I just think people are adding it without thinking about it. Your picture does not need it at all.
I know I have used it a bit wrong before, but now I generally only use it on extreme light sources to burn out edges. You know, like what would really happen with lens distortion.
haha yea, in all honesty I have no clue what it's actual purpose was for, I was trying for the whole "out of focus look you get in life when you look at an item right next to another, the item next to it isn't exactly blurry, but it's sort of double visioned, " If that makes any sense.
Anyone know another way to add that kind of double vision blur without having the blatant lens colors?
I mean, using photographic language in a painting certainly works-- we live in a worldwide media smorgasbord and are utterly accustomed to looking at photos and videos. It can give a kind of strange credulity to the image.
I just want to say that eyes and camera lenses are not the same. Maybe silly was too dismissive.
I just want to say that eyes and camera lenses are not the same. Maybe silly was too dismissive.
Nope not all. I've found over the years that many people who primarily work digitally rely on waaay too many 'tricks' to fix issues they don't know how to resolve. Or that they just like kitschy and overdone effects for whatever reason.
I just want to say that eyes and camera lenses are not the same. Maybe silly was too dismissive.
Nope not all. I've found over the years that many people who primarily work digitally rely on waaay too many 'tricks' to fix issues they don't know how to resolve. Or that they just like kitschy and overdone effects for whatever reason.
Theres nothing wrong with 'tricks' if they are done tastefully. Art has never been some pure thing. I'm sure when the first cave painter used white as well as black the other cave men were crying out 'TRICKS!'. Hah.
Wasser, it's funny that you post that...Scholes is one of my favorite artists. :P I was just looking at a bunch of his pieces yesterday. I adore his use of color. I want to just sink into it. So effing fantastic.
Wasser, it's funny that you post that...Scholes is one of my favorite artists. :P I was just looking at a bunch of his pieces yesterday. I adore his use of color. I want to just sink into it. So effing fantastic.
Hes a really nice dude! Frighteningly good at what he does too.
it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy when I learn people are apparently really nice IRL, too. Like when I hear about certain comedians or celebrities being really cool chaps, it makes me happy.
its not like lens distortion doesn't happen for the eyes either. Happens every morning I wake up. Like blurry golden rainbows on everything.
Right, so this is a similar thing that happens if you see something in a foreground that is blurry while focusing on a medium distance object; your eyes aren't focusing correctly for that distance so there is distortion and it becomes fuzzy or has a halo.
In the real world though, unless you're purposefully trying to paint something as seen by a myopic or blurry morning vision, you can snap your eyes to the foreground and that object gains focus. That obviously does not happen with a photograph. Everything not in focus remains forever blurry.
So, here is a choice I feel should not be made arbitrarily-- whether you want to treat your painting as if you're sitting in the front row in front of a theater stage and the "scene" is right there unfolding in front of you, or if the imaginary "eye" here is acting more like a camera and the image represents a specific focal length and direction at that specific instant. Sometimes you might even literally want to paint an image that is supposed to be a photograph.
So this is actually a really fantastic example to look at for how to make this choice. The perspective is a worms eye view and we are totally locked in on the focus of the monster. It works super well because it is completely consistent with the narrative of the illustration. The truck tires and the desert combat setting tell me the story that this image is coming from the viewpoint maybe of someone who just jumped out of the driver's seat and has hit the deck while this monstrosity is in front of him-- or maybe it's feasibly a camcorder that someone has dropped in the chaos. The rocks can stand to be super out of focus because this is a super visceral moment, the "person" who's eyes we are looking through would be glued to that colossal fucking monster.
I was definitely thinking about Tom when this topic came up, and I also really love his work. He uses the lens color correction in like, all of his environments, but it works within the context of his subject matter and its treatment. His environments are all lush, hazy, fantastical, dreamscape "visions", and the chromatic lens distortion and heavy vignetting subtly evoke the kind of distortion you get looking through a porthole, binoculars or a telescope, which reinforces the far-away dreamy quality of the paintings. It should be noted that Tom is not at all beating us over the skull with these techniques in order to achieve this effect.
it's so weird that you guys mention tom scholes
i met him a few weeks ago, and he emailed me back just this morning
i'd never heard of him prior to that - i got to watch a demo of him painting!
also if any of you are even CLOSE to vancouver, you better be going to Anomaly
Can't see the Sergey Wasser but....... hngggghhh ♥ Tom Scholes ♥
I want to send him clippets of my hair and write him obscure love letters about how I love his colouring and backgrounds. And sit and wait for him in his lawn.
And your painting is turning out great Wasser! Iruka that's a damn fine sketch painting so energetic, Wakka your ladies look as sexy as ever and everyone else is still kicking all sorts of buttockery.
Hey, I've been working on this poster for the play The Tempest for the past week or so now. I'm kind of happy with how it looks, but i suck at typography and anything like that. Any ideas on the composition of the image and the text? and just general crits really
pogo mudder on
what a work of art is man, and the most boring choice you can make
Im a big fan of Dan Paladin, I love how he can convey such complex messages with such minimal detail.
I was hoping I could channel him a bit, but I guess not.
Also first ever time working with color AND first digital. how you guys get so much line variation is beyond me.
So, I need a nice environment for my portfolio. I thought I would try something straightforward and this is what I have after an hour or so. I need some general feedback if possible.
Other than a waterfall, Im not sure what Im looking at.
-the taller waterfall seems to be coming out of nowhere.
-Scale isnt clear. I see a rope bridge/ladder which would make those waterfalls really pretty small... but the space of the image seems to imply vast space.
Wakk, that is sick nasty awesome. You should probably let me know when you are live-streaming.
