The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Critique very much welcomed. I don't paint very much these days (roughly two paintings per year which makes it difficult to actually improve my technique) so trying to get faster and to loosen up my style is very important for me.
i think it's cool looking
but where on earth is that wing coming from?
how it's positioned right now kinda makes it look like it's coming from her arse or lower back
hehe true dat. but maybe I should explain how Everything is a speed painting to me these days.
I used to spend several hundreds of hours on a single digital painting before I learned the magical word known as "speed painting" - just thinking that I am doing something under time pressure makes me paint faster, with more confidence and precision and it makes me avoid rendering detail where detail is unnecessary.
You are right though, 9 hours is still too much for a painting of this caliber, I spent way too much time rendering that wing for instance. In any case, the techniques used when speed painting should not be any different from the techniques used when going "all in", that way you can always just do the same thing: which is speed paint, and if the painting turns out to be worth the extra effort you just continue.
So it's more of a philosophy than a technique. It streamlines my painting process, makes it time-cost-efficient. And more fun. :P
BRO LET ME GET REAL WITH YOU AND SAY THAT MY FINGERS ARE PREPPED AND HOT LIKE THE SURFACE OF THE SUN TO BRING RADICAL BEATS SO SMOOTH THE SHIT WILL BE MEDICINAL-GRADE TRIPNASTY MAKING ALL BRAINWAVES ROLL ON THE SURFACE OF A BALLS-FEISTY NEURAL RAINBOW CRACKA-LACKIN' YOUR PERCEPTION OF THE HERE-NOW SPACE-TIME SITUATION THAT ALL OF LIFE BE JAMMED UP IN THROUGH THE UNIVERSAL FLOW BEATS
the techniques used when speed painting should not be any different from the techniques used when going "all in"
That is fundamentally incorrect. What you have here is not a speed paint at all. Just because you are trying o work fast or have a time limit you are imposing on yourself, that does not make it a speed paint.
When you are speed painting, the goal is to get a complete image using any technique possible - as fast as possible. If it involves overlaying photos, or masking or using gradients, anything is fair game so long as it contributes to making the image 'complete' in less time.
Speed painting is good for thumbnails, or ideation. This combined with its timeliness is exactly why it's origins are rooted in production art, and why it is sill used predominantly there.
In fact, because you weren't speed painting is exactly why it took you so long to make it.
Its good mate. As is said the wing is a bit oddly placed but I love the water reflection. I noticed a few techniques in there that I dont know about or use and a few in there that I did. Good work. I like how you did the ripples and its good to see you are flipping around the picture allot. For the first bit of that movie I was like 'MOVE THE EYE!!!! move the eye!' ahahah and then you were obviously like.. ohh.. the eye.
I like it and the girl looks familiar, cant quite pick it though. Girl of charmed or something but she is a TV star or a model I think.
Critique very much welcomed. I don't paint very much these days (roughly two paintings per year which makes it difficult to actually improve my technique) so trying to get faster and to loosen up my style is very important for me.
This is not the way to do that. I do not know what refs you were using, but your impressive attention to detail does not lend itself to looseness. This whole piece is very rigid and it is not just the technique.
You started out with a face and you didn't change it in the nine hours you spent on this image. That is outrageous.
You need to use much larger brushes. You need to look at this drawing you did in nine hours and try to replicate it 20 minutes. It won't look as technically good as your current drawing, but I doubt very much that it will be dead on arrival like this one was.
The drawing was boring at 14 seconds into your video. It was also basically finished. You fleshed it out, but you didn't really give it anymore energy.
the techniques used when speed painting should not be any different from the techniques used when going "all in"
That is fundamentally incorrect. What you have here is not a speed paint at all. Just because you are trying o work fast or have a time limit you are imposing on yourself, that does not make it a speed paint.
