Do you know where can I find Ruan Jia's work in full resolution?

>>2842453

it's pixel art

Only ones I've got

http://i.imgur.com/IAAS6Or.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/9Yoxhym.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/H74JToR.jpg

yeah ive noticed, i cant find any of his pics in full resolution.

>>2842453
FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT TRASH DOSEN'T ALLOW ME TO POST WHAT I WANT, FIRST IT'S TOO BIG THAN IT IS CONSIDERED SPAM.

File: 81.jpg (3MB, 3000x4000px)

3MB, 3000x4000px

>>2842621
I will cry.

File: 83.jpg (3MB, 3000x4000px)

3MB, 3000x4000px

>>2842626
FUCK THIS GAY SITE.

File: 85.jpg (3MB, 2985x4000px)

3MB, 2985x4000px

>>2842628
KILLING JEWs IS A WISE DOMESTIC POLICY

File: 89.jpg (391KB, 2048x1100px)

391KB, 2048x1100px

>>2842631
THE ONLY THING I WANTED IS POSTING 4 FUCKING LINKS

File: 1443879120660.jpg (3MB, 6000x3177px)

3MB, 6000x3177px

this is the biggest one there is i think. theres another one let me find it.

File: 57a377432f4345830d37b589e8681511b96fbba979cc54-N46lFw.jpg (3MB, 6000x4242px)

3MB, 6000x4242px

>>2842900

File: e93c6c13146517e4d24a640bdff8c7019302633f10a975-Efkk4T.jpg (1MB, 4500x2363px)

1MB, 4500x2363px

>>2842906

File: 5b91da174e64d700395474432dbf7b790cb6b31979350-ukB2kA.jpg (485KB, 2000x2908px)

485KB, 2000x2908px

>>2842913

File: 2830230890843294717.jpg (394KB, 1680x2352px)

394KB, 1680x2352px

>>2842914

>>2842900
Here's the full size: http://i.imgur.com/ncJFO3G.jpg
The original is PSD, which he probably did on one of his workshops. There's only a couple of layers with just a few strokes on the second layer, so there's no point in sharing the PSD. I got it from some chinese art forum.

>>2842917
Hey this was posted on /ic/ once in the begginers thread. Oh shit, RUAN JIA CONFIRMED FOR LURKING ON /ic/

>>2842940
link to the forum?

File: ixra.jpg (543KB, 3783x2049px)

543KB, 3783x2049px

>>2842917
not sure if ruan tho

i wonder how big his pictures are when he works on them... like 10.000 pixels?

>>2843289
Yeah, they are actually.

File: sk19_a4tS3st2nkm.jpg (54KB, 699x495px)

54KB, 699x495px

>>2843084
It was called ccuip or something like that, can't find the link now. I got PSD and some archive with his older works there (few "rare" images, but in general nothing of interest).There was also an archive with the works I assume he did right after he switched from 3d artist to 2d concept artist. I mean stuff like pic related. But I couldn't download it, because the site had a weird spendable points system and I didn't have any.

>>2842917
I'm pretty sure it's not Ruan.

>>2843726
it is ruans, i got it from some chinese forum its a process pic

>>2843731
Post more steps then.
Here is the study that Ruan did.

File: 1288975849ref.jpg (479KB, 1300x811px)

479KB, 1300x811px

>>2843732
And I lost the image.

>>2842917
>>2843733
Actually now I see that it's just an earlier version of the same study. Sorry I doubted you, anon.

>>2843733
>>2843732
i saved it a long time ago i dont remember the forum. i also thought it wasnt his since i looked at the finished one on his site, but the strokes are too familiar to ruans brush strokes at the time

File: day21.mp4_snapshot_18.36.35_[2017.01.15_20.10.45].jpg (355KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 1280x720px

where can i find this?

>>2843730
what

>>2844187
Probably nowhere, since it's a wip and he scratched this version. That feel when the painting he rejected is far better than anything you ever finished.

File: 6a320402jw1eyuvn41u1qj20xc18gtl5.jpg (658KB, 1200x944px) Image search: [Google]

658KB, 1200x944px

>>2844352
that's sad

>>2844393
Ruan Jia uses mac? What the fuck?

