[cybertoker2001]

Hey all,
This is my latest piece. 100% Photoshop 6.
I got the ref for this piece from the August 2001 Playboy pictorial on "The girls of the Badda-Bing!". I don't have a flat bed scanner, (Mine's a "roll-through") so I can't show you guys the pic I used, but mine doesn't look like the chick I used for ref really. If anyone has the issue, you should be able to find the pic I used no problem. Post it here if ya can. Also, if you have a dope pin-up of your own that would fallow with the theme of this one, feel free to post 'em here.

Take a look and let me know what you think.

Take it easy,
CT2001

[Socar MYLES]

The background is nicely done...it just suggests enough that one can tell what it is, while conveying a nice sense of depth and space. Good colour choices, too.

The figure looks rather flat in comparison, however, and I think the face is quite overworked. I think the main problem is that the lighting in the background doesn't quite match that on the figure.

I do like the black lines around the contours of the figure--they create a nice comic-book feel.

The one thing that would have made this a lot better, in my opinion, anyway, would be if you'd concentrated less on the pornographic carnality of the girl, and more on her situation. (Given her a bit more personality, that is.)

Still, it's a nicely painted piece. Good work. Love the background.

[cybertoker2001]

Thanx for the reply Socar.

My background is in comics, so it's hard for me not to get that quality to my art work, but I'm tryin'.
As far as the content of the pic is conserned, I was trying to go for a more "Olivia" type look. I'm not trying to be Dr. Porn over here. (That's why she's covering most of her nauty bits.)

Thanx for your coment on the background. I tryed very hard to make it look as realistic as posible.

Anyways......
Thanx again.

Take it easy,
CT2001

[Socar MYLES]

I'm not an Olivia fan, per se, but what I have always liked about her work is all the interesting lingerie and what not she comes up with. (If I'm way off base and thinking of someone else, who isn't Olivia, then I'll wear a dunce-cap). You see my point, though...you might want to try some interesting accessories for this dame.

[topeira]

i really like the figure and art lines. i bet u used reference. i also think that the face is over worked. u can easily ommite the wrinkles around the mouth for a more young looks. also the figure looks like it's not a part of the BG. no shadow under the figure and the stlye of the BG is not the same as the figure. but the shading and the figure itself is excelent.

[cybertoker2001]

If you would have read my post you would have known that I used reference. If you saw the picture you would see that because of the lighting, she's not casting much if any shadow on the ground. Also, I like the face the way it is. She's no "spring chicken" if ya know what I mean. I wanted her to have a little bit of that "used up" look to her. She's a striper for Christ sake, they've got a hard life no matter how much you try and glamorize 'em. So her laugh lines are just showing a little bit of her age. Concidering all those factors, she's lookin' pretty good.

Peace out,
CT2001

[ July 29, 2001: Message edited by: cybertoker2001 ]

[Usagi]

damn Toker you is soooo good. i love this, you better put it on psychotic episode!!!!! or ill come lookin for ya!!!!!!

[Juan-Philipo]

I like it...

[Felaxx]

That hand is awesome. The thing that bothers me about this is that her eyes look flat. Is that the way it looked on the photo? (also where her ass- I mean... buttocks... touches the platform or whatever it is it looks a bit odd. I don't know, maybe if you posted the photo we could see how you interpretted this =)

[Felaxx]

nevermind you have a crapola scanner! hee hee teasing. ok well that's too bad =/

[Bob the Newt]

well, porn inspired art. i guess i should expect something that original from someone with a name as amazingly creative as cybertoker2001. thats almost as good as pothead420 as far as names go, seriously.

[McFly]

that is one ugly chick.. you captured the hideousness perfectly, bravo sir.

[cybertoker2001]

Bob the newt-
I've had the e-name for around three years now and it has nothing to do with pot use. I like the name and I'm stickin' with it. And what are you talkin' about anyway Bob, your name is weak and so is your art.

Mcfly- What more should I expect from you? I would tell ya to blow me, but I'm above that.

