Thread 7742374

Old: >>7709768

I CAN'T PAINT

Acrylic landscape on cardboard from a few months ago. Yeah, I suck and will be a permabeg because I lack discipline. It is what it is.

Cozy simplification. I’ve enjoyed seeing my sketching power level increase quickly despite never deliberately practicing it

>>7742374 (OP)
Thoughts on hybrid drawing?
Like sketching on paper and then tracing it to make a digital piece

>>7742622
Its nice overall. But the outlines on the house are too harsh, compared to the soft washes.
>>7742657
If you want use it for the final lines, its hard. Doing sketches is on paper come out more natural, its easier to make your drawings flow (if you have the skill of course).
I did it, but i never stuck to this pipeline. I just do a very rough sketch and 97% of work is painting over it.

>>7742571
Clouds are decent. But i dont get the bottom part. Why are the trees on the horizon the warmest spots in the entire painting?
The color perspective is a rule that you should follow strictly, probably up to high int or higher. It's probably one of the hardest rules to break.

>>7742710
Thanks. The “trees” are a formation of reddish rocks along the skyline. The forms aren’t good though. Yeah, color perspective is a motherfucker. I saw a simple trick of adding increasing amounts sky color to whatever you mix to cool and lighten receding objects. One reason why I’m planning to move to oils is that any mixes on the palette dry too fast. Cheers anon

>>7742622
nice

>>7742782
My best advice for colors is to just keep trying to incorporate principles like neutralizing and blue shifting. Even if the results are frustrating right now, eventually it’s effortless to go from vivid to mud and back again. I’m always surprised how much control I feel over it.

This one is kinda a failure of atmospheric perspective, but I tried. I like it overall anyway

>>7742782
>I saw a simple trick of adding increasing amounts sky color to whatever you mix to cool and lighten receding objects.
You dont really need tricks. Mixing colder and warmer mixes is a fundamental skill.
But sure, mixing in the sky color makes sense, its more or less what happens in reality.
Acrylics for noobs is hardcore mode.
Its by far the hardest of the popular mediums. Hard but not rewarding.

Something I did for an art assignment (don't be mean, this was one of my first paintings ever since 3rd grade) also yeah it's HH

Thoughts? Second time drawing this beautiful statue of st Joan. Will probably draw it many times again

>>7743005
no need to rub it in

>>7743133
>no need to rub it in
? lol

>>7742870
Thanks, I’ll keep at it. I think moving to oils will let me slow down and not rush. Acrylics just dry too fast even with a stay-wet palette and slow dry medium.

>this one is kinda a failure of atmospheric perspective
I think I see what you mean, but goddam that dark valued blue next to the foam of the wave in the foreground is just pure sex. Love the shadows of the rocks on the beach too.

>>7742916
>HH
Heil Hitler?

>>7742622
This is the nicest work I've ever seen in this shithole board. Is this from your own reference?

is there a good book or course on soft pastels?

>>7743492
Do you know any other nazis except Hitler?

>>7743577
Herman Höring

>>7743577
Heinrich Himmler

How's my fruit?

>>7743781
lol

>>7743533
there are much better artists here, but I appreciate it. It was just off of an unsplash one.

>>7743782
For me, it’s the shadows on the apple. Nice one. I’m not an expert, but I think they might be being held back by the lack of a highlight on the right side. It’d have to be pretty strong light from a single direction to produce a hard shadow like that. I think that means it’d produce a highlight as well

>>7743794
yeah, you're probably right on the apple shadow

>>7743724
Bingo

>>7743821
kek, I didn't even open the image, I thought I was memeing

>>7743782
Not too good. Try grisaille first, maybe.

>>7742622
Very nice work

We had some conflicts here but I've taken a lot of you bluds advices here and they have helped good sheit ty UwU, still a bit to go but almost gett'n there

>>7744283
much better, bud, much better. I like the shadows on the ground and on the dress. I still think you can exaggerate the difference in saturation in the different layers, but it's ok. Just keep that in mind in the future

>>7743577
sydney sweeny and the ss guard ftom wolfenstein 3d

>>7744283
I found this painting that reminded me of yours. Look at how the saturation recedes into the background. That's what you should strive for.

>>7742916
it sucks, but I lost interest before I finished the drawing

>>7744886
gotcha i vill try maybe next one or this one

>>7745026
notice how the loss of saturation happens in the sky: the point furthest away from us is right at the horizon, and then as you move towards the top of the page the sky gets more and more saturated, because that's the sky closest to us. Basically, the opposite effect that happens with the ground.

>>7745029
wew its like a saturation cone towards the vanishing point very interesting

>>7745277
I’m not that guy, but yes. Fog is when the moisture in the air is very high, but there’s always “something” in the air obstructing light. It’s not perfectly clear. How near or far an object is determines how much air is between the viewer and the object.

Also, everything usually shifts towards blue in the distance.

I practiced neutralizing colors to make different grays e.g. blue-gray, reddish-gray, etc…

In general, a painting will look much better if you emphasize the atmospheric perspective much more than a photo will

>>7743577
yes, myself.

>>7745300
there are two ways to approach it. one is the more basic and simple “mix more blue into the tones” as stuff gets further into the distance.
the other is a more naturalistic “the yellow comes out” of the paint, the tone can still lean towards green, red, etc as long as stuff further away is relatively less yellow than stuff closer.

>>7745630
>“the yellow comes out” of the paint
Green without yellow is, let me check it, yes, right, it's blue. Another nazi owned, keke.

>>7743007
Lot of the faces I draw look “stiff” any tips or references for help? Even when I draw larger my faces still come out looking more or less like these with maybe better shading detail but just a stiffness in “expression” or “features”

>>7745864
nigga, go to /beg/, what do you expect?

To the russian bro who hates today's soulless art, have you read this book? I ordered it yesterday but I've been skimming a digital version, it looks like a great read.

>>7742706
I sketch out on paper while brainstorming and then I digitize it on my phone
Mainly cause colors are free on the phone and less messy

>>7746029
>on my phone
nigga...

>>7746035
Yeah what?

>>7746043
that's retarded and miserable-sounding. How old are you to not have a goddamned computer yet?

>>7745747
it can lean grey instead of blue. if you just shift everyting towards blue pros like me will know you are a mere sunday painter.

>>7746045
Oh I have a computer alright
I just can't get used to the screenless tabs

>>7746017
>Dietrich von Hildebrand
>He was one of Europs most outspoken voices against Nazism and Communism
Look at Wasaw, the nicest building from the last 100 years is a Communist one. Are you sure he is writing about aesthetics and not something else?

>>7746051
>if you just shift everyting towards blue pros like me will know you are a mere sunday painter.
That's exactly what Renaissance masters did.
What are you, a modernist?

>>7746057
you can always get a regular tablet and draw that way
its how i do it with digital

I mean not that you cant criticize Nazi and Commi aesthetic, both are too modern and too Americanized for my taste. But something in me tells me, a post-war catholicuck would do it for all the wrong reasons.

>>7746138
>Look at Wasaw
Not even once

I have a confession to make. I was wrong. I decried your skill and knowledge and I realize now that it was jealousy and pettiness that drove me.
I have spent the last few days trying over and over to defeat the arguments I dismissed in my sad attempt to preserve my ego and I have come to terms that everything you've said is a self-evident Truth.
You know who you are, and you are by far my better and, I would think, the best artist in this general by far after Brian.

>>7746146
Too expensive
I'd rather suffer lol

what do you guys do with pencil stubs?
any easy DIY method for making some kinda handle to stick them in?

>>7746327
Easiest one would be making a paper cylinder and then attaching it with the pencil stub at the bottom with glue
Use a filler like sand for the extra part of the cylinder and then sealing it up with glue

>>7745955
Pyw

my /ic/gger room

>>7746127
uncle Sperger! technique look neat !

>>7746440
Fire

>>7745300
daym nice flower A.H.!

Kinda cringe and cluttered but

You guys are so goated

>>7746601
We stan Heinrich in this house

>>7746656
Fire

>>7746218
FAPUTA!!!

>>7746723
Here's the fully digitized version

>>7746737
Awww kyoot

>>7746703
Give me inspiring nature to paint from.

>>7742374 (OP)
So excited to work on this one

>>7742374 (OP)
Was working on a slave statue but my grandma wanted it back lol

>>7742374 (OP)
Any left 4 dead fans?