When you are speed painting, the goal is to get a complete image using any technique possible - as fast as possible. If it involves overlaying photos, or masking or using gradients, anything is fair game so long as it contributes to making the image 'complete' in less time.
Speed painting is good for thumbnails, or ideation. This combined with its timeliness is exactly why it's origins are rooted in production art, and why it is sill used predominantly there.
In fact, because you weren't speed painting is exactly why it took you so long to make it.
This is exactly why I come here. Reflecting on what you just said, and it makes perfect sense. Thanks for the insight.
Critique very much welcomed. I don't paint very much these days (roughly two paintings per year which makes it difficult to actually improve my technique) so trying to get faster and to loosen up my style is very important for me.
This is not the way to do that. I do not know what refs you were using, but your impressive attention to detail does not lend itself to looseness. This whole piece is very rigid and it is not just the technique.
You started out with a face and you didn't change it in the nine hours you spent on this image. That is outrageous.
You need to use much larger brushes. You need to look at this drawing you did in nine hours and try to replicate it 20 minutes. It won't look as technically good as your current drawing, but I doubt very much that it will be dead on arrival like this one was.
The drawing was boring at 14 seconds into your video. It was also basically finished. You fleshed it out, but you didn't really give it anymore energy.
Really nice details though.
While I don't really agree that it was dead on arrival as I did change it a few times. minor, but still, no refs, besides a schematic of how wings are built up, you are still correct that it is rigid, and I am not really playing around with it enough, it's even more apparent in my previous work, I know this, and what I mean by loosening up is not that I am yet doing it, it's that I need to do it, it is one of my goals is what I mean.
I think a lot of time-lapse videos are boring around the "14 second mark" (or wherever that threshold lies) and I tend to skip to the middle after watching the intro. My intention is not to make a good video, it's to paint a painting. The video is there to help me and you to critique my work.
I have always thought to myself that once I have the basic composition and layout done I am pretty much finished in terms of adding "artistic value". Detail rendering is something I have always seen as a "craft" more than anything else. 14 seconds in I was indeed "finished" as you say. Maybe this is also fundamentally wrong?
Anyway, I guess I will not call it "speed painting" any more since it confuses things, is there a better term for what I do? (or what I try to do?)
I think a lot of time-lapse videos are boring around the "14 second mark" (or wherever that threshold lies) and I tend to skip to the middle after watching the intro. My intention is not to make a good video, it's to paint a painting. The video is there to help me and you to critique my work.
I'm on my way out the door so I haven't time for crits at the moment, but to clarify: he meant the painting itself was boring from 14 seconds after you started it, and all the rendering in the world couldn't change that. He didn't mean that the video was boring.
I don't totally agree. And I will say that your rendering skills are quite good.
Most speed paint videos are entertaining because what the painter originally envisions at the beginning of the video, is totally different to the final outcome. This makes speed painting videos quite entertaining. Because yours already has a concept from the beginning, with little change in direction, it is not as entertaining. But thats not saying its bad. I actually think its really good (or, in other words, badass:)). I think its informative, shows your process/techniques and can be really good for people who are new to digital painting. It's more a tutorial video than a speed paint. But that doesnt really matter.
*thumbs-up*
I guess I should keep all my stuff in one thread and keep it chronological. New stuffs:
huh, the pose was stiff to begin with so I guess I havn't learned a thing. T_T I started out just doodling and with no clear idea of what I was going to paint. I think if I want to reach my goals (yes I've been lurking the forums and have been thinkg about what I want to achieve) I need to do more life studies, get better at anatomy, compose before I paint and not paint unless composition is actually good and I have a more clear idea of what I want to draw. I realize I don't know shit about color, even though I've read tons of color theory. Getting feedback here on this forum was very valuable but I think that I could ask for critique in better ways also, like do thumbnails/parallell prototype sketching and ask which one of several ideas is better rather than diving straight in with the first idea that comes to mind. I come in from time to time and dive into one of the massive threads you guys have up here but I either don't have time to comment or just feel really stupid doing so but maybe I should critique more to get better at self critique as well.
