have you ever raised the bar too high for yourself?i have, and

>>2873138

Honestly the only thing I find really impressive about this drawing is that there aren't any smudge marks

I'm too lazy to crit, but other than the assembled junk on the floor, most aspects of this drawing are really shoddy. The tubes and screen are totally flat and look like rough sketches, the robot doesn't look like it's even the subject of the drawing, it's muted and the entire composition seems to work against it. I'm glad you feel proud about it but you can probably do much better in 2 months just grinding some fundamentals and studying composition. You'll look back in 2 months and wonder why you set the bar so low

>>2873138
Nope, not yet. I haven't gone that far out of the comfort zone. What size paper is this though?

>>2873145

Also OP to answer your question, I seem to raise the bar each time I grind fundamentals. Especially if it involves any part of the human body. I'm deathly afraid of drawing anything below the neck, other than maybe the butthole, of which I have arcane knowledge of.

>>2873147
I used 9x12in mix media paper. The reason it's so small here is because i only drew the top third of the page, and i cut the bottom two thirds off.

>>2873145
>unironic muh fundamentals post

have you ever seen any art aside from game space hangar concept art?

>>2873188

That's a nice strawman but my current favorite artist is Gerhard Richter, and I despise 95% of concept art. Either way, nothing you said disqualifies my post

>>2873145
>>2873145
lol I bet that's way better than anything you can do.

>>2873138
I can see what you're saying. Some other folk are saying the drawing isn't good but it's clear you connect with the idea and think you did a good job representing it. I think the mood gets across well.

In terms of what you can do about this, you can think of yourself "having a genius" rather than "being a genius." In this way you are not in charge of the quality of what you make because it is somebody else doing it. For you, your 'genius' has been acting pretty lazy. That's not your fault, but maybe you should feed him some cookies to try to get him to make some better art?

>>2873145
Thank you man. Nobody ever tells me these things in real life, so this is very constructive for me and my new goal in life. I just drew a robot skull, then spent two months adding a bunch of bullshit around it with no goal, then I thought that those tubes were soo cool because I've never done that kind of thing before, and it was so much better than all the other garbage i've made before. Thanks for for the advice!

File: 1469823061768.jpg (228KB, 776x1119px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 776x1119px

>>2873195

It's not, pic related.

More seriously, are you really this salty I don't think your work is good? Just improve and stop bitching lmao

>>2873198

Nevermind, I thought you were >>2873195

You definitely should plan more. Even drawing some light lines of action in a 4H can really do wonders.

Perhaps do some studies of famous works of art to get a feel for composition!

>>2873138
So, let me guess. You posted a shitty picture so that people would attack you for having a high opinion of your own work. I see you included the name of the artist as well. Do you have a grudge against him, and want /ic/ to be your personal army?

>>2873202

I just googled his name and the name of the work and 2 of the top 4 results on google are this thread, so I think it's genuinely the artist...

>>2873197
You cunts need to fuck off back to tumblr. This is not the board for vague descriptions of inner beauty, when someone posts a bad picture and you want to spare their feelings.

>>2873203
What does that have to do with anything? The picture is on Deviantart.

>>2873206
kys. Fundamentals aren't the only thing that matter in a drawing you dickface. A drawing with good fundamentals is worse than something with effort put into a concept and maybe shit fundamentals.

He should already know his drawing fundamentals is shit from the other posters, but I can tell what he meant by 'putting the bar too high.' Obviously you can't because all you fucking want to do is GRIND FUNDIES, YOU FUCKING UNCREATIVE FUCK.

>>2873210
a drawing with good fundamentals but absolutely no substance or design or any thought*

>>2873210
I don't give a fuck about fundamentals. People learn to draw through various means. I've spent maybe 10% of my time working on fundamentals. It's about whether or not you can draw.

Fact is, OP can't draw. If you can't draw, you can't be particularly creative, because the way you express yourself through drawing is... wait for it... by being good at it.
It's like being a vocalist without being able to sing. It doesn't matter how much "creativity" you have if you're tone deaf.

>>2873210
>>2873212

There's little point is exploring "creativity" until you at least have decent imaginative and observational skills. You're working with a lackluster, everyman visual dictionary then. You don't understand the world around you yet. Picasso would not have been a great artist without those skills; his masterful use of color and deconstruction of form are entirely a result of using the skills he learned and taking them in another direction. There are essentially zero decent representational artists that aren't great without the fundies, and almost no good abstract artists without them. See: retard Damien Hirst attempts shitty paintings thinking he can be in conversation with Francis Bacon and end up just embarrassing himself

You just seem angry that you don't have the patience for the fundamentals and are here to vent

File: wut dec.png (625KB, 542x657px) Image search: [Google]