>>7746905
this could be a Jenny Saville quick sketch, I like it

Some insights from my last museum visit. Size actually isn't as important as i thought it is. A lot of miniatures were very good and fun to look at.
There was to big paintings with a smaller studys on the side, i photographed only this one. But the little study is a lot fresher and more holistic. The big one was impressive as well, but i think i would prefer the small one overall.

>>7747222
This one looks small on the photo, but it is actually around 1.5-2 meters.

>>7747223
>IMG_2135.jpg
It looks more harmonic on my monitor that it was irl.
Impressionism is an instagram art style.
I always looked at it in internet and it looked very cool. But after seeing it live i was a little bit disappointed.
It is quite gimmicky. You stand in front of it, and its flat and too saturated. You have to go way back to make look 3d and vibrant. You need more than 5-meter distance for a a4 painting to look haw it was intended.
I dont know i felt a little bit stupid while doing it.
Pic related looked very abstract and very flat. But than i looked at it from across the room, and it was so much more realistic and three-dimensional.
Whats the point to make art that look good only from far away?

>>7747241
the point is that it looks good in exhibitions and bougie homes, retard, because that's what it's made for
if you've ever been in an old money house, you'd understand, massive fucking paintings hanging at ridiculous angles so they look good from a seated position in the middle of a 50 square meter high ceiling room

>>7747251
18-19 century paintings look good from nearby as well as from far away.

>>7747258
categorically wrong for 99% of paintings, but that is besides the point, you asked why, I told you why, paintings were statistically unlikely to be at a height where you could physically come close to them, they weren't seen from point black

>>7747262
>paintings were statistically unlikely to be at a height where you could physically come close to them, they weren't seen from point black
You know the Dutch painting tradition was based on the exact opposite of what you're saying, for centuries?
Impressionism was a progressive art movement, it was the opposite of the salon, it wasnt art for very rich people with big mansions.
Most impressionism was done in small and middle format, because it was supposed to be painted on location in a short amount of time.
You have still to step awaz from small impressionism paintings.

>>7747267
In opposite to miniature academic work

>>7747267
I literally posted the salon des refuses because I knew you'd be retarded and Turner was certainly not an impressionist, so not sure what point you thought you were making

>>7747267
Who gives a shit about the Dutch lmoa

>>7747270
My point is, you can adopt any style to be seen from far away. But for impressionism its the only way it works.
I literally posted 2 miniatures, an impressionistic and an academic one. For the optical color mixing gimmick to work, you still have to step back from the impressionistic paintings.

>>7747273
There was a very big market for art in the Netherlands. The houses of the buyers were narrow, with small windows and dim nordic light. And the Dutch tradition was quite influential in its Golden Age.

>>7747280
The Dutch are shit tier artists lmao literally rendermonkeys of trad
Their garbage was so lame their most influential artist is a permabeg and the next most renowned artist's most known work was literally so filthy everyone thought it depicted a night scene until someone bothered cleaning it lel

>>7747287
Gay rage bait.

>>7747333
>shitting on the d*tch is baiting gay rage
Nice self own, fag

>>7747287

Absolute retard. Vinnie definitely wasn't more influential than Rembrandt. Ever heard of Hals or Vermeer, and many more like them?
You should brush up on your art history. Or develop not shit taste, up to you.

>>7747144
Saw her work and feel very complimented by the comparison, thanks anon. I’m also glad you like it, I’m excited to finish it as well

>>7747222
>>7747223
>>7747241
These are lovely. As a psychedelic lover these are trippy in a way I really appreciate

>>7747446
Color is one of Saville's main things, which you obviously are not doing there. But the composition, the point of view, the selection of the body type, all very Saville-like. Did you draw from a pic? And if so, can you share it?

>>7747362
>defends the dutch being called soulless rendermonkeys by bringing up vermeer
AHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAAAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAAA

>>7747473
Yea here’s the ref

>>7747362
Vermeer is peak slop

I agree on Vermeer.
Obscura tracing was ai-slop of the Renaissance.
Ethno-European art was peak.

this thread is now blessed by the scrunkloid wizard

>>7747674
>>7747688
Vermeer's drawing is shit, no doubt about that. Look at the faces he does, they're absolute shit, they're deformed monsters. Whether he traced that or not, I don't care. But what he's absolutely amazing at is colors, values, atmosphere. Are you saying he used a camera obscura for that? Honestly, it doesn't matter. Whatever he was doing was awesome, and nobody else of his time was able to do subtle colors like he did.

>>7747894
He literally just color matched via camera lucida, it's the equivalent of colorpicking a photo digitally. It's so retarded a literal permabeg can do it, watch Tim's Vermeer. This further ties in with "Vermeer's" paintings later attributed to his apprentices, he literally ran a workshop where students were cranking them out.
Basically, your taste is shit.

another day, another not painting

>>7748314
Sorry, i was visiting a museum, again. I saw this moving masterpiece of postmodernity, such composition and brushstrokes.
There was some local medieval trash art as well, but i skipped it, to have more time for the post-war period.

>>7748339
>call it amuse-ium
>it's boring
they're laughing at us

>>7749413
actually lolled

>>7747898
Tim's Vermeer is a load of horseshit, almost on par with Hockney's retarded ideas, and his end product proves it by how much it doesn't look like a Vermeer.

>>7749504
cope

Another attempt at painting. I really want to improve so I'm not confides to pencil drawings anymore

>>7750928
I was gonna say something about the ear but they did actually look weird lol

I'm a euroshit and last week I bought some Williamsburg genuine flake white from another euroshit cunt, no questions asked. I really want Rublev's lead white but they are cunts that ask for your loicense to purchase. Interested to see if this Williamsburg flake white is indeed better than holbein's silver white.

>>7751033
>Williamsburg genuine flake white
how much $$? Can you share the link? Can't seem to find it

>>7751660
I'm assuming he bought it off a private listing

>>7751660

Nice try, glowie.

>>7751678

No, regular old retailer somewhere in Western Europe.

>>7751033
>Interested to see if this Williamsburg flake white is indeed better than holbein's silver white.
You don't paint anyway, what's the matter?

>>7750928
I hope you keep painting, these look great. I’m not able to decipher the text in your images but like the style. I rarely try portrait paintings but maybe I’ll try to give it a go.
I painted this landscape last night, and a few things worked well so overall I’m fairly happy. I also stopped in time to not ruin it. Most of the perspective lines were painted with a ruler which helped a great deal. I think I need to stop using this blue since it gets overly granular and not nearly as smooth as I’d like. I need a nice and smooth cerulean blue if anyone has a recommendation.

>>7752350
If you take away even the little bit of texture there is, what do you think will remain?

>>7752350
cerulean is granulating

>>7752366
Here’s an older painting as an example. I was hoping for a warmer blue sky without the intense granulation. I prefer to mostly let the brush and paper work to create the texture using varied brushstrokes and I had hoped the sky with have better gradation like in this older one. I probably need to avoid the cerulean for this purpose, and stick to phthalo or other blues for this.

>>7752490
you can try pb15 manganese/cerulean hues, I guess

>>7752490
1 Ultramarine is very smooth
2 Artist grade brands tell you if the paint is granulating or not and how fine the pigment is grinded, check homepage.
3 If you want even smoother copic marker looking washes, use pigmented fountain pen inks.

Hmmmm today I will maybe paint

Slightly off topic, but I want to hear your opinion on this. Is it as bad as it looks? Am I missing something?

>>7752490
Indanthrone blue is a good one, smooth, strong but not so strong it's hard to used for mixes. Got it for basically the same reasons you mentioned, wanted a non-granulating blue for wash areas and I hate how pthalos just contaminate everything. I use it a lot for monochrome paintings, sometimes mixed with burnt sienna to make a payne's gray type blue. Think this painting was done with about an 4:1 mix. Really like the very controlled style of your stuff. I use gouache over watercolor when I want to do more texture but it has a very different look IMO.

>>7753202
maybe it was supposed to be displayed at a greater height, so the parts that would be further from the viewer were made bigger, then some retard put it too low, it's a common occurrence, also why michelangelo's david looks so dumb in photos from the same height

>>7753265
I thought of that, but it's not much bigger than real life, unlike big Dave who's over 3 Italians tall.
Is sculpture a trad art? I don't see it much on here.

