[eyewoo]

This is maybe finished... I think...



detail 1

detail 2

detail 3

detail 4

fleab...

[ August 02, 2001: Message edited by: fleabrain ]

[ August 03, 2001: Message edited by: fleabrain ]

[Pat]

This piece reminds me a lot of egg-tempra. I haven't seen that in a while. All the colored hatching marks you've made have a lot of power when they're patiently built up layer after layer. My only gripe is the one vine that drapes down into the rock area. It's got an awfully saturated orange look to it; possibly too saturated to be a reflection of the lower yellow light source.

-Pat

[Cicinimo]

Hey, I really like that hatched out look. Great work. I cant think of any critiques really. Whats the glowing at the bottom left though?

[Breakerboy2]

It tightens up really well. Looking at the details I was very surprised at just how loose it is. Great atmosphere.

Would it be possible to post a link to a larger version of the whole piece? I'd really like to get a better look at the detail in the context of the whole image.

[eyewoo]

Michael,

The full size is about 6200 x 2900 pixels, so I don't really have it on a server. I'm thinking about getting one of the Epson large format printers. If I do, I could send you a print...

BTW... know anything about those printers. Do they have archival inks for them??? Just starting to investigate...

fleab...

[eyewoo]

Here's another detail... It's not full rez, but it does show the strokes in a wider field.



fleab...

[ August 03, 2001: Message edited by: fleabrain ]

[jr]

this is really cool. your colors look very fresh.

[Andromeda]

I love it ... its different from the 'smooth' style most are going for nowadays.
i dont get the glowing yellow lava thing.
but i like it. leave the glowing lava thing.

still, we all wanna know what it is.

(PS, what is "archival inks" ?)

[Wyatt Turner]

hehe,,, I seeing again here... Yup Still liking it too..

y@

[Breakerboy2]

Jeez. That is even cooler looking than I thought! Really amazing. I like what you did with that (still) kind'a weird reflection in the lower left. The color makes a lot more sense even though I'm still not sure what's going on.

Have you ever seen Paul Cadmus' work? He's a fine artist that does these psycho-hatched out colored pencil pieces. They're really amazing and his subject matter is always entertaining if bizarre.

I've used the larger format printers, but haven't gotten familiar with what kind of inks they use. I've been wondering what the best way to reproduce digital art would be as well. Maybe we should start another thread.

I'm really loving this piece. The light is just so luminous and your hatch marks really accentuate that fact.

The ONLY thing that sticks out still, is the right part of that vine. When it hits the rock, it doesn't feel like it comes towards us enough. It feels like it just goes straight down. Maybe it's just the size of the image on my monitor. This isn't really a big problem for me, I'm just trying to say something constructive.

If you're offering me a print - I accept!

[ August 04, 2001: Message edited by: Breakerboy2 ]

[osk]

..hmm I like it a lot. But I think I would like to compare it against the photo that you painted over. I dont mena to put you down I just want to see what you used as reference. The reason I bring this up is because on your "detail" I can see some hints of "real rock" behind there.

[eyewoo]

Osk,

You bring up an interesting point. How are works of art created? Is the process more important than the result? If a concept is in mind, is it legal in today's world of digital magic to use the magic?

I use photos as a reference. Sometimes I trace, most of the time I don't. What I'm working with mostly is an idea in mind -- a concept that I'm trying to realize.

But to answer your question, below are photo reference stages that lead to this result:



You know, I really don't enjoy answering this particular type of question... It's sort'a like a woman made beautiful with great make-up having to tell some naysayer just how she applied the makeup...

...but, on the othert hand, it is an important question...

fleab...

[ August 04, 2001: Message edited by: fleabrain ]

[Breakerboy2]

As long as they're your photos, you can use them however you want! What you've done isn't any different than how a lot of people (including myself on occasion) do matte paintings. Besides, you've taken this image so far beyond the scope of the photos, you should feel really good about it.

It is a bit of an uncomfortable question to have to answer, though. But we all benefit from your willingness to share.

Thanks!

[Red Leader]

Hey Fleabrain,

There is indeed a problem with that vine. You need to lose it in shadow somewhere between the tree and the base of the rocks. You may have made it so bright to draw the eye down to the glowing crack, which it does, but don't be afraid to break it up a little. Right now it has no atmospheric perspective because you have rendered it so uniformly.

Beautiful work with the trees, by the way.

[osk]

Thank you so much for sharing and showing the progress pictures you had there. I definitely think you have talent. I do not think that using a photo as a base for a great piece of work is illegal at all I have acutally done it myself also. I agree that once it gets to a point where the photo has mutated to what was in the painter's imagination, it no longer matters. I am still amazes how those perfetly placed strokes come out to be a wonderfully rendered image. Great job, and thank you for responding in such proper manner. (Unlike some)