625KB, 542x657px

I'm taking Visual Arts now, and I'm learning tons of stuff there. If I had taken that class before, this and maybe all my other stuff would be better too. I made the Robo Cancer about half a year ago, then posted it a couple of months after, and people like my dad have told me about composition and stuff later on. I made this drawing after that. Did I improve, or have i fallen even harder? (This too also started off as a funny face with the idea of completing it come later). (i still didn't understand the concept of why you should use h pencils at this time)

File: lele man.png (162KB, 391x407px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 391x407px

I didn't even look at what a human looked like on the insides at all, and i just wanted to express my state of depression at the time i made it. It ended up just being boring and with 0 dynamacy. Yet, this was my my best work compared to the rest of the trash that I've made previously. I admit it, it's time for me to grind my ass and learn the rules so that I know what I'm breaking.

>>2873245
I mean, that pile of flesh should be A LOT more bigger. I was just wondering if anyone else made a picture far better than anything else they've made, and then couldn't replicate that goodness afterwards. Didn't know everyone would be focusing on mine instead, I just used it as a relatable example

>>2873222
Yes, it is about how well you draw.

OP can't draw well. And it's not very or particularly creative, but it is trying to say something nonetheless, and according to him he was more successful than average. And yes, the better you can draw, the more creative you can be with drawing, for sure. But you don't need to be good at drawing to wait to say something. A writer doesn't need to wait until he is a good writer to be able to say something, either.

My point is there are people on this board that don't consider the concepts to their drawings. It's just practicing grammar to them. They get to the point where they want to say something with their drawings but they can't because they got into a habit of only practicing their grammar. And they can draw to some degree but they're stuck in this neverending depressing grind phase.

There is plenty of point to exploring creativity because it's not something that has prerequisites, creativity exists on a spectrum. Anybody can put together creative ideas by putting pencil to a journal yet there are people drawing for several years who aren't doing so. You don't need an above-average visual library to come up with concepts. You seem to be construing creativity as some of the greatest creative achievements of the past 100 years. There are different degrees of creativity. The creative genius of picasso didn't wait until he had skills. You can't turn that shit off, his creativity was just being expressed in a different way.

I have plenty of patience for fundamentals. I don't have patience for people who have for some reason placed the role of conception out of the group of fundamentals. As stated by Loomis in Successful Drawing, "Before beginning to draw, close your eyes and try to see the subject. Think of what would be happening. Think of the basic idea or purpose of the effort. All this may be called the conception of the subject."

>>2873257
>The creative genius of picasso didn't wait until he had skills.

That's absolute bullshit.

http://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-3939.php

Age: 11

Seems he did the fundies before his Blue and Rose periods!

>>2873257
I can't tell if you're just bitter because you can't draw and have deluded yourself into thinking your "creativity" somehow makes up for it, or if you're just a post-modern tumblrcunt who thinks ideas are ten times more important than actual skill.

Either way, fuck off.

>>2873259
>http://www.pablo-ruiz-picasso.net/work-3939.php

So you're telling me was never creative until he got good? You're telling me a switch flipped in his head once he got gud at drawing and he suddenly became a creative genius? That's now how genius brains works.

>>2873262
I don't think creativity somehow makes up for poor skills. I never said that. I also think it's a horrible idea to put off learning technical drawing fundamentals, but there's no good reason to not practice concept skills at any level. I don't think ideas are more important than actual skill, but the general atmosphere here completely devalues concept and idea, and you can see it in a lot of the images posted in the threads. Good drawing skill, but they're stuck creatively. I've already put effort in to helping them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdGAR5zaipw

"merely knowing your craft will never be enough to make a picture. if you ever amount to anything at all, it will be because you were true to that deep desire or ideal which made you seek artistic expression in pictures." -Harvey Dunn

"if your life is full, you will paint full pictures. If it is empty, your pictures will be empty too." -Harvey Dunn

This has nothing to do with post-modernism, I don't even know how to define post-modernism in terms of its aesthetics. My current reflections are based on the lives of prominent illustrators, my own observations of what makes good drawing, manga, and Loomis.

Anyways, you've blown this out of proportion. My original post directed the original point of the thread directly by saying I can see why he might think the piece is more successful than his average, but that was ultimately a side-point of my post. I mostly told him about how creative genius used to be viewed in ancient society, as something that people possess rather than are. With such a viewpoint their failures do not demotivate them and their successes do not stifle or paralyze them, because they aren't in direct control.

>>2873293
>That's now how genius brains works.

Genius is generative. How "genius" were you at 11? Not as "genius" as you are now. I'm more of a /lit/ person and a failed aspiring poet myself. Poetry is probably the easiest way to show that "genius" is largely a result of absorbing good work and honing one's skills; not that everyone has it. But there are two types of genius in poetry: the young romantic and the old sage. This is an oversimplification, but the former category holds Rimbaud, Hart Crane, Lorca, and TS Eliot; the latter has, for example, Wallace Stevens, Walt Whitman, Dante.

