booooo!

[wallychairmover]

http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17697


BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! That is just mean.

[Forge]

when a post is locked... he is locked
don't bother people with your opinion...
no one care... ceeya in other circumstances i hope.
forge.

[DanSTC]

I wouldn't really even call that "concept art" per se...more like a study (or direct copy, depending on how you look at it) from a photo. He could conceivably post it in the sketches or techniques forums, but it DOES look rather out of place in the "finished" forum.

Also, the portrait may be detailed on the surface, but it's only skin-deep. I don't get much of any sense of the underlying structure, and the figure just comes off as looking odd and boring. It looks, quite literally, like we're looking at a drawing of a photo, instead of a drawing using a photo as reference.

I'm not a big fan of (most) photo-realism because any idiot who doesn't have any idea about anatomical or three-dimensional structure or volume or lighting can color-pick or copy from a photo and get it looking "real", but also because when it comes to photo-realism, a camera lens will beat you every time...there's also the fact that most photographed models are usually very poorly lit where drawing is concerned. (Though they can often be good for studies.)

Anyway, what I like are artists who work from photos for reference, but do things you simply can't do with the camera, and that you need that studied and intuitive knowledge in order to accomplish....something this guy simply doesn't have.

When I look at stuff like this, I'm just utterly unimpressed...so you can copy a photo. Why not just use the photo?

What would really impress me is if he took the picture and changed the figure's costume, changed the angle of the lighting, "tweaked" the pose to make it pop out three dimensionally much more, or otherwise made it into something that's not a direct copy of the photo on which it was based. For example, big-shot artiste Alex Ross, who makes excellent use of photo-reference to the point that they sometimes look like direct copies, but employs a strong sense of artistic skill to "tweak" and compose them that only a skilled artist like him could pull off. He's so good that even in the shots where he's "inventing" stuff, he makes you think he must've copied it directly from a photo!
Guys like that are who impress me when it comes to making stuff look nearly photographic.

Meanwhile, this guy says he got an A in portrait painting and an E (?) in imaginative drawing. Judging from his other drawings, I'm not at all surprised...I'm betting that if he attempted to do anything but copy directly from a photograph, it'd undoutedly fall apart under the pressure. Also, whoever runs their portrait painting class should be taken out and shot...oh wow, a class where you learn to essentially carbon-copy from photographs. Color me impressed. :rolleyes:

[otis]

All I can say is.. what is the point in painting this way? Just make a copy of the photo you are trying soo hard to duplicate. I can appreciate the skill to paint "photorealistically", but I think it is worthless if you make it too photoperfect. Instead, use your talent to have fun with your strokes, composition and color!. Expieriment a bit!...I really don't see the rationality of copying a photo. Waste of time, and boring IMOP.

[dfacto]

um, maybe he is just trying to learn how to color.

[davi]

even if he is trying to learn how to color i'm getting alittle snippy about what i let into the finished section.

[Jens]

his little paintover didn't convince me actually

[wallychairmover]

yeah i can appreciate where you folks are comin from, I was actually just a little more bothered by the use of the ol' parental "this is what i say and that's final" aproach to it. I understand Davi that you mods have quite a task to keep all of us non mods from just going into arguments and flame wars at any given moment while trying to pursue an outside life as well, but it seemed to me that perhaps you could have closed off that thread without adding your final lecture. That's just my opinion though.

[dfacto]

Though I'm sure that wading through forum threads all day long doesn't exactly make one jovial...

[Joeslucher]

I didn't think the piece belonged there but I thought it was pretty crappy of people to then make fun of his sketches which weren't copied from photos and were actually Concept art. Perhaps that kind of criticism of the more imaginative stuff pushed him to create lifeless photo copies. I just didn't think there was a reason to drag his sketches into it.

[Forge]

you know wally, if this thread were not locked, people would have injury this man all day long... most of them more for fun than for concept art.... as a modo on another website i can say that sometimes we have to play the mum to stop overflows :ranting: :ranting: :ranting: <---- u see what i mean...

[Kirt]

Please forgive my bluntness ... I should just keep out of this but I couldn't help myself.

Net-iquette - usually it's in bad form to open another thread to discuss a locked down thread. The mods have thier reasons, let it go.

[wallychairmover]

yep, i kin diggit folks but look here:D everyone still has to say their piece even after the fact. ironic isn't it. trust me I appreciate the mods, we all know what happens when nobody watches over the fun. so just relax, kick back and make some good art. word to yo mutha(in a good way)

[Erik]

Perhaps this thread should be closed? :D

[AnarchyAo2]

I think shutting down his thread was TOTALLY inappropriate. This forum may be designated for conceptual artists but I think we've let other types of artists in also (I think about 1/2 of us arn't concept artists). For some of you guys to be like "Boo! Its crap. He copied!", that just ignorant. Then some guys go and link his other drawings and make fun of that. Thats terrible. Even if he did copy it, how does make it crappy art? Compairing his drawings to his Britiny picture, even if he did copy its an incrediable improvement and I think he put a lot of time into it. He also posted progress pictures which suggest that he didnt' copy. I don't know what real evidence you guys have. Not enough to lock a thread or rip his dignity to shreads.

"When I look at stuff like this, I'm just utterly unimpressed...so you can copy a photo. Why not just use the photo?"

Just because if his methods displease you doesn't mean that hes wrong for doing so. For example, many artists HATE the "grid". Does that make artists who use the "grid" bad artists? No, it doesn't. Ever heard of Chuck Close? Yeah, he uses the grid (not for photorealism anymore because of health reasons, now he creates just as beautiful art now). I want you to go and tell that guy that his art unimpresses you just because he uses the grid.

My point is that art has many different methods and you can use those to achive different results. Copying may be the easiest way to achive good results. Thats why many of us strive for something more difficult. Like drawing from memory, life drawing, or using photo reference . In the end the results are much more pleasing for youself if you take the hard way.