Join 500,000+ Artists
Its' free and it takes less than 10 seconds!
I searched on here to see if it was discussed. But, I didn't find it, so here it is. The only question i have is what materials is he using? To me it looks like mixed media, charcoal and pencil? Also, I can't tell because of the grainy video but did he do a line drawing first? Because by the way he's going about the shading, it doesnt like someone who would do it one pass it looks like he already has a line drawing set.
Last edited by TwoBit_boy; April 10th, 2006 at 10:58 PM.
He did do a line drawing first. You can see the fingers of the line drawing near the start, if he has the fingers drawn in I'd assume he drew the lines for everything lightly to begin with, just the video is too grainy for them to show up.
And yes, the way he's doing the shading also shows that he has a line drawing in place.
Looks like mixed media to me too, I would guess the same as you, charcoal and graphite, although I notice a pen is always close at hand on his desk. It's possible he's using ink for the darkest values, but I'm really not sure.
I feel the same way you guys do. I mean maybe as practice, this was ok, but seriously what's the point in filming yourself?
Thing is. I really shouldn't say anything, I'm not even to that point yet of being able to render well.
I dont know, am I the only one that finds it a waist of time to copy a photograph exactly as it is? Because if I am I'll gladly shut my yap rightnow... maybe
Actually this might be a good place to start bringing up the whole discussion on whther copying a photograph is good or not i dunno... Nah, probably not to many of those.
Why dont you guys check the Art lout oud thread? Nothing wrong with using a photograph as reff, even if it is to do a portrait. The guy didnt copy it, if he did hed put it in a xeroxmachine.
Its still his enterpretation, and hes pretty damn good at shading too. Its almost as if because hes not a part of CA community you "diss" him (hehe)
Last edited by timpaatkins; April 11th, 2006 at 04:04 AM.
Humans can be xerox machines, too. It's all good for practice, but it wouldn't be a very valid portfolio piece... he didn't shoot the reference himself, and he's trying his hardest to copy the photo as much as possible. No change in composition, no concept behind it...just a drawing of a photo. People who use ref succesfully are using it as something to guide their thought process without becoming too reliant on it to make their own decisions and changes.Originally Posted by timpaatkins
Depends on what hes trying to do, doesnt it?
Yeah, if he's trying to xerox it, he succeeded ... but like cotron implied, that's boring as hell, all it is an example of "technical" skill ... makes me wonder if that guy would be any good if you told him to draw a fully rendered piece straight out of his head.
I've never been impressed by people that draw directly from photo reference.....it that wrong?
You guys make me laugh...
I'm with everyone else here. THe only reason I think he would film himself are
B;Someone didn't think he was drawing his drawings so he drew a drawing on film to show them.
C:A "Process" to show how he works.
Yeah, its too bad Fred Flickstones tutorials are down, otherwise you could have posted how unimpressed you are that he copied (and showed how to) a couple of photographs.
There's nothing wrong with using reference, by any means, I use it all the time, and so do the majority of professionals...it's a big help, and is often necessary. That's not the issue I was talking about. There's a difference between using a photo to get what you want out of it and mindlessly copying the thing.
It's a good exercise to copy photos, but only to a point. Especially if it's not even your own photo you're using like that. If that guy was trying to show that drawing in his portfolio or if it got published, then the person who owns the copyright to that photo would have a problem with it. Taking your own photos and utilizing them like a tool to help you achieve what you intended from the start is the point of reference- but taking an image that isn't yours and not altering it in any meaningful way isn't making good art, it's making the same shit you see guys at stands on the street or in malls selling. There is a redundancy to copying a photo as closely as possible, as a camera will always do it better and faster. What makes a drawing/painting art is the thought process that goes into it to make it original and something that no machine can make.
ps tim- fredflickstone was using the ref the way it's intended... taking his knowledge of anatomy/color/light and using the photo as a guide to make something that's obviously more than just a copied photo. ol' kanye is another story, though.
he's obviously showing off.....thats about it.
Yea, how dare he show off. unlike us CAers here.
Have you asked the dude why/how/what knowlegde he is using while he is making his portrait? Why wouldnt he be using his knowlegde of light and shadow and applying it to his drawing? Have you actually seen Freds tutorials? Im amazed at how narrowminded you come off.