The former artists were wildly original in their output, most of which happened in their early 20s; but their early work is largely trash, not dissimilar to the early work of the latter poets, who often produced trash into their 30s or even 40s (Stevens). All of them had been exposed to hundreds of poets and thousands of poems, and tens of thousands of lines of poetry. Rimbaud is the Picasso; he began and ended young, but he was memorizing 100 lines of Virgil a day when he was 8 or 9, and began poetry as a profession in prepubescence. His work slithers forward from mediocre romantic poetry to the great original works he's known for today; through Absorption and practice, and then the spark hits.

Stevens had literally no creativity at all until he was at least 35. He wrote poems but they were certifiably third rate; but then he started taking it very seriously and he became one of the greatest of the 20th century, each poem literally better than the previous.

I am very much telling you there is a switch in his head, and in most genius heads, that flips on after exposure and practice. Few have that switch, but it does have to be flipped.

>>2873293
>but the general atmosphere here completely devalues concept and idea, and you can see it in a lot of the images posted in the threads.
Not really, no. You're just making shit up.

>My current reflections are based on the lives of prominent illustrators,
You keep talking about creativity, but you seem to have none of your own. You just keep quoting or referring to other people. Try forming an opinion of your own for once in your life.

>Anyways, you've blown this out of proportion.
I'm not the one writing walls of text.

>With such a viewpoint their failures do not demotivate them and their successes do not stifle or paralyze them,
These stupid pop-psychological mind tricks are typical of post-modernism, because the people who follow that bullshit are base their lives around the placebo effect.
Hell, the entire contemporary art world is based on the placebo effect. They think something has depth, meaning or some kind of hidden quality that only they have access to, because that's what they've been told.

>>2873313
>i'm not the one writing walls of text
I'm talking about you calling me a tumblrite. I found that very out-of-proportion because I don't know what it is I'm saying that is making you say that and I hate them as much as any guy here.

>not really, no. You're just making shit up.
I'm not making shit up. The advice posted is mine, btw.
>>2862059

Bad habits like this would never happen if we placed more importance on conception on this board.

About the trick I mentioned, honestly, I mostly agree with you. I didn't really know it was an aspect of post-modernism. I currently have an art professor who is pretty liberal... and is showing me a lot of out there stuff. She played this podcast this morning and it was talking about this. Mostly everything was BS and pissed me off except this one small idea. It seems to be based on this info http://chalcedon.edu/research/articles/the-idea-of-genius/

It is placebo, though I thought it might be interesting to consider for OP. I don't like how the contemporary art world is and I agree with you on that front for sure.

>You keep talking about creativity, but you seem to have none of your own. You just keep quoting or referring to other people. Try forming an opinion of your own for once in your life.

I posted those links and quotes because you called me a post-modernist. I don't follow that crowd and I was trying to show you stuff I've seen recently to show you people that also place importance on concept, and that I'm not just sipping some post-modernist concept of what makes good work. I'm trying to persuade you, and maybe anybody else seeing this, to consider conception within the 1st year of study.

>>2873309
Interesting. I was mostly thinking of it in terms of people who have strong capacity for convergent thinking, divergent thinking, technical and creative competence. Old wise might need to hit a switch, but I think some are creative their entire lives, like the young romantic.

>>2873153
>I'm deathly afraid of drawing anything below the neck

You shouldn't be. We learn to draw by doing mistakes and then fixing them, not just by grinding fundamentals.

>>2873153
Care to share how you construct asses? Genuinely having trouble simplifying it into shapes, particularly the maximus and the medius. Like, how do they connect or wrap around that one bone at the sides.

>>2873138
Literally every single drawing I've ever made.

Never settle, you faggots.

>>2873138
every day

ITT spergs discuss art as a product and whine about concept and fundamentals being pivotal to artistic success but leave out the most important talent an artist should learn to be successful: pandering

>>2873199
I'm more impressed with OPs drawing. Traditional art looks so much nicer than digital. It's a heck of a lot less forgiving too. Once you commit to something not in pencil you're forced to stick with it or adapt it. Can't just CTRL+Z away your problems with traditional art.

Don't get me wrong your digital painting is hella impressive but overall I like and appreciate OP's (charcoal?) drawing a lot better. It's way more unique and imaginative than yours and I appreciate creativity.

Also something about your dude's head and dace looks off. Kinda uncanny valley off. Makes him look like a creepy android. But faces are really hard I can related to that.

>>2873138
OP, don't feel bad about what this guy said, he's right you definitely could improve but this is an amazing piece of art either way.

>>2873926

>being this new

>>2873926
Could you please just leave? People go to /ic/ in order to get away from cancer like you.