>>7753303
sculpting is an expensive art

>>7753303
>woman
it's just bad, then

I didn't paint

>>7751033
how's that new lead white turning out? And how much $$ was it?

>>7754429
I haven't tried it yet, I only got it 2 weeks ago

>>7754454

Don't be an imposter.

It's good, it has a consistency that I personally like much better than holbein silver white. Holbein's is perfectly serviceable as a lead white but it does seem that the pigment load in the williamsburg is higher. All in all I'm chuffed about it my purchase, only downside is that it's in a jar and not a tube. I might buy some empty tubes some time and fill them with flake white but that's a pain in the ass.

>>7754458
cut your nails

>>7751840
>>7754458
Why are you so shy about how much it cost?

>>7754459

My nails are fine. I don't bite them to the quick because I'm not a savage.

>>7754463

I'm not, just forgot to answer, it was € 89 I don't mind paying for the art supplies I need and this will last me for a while.

>>7754466
>grows coke nail like a bum
>never heard of clippers
>not a savage

>>7754468

Anon, a coke nail is on the pinky...

>decide it's time to put on my big boy pants and add yellow ochre to my burnt sienna and ultramarine baby palette
>it's the most disgusting thing imaginable
I am viscerally repulsed by each stroke, it's like painting with diarrhea of an exclusively corn fed baby. It's so opaque, thick and gross looking, even dipping my brush in it is gross, it's the consistency of mud.
I hate everything about it.

>>7754474
woah, we got a coke nail expert in the thread, watch out, brian

>>7754468
jesus... worry about yourself dude. throwing a fit over nails

At some point all my paintings end up being quagmires. Usually I think the sketch is ok, then I add colour. Then im not happy with some parts or afraid to change things again and then I try to fix local mistakes. But often I know something keeps being wrong but not exactly what.
If I look at /trad/ paintings they all seem to be structured and the artist knows what to look for exactly.

Boomer painter paints his boomer muse

I'm using printer ink for my dip pen. What can I use instead of an inkwell?

>>7754454
>I haven't tried it yet, I only got it 2 weeks ago
>>7752168
>You don't paint anyway, what's the matter?
Hahaha
>>7754468
>clippers
Do americans really? Fucking disgusting, why cant you guys use scissors like normal humans? Is it some safety regulation shit? Its such a shame to live in a world dominated buy McAmerica.
>>7754476
Which brand? Ochre is quite diverse, a good Ochre has a nice consistency and is pleasant to mix with. But a lot of people think they can buy the cheapest earth from the cheapest brand. Its not worth it, just buy earth from a premium brand, its still series 1 and not very expensive.

this guy here has some really great videos, mostly about plein-air/landscape painting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWEF5oqZ45k

>>7754618
It is the cheapest artist grade brand, but I've gone through multiple top tier brands for the burnt sienna and ultramarine and found no appreciable difference, got the distinct impression I was paying 300% for the brand name.
It's watercolor, though, not oil if that makes a difference.

Are the Blick studio hardbound sketchbooks any good?

>>7754614
I used to use pill bottles and tac putty for mini painting handles. That should work and inhibit spilling.
Also detergent cups.

>>7752397
>>7752563
>>7752683
Thank you for the useful information and advice. I painted my cat and it was really enjoyable. Totally overworked and I learned a lot. Started with a gesture drawing which I almost never do and it was extremely useful to place the body and legs. I scratched the paper a great deal to add hair and whiskers after painting

>bought all those acrylic paints and palettes
>realize it generates tons of microplastics everywhere
i tried to avoid oil as much as possible because of the bad experience PTSD, but it looks like I will have to eventually crawl back to them

>>7755047
yeah, that's a bit too busy, but the thumbnail is very nice

>>7755055
Just don't eat the cadmium and vent the solvents well. You're probably getting worse shit out of your drinking water.

>>7755088
this is basically it. Oil is a beautiful medium, the feel of mixing it and applying it to a nicely prepped canvas is unbeatable. Don't let fear take that away from you.

how long until next layer when I use slow drying medium? Touch dry?

>>7755628
typically yeah, touch dry is enough.

Just finished this one.

>>7756177
And this will be the companion piece. Just started it.

Something

>>7756180
>>7756177
Spooky. First one looks like he wants to steal my skin.

>>7756194
Thanks! And it's definitely meant to seem unsettling. But the figure in the second image will be far more threatening than the first.

>>7752563
This stuff works well for me, used it in the lower half of the sky and under clouds

AMBATUBARGUE

>>7756177
kek
I remember the other ones

>>7742374 (OP)
https://youtu.be/ClNtnsOJpVI?si=fjhQWovvwq7tlWwC

>>7756807
based climate stormtroopers keeping the supply limited

>>7756807
Lool, such americaboos.

Here's my doodles for the day

Finished this one after what feels like a long time.
I've been doing a lot of ink stuff on the side though.
Have another touhou thing for a buddy coming up. I know nothing about this fandom but it's obviously popular lol

>>7754466
i got a massive haul of artist paints including a tin of williamsburg flake white like yours from a local marketplace auction last year for like 110usd. 20+ artist grade tubes hardly used.
always keep an eye on local secondary market.

>>7746017
I tried to read this some years ago but got filtered hard. Might try again soon

>>7756988
Digitized it

>>7742374 (OP)
This is a drawing I've been working on since March. These are the two most recent streams.

Hunter
https://www.youtube.com/live/vPQgMJGkUCA?si=XUTcQfIXO-xxT1KA

a garbage clown drawing session
https://www.youtube.com/live/wyakQXodTU8?si=-4MQubin0tgKNqz9

I miss Brian being the thread schizo

I'm in a wired spot. One is supposed to use emotion and life experiences to create art, but I'm in a sorry piss poor mental state that's even worse than the one I was just in.
I stopped drawing/painting months ago from depression being unemployed. I'm now in the process of starting a job that I'm going to probably hate and it's giving me all sorts of negative feelings based on who I was when I used to do it.
Now I don't want to draw or paint or even play my guitar because I don't want the way I feel right now associated with things I used to enjoy.
Is this ass backward thinking? Should I be starting drawing and painting again (I was never very good) even though I hate everything right now and have gone from mildly suicidal despair to emotionally dead loathing?
The way I figure it, either this job will work out and I'll stabilize in a couple weeks or it won't and I'll be in some new catastrophic mental state.
Is it better in these fugue episodes to just catatonically doom scroll, avoiding things I used to take pleasure in, or should I try to put it into art.
This is so shitty I don't see why I should preserve it in form, much less share it with anyone.

>>7758743
>/ic/ - Psychotherapy

>>7758743
>this unwanted blog post brought to you by 'Undiagnosed Histrionics'. For all your attention-seeking needs.

>>7758978
>>/ic/ - Psychotherapy
It's always been this way though, hasn't it? Over at the Video Course General we have the obssesive-compulsive hoarders, Furry Art General is for the schizoid personality disorders, etc etc

>>7759008
I see the mental illness part, I'm not seeing the therapy part, though

good morning

>>7752350
nice
>>7752490
nice
>>7755047
nice
>>7756242
nice

good morning tradsisters !

>>7759074
>>7759075
>>7759077
and here comes the schizophrenic who hears voices no one else hears. Hello young man, is this "God" you speak of here with us in this room? When was the last time he spoke to you?

just kidding mate, keep posting, I enjoy your work

>>7759083
looks like putin in drag

>>7759014
Unfortunately, yes. I'll just go on not doing anything. I feel better about it. I don't know why. It doesn't really make sense, but those shitty responses make me feel like I'm not missing anything. Like I'd rather be depressed than a douchebag. This is absurd as it's generalizing an activity based on up to 3 posters (could even be only one) but emotion doesn't have to make sense.

>>7759087
I'm not christian, the customer was a priest. I won't be a reddit gaytheist on people who pay. thanks!

>>7759110
you're not the brazil bro who was doing an amazing pencil drawing of some virgin mary scene, are you? Like a year ago or even longer, something commissioned by your church

>>7759092
faces are not my forté

>>7759110
no, romanian

>>7758743
Well, I can't tell you from where you stand, but I'll tell you a little tale of my life.

Some years ago I was quite active in /ic/ and /tg/, dropped out of university and took a 10 month sabbatical where I was basically studying art 10h a day on good days, 6h on bad days. It was good learning, at the time I lived with my parents and didn't have to pay the bills, but they gave me an ultimatum and I had to get my shit together. Despite becoming reasonable with art, I didn't feel like following art as a career at that point in time, because I would either be living out of commissions or working in a soulless and purely commercial industry (e.g.: games, movies, comics, design), which is arguably worse. Thankfully I didn't go for commissions, because AI absolutely killed the market.