File: 6b6629fbjw1eyu9iew3qgj218g0xc13y.jpg (414KB, 1600x1200px)

414KB, 1600x1200px

I want all his unreleased pics

>>2844398
yes

>>2844398

I don't see how that makes much of a difference if you use Photoshop.

File: O431fx1.png (172KB, 480x509px)

172KB, 480x509px

>>2844434
>>difference

>>2842453
How do I render like that, look at his brush strokes, how? How many layers are there?

File: IMG_1148.jpg (364KB, 2569x1523px)

364KB, 2569x1523px

>>2844662

Probably few layers

Work in a really really large resolution

Use a variety of hard and soft small brushes

Be good at basic form principle, then switch it up with hue variations

>zoomed out
amazing
>zoomed out
wtf is all this scratchy shit

how??

>>2844692
That's how painting works.

Have you never seen them in real life? They look like absolute shit close up.

>>2844667
How do I master study this? It's like trying to master study Pollock's abstract shit.

>>2844667
How did he render the face in OP pic? I think its quite different from his usual stuff

File: bg.png (3MB, 2560x1440px)

3MB, 2560x1440px

>>2844717
its not any different

I wonder what resolution he works at.

>>2844751
where did you get that resolution

>>2844777
They're screenshots from a video where Ruan was zooming in and out of the original files and talking in Chinese about them

he uses unsharp mask alot.

>>2844777
https://youtu.be/_VPttA0i-6k

>>2844752
At THU he said it's usually 6-8k pixels wide, sometimes he goes up to 10k wide. He'd go even bigger but his computers can't handle it.

>>2844904
>technology is holing Ruan Jia back
So this is what they meant by ahead of their time

File: 5e475b33gw1f6q6rj2z6lj22io1w0hdt.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px)

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>2844905
He's using a pretty shitty equipment for some reason, that's why.

>>2844988
probably because he is poor

File: 5e475b33gw1es1kg3b9qmj21d00w6gsh.jpg (257KB, 1764x1158px)

257KB, 1764x1158px

>>2845001
Nah, he's just too attached to his macbook. Probably an autism thing.

>>2845005

That living space is depressing

>>2845038
id live in it

Imagine what one could accomplish with creative ideas and ruan jia's rendering.

>>2845046
We already know, just look at Ruan Jia.

>>2845047
He does pretty generic stuff desu, his art doesnt make you think

>>2845046
>>2845049

This is my whole goal with art

>>2845049
Some day you will come to the realization that anything you will ever do, no matter how creative you think you are, most people will considering it to be generic as well.

>>2845076
I will do more interesting stuff than Ruan Jia for sure, although he is a god when it comes to technical stuff

File: 1486142966015.jpg (580KB, 800x903px)

580KB, 800x903px

>>2845079
>>I will do more interesting stuff than Ruan Jia for sure

>>2844455
how I know you will always be a failure

File: 1409460771018.gif (4MB, 337x263px)

4MB, 337x263px

>>2845005
yeah, not poor at all

>>2844398
>>2844455
>he fell for the vidya gayme meme
Price and hardware are debatable, but OSX>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Windows

>>2845079
I'm sure some people will consider it more interesting, but plenty of others will find it boring, generic trash. Is it really so hard for you to understand that the word "interesting" is inherently subjective?

>>2846664
>UI that seems simple but is harder to use
>Can't run ton of the shit windows can
>Aforementioned Price and Hardware

???

>>2845046
Peleng pretty close to that imo.

>>2846664
>2 out of 3 key elements to decide which is better is debatable, but I won't debate at all
k

File: aaa.png (1MB, 1000x664px)

1MB, 1000x664px

>>2844692
Paintings are only meant to be seen at a certain distance.

You might consider removing your zoom shortcuts in photoshop. You'll be happier.

>>2847160
no thats not how it works. you can have paintings that have excellent details at any distance. its just a matter of how refined things are, and how lazy that artist is. a few dabs of paint can mean anything and represent anything.

>>2847186
Wrong and wrong. I can tell you have never seen a painting from a master in real life.

