[Weeks]

Let me show you my last digital painting.

Reference : Vermeer the great..!

No scan, just Photoshop, wacom, Vermeer and me.

[Weeks]

[ceenda]

Weeks: Very nice indeed!

I recognise the portrait, but I don't have the reference on hand so these crits might be a silly.

The colours seem to be very seperate, e.g. Face pink, Scarf blue etc. The backlighting is lovely on the side of the face which is recieving the glow from the gold coloured shirt. Also, the pearl/silver earing is nice, but the reflections are not convincing.

Anyway, I really like these old master studies, good job.

If I recall correctly, you posted a really nice study of Velazquez a few months ago?

[zak]

i like it very much, i kinda agree with ceenda, but i also think j,the shadows and folds on the clothes look a bit peculiar. i dunno if its just me, but yeah,....it looks great

[Weeks]

Ceenda : you'are absolutly right about the color,
but I have to say that it is very difficult to paint
with Photoshop. And you know what I mean.

It depends of your monitor, your reference,
your machine, etc.

So, with your help, I try to do my best :-)

Actually, I posted something of Velazquez.
bravo... It's been a long time ago...!

Zak : in fact, the painting is not completly
finished. I could'nt wait any more...

Here is the first rough.

[Weeks]

Step 2


Step 3


And so on

[Weeks]

qsz

[latsami]

mmm... I dun really remember the rendering of the real one, but I think the face is too.... l�ch� (can't find the word in english, you're french hopefully ! XD)
I like the blue scarf, you should have work more on the shirt like the shadow part of the scarf I think...
But it's a nice work ! ^^
The only thing that minds me is the contrast of the face rendering and the rest.
And if you think painting with photoshop is difficult, maybe you should try Painter?

[Swarm]

I though it was the reel painting... and Latsami the original is l�ch� too...(idem for the shirt... he's just like that :) (I have this painting on a book so I compare lol) the texture of the "real painting" please me more than digital but it's really great ... just few things strange.


(I hope you'll understand my bad english -_-)

[Weeks]

Latsami : Swarn ;

As I said : you know how much it is difficult to simulate a real painting, specially, when it is a master like Vermeer.
I have to say that Photoshop was'nt the soft that i prefer.

So far, it is Painter that I practice since a certain time.

But, strangely, if you want to simulate "gouache" or even "oil",
I think ps is more adapted.

Anyway, thanx for your support and crit.

But I have to say that I felt a bit surprised that in this forum (that I like so much)In general, the members are not very interesting about this kind of stuff.

Only 5 or 6 messages for this post... ?

You know what it is..Proudness...

So, never mind.

[latsami]

I don't think PS is better than Painter to simulate natural media. You just didn't practice enough with Painter I think, you can make great textures within the paper choice and the impasto brushes. :3

But now, if you do want your work look like real media, why don't you simply use real oils or gouache ?

[Weeks]

latsami : I said exactly the contrary.

For me, Painter is better than ps, but i cannot
do what i've done with ps.

I bought my first Painter'version in 1995.

See you...!