I ended up becoming a software developer, and at the time I went for it I felt very depressed and "longing" for those good moments I spent grinding the fundies, but I then met a nice lady, we married, had children, and now I'm (trying) coming back to arts from a better mental and financial standpoint. Sure, I have way less time nowadays due to full-time employment, family, household chores, so on, but I also don't have the pressure of trying to make a break with art, I take it at my own pace, with plenty of resources, and no depression to speak of. Now that I don't have to worry about catering to the industry or the niche I get commissions from, I can focus on works that I really care about, and with more depth that I could ever achieve with the tight deadlines I'd have if I was doing it commercially. This is way more fulfilling.

The moral of this anecdote is the whole life and lemons thing. It's not the end if you take a long sabbatical from art, you already stopped months ago; the matter as I see it is to find a source of purpose, one that in the future will pay dividends and lead you to a position where you won't have to worry about the meta stuff currently holding you back.

>>7742916
are you the atelierfag that loves to draw himmler?

>>7759524
Sounds like you're in a good place and going to a better one, happy for you. There's this youtuber artist getting some traction, Chelsea Lang, and she says the same: don't make art your main financial support. Get a job that pays the bills and then do art on the side, free from all pressures. If your career starts go take off, you can always quit your job.

>>7759639
Don't know her, but that sounds about right.

Honestly, back in the day I dreamt of going to Watt's atelier, but living in a third-world country I couldn't find an alternative or even conceive affording going there to study. With the way things are currently developing, in a couple of months I'll be in arms reach of one of those world-class ateliers in Europe through my day-job career, and even able to afford it for night classes.

Going to these ateliers to kick-start your art career is only really viable if daddy has deep pockets, and even then the people that leave those places pursuing a career often feel lacking. Not technically lacking, but in personal depth. One thing I came to realize taking a sabbatical from art is that in the West there's a divide, where one side is purely expression without technique (fine arts), and the other is purely technique without expression (art industry), and that both bubbles hardly ever communicate. I see a lot of eastern-european artists that manage to make really meaningful art with really solid technique, and several of them have a cultural depth that most Americans can't even fathom. Watt's is an amazing place to learn technique as I see it, but the basic education of Americans, which is most of their students, staunches the viability of meaningful works. Being parted from arts gave me the opportunity to see this from a distance, which I believe was ultimately benefic.

Idk, food for thought.

>>7759623
I don't have an atelier but I do love drawing him. If you know any other artists that commonly draw him you'll have to let me know.

>>7759665
>I see a lot of eastern-european artists
please share some. I agree with your take on the divide between fine arts and what you call art industry (atelier world, I'd say), and I'm desperately looking for people who can bridge that gap

>>7759639
>free from all pressures
Yeah man, like best art is when no pressure and shit. Visit a modern museum to see what art such laissiez fair mindset leads to.
>eastern-european
>cultural depth
What do you even mean? Russia, Poland?
The soviet school striped the old masters tradition from colonial influence to be able to produce social realism. In the post soviet era social realism was ditched and replaced with a toned down version of American postmodernism. So basically McAmerican """culture""" with a better technique. I cant even tell, whats better (American postmodernism is better).

>>7759897
I'm not OP, but I'll take this bait.

There's a distinction to be made on what is this source of pressure, and I think Maslow's pyramid of needs is a good illustration of that. When you're putting art as your source of food and shelter, you'll be willing to stoop very low to be able to survive (I know plenty of third-world artists making their living out of deranged porn commissions). Now, if your physiological needs are fulfilled, your safety is in check, your sense of purpose and belonging is healthy, and your esteem is maintained, all you have left is the struggle for self actualization, which is arguably what produced the best art historically speaking, such as historical paintings (e.g. Jan Matejko), mythological, religious, literary interpretations, philosophical, etc. It's not a pressure to survive, but a desire to reach higher. Even the financial model of art has changed, and that severely impacts how art is made and what artists have to worry about. Mecenate and patronage are no longer practiced as it was back then, as there is no nobility in most countries to care about high culture production, to want to sponsor promising talent so to one up their peers. In liberal democracies this system mostly vanished since the State cares about an agenda. I'm being reductive, but even if petty it bore fruit.

As for social realism, I do agree that soviets took academic illustrative realism and "socialized" the thematics while keeping the techniques, but to say that former soviet countries devolved into american post modernism is to ignore the changes in the academic painting scenario of the region, but more specifically Russia. Their academies of fine arts steered more towards the atelier movement, ARC, and illustrative realism than towards post modernism after the soviet union, which isn't the case for art departments of common universities. It's as if Caltech opened a fine arts department and people thought the next Alma-Tadema would come out of there.

>>7760034
Discomfort , at least the kind that benefits art, only comes from familiarity. Steep yourself in habits and nostalgia, care less about social ladders. Getting married can make you happy, change your mindset, but break routine. Art suffers. Loving a woman you meet randomly, breaks routine. Traveling, drinking excessively, mingling with strangers and other people, all of this is too chaotic for art production. Alone in a room, sleep alone, study, contemplate, remember, feel cold, even feel warm, if people provide for you, your parents, your state, your job


Here’s the thing, art is about today. And if you want to see change in the world enough to make artwork from it, how can you visibly notice change without the boredom and repetition of habits and routine? If you go to get the same sandwich every day you will see the world changing, however slow that is. Going place to place and never repeating yourself in your routine is a death of creativity. You’ll observe nothing, you’ll think the world is faster and slower than it is and bemoan silly things like money and politics and other people, without ever noticing the place you would go for sandwiches was torn down three years ago , such cases as that, or someone you’d known old had passed away, these are your job to notice as an artist. It is a solitary life but you can see shifts others cannot, or would never care to. Art is about observing

>>7760102
>paints anime girls

>>7760421

That is fantastic anon. Watercolours?

>>7760102
Mate, that's an awful strawman argument.

Living selflessly for others, be it your family, community or the people tangible to you, is one of the greatest sources of fulfilment and purpose one can get, anything else is selfish by definition. When you strawman a "fulfilling" life to be chaotic, vicarious, and unruled, you're likely projecting some bad experiences you had or witnessed. You talk about traveling and meeting people in a bad light, but this is what gives you enough personal depth to break with this kind of hysterical purview.

As for art being about today, I couldn't agree more. You, however, assume that a fulfilling life is not dictated by routine and rules, if that was the case no one would be able to plan ahead and define goals in their lives. I do agree that boredom and contemplation are key to insight, but I can't say I agree that self-isolation and self-inflicted suffering is the best way there.

I also think that when you say "death of creativity" you actually mean inspiration. Creativity is an intrinsic characteristics of those who materialize ideas, whereas inspiration is derived from our daily experiences and insights. Anything can be a source of inspiration and a subject to study, just look around.

Lastly, attachment to worldly things such as money and politics is on the person. Honestly, I do feel that artists more than normal people tend to have unhealthy attachments to these things, just go on Twitter and check out the political opinions of world renowned illustrators and concept artists, or even fine artists. See how much they talk about themselves, how much they talk about sex, their complaints about money, how AI is bad because it's taking away jobs, so on. Artists have a tendency to be self-centered vicarious pricks, I don't think that's a novelty tho.

>>7760436
>fantastic
What about it is fantastic? 75% of it is digital noise.

>>7760436
>>7760463
I don't even like it, but it's mars black and green umber, it's not digitally edited, it's granulation

>>7760473
>it's not digitally edited
What camera have you used to make the photo?

>>7760484
my ipad, same as every other pic I post here, you can see the apple filename

random old pics I don't think I've posted

this one was fucking around with random colors
all of these were taken on the same camera, different paper, the skull is rough baohong, not sure about the others

>>7760492
>my ipad
The phone takes several photos with different exposures with a tiny photo matrix, then compose several shots to one and then it puts a lot of denoise and filters on top. When done in low light conditions like in your case, the photo is full of digital artifacts, like in your case.
So this
>it's not digitally edited, it's granulation
is clearly a lie.

>>7760525
the photo was taken in front of a north facing window at noon with the overhead light on
post your photography or never reply to me again

>>7760531
>post your photography or never reply to me again
I normally don't comply with black mail, but of course i cant risk loosing such an important conversation partner like you.