Peace out,
CT2001

[ July 29, 2001: Message edited by: cybertoker2001 ]

[ July 29, 2001: Message edited by: cybertoker2001 ]

[cybertoker2001]

BTW.......... Playboy, (the place I got the ref pic for this) Is NOT a porn mag. My fiance collects them and she's totally straight. If you have ever picked up a Playboy mag you would know that it's much more than pictures of nude woman.

Quote-
"For over 40 years PLAYBOY has been one of the most powerful voices in American culture. People have a serious reaction to the magazine because it is a magazine people take seriously. They know it's as much an American institution as it is a magazine.
All that some people know about PLAYBOY are the pictures, and a segment of this group completely misunderstand them. They infer- from their own view of pictorials-that men's interests as PLAYBOY presents them couldn't possibly be compatible with women's interests.
From day one, PLAYBOY has demystified the battle of the sexes. The idea of improving relationships by improving communication is nothing new to the magazine. It is now, and has always been, about decent behavior between men and women. PLAYBOY approaches its portrayal of women from an idealized, romantic and respectful point of view. While far different and less idealized portrayals of women are indeed available in society,men continue to turn to PLAYBOY in recognition of their romantic curiosity------a curiosity that doesn't exploit women or obectify them. Sex is not sexism. Women have been and always will be objects of male desire, and men of female desire. PLAYBOY recognizes that.
PLAYBOY also recognizes that women may be bosses or beer buddies or mentors or colleagues. It writes about that---it writes about both the possibilities and complexities in male-female relationships. And 3.5 million people buy the magazine every month, and 12 million read it and that says something too. Readers trust PLAYBOY to draw the line--to define the boundaries and standards of popular acceptance of public sexuality. It says that an interest in beauty and the erotic is a natural and healthy instinct.
It also proves what we've always said about the magazine: Men buy PLAYBOY for the women, and read it for the package. Readers see in it a man's vision of romance and fantasy, and they continue to learn from it all the lifestyle possibilities open to men in this century."
Christie Hefner
Daughter of Hugh Hefner and Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of PLAYBOY magazine.

I'm not showing any penetration or even most of her genitalia. So give the PORN thing a rest. If this picture offends you, it's because of your own hang-ups and issues. Not mine. And I'm sick of hearing it.
Please feel free to comment on the ART WORK.
If the subject matter offends you, then don't look at it.

Take it easy,
CT2001

[ July 29, 2001: Message edited by: cybertoker2001 ]

[extension13]

pornographic adj : designed to arouse lust.

That is the definition. If you wanna draw stuff like this that's your prerogative, but don't get so upset someone calls it pornographic.. because that is what it is. Maybe it isn't as vulgar as some other porn... you could argue that, but it's still porn.

[cybertoker2001]

This is getting way off topic. Honestly, does this image seem vulgar to anyone? Because I wasn't trying to be vulgar in any way. I have four more pictures coming in this series of pin-ups. I sure hope we don't have to have this discussion every time I post one of them.

Also....
Does anyone know of a Pin-Up exclusive art forum for me to post these types of images at?

Take it easy,
CT2001

[Usagi]

give'em hell Toker!!!!!!! newt? mcfly? where the hell did they get those names, i think it was handed to them. Ha! i think a draw off between the three would settle this and www.psychoticepisode.com is the place!!!

Beat them like their momma should have!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Bob the Newt]

My name is weak and so is my art. Harsh, man, harsh. Especially considering I've never posted art here.

And your fiance is a lesbian. Big deal.

[Impartial]

Cyber,

I think you did a nice job on the pic. I haven't seen the original but one thing I find is that she appears to almost be floating above the table. If you made the table show some more visible subtle reflections from her body, it might "ground" her.

Great job.

Newt,

Shut the hell up. This is the third thread in the last 2 days where I have seen you posting crap. Harassing Enayla, etc. It is people like you who ruin this forum.

[J-D Leon]

I just created a new folder in My picture directory, called "touched"
here is one of it. i pin it simply becuase the picture is great in term of meaning. (the woman looks soo natual and serious, she seems like thnking somethig deeply, and she looks like the woman in the acient time. like Italian status, fat belly, and long hair)
well, this is it. enjoy ^_^

[Fallen]

I don't think this is pornographic at all. The most "bits" that are showing is her breasts and any typical nude even done by the masters has those. I also direct your attention to some of Sorayamas artwork, He's got some bent-over, fingering themselves, pierced-up, dribbling women and nobody's hounding him. I think the pic looks fine and I consider it artwork, pin-up, but not porno in the least.