Painters know that suggesting colors instead of directly painting them creates more depth and texture.

As an example, instead of painting green they do crosshatchings of blue and yellow. This creates more depth. Same with value.
Of course, this illusion can only be maintained if you see it from a certain distance.

Stop painting by the numbers like in a kid's book.

File: b7aa671707613aad0a4a5d97900e9fae.png (442KB, 745x386px)

442KB, 745x386px

>>2847194
Case in point.

>>2847200
What is this black magic

>>2847194
>As an example, instead of painting green they do crosshatchings of blue and yellow. This creates more depth. Same with value.
>Of course, this illusion can only be maintained if you see it from a certain distance.
ok no this is not how paintings are done. you clearly have no idea about the qualities some paint tubes have. some are transparent for glazing some are opaque for nice dabs of thick paint and some are semi transparent. try looking at actual master pieces and dissect them properly.

File: aaaa.jpg (1MB, 1619x900px)

1MB, 1619x900px

>>2847208

Are you blind?
Look at

>>2847200

This is not an argument. We interpret colors differently according to the distance. That's how printing works. It's a scientific fact.

The kind of texture and blending that you get from being scratchy and loose in the details cannot be replicated by making every surface ultra polished and with solid color. Just open any pic in this thread and see the variations in pixel density.

Why am I even arguing about this...

>>2847223
I haven't seen this destiny image in a long time.

>>2847200
this is irrelevant and if it was done in any painting it would be called pointillism retard. like one of the famous paintings Sunday on the Island of La Grande.

>>2847223
youre proving my point earlier.
> a few dabs of paint can mean anything and represent anything.
look how messy that painting is, all im saying is distance is not relevant with detailed paintings.

File: 1477460986412.jpg (74KB, 530x397px)

74KB, 530x397px

>>2842453
>tfw i've seen this image countless times, yet only now I've just noticed she has chobits ears

File: Capture.png (138KB, 654x501px)

138KB, 654x501px

>>2847245
You just can't stop being wrong.

Here, I applied a vectoring software. Now you have extremely refined paint. No more scratchiness. And the painting looks dead as a result. Real life is not perfect. All objects have imperfections that alter the values and hues. all the scratchiness creates texture and light dissipation.

Being loose has NOTHING to do with being lazy. That's the worst insult to painting. Shame on you.

>distance is not relevant with detailed paintings.
Repeat that out loud.

Do you really think that if you see the "Young Man Writing" from Meissonier with a microscope you won't see imperfections? Scratches, fingerprints, hairs, painting over the lines...

And sadly digital zooming is like having an extremely powerful microscope. This is not goof for artists.

You can zoom in to the point of having one (1) pixel covering your entire screen. At that zoom level an 8000px image in a 24in monitor would resize it to be A 3 MILE LONG PAINTING.

Are you seriously going to call artists LAZY for not painting at that distance!?

>>2847266
>it's the scratchiness that makes it good and not the transitions between the colors

did someone already post the cmyk thing

>>2847284
>>2847200

kek i'm literally blind

>>2847266
im talking about being able to look at the whole picture, not specific parts of it and see the smallest fucking detail of paint at a micoscopic level, fucking autist. as far as the laziness, it is being lazy because less effort = more lazy how dumb do you have to be to not understand that.

>>2847258
>she has chobits ears
nope, they would have to be further in. theyre way too far back, so its part of the headdress

File: 1484415546939.gif (414KB, 480x287px)

414KB, 480x287px

>>2847312
>being able to look at the whole picture, not specific parts of it
You lost.
To be able to look at the whole painting at once, you need to see it only from a certain distance. If you get any closer than that specific then you're already seeing specific parts of it.

You said.
> you can have paintings that have excellent details at any distance. its just a matter of how refined things are, and how lazy that artist is.
Which is a clear contradiction that what you just said. You cannot look closer without losing sight of the big picture.

But I'm glad you are finally agreeing with me. You only need to zoom as close as you see the whole picture.

If the details look more loose when you zoom any closer than that, it's not laziness. Just an involuntary side effect of the digital era.