>>7760547
Oh, I see, you're jelly

>>7760549
Such a consumer thing to say.

>>7760525
>>7760531
>low light conditions
Are you gonna apologize for sperging out and being wrong?

>>7760555
It's okay, I forgive you, we've all been there
try some granulating paint on rough paper, it's nice

>>7760556
As i sad, the photo sensor on your overpriced slop-machine is tiny, a cheap led lamp is not enough. Plus you wasted a lot of the already tiny sensor to photograph the wall instead of the picture.
>>7760557
>try some granulating paint on rough paper, it's nice
Its nice indeed.
You whats nice as well, being able to preserve the textures on your photo. Like i did here >IMG_0267.jpg
But to do so, you have to get rid of your overpriced surveillance device and to learn the basics of photography. Even a cheap15 yo pre-in-camera-processing digital camera would do better.
American consumer culture is poison for your brain. Consume the slop, dont think to hard about it, defense your tech overlords online against free thinker. (i am the free thinker you are arguing against, in this scenario, btw)

>>7760566
Nigga, I'm not him, you're blatantly wrong and coping now. Are you the postmodernist gypsy? Babe honest.

>>7760566
Not that anon you're talking to, but could you point out the digital artifacts you mean? As a painter who is trying to learn about photography, I'd love to learn about this. I know what digital artifacts are, I'm just having a hard time seeing them in that pic. Thanks!

>>7760566
lol

>>7760555

He's not wrong.

God this thread sucks ass. So many posts that are overly antagonistic. Take a chill pill, fags. Or drink your turpentine.

>>7760568
>you're blatantly wrong
Im speaking hard facts.
Smartphone algorithm + cheap led light + tiny photo sensor + fish eye lens produces grotesk digital slop. And is not suet to photograph trad art.
>postmodernist gypsy
Im not a postmodernist. I am not the people depicted on my painitngs. I think i have to reject this cognomen.

>>7760582
Nigga, you can clearly see the frontal direct natural light and blue shadow from the sky, why are you like this?

>>7760575
It looks sharp and soft at the same time.
The sensor is small and and noisy, it naturally produces soft and grainy picture. To fight it, they heavily process the photo. Sharpener, ai upscale, denoise all the modern cancer.

One of those photos has a lot of digital noise, the other one a lot less.

>>7760592
But you need a monitor thats showing the picture unprocessed. If you are looking at it through your phone screen, it will not work. Smartphones process the output signal as well.
>>7760585
>you can clearly see the frontal direct natural light and blue shadow from the sky, why are you like this?
Yes, but what is your point?
His photos contents so much digital noise, you get only a little glimpse of what it looks like irl.
Whats the pint to post something like this in a trad thread?
The main point of his art is texture, he is not conserned with anatomy, form abything anything else but mood and texture. He is saying himself, how great granulating paint and rought paper are.
But all i can see is digital denoiser and digital grain. Isnt it ironic?

>>7760602
Take a walk, anon, you're seething for no reason.

>>7760603
If you read the conversation from the beginning, i wasn't even commenting the picture itself. But the "fantastic" comment. Maybe the painting is phantastic, but how would he know, considering the very low quality of the photo.
But maybe it was just an American thing to speak in superlatives without really meaning it.

>>7760610
>kneejerk seething at Americans out of nowhere directed at a post posted at 1pm CET

>>7760610

What, you salty no one calls your stuff fantastic?

>>7757548
I like it.

haha I wonder what kind of art I will find toda-

>>7760610

You are really fucking annoying and have dogsbit opinions. Next to Brian you're the worst regular in this thread, just so you know.

>>7760610

You are really fucking annoying and have dogshit opinions. Next to Brian you're the worst regular in this thread, just so you know.

>>7746218
I wish you many moneys so you get a decent tablet

Did a quick oil sketch in an hour and a half on a panel. Referencing a pencil sketch I did at a figure drawing place and trying to apply my mind's eye to fill it in with colour.
It's challenging to work like this but also fun as I cannot directly compare the painting to anything and have to judge appeal completely by my own taste.
Will probably wait a little and go over this again once it's dry to refine some shapes.

>>7756180
And I think I'm calling this one done.

>>7760830
To add. for some reason the ceiling looks way brighter in the photo. It's actually much grayer. I'll have to try taking another pic at some point.

>>7760844
I find that I can get the best foto's if I put my painting on the floor upstairs next to a north facing window (on the northern hemisphere) with natural light coming in.
It's always a challenge to get a proper picture of your paintings but for me this works the best.

>>7760859
Indirect sunlight and sharp glass works best.

cow

and horse :D

>>7760830
I really like it overall, the only thing that upsets me is that your perspective is fucked in some glaring and actually easy to fix ways. Mostly the top of the door frames, specially the closest one on the left. But again, good job overall. The floor is great, and it's got light, shadows, lots of reflections. Good job there

>>7760988
Yeah I got lazy about the perspective for the doors. But thank you, I fixed it.

There we go. That's a bit better.

>>7761116
cool

>>7761116
Really nice.
The only thing Id change myself is the lamp on the ceiling.

>>7761116
I guess first door on the left is still a bit weird but actually I dont care

>>7759058
Thanks! Here’s another I just finished. I think I’m obsessed with these things and need to paint a few more. Perspective was done with a taped down string and the paper about 2 feet away and then once taut I made marks with small ruler. I think next time I’d just mark out regular guidelines

>>7761601
I love these structures, there's something about them that's so aesthetic

I just started doing trad, I was wondering what are good tools to get? Not that interested in coloring yet, mostly looking for how to ink stuff, big black areas etc.
Should I get what mangakas use or is there a cheaper option?

>>7761693
I’d use whatever you have on hand. I made this with a G2 pen and sharpie and they work well together for cheap black and white.

>>7761693
Brush and ink is very simple way of blocking in big shapes. Maybe add some fineliners for detail work.
Also can recommend always bringing a small sketchbook and a tombow dual tipped pen, it has a felt brush and a small felt tip, I used it a lot for sketching outdoors and on the go. It's a good practice tool.

>>7761729
i think i got some alcohol markers but when i used them in the past they always ruined my lines
your drawing looks great, especially love the tree trunks
>>7761743
yeah i need some more fineliners. any recommended brands?
dual tip seems interesting, gonna check if they sell those at the art shop later

>>7761783
I don't have much to recommend for fineliners, I've used almost all brands but never found one I truly like and recently had more fun just using a small brush, india ink and water. Used just that many times in figure drawing places that do short poses, a bit challenging at first but a lot of fun.
And the tombow is more of a marker that I use outside just because it's so convenient and versatile.

Going to focus on perspective rather than other elements, I think perspective and form are bigger strengths than my other foundational stuff

>>7761952
What is roughly the size of this painting?
It looks kinda neat, I have not had much luck selling nude figures, just a small one to a fellow painter. For me it's mostly landscapes and studies of birds that people appear most interested in.

>>7760639
Thanks bud

>>7761966
Do you paint anime only in oil?

>>7761952
Where perspective?

>>7757548
its pretty good, but i feel like anime is a lot more suited for mediums like watercolour and gouache, have consider using those?i feel the paintings would come out better

>>7761961
16”x20”, as is this one

>>7762049
brian, it looks like she's taking a shit

>>7762240
Everybody poops lil nigga

>>7746218
Another one
Came back from the exams and whipped it up

>>7761988
Yeah, I tried acrylic and it was a genuinely miserable experience

>>7762039
I like oil, it's very relaxing and forgiving. Watercolor feels like a completely different style and not sure that's what I want. Gouache is probably good but I've heard painting over mistakes is hard because it reactivates (and honestly I'm not in a hurry to re buy all my paint).
I'm down to try new stuff obviously but right now feels like I should just learn oil better and how to adapt my work to it more.

>>7763297
>I tried acrylic and it was a genuinely miserable experience
Thats true.
Dont you paint in photoshop?

Visited a local museum last week. Not a single artist name that i knew, a very ugly modern building it was located in. And a quarter of the exhibition was contemporary.
So my expectations were quite low, but boy o boy was it nice. There was so much old Christian art, local artists, local landscapes and so on. Some Dutch, no Italians a lot less realistic even the 16 and 17 century stuff. I couldnt really see the camera obscura artefacts, that are clearly visible in Italian art of the late Renaissance.
Very, very nice Gothic and Renaissance painted wooden sculptures.
There was no Rubens or Van Gogh like in Cologne but i think i liked this museum even more.