[Laemtao]

Bah.. i feel i have to put my 2 cents in this. Whats up with this uptightness about sexuality? I really do not understand the flaming of cybertoker on this. Everyone's entitled to their preferrences to what they like to draw. Why are u all so quick to pounce on his work? Are u all still so conservative about sex at this current age? Boy what era are u guys living in?

As long as it doesnt depict sexually explicit acts, its not porn. Its Erotica in an artform. And i dont see Socar being offended by it, and she's one of the most adored artist here on this Sijun forum.I can pretty much speak for the majority that she provides honest criticism.

Lets not flaming just for the sake of flaming. Thats not cool. Don't forget, this is an "ART" forum. Its not a forum to debate the morality or debate the decency of the content of the art. We're here to critique art, give pointers to improve. And he did post a warning that its a nude piece. If such contents disturbs u why even click on his thread to begin with? such Hypocrits. What did u expect to see? A more tasteful nude piece that doesnt arouse lust? Gimme a break. Only way that would happen is if he had a totally unattractive subject as refference and to tell u the truth.. that doesnt inspire me to paint or draw in a first place. Wouldnt u want to draw something pleasing to the eye?

All u flamers should take a chill pill. Honestly, i sometime think a chillingly violent subject matter like a decapitated head would get less attention than what cybertoker just did.

Peace out
---------
Mo

[Muzman]

If you actually read this thread, only one person referred to the pic as being based on porn. And categorically it is. If the word "porn" only conjures up in your mind the dirtiest hard-core (or anything other than this picture, say), well that's fine. But to say that's the only definition of pornography or pornographic imagery is incorrect. A picture of a nude woman in silletos, taken from Playboy no less, in a classic stripper pose and people are trying to say it's not categorically porn or art based on which? Don't make me laugh.
So most of you should be keeping a lid on that freedom-of-expression, anti-prude flame thrower you've all obviously got primed to go off at any moment (the artist among them). Don't we see who is truly uptight here?

Pic's cool, btw. Contrasts are a little strong on the body here and there. But maybe that's the idea and it suits. I think the background works great too.

[ July 30, 2001: Message edited by: Muzman ]

[Mordecai]

Bah....its a naked woman...big deal....a well captured image toker, very impressive!

porn or not to porn that is the question...

but christ its just a woman who happens to be dancing....and just so happens to have her clothes off as well...everyone is going to have their own opinions as to what PORN is exactly....it will be a never ending battle...so in closing i would just like to add...its a naked woman youve seen them in countless figure drawing classes...what makes this so different than the models schools or companys hire to come in and pose for study sessions?
...ok well forget about the private booths, the sexual favors for money,the flashing lights, the 80 year old dirty men that inhabit the "clubs", and who could forget the always impressive and secretive champagne rooms...honestly i dont see those ANYWHERE in this picture does anyone see that here????....no....but all this is... is a woman in a somewhat suggestive pose...ive seen and drawn a very similar pose in a figure drawing class i took last semester...and get this folks... she wasnt a "stripper"!!!


how bout them apples??!


get over it hippies




good day

[VanhoozerArt]

Personaly, I don't think this is porn. I think it may be slightly provocative, but porn? No

i do think that it is a bit weak as far as ARTWORK is concerned. I looked at the picture that it was taken from, and it is just too close to be considered anything more than a photoshop tracing.

Sorry dude, but please keep going.

