 |
|
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Topic : "Another orbs picture" |
eyewoo
member
Member #
Joined: 23 Jun 2001
Posts: 2662
Location: Carbondale, CO
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Capt. Fred
member
Member #
Joined: 21 Dec 2002
Posts: 1425
Location: South England
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 6:18 am |
 |
 |
oh nice! like the trees in the background and in the foreground, and the colour.
I like this best of all these orbs paintings. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Capt.FlushGarden
member
Member #
Joined: 12 Sep 2000
Posts: 737
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 11:02 am |
|
|
Awesome Eyewoo! love the sunlit BG behind the trees! one thing that pops out though, is the halo thingie, it doesnt have the same texture as the rest of the painting, it sort of makes it look like the painting was scanned in and that you added that halo thing in the computer afterwards, maybe you could scratch it up a little? i looked at the other ones too and i like the "stream with orbs" it is very suttle, sort of liek UFO images are, a bit scary! and this might be a stupid question, but wha is an orb? is it a wort/name oyu came up with or is it a well known thing in stories ?
Cheerio!
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
Lunatique
member
Member #
Joined: 27 Jan 2001
Posts: 3303
Location: Lincoln, California
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:47 pm |
|
|
Really love the textures! This is all PS?
I've been trying to figure out how to achieve a convincing scumbling effect digitally, and I haven't figured it out yet. Digital scumbling seems too neat and not random enough. I'd also love to be able to get the really spontaneous impasto look. Digital impasto still looks too contrived so far. I'm starting to think I'd like to go back to painting tradtitional. |
|
| Back to top |
|
eyewoo
member
Member #
Joined: 23 Jun 2001
Posts: 2662
Location: Carbondale, CO
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:32 pm |
|
|
Luna... Yes... all PS, start to finish. I've been trying to figure out how to put together a tutorial on getting that look... It's a pretty complex process involving rough looking brushes like PShop's granite brush, quick mask, layers, adjustment layers, displacement filters, and insane over sharpening... That over sharpening being applied to just about every stage in the process. That's about where I'm at with it right now. I'm still doing a lot of experimenting.
I think one of the things to keep in mind with digital painting is it has less to do with brush strokes and more to do with adjustment tools. That's a hard concept to swallow for many artists with traditional media experience.
_________________
HonePie.com
tumblr blog
digtal art |
|
| Back to top |
|
Lunatique
member
Member #
Joined: 27 Jan 2001
Posts: 3303
Location: Lincoln, California
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 9:04 pm |
|
|
| eyewoo wrote: |
I think one of the things to keep in mind with digital painting is it has less to do with brush strokes and more to do with adjustment tools. That's a hard concept to swallow for many artists with traditional media experience. |
I never thought of it like that. That's a bit of a revelation for me. Strangely enough, I use PS to do extensive tweaking on my photography, but I never think about using it that way for my paintings. I guess I have a lot of the leftover "purist" mindset from painting traditionally. Tweaking the hell out of a painting doesn't sound as fun as just painting it though. Not sure if I want to try that, or go back to traditional painting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
jet liera
junior member
Member #
Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Posts: 2
Location: Los Mochis, Sin. Mexico
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 7:08 am |
|
|
Hi guys...
I feel that the main disagreement comes when we 'listen' to the word "painting" when referred to a digital rendering....
The digital medium has put new tools in our hands, and these tools -in real life- would require new schools of thought for using them towards creating art with them.
We are familiar with an airbrush nowadays, but when it first appeared was considered a fad and not taken seriously as an artistic tool....
The digital medium allows us to explore images in a different realm and dimension so it is not easy to relate directly to traditional art, although it can be used mocking traditional media, it soon becomes evident that we're not using this tool to its full capacity, and we start exploring new ways to express ourselves through this new medium...
The BIG drawback is that it lends itself for countless ways of using it for the wrong reasons....Lots of talentless people become instant artists by just doing a few tweaks on a photograph, giving the impression that ALL digital art is created this way...
Eyewoo, for instance, puts a lot of real hand work, (digital sculpting, drawing, smudging, painting, interdimensional erasing and blending), together with a dose of his personal touch, in his pieces.
It takes a huge amount of time and effort doing one of his pieces, compared to the usual low-level manipulation done by digi-art newbies that take a few 'direct approach' 3-stepper filteringthat give raw 'art' pieces -if any-.
Lots of these newbies try to pass their lame manips for a real traditional art piece, because their untrained eye doesn't let them 'pinpoint' all the give away clues that digital experts catch at first sight...
I believe that we need a new set of words to describe the different processes that can be done with digital, so we can stop using the same names as traditional artists , as this practice is what gets us confused, and many times used for misleading the viewer by mixing up the terms..
Just my 2 cents
Kind Regards
_________________
Learning ! the perfect state of mind... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2005 phpBB Group
|
