So...

>>3004191
Fucking shit
Why?

i can draw a hyper realistic super over exposed photo

>>3004195
i guess not. Because our brain is not capable.

>>3004195
your brain can't possibly store enough information to get every single pore right

>>3004209

Something being hyper-realistic doesn't mean it has to be a photocopy, it just needs to store enough information to know how pores look in general.

>>3004190
Someone with near photographic memory could, I suppose.

I don't understand why this is even an issue. I can't think of a more pointless thing to debate.

>>3004212
thats just one detail, think of all possible things you would paint, its too much to know

>>3004223

If you specialized, I bet people could do hyper-realistic portraits, or mountains, or flowers.

Obviously not everything, though.

>>3004190
Are hyper-realistic art even a thing anymore now that camera are everywhere?

>>3004226
>I bet people could do hyper-realistic portraits
That's why all fine artists draw from models?

NITR-073

I would argue it's possible, but it would take a really fucking long time.
>pores
>wrinkles
>minor tonal shifts in skin
>individually rendered unique strands of hair (god that must be a nightmare)
>transparent details not easily noticable to the naked eye (like how you can see your veins under your skins)

>>3004190
Technically what we call hyper-realistic drawing is very non-realistic, because our brain doesn't work that way. When looking at reality, your brain makes its own focal point, groups elements together, forms patterns, which is not possible when looking at a flat picture, so you have to make those structural alterations yourself.
That's why some of Peter Han's sketches might look more real than a ""hyperrealistic"" version.

>>3004246
I forgot to mention, Peter Han creates a strong focal point by grouping details together, which is simulating how real human brain works. Your brain recognizes that and thinks it's the real thing.
We're all illusionists, really.

File: dong cunt destroyer.png (288KB, 411x550px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 411x550px

>>3004234
bless, anon

>>3004229

I never said it'd be easy or not a complete waste of your damn time.

>>3004227
hyperrealism wouldn't exist without photography, anon

>>3004190
All hyper-realism both is and is not drawn from imagination.

Is not because it employs photo-reference.

Is because it seeks to render more realistically (hence hyper-real) than the photographic reference.

>>3004283
thats exactly what most hyper realist doesnt do, many of them even include blatant effects of the camera like like bokeh, noise and overexposure, most also include maybe without knowing it the cameras tone values. because they just copy

>>3004234
>NITR-073
my hero... you knew what i was about to ask.

>>3004246

All your points are completely irrelevant to the thread, no one is impressed with your entry level understanding of art.

>>3004284

What the fuck is this tin foil hat ass shit nigga

>>3004190

Anyone who could do it has outgrown wanting to do it.

>>3004190
>that bit of chub over the thigh high
HHNNNNGGGG

>>3004209
I'm not sure, all you'd really need to know is how a few kinds of pores look, and how they exist on the skin and boom, you've got a benchwork to apply to the entire skin work. It's not photocopy, but emulating the natural system. I could see it being done by someone with no time and a nofap wizard of at least 50 years

File: 1494961611626.gif (2MB, 460x259px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 460x259px

>Hyper realism
So it's MORE realistic than realism?

>>3004190
Hyper realism is a meme. All good artists use reference. The more you fight reference the more your art won't quite get there for you.

>>3004627
Realism is doesn't always have as much detail from life as hyperrealism should have

>>3004633

Hyperrealism is a art movement dumbass. Your comment is irrelevant.

>>3004190

I would say it's possible but do you know even one artist who can pull it off?

File: 1477665840089.png (10KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 300x300px

>>3004234
You da real MVP dawg

File: 1496419454743.jpg (16KB, 600x315px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 600x315px

01101001 01100011 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01100010 01100001 01101001 01110100

File: bd3eb13533fa828b6f684df8ff1f4134970a5a66.jpg (34KB, 334x441px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 334x441px

Kim Jung Gi can do hyperrealism from imagination you retards.

>>3006096
>believing his lies

>>3004234
thanks

>>3004190
Source?

>>3006096
This is not even by Kim Jung Gi

>>3006096
>Abstractions done through lines
>Realism

>>3006046
source on your pic plsssss

File: wellwishes web.jpg (531KB, 1100x792px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 1100x792px

>>3006096
good bait

>>3004190
pic related was done by Johannes Voss from memory, I'd say you can get pretty far that way. But the reason you should try to work without reference isn't because it's possible to get a good finished product, it's because if you use ref while learning to paint you'll become dependent of it in the long run