>>7763299
No, I do some lineart stuff in CSP but kind of rarely these days. Mostly the oil painting or ink sketches like picrel

>>7763307
>>7763307
>I couldnt really see the camera obscura artefacts, that are clearly visible in Italian art of the late Renaissance
In which paintings? Post some, I heard Vincent Desderio say that Vermeer had some too but I've never seen them.

>>7763370
When looking at Italian masters, somewhere around 1430 to 1500 the realism exploded. If you compare it to older Christian art the difference is huge.
But here, in this museum the steps to more realism are much slower, even art younger than 1550 looks "handmade"

I dont know maybe they used camera obscuras, or maybe the cameras they used were lower quality. But the painting looked raw and somewhat crude, compared to Italian and Dutch masters. And that was exactly what i liked about it, it seamed more honest.
P.S. photos are low quality sry.

This one is so detailed irl, crazy. I really dont know, what kind of brushes they used for such fine but sharp lines.

>>7763421
Detailshot

A clock painting, such a whimsical thing to do, imagine postmodernists would call it kitsch.

You dont have to paint like Raphael, to hand in a museum, we all are gona make it, anons.

>>7763416
>I dont know maybe they used camera obscuras, or maybe the cameras they used were lower quality.
bro people need to stop this cope, these people spent 8 years from childhood working under masters, they knew how to draw without camera obscura

>>7763441
Yeah, no. In Cologne i saw some Italians and it was crazy. The highlight were so confident. Like the whole painting was compressed in it values and then the painter placed some very bright spots, most of the time tiny dots, to show the highlights, and it was very realistic. And couldnt comprehend how something like this would be possible by eye.

Landscape paintings looks so boring on photos, buy they are much more interesting irl, no idea why it is.

Some gore, painted very, very transparent.

Wooden statues

The museum is one large floor, you start with the middle ages and at the end there is the post war section that leads back to medieval art.
Postmodernism is just so boring. Its so stupid and dull, just a waste of wall.

>>7763439
Honestly I really like this, it's a very charming painting and still better than anything I could do.

>>7763449
>>7763416
I'm not the other guy but if you can't show camera obscura artifacts and distortions you shouldn't go around claiming they used it based on "It looks too good to not use it." I can't say the same to Vincent Desiderio but you at least I can.

>>7763489
Its not bad, just a little bit naive.
>>7763497
>if you can't show camera obscura artifacts and distortions
What do you mean?

>>7763449
I cannot imagine how that would work practically, you still have to see the projection with your eye, in the end I believe a camera obscura proves most useful in the drawing stage, proportions and perspective, but not so much the painting stage where you go into values and colour.
Besides there are many things an artist can choose to do to make a painting look more real, without needing to see exactly the scene in front of him. Softening and sharpening edges to move focus and create depth can be entirely composition driven, just like colour and the application of atmospheric perspective can be slightly overdone to suggest something that reads better than what the artist may see in front of him.

>>7763504
>What do you mean?
I asked you to post photos of such examples, details of paintings, from the internet if you can recall any. You didn't post any, you said you weren't even totally sure, you just assumed as much. Your claims are that the paintings are detailed but detail doesn't mean use of a camera.

>>7763506
I mean camera obsuras existed, thats a fact, do you really think nobody used it?

It looked too good to be true, it looked uncanny, really.
I think it looks more uncanny when you look at it irl, becouse if you look at it on photo, your brain is used to see photo distortions. I think your brain interprets some of the distortions that are in the painting as distortions from the photo of the painting. But irl its even stroneg.
I dont know, a lot of people cant belive the pyramids are made by humans, when they visit Agypt and stand in front of them. Maybe its the same here for me.
But i can belive that they did it buy hand and eye.

>>7763531
I really wish I could see some examples of this.

>>7763526
>I asked you to post photos of such examples, details of paintings, from the internet if you can recall any
Vermeer is by far the most obvious.
I mean who paints like this?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/Johannes_Vermeer_-_Het_melkmeisje_-_Google_Art_Project.png

>>7763534
You mean in real life?
Yeah i would like to see what a Jan Van Eyck or Vermeer looks like, when standing in front of it.
Maybe i will be able to visit Amsterdam this year, not sure though.

>>7763537
You're right no one can paint like Vermeer even when using the camera obscura because they lack the techniques required to paint on top of that.
My point is where are the details? Desiderio mentions that there was distortion that was shown and used in the paintings of Vermeer more than anywhere else from the camera obscura that even other painters who used it at the same time did not include and that it must have some artistic reasoning, but where are they?
Can you point them out?
We have this argument every /trad/ thread and I was hoping someone would come with the proofs for either side but no one has yet. Can't you find me them in other paintings too?

>>7763572
For starters, he was always painting the same corner of his room, why?
Here is an article about optical artifacts in his paintings.
https://www.essentialvermeer.com/camera_obscura/co_two.html

>>7763572
>We have this argument every /trad/ thread
I will include a link to this article with proofs for tracing in the next thread. It is really a regular asked question, i think it makes sense.

Bros where is his camera obscura???Is Sweerts pranking us???

>>7763589
Thanks for the article.
It does include a few mentions of why it would be a camera obscura being used but it's still far harder to find other paintings that make use of it. Even among Vermeers contemporaries.
>>7763612
They have trained him incorrectly on purpose, as a joke.

>>7763626
youtube.com/watch?v=GFfmc4e7KgM
to me the evidence at the end is pretty conclusive

>>7763655
In other examples outside of Vermeer whom makes it the most clear out of other artists.

>>7763626
>but it's still far harder to find other paintings that make use of it
Now your moving the goal posts.
>>7763659
>outside of Vermeer whom makes it the most clear out of other artists
Jan van Eyck, Rembrandt

>>7763664
>Now you're moving the goal post
No, no I'm not, I always said Vermeer used it, I said it was hard to find direct examples especially outside of Vermeer.
>Jan van Eyck
Where?
If Van Eyck used the camera obscura why did he not get perspective correct?
Why did only he use it while other painters didn't use it either and had similar perspective problems?
How do you account for the differences in Van Eyck and Vermeer?

>>7763655
I dont get his gradation of value argument. Of course you dont realize how dark the wall actually is on the right because theres no harsh transition. But if you know how the light on the left part is and mix a valuerange on your palette that gradually becomes darker then you can easily make it. And if you know even a little bit about how light works you will know the right part of the wall is quite dark, and darker than it seems at first glance.

>>7763687
>you can easily make it
uh huh
your work wouldn't happen to be itt, would it?

>>7763675
>I always said Vermeer used it
Honey, pls.
>>7763675
>why did he not get perspective correct?
The overall perspective can be wrong, cos you have to move the camera, but the packages of perspective done from one position are unhumanly perfect.
>Why did only he use it while other painters didn't
It was hight tech back in the days, a pesant could not sell some bread and by a CO, obviously. Dont play dumb.
>How do you account for the differences in Van Eyck and Vermeer?
Vermeer went full retard.

Normaly the opticals were used for faces, architecrure and so on. Its like a collage. Parts were drawn by hand, parts were traced, for other parts only the outlines were traced.
But Vermeer was a hack, he just traced one single image of what was in front of him.
There wasn really a lot of people who was interested in photoreal tracing of the same corner of a house.
I mean you are right, Vermeer was special. He went full retard on tracing before anyone else did.

>>7763687
>I dont get his gradation of value argument.
Human vision and and a camera work diferent. Camera is objective, it captures the true value of things. An eye cant do it, the longer you look into a shadow the brighter it gets.
You cant lock the exposure in your eyes. You cant "take a picture" with your mind. You are seeing a "live streem" of the object. And while youre sitting there, the exposure in your eye (brain actually) changes all the time.

>>7763701
I can willingly believe limited use of camera obscura in oil painting compared to full use of Vermeer if that's your specific theory.
I have, one last question though, how do you account for enlarged murals including frescoes on wall or ceiling where neither use of models or direct image projection could have been used? That's kind of a huge point not just regarding camera obscura but how many old masters in Italy in specific would have painting from life.

>>7763691
You can shit on me but I still dont see why he or any painter with proper training wouldnt have been able to create or understand this value transition without a device. He knows the light from the window doesnt extend all the way to the right so why the fuck wouldnt he be able to see or know it.