I did a time-lapse of the above pic. I realize my skills are not up to par to make it worth while for anyone to watch my videos, but I find it to be quite fun to do these. But this will probably be my last for a while since I also realize I could probably have done about 15 anatomy studies in the time it took to edit these videos.
On the positive side I did actually finish this, which I am starting to believe is more important than what I have previously thought. the background could have been tighter I guess but overall I'm happy with the rendering.
(looks a lot better in HD but I don't know how to embed youtube clips in HD on this forum)
Posts
but where on earth is that wing coming from?
how it's positioned right now kinda makes it look like it's coming from her arse or lower back
If it takes more than an hour it's not a speedpaint.
I used to spend several hundreds of hours on a single digital painting before I learned the magical word known as "speed painting" - just thinking that I am doing something under time pressure makes me paint faster, with more confidence and precision and it makes me avoid rendering detail where detail is unnecessary.
You are right though, 9 hours is still too much for a painting of this caliber, I spent way too much time rendering that wing for instance. In any case, the techniques used when speed painting should not be any different from the techniques used when going "all in", that way you can always just do the same thing: which is speed paint, and if the painting turns out to be worth the extra effort you just continue.
So it's more of a philosophy than a technique. It streamlines my painting process, makes it time-cost-efficient. And more fun. :P
Awesome stuff. Good process.
That is fundamentally incorrect. What you have here is not a speed paint at all. Just because you are trying o work fast or have a time limit you are imposing on yourself, that does not make it a speed paint.
When you are speed painting, the goal is to get a complete image using any technique possible - as fast as possible. If it involves overlaying photos, or masking or using gradients, anything is fair game so long as it contributes to making the image 'complete' in less time.
Speed painting is good for thumbnails, or ideation. This combined with its timeliness is exactly why it's origins are rooted in production art, and why it is sill used predominantly there.
In fact, because you weren't speed painting is exactly why it took you so long to make it.
I like it and the girl looks familiar, cant quite pick it though. Girl of charmed or something but she is a TV star or a model I think.
This is not the way to do that. I do not know what refs you were using, but your impressive attention to detail does not lend itself to looseness. This whole piece is very rigid and it is not just the technique.
You started out with a face and you didn't change it in the nine hours you spent on this image. That is outrageous.
You need to use much larger brushes. You need to look at this drawing you did in nine hours and try to replicate it 20 minutes. It won't look as technically good as your current drawing, but I doubt very much that it will be dead on arrival like this one was.
The drawing was boring at 14 seconds into your video. It was also basically finished. You fleshed it out, but you didn't really give it anymore energy.
Really nice details though.
This is exactly why I come here. Reflecting on what you just said, and it makes perfect sense. Thanks for the insight.
While I don't really agree that it was dead on arrival as I did change it a few times. minor, but still, no refs, besides a schematic of how wings are built up, you are still correct that it is rigid, and I am not really playing around with it enough, it's even more apparent in my previous work, I know this, and what I mean by loosening up is not that I am yet doing it, it's that I need to do it, it is one of my goals is what I mean.
I think a lot of time-lapse videos are boring around the "14 second mark" (or wherever that threshold lies) and I tend to skip to the middle after watching the intro. My intention is not to make a good video, it's to paint a painting. The video is there to help me and you to critique my work.
I have always thought to myself that once I have the basic composition and layout done I am pretty much finished in terms of adding "artistic value". Detail rendering is something I have always seen as a "craft" more than anything else. 14 seconds in I was indeed "finished" as you say. Maybe this is also fundamentally wrong?
Anyway, I guess I will not call it "speed painting" any more since it confuses things, is there a better term for what I do? (or what I try to do?)
I'm on my way out the door so I haven't time for crits at the moment, but to clarify: he meant the painting itself was boring from 14 seconds after you started it, and all the rendering in the world couldn't change that. He didn't mean that the video was boring.