>>2873945
>>2873952
lmao someone's salty because I didn't like his "superior" art

>>2873138
this is better than anything anybody on /ic can do.

>unique style
>independent
>detailed
>non cliche science fiction

too bad the industry caters to anybody with no style instead of artists like yourself OP

>>2873955
>>2873956
Fuck off, Mike.

>>2873926
lol this guy
welcome to /ic/ pal

I agree with others criticism, if you had a better grasp of fundementals this drawing would come out better. anyone can autistically grind out a drawing like this.

>>2873956
This is exactly what I was trying to say here >>2873926 but I get called a newfag for it. I see way more creativity in OP's drawing than I see in this >>2873199 salty mofo's painting of a generic video game soldier. The salty motherfucker may be "objectively better" at drawing (though I can't say for sure as I have not seen enough from either of the two artists) but personally I see a lot more love and creativity poured into OP's drawing that I end up appreciating it a whole lot more as a piece of art.

>>2873963
I don't visit /ic/ too often I'll admit that, but in all my experiences posting here nobody has acted like such a cunt and been like "pic related I'm better than you lean x and get on my level". That just seems so counter-productive to me. Especially seeing as the art that mr salty mofo provided has so little in common to OP's drawing that it's really hard to compare them.

>>2873963
he's right you know

>>2873967
kill you're self

>>2873970
>>2873972
You might want to change your writing style if you're going to pretend not to be the OP, faggot.

>>2873989
>

>>2873968
Are you autistic, by any chance?

>>2873997
No not at all. Gr8 original meme though

>>2873997
kek

>>2873998
You still haven't realized, have you?
Well, this is going to be a fun thread.

>>2874003
don't reply to me

>>2873989
being this new. weeww lad

>>2873185
>>2873198
>>2873229
>>2873245
>>2873253
For the record, I'm OP, and these are my only comments on this thread. I appreciate the criticisms, and flattered by the people who like my art, and even though this is basically now a shitshow, I'm still thankful.

File: IMG_5861.jpg (570KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 1280x960px

>>2874089
I forgot the proof. I used graphite for those who thought I used charcoal. The drawing irl is a lot grayer and even more muted, so I fixed it using the lighting settings on FSviewer. So there goes the only impressive thing about it, (no smudges) because I put pieces of office paper under my hands and treated it like a nuclear bomb that would explode if I smudged it with my fingers. It has some smudges now tho, because it's on my wall, and sometimes I bump into it in the dark, and I've yet to find the opportunity to use fixative.

>>2874037
So it's just Malaysia as usual. Great.

>>2873968
It's a meme you dip

>>2874101
It IS pretty impressive, a good image by itself, and a lot of detail for such a small frame.

>>2873199
>Nigger larping as a real artist
Shit, this is an abomination actually. That face looks more fish than human, the head shape looks like you just drew a square and filled it in with human features. Basically all you got right was the shading (the bullshit tactic of a bad artist). OPs beginner doodle had flaws sure, but if this is really your art (which I doubt) OPs shit has much more interest to it.
What's yours supposed to be, some cookie cutter vidya pseudo concept art? It has nothing unique to it, it's completely uninspired and I guarantee the rest of your shitty art is lol tier, characterless drivel.
That said, lets see your blog.

>>2873138
A lot.
And every time it was a massive disappointment.
>Spend a lot of time
>it's shit
>want to kill yourself
Better to know your limits and push them softly.

>>2874165
Thanks!

File: 1484838220704.png (277KB, 943x541px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 943x541px

>all this people not knowing about merc_wip
Jezus people lurk moar

>>2874165
I can't tell if you're blind, a shill or a troll.

>>2873226
I'm new to drawing, but why can't you just practice drawing the fundamentals on creative subjects?

maybe if I want to draw a spider-mecha-tank, why not take it as an opportunity to practice construction and perspective, or vice versa?

>>2873956
>unique style

This is incredibly derivative of HR Giger minus any of the sexual horror that made his work so intriguing and reflective of certain aspects of humanity

>>2874488
hr giger drew poorly shaded penises

>>2874242
I honestly like it. I like lots of amateur art.
Not everything has to have perfect perspective anatomy and all that jazz to be enjoyed.

>>2874488
idk what you're getting at. you're a dumb cunt.

>>2874493
yeah but at least they were his own poorly shaded penises

File: sheev.jpg (98KB, 880x880px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 880x880px

>>2874210

Posting it is the best way to figure out whether someone should be ignored on this board. It never fails

>>2874497
how is this amateur art? fucking cunt.

you're pretty dumb for an asian.

Remember to report all blatant shitposting. If enough people do it, maybe the mods will actually ban this cunt.

>>2873199
This is the only thing I ever see you post when you say you're good at art, is this like the only good piece you've done, or just don't like the rest of you're stuff?