>>7763726
>how do you account for enlarged murals including frescoes on wall or ceiling
Examples.

>>7763726
nigga, we know michelangelo traced a shadow of a horse figurine because the curved surface was annoying

>>7763728
How would you feel if you had no breakfast this morning?
How would you see things, when all your life you've only seen a live stream and never a still image?

>>7763728
there's a difference between following a general concept and complete accuracy to reality when your senses are literally incapable of perceiving it, retard
our inability to correlate the shadow to the light is a common principle in painting, have you read even one book on light?

>>7763733
That's not what I'm asking.
>>7763730
All of them?
All of the ones in the Sistine Chapel?
All of the ones in St Peters?
For specifics I guess just ones by Giulio Quaglio and Andrea Pozzo?

>>7763758
>models couldn't be used
>d-doesn't count!

>>7763758
Show me one that's is as photoreal as Vermeer on van Eyck. Everything else makes no sense in the context of our discussion right?

>>7763769
Okay thanks for the clarification I'm glad we could make clear what kind of art we're talking about. If the obscura was used it's very limited to smaller sized oil paintings which were perfect for Vermeer.
>>7763765
Unlike you.
Models as in live models and drawing or painting from life which would have been impossible especially on ceilings unless you believe they were turning heads to every model every 10 seconds.

Holy shit what a retard.

>>7763793
Reply to who you're talking to directly you asshurt little nigger.

Oh, somebody's feeling called out. Curious.

>>7763800
>Let me do the online equivalent of talking behind peoples backs like a woman
>Get called out on being a faggot
>DURR CALLED OUT HUH?
Go get your asshole blown out nigger faggot.

>>7763788
>If the obscura was used it's very limited to smaller sized oil paintings
No, thats worng, optical helpers were used for a lot of things. Camera obscura is what Vermeer used, but there were other devices as well, little mobile mirrors for drawing, devices for self portraits, like what Rembrandt used. Later on even photography.

Oh wow, I don't know who this guy is, but he's really mad for some reason. Guess he read something that hit a bit close for comfort, huh?

true, true
he really is a retard and mad
must be the fumes

>>7763805
>optical helpers were used for a lot of things
That's true if you include things like plumb lines in your definition, that much we can agree on but not all painters used them in all cases.

>>7763812
nobody claimed "all painters used them in all cases", you goalpost moving retard
he outright said they were used on parts of paintings and Vermeer is notable for just using it for everything
what are you even arguing at this point

>>7763805
>devices for self portraits
What are those?

>>7763815
It was used less in Southern Europe than he let on.
I wasn't the only person who was discussing this with him in the thread.

>>7763812
>not all painters used them in all cases
Now, youre moving the goal posts even further.
Yes, not every single painter in existence, used optics on every single art piece ever created.

But, a lot of Italians and Dutch hanging in museus did.

>>7763818
>What are those?
I dont know the name of the device, if you google it, you will find it. A read an article, that showed specific angles and distortions in many of his self-portraits.
When i remember correctly, it was mostly used for the drawing, proportions and so on. I think the picture this device produced wasn as clear and sharp as CO.
>>7763826
>It was used less in Southern Europe than he let on.
It was used less in Germany. That's what i was talking about.

>>7763828
Alright, I don't think I moved the goal post, I just went in without a clear claim in response to that statement to see what he meant, must have been the language barrier.
>>7763835
Ok thanks for the clarification.

youtube.com/watch?v=DQwYj_9YBI8
skip to 46 minutes
example of a camera obscura recreated that was in common use at the time
however this is likely not what vermeer was using, but shows how artists have used optical tools that are now very uncommon

there are some artists making still lifes (my area of expertise) who i strongly suspect are using some kind of optical device.

I looked up the article about Rembrands self-portraits. Im not convinced at all, the evidance base is very thin on this one. I take the claim back.

>>7763870
>there are some artists making still lifes (my area of expertise) who i strongly suspect are using some kind of optical device
Now?

>>7763874
yes, but i don’t want to make pretty much baseless accusations. just something about the way they paint gradations specifically on flat surfaces like walls and table surfaces etc.

>>7763892
also the ones i suspect have never posted any kind of progress video or timelapse despite being working artists for decade or more.
again, its just a suspicion.

>>7763892
Show me, i can look for myself.
I think with direct projections, one could have better colors compared to photography.
But its hard to imagine that someone would actually do it.
Photos are cheap and fast, nature gives you most fun and best results. But using a Camera Obsucura now would be quite a statement.
I would even say, it would make no sense to hide, but the opposite. Using old masters devices could be a unique selling point.

Man, I am not sure what the purpose of this discussion is anymore.
Use tools if you want, or don't, many painters were perfectly capable without any devices like camera obscura.
If you can produce something amazing by tracing a photo, by all means do it.

>>7763908
>I think with direct projections, one could have better colors
How would that work in practice? You project light on the canvas and then fill it in with the colour you see? How would you know it's the same if the projection is taken off? How would it be any more accurate than using your eye and look at the scene directly?
There's no way mixing colours with a projected light is going to make sense.

>>7763922
have you watched tim’s vermeer? nta but you can see the kind of device that is under scrutiny as a possible tool that was used by vermeer.
it’s also an interesting documentary even though it is associated with the insufferably leftist penn and teller

>>7763922
>How would it be any more accurate than using your eye and look at the scene directly?
>>7763908
>compared to photography.

You see the real light and not a photo.
Photos seam to be quite naturalistic, but then you paint from life for several hours, you look at the subject for an extended amount of time and if you try to photograph the scene with a camera, you realize how worse the picture looks compared to reality. How much of this difference you are able to translate to canvas is a different story, though.
>>7763915
>If you can produce something amazing by tracing a photo
If it's traced it can't be amazing.

>>7763938
But I still don't understand how projected light is going to be useful in the context of colour. The light is going to appear different if the canvas is white, it's going to appear different again if you have an imprimatura, and different again if you actually put down colour in place of the projection. You are constantly chasing something when it's by all means easier to just look and try to understand what you are actually seeing.

>>7763954
Vermeer had good colors in his paintings.

>>7763954
How about you watch and read the things linked in the thread before asking dumb questions?

>>7763954
that's literally explained like 10 minutes into tim's vermeer

>>7763971
>>7763979
>>7763994
I'm just trying to understand this statement
>I think with direct projections, one could have better colors compared to photography.
As I don't see how you can get your colors close at all with a direct projection. What link in the thread do I need to visit?

>>7764005
are you fucking retarded

did this today. Honestly hate it, but gotta keep at it. Tried pencils on bristol paper and its just not it. Too flat, doesnt absorb the pigments, no texture, no contrast etc. By the time I was rendering the stones in the foreground I gave up. I guess ots good for graphite tho

>>7764483
Also tried using marker for contrast at the end but it ended up looking like a comic book with the dots. Fuck this paper honestly

>>7764005
if you are directly projecting the actual reflected light of the object as part of a camera obacura or other optical device (again, it is demonstrated at length in tim’s vermeer) you are naturally going to get more accurate colors and depth (esp in shadow areas) than you ever could replicate in a photograph

>>7764483
I like it

>>7764568
Is the documentary on YouTube maybe, I couldn't find anything but short bits of it.

>>7764576
It's alright but don't try to outline all the features, like the nose and especially the lips. Try to see how these features create shadows and mark it down, see how edges are sharp and soft and draw your lines sharp and soft accordingly.

>>7763687
Ignore the retards, you're on the right track.

>>7763716
You've never taken a painting class, have you? Everything you talk about is what we spend years trying to learn in ateliers. We are all told from day one that our eye's exposure changes constantly, that why we are taught to squint, to not look directly at details, to look at our painting as a whole, to paint our shadows while looking at the light.

It's so obvious that the people making these arguments are not artists, or hack artists like Hockney. Of course the untrained eye is terrible at seeing the light gradation on a wall, that's why we study. That's why we know the theory of the fall of light, that's why we study the form on casts, that's why we study Lambert's law.

The core of the argument is "I'm a dumb retard with no training at all and I can't paint like Vermeer. Therefore, Vermeer MUST have used some tricks to paint the way he did". Ridiculous

Pic related is from Stephen Bauman, the hackiest of hacks, and even he knows about value relativity and to watch out for it.