Wass - That is the kind of feedback I need. What I'm taking from it is the scale is off, but more importantly it fails compositionally. I sent you a PM.
---
Alright, I decided to try a vertical composition, I think it looks better but there is still no focus.
I have not posted anything In a while, as Iruka says, so I figured I could put a WIP up I guess.
I have been uhh... trying to deal with color. I have lately kind of regressed back into all grayscale all the time ,and I am trying to be a big boy with real colors.
I was basically determined to fucking color something and in my disastrous rampage trying to colorize half finished WIPs and other random PSDs I had lying around, this was the first one that started going anywhere.
Posts
haha yea, in all honesty I have no clue what it's actual purpose was for, I was trying for the whole "out of focus look you get in life when you look at an item right next to another, the item next to it isn't exactly blurry, but it's sort of double visioned, " If that makes any sense.
Anyone know another way to add that kind of double vision blur without having the blatant lens colors?
Hiking Essentials
It looks more like proper camera depth of field than any other blur.
Its no more silly than 'pretending' to make any other sort of effect.
I just want to say that eyes and camera lenses are not the same. Maybe silly was too dismissive.
Nope not all. I've found over the years that many people who primarily work digitally rely on waaay too many 'tricks' to fix issues they don't know how to resolve. Or that they just like kitschy and overdone effects for whatever reason.
Theres nothing wrong with 'tricks' if they are done tastefully. Art has never been some pure thing. I'm sure when the first cave painter used white as well as black the other cave men were crying out 'TRICKS!'. Hah.
Lens blur used by Sergey Kolosev:
Tom Scholes using lens distortion:
Hes a really nice dude! Frighteningly good at what he does too.
it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy when I learn people are apparently really nice IRL, too. Like when I hear about certain comedians or celebrities being really cool chaps, it makes me happy.
Right, so this is a similar thing that happens if you see something in a foreground that is blurry while focusing on a medium distance object; your eyes aren't focusing correctly for that distance so there is distortion and it becomes fuzzy or has a halo.
In the real world though, unless you're purposefully trying to paint something as seen by a myopic or blurry morning vision, you can snap your eyes to the foreground and that object gains focus. That obviously does not happen with a photograph. Everything not in focus remains forever blurry.
So, here is a choice I feel should not be made arbitrarily-- whether you want to treat your painting as if you're sitting in the front row in front of a theater stage and the "scene" is right there unfolding in front of you, or if the imaginary "eye" here is acting more like a camera and the image represents a specific focal length and direction at that specific instant. Sometimes you might even literally want to paint an image that is supposed to be a photograph.
So this is actually a really fantastic example to look at for how to make this choice. The perspective is a worms eye view and we are totally locked in on the focus of the monster. It works super well because it is completely consistent with the narrative of the illustration. The truck tires and the desert combat setting tell me the story that this image is coming from the viewpoint maybe of someone who just jumped out of the driver's seat and has hit the deck while this monstrosity is in front of him-- or maybe it's feasibly a camcorder that someone has dropped in the chaos. The rocks can stand to be super out of focus because this is a super visceral moment, the "person" who's eyes we are looking through would be glued to that colossal fucking monster.
I was definitely thinking about Tom when this topic came up, and I also really love his work. He uses the lens color correction in like, all of his environments, but it works within the context of his subject matter and its treatment. His environments are all lush, hazy, fantastical, dreamscape "visions", and the chromatic lens distortion and heavy vignetting subtly evoke the kind of distortion you get looking through a porthole, binoculars or a telescope, which reinforces the far-away dreamy quality of the paintings. It should be noted that Tom is not at all beating us over the skull with these techniques in order to achieve this effect.
Also a thing I am starting:
In Soviet Russia, Jell-O always has room for YOU!
</incredibly terrible joke>
Twitter
Whelp, time to BLAH this page up a bit.
4 Horsemen WIP - Started adding colors n'stuff. Icons still need to be played with.
i met him a few weeks ago, and he emailed me back just this morning
i'd never heard of him prior to that - i got to watch a demo of him painting!
also if any of you are even CLOSE to vancouver, you better be going to Anomaly
A series of self-cartoons
I want to send him clippets of my hair and write him obscure love letters about how I love his colouring and backgrounds. And sit and wait for him in his lawn.
And your painting is turning out great Wasser! Iruka that's a damn fine sketch painting so energetic, Wakka your ladies look as sexy as ever and everyone else is still kicking all sorts of buttockery.
I really like this!! I just wish the creatures pose was as great as the rider's.
LOL... I was thinking the same exact thing. I can hear the claptraps in the back of my mind when I look at it
Alternately, this means my taste is marketable.
Im a big fan of Dan Paladin, I love how he can convey such complex messages with such minimal detail.
I was hoping I could channel him a bit, but I guess not.
Also first ever time working with color AND first digital. how you guys get so much line variation is beyond me.
Dan Paladin 2
-the taller waterfall seems to be coming out of nowhere.
-Scale isnt clear. I see a rope bridge/ladder which would make those waterfalls really pretty small... but the space of the image seems to imply vast space.
Wass - That is the kind of feedback I need. What I'm taking from it is the scale is off, but more importantly it fails compositionally. I sent you a PM.
---
Alright, I decided to try a vertical composition, I think it looks better but there is still no focus.
Also on my goofy doodle, no pain no gain, please crit. (background was a placeholder and was too lazy to change it... )
I have been uhh... trying to deal with color. I have lately kind of regressed back into all grayscale all the time ,and I am trying to be a big boy with real colors.
I was basically determined to fucking color something and in my disastrous rampage trying to colorize half finished WIPs and other random PSDs I had lying around, this was the first one that started going anywhere.