He IS making choices everytime he puts down the pen to the paper. And so what is he is trying to make a perfect copy of a photo? What gives you the right to belittle his efforts? Why is it different to what Fred is showing in his tutorials, or someone doing a bargue from a photo? And who said anything about getting it published?
Maybe he was using it as a valuestudy, who knows, and who cares.
Per Fred Flickstones
http://www.adventuregamers.com/article/id,205The most important lesson I could pass on to another fellow artisan would be to keep your mind open and flexible. Techniques can be taught, and learned, but these techniques don't necessarily make you a good artist. Without vision the end goal is difficult to reach, obtain, or even find. Most art students hang their imagination up to learn the ways of the arts, and most of these students forget to go back to that imagination once they get out of art school, diluted with false impressions that the techniques they have just learned are the true meaning of art. This produces many proficient technicians in the arts, but doesn't produce many quality artists. You have to rekindle that imaginative side of the brain. This is where you will find your most creative thoughts and ideas. Art techniques are only tools. They are not the end means to success in art or the only way to create art.
I'm with timpaatkins. It shows that he has some skills. He's adding values in that disceted way. I don't think that is that easy to do and still have a consistent work.
The video shows that he has some knowledge about values and a good hand-eye coordination. And some people here react as if he's killing babies.
I get that impression all the time.And some people here react as if he's killing babies.
jeez what a way to pull out your tampon and throw it in my face......but yeah you're right I do feel stupid for saying that
Last edited by Kresh; April 11th, 2006 at 10:20 AM.
Damn, I expected Kanye West doing a drawing, not somebody drawing Kanye West.
and I don't care wether he's copying it or not. It still takes a certain level of skill and attention to detail, even if its not as impressive to watch. I've always been curious as to what it would be like to watch me draw, watching as a sketch developes from start to finish. It has nothing to do with showing off imo.
We'll ride the spiral to the end, we may just go where no one's been
I didn't mean I was unimpressed, I meant that filming yourself and having it get onto (Not going to say he put it there, not sure if he did or not) EBW doesn't serve much of a purpose.Originally Posted by timpaatkins
If I know any better, the thousands of kids who flock to EBW will be like "WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAH." The few artists in our school get it all the time, no matter what they do.
I think that doing Barque drawing is the same than copying pictures and make it photorealistic, but nobody never complains about Barque drawings right? Cause it teaches you rendering and measuring stuff, so I guess it can be the same with pictures copy.
Only if you are using the Sight-size technique. Bargue is about more than just value and patience. It's about being annoyingly accurate. Doing that with a photo kinda stinks, because photos are completley 2d, and not meant to be drawn, especially not for at LEAST 12+ hours. Bargue plates' sole purpose is to be recopied for practice.
So no, it's not the same.
Listen to yourself, please.Originally Posted by Pixeldragoon
Doing a Bargue drawing from life is pretty much identical to copying a photograph. Hang up a photograph of a sculpted head 5 feet in front of you, and draw it. Put the real sculpted head 5 feet in front of you, and draw it. What's the difference? Bugger all, except maybe you'd get some glare off the photo if it was on glossy paper.
Like you said, it's about being annoyingly accurate. You can do that with a Bargue drawing or a photograph, in the end it's just copying a still image and getting the shapes and volumes as accurate as possible.
Why are we even talking about this?
looks like he traced the lines from the photo. the first photo looks the same size as the drawing. also, his application of the charcoal (section by section) is uncool
Yeah Denart, I was a bit suspect that the sizes were identical too. It's not too difficult to copy shading when you have perfectly accurate lines bounding your areas of light and shadow.
The guy should record another video, only this time not using any reference, and just making up a photo-real head and rendering it out like that.
The only thing i'm really "against" in this one is that it seems as though he's showing off, otherwise, if he's just trying to work on his technical drawing skill, i see nothing wrong with it. If anything, to me this is just him practicing and there seems to be nothing wrong with that. But both sides are correct in this one in some way or another.
Denart, i don't quite understand what you were saying about his charcoal technique being uncool.
That does seem kinda shitty if he traced those lines, but i was wondering what you meant by his application of charcoal being "uncool." I don't have much experience with charcoal; so, i don't really know how your "suppose" to work with it. Now let me at least add that Anthony Ryder when shading, actually prefers to migrate accross the form concentrating on only one area at a time (although not quite like this), and he's a Living Master according to ARC (sorry, i'm not trying to start some ARC debate). Oh btw, is this charcoal that he's using for sure?Originally Posted by Denart