Jeremy

[Laemtao]

Hello...Muzman? How about you? Did u also read that thread? The word "porn" came up in quite a few people's reply on cyber's pic. In particular "newt" and "extension" who obviously had issues with it and Fallen, who had taken a defensive stance regarding it being porn. Thats y i wrote what i wrote. Did u actually UNDERSTAND what i posted? Or is it the standard of English in Australia has dropped so low as to be totally unrecognizable as English and is now Australish? Or mebbe you are one of the few "rotten apples" that slipped thru the cracks of the Australian public education system. Why dont u re-read my earlier post again. Essay comprehension in English class must not have been your strong suite in school i guess. The main point i was trying to make was not about what is porn and what isn't, that is a debate that should be discussed elsewhere and it would merit its own thread.

quote:

---

Extension13
pornographic adj : designed to arouse lust.
That is the definition. If you wanna draw stuff like this that's your prerogative, but don't get so upset someone calls it pornographic.. because that is what it is. Maybe it isn't as vulgar as some other porn... you could argue that, but it's still porn.

---

That definition is just too vague. So if someone watches Baywatch and he gets a woody looking at female lifeguards, then Baywatch is Porn? Dont make me laugh. Everywhere u turn, there would be porn then. I would stay at home and be a hermit if i were u Extension13, cuz such vulgarities are just too much to take. oh wait.. there's the TV at home. Better throw it out as well.

McFly

quote

Quote:

that is one ugly chick.. you captured the hideousness perfectly, bravo sir.

Lets see one of yours McFly. If u have nothing constructive to say to improve upon a somebody elses artwork I suggest u stiffle the urge from your pigheaded brain to flame just for the sake of flaming. We dont need the likes of u to come in here and pass unwarranted judegements or comments like that. Go back to your dark cave from whence u came u troglodyte.

CyberToker, i apologize for posting a reply that had no crits or comments on your pic in my earlier post. I shall make ammends by doing so now.
Your fore-shortening of her arm was really really well done. Her face could do a bit more work. The whites of her eyes and teeth seems too white that it jumps out from her face. Mebbe a more muted white would do better. That little ridge from her nose down to her upper lip has too much definition. It looks like she has a mustache. Mebbe mute that abit more as well. The leg looks good. Overall a pretty good effort. I suggest though that next time u post something like this.. u should put "Soroyama-esque" pin up! as subject matter. So ppl would really know what to expect.. that is if they are familiar with Sorayama's work. But if they are any aspiring artist worth ther salt, they should know who he is anyways. If they dont, I wouldnt take their comments seriously.

-----------
Mo

P.s. The debate of what is porn or not should be put art discussions section or Random musings, not here. So if u wanna carry on this topic .. should start a thread there you can flame till your hearts content. Let Cybertoker get his crits and comments in peace.

[ July 30, 2001: Message edited by: Laemtao ]

[cybertoker2001]

Sory buddy, but I don't do trace overs. I'm a REAL artist.

Following is the original line art done in HB pencil on Bristol board by ME.


Thanx for your time.
CT2001

Damn. Why are there so many haters out there?

[cybertoker2001]

Oh....And I don't own a light-box either.

Some changes where made to her face in the painting. I had a hard go of it with the face. Never quite came out right. But anyways.....On to the next.

Take it easy,
CT2001

[cybertoker2001]

Hi all....me again. First, I would like to thank LAEMTAO for summing up so nicely what I've been trying to say this whole time.
Following is a list of people I would like to thank:
MORDECAI, FALLEN, IMPARTIAL, USAGI, FELAXX, and TOPEIRA. Notice I didn't just list names of people that gave me compliments, but people that actually critiqued my ART free from mention of it being "porn". This is an ART forum, that is why I come here. This image was posted with a warning, so if you didn't want to see nudity or "adult" content, you shouldn't have clicked on it in the first place. Finally, I would like to thank SOCAR for stating her views in a non-argumentative manner and critiquing my work.

So as far as the "porn" issue is concerned, let sleeping dogs lie. Please no more comments unless it fully pertains to the art work.

Take it easy,
CT2001

[VanhoozerArt]

If at any time I am mistaken, I will apologize. So, I am doing just that. Obviously, you did take the time to draw out the pose, and for that I give you credit.

My comment still stand regarding the similarity of the posing. I guess I would appreciate the artistic value of the pose a bit more if you had given it more life. Sometimes when copying from a photoweas artists tend to become handicapped if we try and reproduce the pose exact.

I like it more now that I have seen the sketch. Try doing more poses of the girl using the body information that you now have. Always good practice.

Keep up the fine work.

Jeremy