's similar to an entry level wacom device, but cheaper.

I know you probably want to "look" at what you're drawing like you're used to and may not like staring at your computer's screen while you draw, but you get used to it fairly quickly. No sense in buying a cintiq or something unless you're already experienced (why would you buy a $2000+ guitar if you're just learning how to play?)

Read the sticky for more info in tablets. Good luck.

>>2389139

A regular pencil and simple copying paper is superior in every single way.

I liked it, it closely showed the techniques of the Camera Obscura painting, wasn't really much of an art documentary.

It is good.
It made me feel less bad about taking photos and adding filters to them and calling them paintings to my instagram followers.

Interesting, but nothing new. It's well known that artists back in those days were more like craftsmen and artisans than poets with brushes.

The only thing this documentary seems to show is how our notion of a painter changed under the influence of romanticism

oh ye any critique and tips are welcome

Did you even look at the catalog before your posted this you autistic nigger

>>2386921
>>2386918
theres a draw thread, and theres a beginner thread. dont make your own thread. You arent good enough to make your own thread, when youre good enough to make your own thread, dont. Dont make your own thread.

Dont make your own thread

dont

also its muddy as fuck and your boxing in it bad.

no
I just draw, study
all day
its fun

>>2386657
Well I actually find drawing fun so...

>>2386657
op (or anyone), do you have a certain schedule of what you draw?

sure, how much are you paying, don't say nothing [spoiler]it's nothing isn't it[/spoiler]

>>2386506
unfortunately yeah its nothing, it's just for fun and practice

>>>/3/511953

link to the thread on /3/

>>2389169
expressing emotion is a meme, if your work is quality people make the emotion for themselves.

>>2389169
I dunno about 'artistic genius', but a great artist will be able to convey an emotional state with their work.

>>2389217

I completely agree but I have an Art History essay due next week and I am basically pulling stuff out my ass at this point trying to sound intellectual.

>Michelangelo has been referred to as a High Renaissance genius by many art historian's. Clarify your opinion toward this comment and discuss how you relate the concept of artistic genius to his work.


Advice? Besides fuck off I mean

File: 20160209_221951.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

>>2388806
Clearer image

>>2388812
proportions nad measurements are off. if you want to practice shading/rendering, try tracing. Nothing wrong with that if you're using it as a tool to learn.

do it more

>>2388293
Learn the real thing, then distort it yourself.

>>2388293
>Disney during the 2000s
Yeah, they're been pure cancer for a while now.

>>2388831
both 2000s Disney and current day "pure cancer" Disney make use of the exact same principles of stylization and shape design. Only difference between now and then is that it's being applied to 3D animation instead of hand drawn animation.

>>2387580
don't think to yourself that you're drawing a face, instead focus on drawing a ball, then a block underneath the ball.

google "symbol drawing" - this is what you need to quit doing. better lines and accuracy comes with practice.

>>2387580
>not posting in the beginner thread
Everything.

>>2387580
>anime

>What am i doing wrong?
you're having autism

>>2375314
being lazy and stupid

>>2375314
brutalities of war

Lack of talent or drive I guess.

Thanks for this though anon, I'm strangely motivated now. .

anyone with advice out there? please

>oils

cad yellow light
cad red light
yellow ochre
phtalo blue
raw/burnt umber
black
white
alizarin crimson (if you want true purples)

for gouache, get primaries, black & white, plus a magenta/purple if you want true purples. Same for watercolors

>>2385929
You forgot your sienna's and a lot of other colors.

Also, black? Rofl, really, black?

>>2388157
All of the teachers worth anything aren't on partreon. Check these out if you wanna pay to learn online:

http://drawabox.com/
http://www.ctrlpaint.com/
http://www.newmastersacademy.org/

Don't know anyone except Krenz
>>2388164
>All of the teachers worth anything aren't on partreon
>http://drawabox.com/
>http://www.ctrlpaint.com/
Fuckin reddit shitters.

I'm the guy who runs drawabox.

>>2388164

drawabox is actually supported through patreon, but none of the important information is behind a paywall. It's just a continuous donation drive. Still, I'd say that counts as being on Patreon.

>>2388157

I haven't taken John Park's Foundation course, but I *have* studied under him in person. He's an excellent instructor when it comes to topics like form language and design. I can't speak to how he handles dynamic sketching, but I wouldn't doubt that it's just as good.

If you want to rank them, I'd say

1. Dynamic Sketching 1/2 with Peter Han (via CGMA if we're talking strictly online)
2. Foundation (this is faaaar behind the dedicated course, don't expect it to be even close)
3. Drawabox (and this is likely far behind Foundation, since I've barely been working professionally for a year, while John Park has ages of professional and teaching experience behind him).

File: tgr.jpg (1MB, 3543x2362px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3543x2362px

some refs

File: IMAG0066.jpg (529KB, 1836x3264px) Image search: [Google]

529KB, 1836x3264px

Critique my shit art

File: IMAG0028.jpg (521KB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

521KB, 3264x1836px

>>2384751
Gf reference

File: New Canvas.png (291KB, 722x832px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 722x832px

is narrow field of view (little perspective distortion) bad in porn? feeling like curves and gesture are way more important. I know the sketch's bad, wanna redo it with ref and her legs touching the ground

>>2376927
>>2376927
Narrow field of view can work in porn. Joel Jurion and Milo Manara both often use it and get great results. It depends on the how it is used and what it is being used for. Try out both narrow and wide fov's in different situations to discover the benefits of each!

Also check your proportions - head feels small and arms feel thin.

>>2376991
Thanks for references, checking their work out! As for proportions, yeah, dropped the picture mentally…

>>2388804
Those are some wonky nipples