I don't totally agree. And I will say that your rendering skills are quite good.
I'll just add to this...
Most speed paint videos are entertaining because what the painter originally envisions at the beginning of the video, is totally different to the final outcome. This makes speed painting videos quite entertaining. Because yours already has a concept from the beginning, with little change in direction, it is not as entertaining. But thats not saying its bad. I actually think its really good (or, in other words, badass:)). I think its informative, shows your process/techniques and can be really good for people who are new to digital painting. It's more a tutorial video than a speed paint. But that doesnt really matter.
*thumbs-up*
huh, the pose was stiff to begin with so I guess I havn't learned a thing. T_T I started out just doodling and with no clear idea of what I was going to paint. I think if I want to reach my goals (yes I've been lurking the forums and have been thinkg about what I want to achieve) I need to do more life studies, get better at anatomy, compose before I paint and not paint unless composition is actually good and I have a more clear idea of what I want to draw. I realize I don't know shit about color, even though I've read tons of color theory. Getting feedback here on this forum was very valuable but I think that I could ask for critique in better ways also, like do thumbnails/parallell prototype sketching and ask which one of several ideas is better rather than diving straight in with the first idea that comes to mind. I come in from time to time and dive into one of the massive threads you guys have up here but I either don't have time to comment or just feel really stupid doing so but maybe I should critique more to get better at self critique as well.
I did a time-lapse of the above pic. I realize my skills are not up to par to make it worth while for anyone to watch my videos, but I find it to be quite fun to do these. But this will probably be my last for a while since I also realize I could probably have done about 15 anatomy studies in the time it took to edit these videos.
On the positive side I did actually finish this, which I am starting to believe is more important than what I have previously thought. the background could have been tighter I guess but overall I'm happy with the rendering.
(looks a lot better in HD but I don't know how to embed youtube clips in HD on this forum)
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2_iL8ylrF4&feature=channel
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfnb5SgrbCo&feature=channel
So next up is a huge dump of photos I took this year between april and july. Taken with my very first camera: Canon IXUS 980IS.
Beijing, China
More after the spoiler...
Hangzhou
Henan
taken at the actual Shaolin temple in Henan
Xian
6000 pixels wide version
Yangshou
Aso
Beppu
Himeji
Kumamoto
Kyoto
Nara
Nikko
Osaka
Cameron Highlands
[img]http://www.samimatilainen.com/images/asia_2009/Malaysia/Cameron Highlands/IMG_5630.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.samimatilainen.com/images/asia_2009/Malaysia/Cameron Highlands/IMG_5594.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.samimatilainen.com/images/asia_2009/Malaysia/Cameron Highlands/IMG_5632.jpg[/img]
Cherating
Khota Bharu
[img]http://www.samimatilainen.com/images/asia_2009/Malaysia/Khota Bharu/IMG_5965.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.samimatilainen.com/images/asia_2009/Malaysia/Kuala Lumpur/IMG_6698.jpg[/img]
Pulau Tioman
[img]http://www.samimatilainen.com/images/asia_2009/Malaysia/Pulau Tioman/IMG_6240.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.samimatilainen.com/images/asia_2009/Malaysia/Pulau Tioman/IMG_6239.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.samimatilainen.com/images/asia_2009/Malaysia/Pulau Tioman/IMG_6266.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.samimatilainen.com/images/asia_2009/Malaysia/Pulau Tioman/IMG_6290.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.samimatilainen.com/images/asia_2009/Malaysia/Pulau Tioman/diving.jpg[/img]
Singapore
Tetzuwan Atomu (Asro Boy) in the Ozamu Tetzuka Museum in Kobe.
Founding place of Nintendo in Kyoto.
I also visited their current HQ which is about a kilometer down the river. Yeah that is how geeky I am.
Detail at roughly 50% magnification