>>7764677
This is a random student at Barcelona Academy of Art, a mid-tier institution. This was painted from a live model, in about a month I would guess. Notice how the light falls off, from the chest down to the leg and to the foot. But according to that professor, the human eye is incapable of seeing this. Fuck off back to your stupid books, you dumbass, and leave the painting to the painters.

>>7764483
I think you should be able to knock down the black marker with a colored pencil.

>>7764677
You can paint very, realistically from life.
I would like to see a modern academic painting hanging side by side to a Rubens.
>>7764682
>random student
You would call those values precise? Face, i would say, is quite precise, as much as i can judge from the photo.
The body, especially the lower parts lacks form and precision in values.
Forget the painting. Why is he even painting? His drawing skill are quite poor, honestly, the anatomy is all wonky. In a good post-sovjet art school, he would draw anatomy for 1-2 more years, before wasting a month of his time on a painting thats way over his head.
>we
Pyw btw.

>>7764677
>The core of the argument is "I'm a dumb retard with no training at all and I can't paint like Vermeer. Therefore, Vermeer MUST have used some tricks to paint the way he did"
No, thats a straw man.
Its the motivation behind Hockneys agenda, for sure. Thats not a secret. Postmodern faggots hate academic art and they will do anything, to tear it down in any way possible.
But its not the argument.
The argument is, that it has too many "optical" artifacts to assume he haven't used an optical device to paint it.
I know you adhd zoomis have problems to read a longer text, ask chat gpt to summarize it for you, maybe.
https://www.essentialvermeer.com/camera_obscura/co_two.html

Look at me. You can state the obvous: Vermeer used CO; as well as: modern art is shit, we should relearn the techniques of Academic art and bring realism even further, from where the guys left it 100 years ago.

>>7764677
Very low IQ

I put acrylic over oil like a dumbass because I didn't watch which tube I grabbed, I wiped it off instantly after emptying the acrylic tube onto the floor in rage and throwing it away but the layer I put in that area there after keeps coming off and refusing to dry.
Do I just abandon the canvas completely or what.

>>7764682
I don't know if you're disingenuous or legitimately don't understand the point, there being a "light falloff" as a concept is immaterial, the gradation of the light falloff being 1:1 to reality is the issue.
Your example has a completely artificial interpretation of light, it makes zero sense you'd post that.

>>7764806
If its soft, scrub as much as you can with a blade. Then wipe it up with a solvent.
Go from weak solvent too aggressive one. Im not an expert, i would suggest using turpentine or white spirit first, if its not enought then ethanol, or spirit or whatever you will call it.
If its still not enough, you can use ammonia to remove the entire color layer.
But i guess turpentine and knife should do the job.

>>7764826
I rubbed in spirit the moment it happened and rubbed and wiped as much as I could off.
I'm not sure how it still affected things if it isn't letting it dry properly. A day after I tried doing a new layer but it just refused to work.

>>7764834
Post a photo, im not sure whats going on with your painting. A lot of chemicals are involved, who knows how they react with each other.
How many layers of oul do you have. Whats primer did you used?
If you remove the entire oil paint layer at this spot, you should be fine.

>>7764834
>>7764806
honestly, is what you've done so good this is an issue? just dump it and start over

>>7764736
>In a good post-sovjet art school, he would draw anatomy for 1-2 more years, before wasting a month of his time on a painting thats way over his head.
That feel when living in gay western yurop and received 0 anatomy classes at artacademy

>>7764865
Barcelona Academy of Arts has it, just like the Florence Academy in Florence and even their department in Sweden.

>>7764865
What fucking school did you go to that didn't at least have basic anatomy.

>>7764874
>Barcelona Academy of Arts has it
Boy are you going to be shocked to see where that painting comes from.

might be a hot take, but I genuinely don't see why anatomy should be a class at all
the amount of anatomy a typical fine artist needs is nominal at best and if someone does need it due to subject matter or personal interest, there are so many fantastic anatomy books that having a class dedicated to it just seems like a waste of time and basically welfare for a professor
hell, the average fine representational artist barely even draws figures in the first place

>>7764925
Yeah, thats the problem with theory. I make sense until you try to translate it to reality.
And if you compare art of people who did study anatomy and who did not, the conclusion is obvious.

>>7764962
how is the landscape of an artist who studied anatomy different from one who didn't?

>>7764663
Interesting thanks

>>7764902
I don't see how that is relevant, just pointing out there are art academies in Europe that focus on anatomy.

>>7764986
Were obviously talking about depicting humans here. Otherwise you might as well wonder how anatomy classes are going to affect videoart.

>>7764901
ehm just an average one in my cuntry

>>7765063
we're obviously not, read the post before replying to me

>>7764986
Academic style is about painting full scenes, with people, animals, objects placed in a landscape or architecture.
Thats the golden standard.
Most great landscape artists learned to paint people and were able to do it on a high level.
Should you specialize your art training this narrow this early? I would say no.
>how is the landscape of an artist who studied anatomy different from one who didn't?
Theoretically there shouldn't be a difference, practically the guy with a full classic education will be better.

>>7765139
>the academic style
nobody's talking about the academic style
>golden standard
according to whom? neither the critics nor collectors consider it such, and considering the number of artists pursuing it, neither do artists
>full scenes, with people, animals, objects placed in a landscape or architecture
relatively small, costumed figures in a scene, not nudes taking up 80% of the canvas
head, neck, hands are the only critical anatomy, everything else is situational
>practically the guy with a full classic education will be better
>t. doesn't know jack shit about landscape painters

How’s this?

>>7764682
notice how this lighting isnt naturalistic at all and the lighting in the vermeer is perfectly naturalistic and virtually photographic. your cope is that vermeer “just so happened” to exactly reproduce the gradient seen as if he was a human light meter and that he could only do this for one corner of one room in his house that he exclusively painted

PERFECTLY naturalistic, nigger.

>>7765748
Nah man. Besides, cameras and lenses distort everything.

>>7765637
I think it looks pretty great. Reminds me of playing kings quest as a kid.

Just completed this, I think it came out pretty good. Ink plus watercolor really looks clean. I rough in shapes with gesture, then made 3 sets of perspective lines with string, then ink, then paint. Masking fluid for highlights snd the yellow to orange highlights were painted last

>>7765869
Love this. I did an architecture project for school kinda similar. Love 5g towers and transmission towers

>>7765637
>>7765869
rotate your images

I did a little research. Found this Vermeer 1.5h away from my home, in a museum. Not his best work, but still.
I think i will visit the museum soon. Im very curious to see one of his paintings irl.

>>7766028
You fucked up, I'm coming for you

>>7766031
shieeet, must hide my masterpieces then

>be dutch
>go to a random museum
>at least 5 vermeer pieces
god it feels good

>>7766092
Het rijksmuseum is niet "een willekeurig museum" tho.

Weer hebbin ein seeriues prooblem

>>7766092
That Vermeer is in Frankfurt, so most likely the anon is afghan or syrian

>>7766115
Stop met mijn taal belachelijk te maken! :(

Nederlands? In MIJN /trad/?

>>7766171
Met al onze oude en nieuwe meesters hebben we de kans om echte /trad/ instituten op te richten wel een beetje uit handen gegeven helaas.

another thread RUINED by the netherlands menace. their stupid, whimsical nature is an eternal threat to the seriousness of /trad/. a totally superfluous people.

>>7767056
Dees boot uneeroneekalee

>>7759672
Seriously, why Himmler though? Your art is technically very impressive and I really like it, but dude, I swear you've been at this for like 2 years, if not more. Where did the Himmler obsession begin? I'm genuinely curious.

>>7767102
It makes his peepee big, what's not to get?

>>7767056
T. Aint much

>>7767102
the guy has homoerotic fantasies about sucking himmlers dick like the jew he is, thats why he has to draw him all the time obsessively.

>>7767505
Verstehe, viele solche Fälle.

new >>7767516

>>7767102
When I was 14 years old I coincidentally heard of him. His name immediately grabbed my attention. I started picking up multiple hobbies (drawing, jewellery making, journaling, writing poetry) so I can dedicate art pieces to him. I'm not a good artist, just a good admirer.

The question isn't: why do you draw him?

It's: why do you draw? And the answer is: for him.

>>7767505
>>7767236
You can stop having sexual fantasies about people, based on pencil drawings depicting nazis now.

>>7767813
>Why do you draw?
>For Him(mler)!