Imagination/creativity

[ShaneHudson]

This is one of my problems too, I am useless without a reference! I would love to see this answered.

[Lunatique]

Even advanced professional artists use references. Using references isn't about copying them--it's about consulting them when you need to, and changing things if you feel like it. They are guideline, not strict rules.

If you have ideas for visual storytelling, then first write out a description of the scene or a list of all the things you'd like to depict in the scene. Then go and gather the references you need in order to execute the image.

Drawing out of your head is all about memorizing and learning about the structure of many things, on top of having a strong grasp of the foundations of visual art. If you have not learned properly about lighting, values, colors...etc, you will not be able to work out of your head convincingly--especially when going beyond simple line drawings.

It's simply impossible to build a memory bank in your brain of how everything looks in existence, and that is precisely why it's misguided to think that "good artists" only work out of their heads. It's one of the most misguided rumors and myths being passed around by novice artists who don't even understand what the word "reference" actually entails.

[mocaw]

It's simply impossible to build a memory bank in your brain of how everything looks in existence, and that is precisely why it's misguided to think that "good artists" only work out of their heads. It's one of the most misguided rumors and myths being passed around by novice artists who don't even understand what the word "reference" actually entails.

I fought this for years as I either thought you were copying something or "making it up" and never the two shall meet. As I became an illustrator I learned the importance of "understanding" the subject. I'm still at just the beginning of this road, but using it in conjunction with constructive methods (such as those emphasized by Villpu and the like) of image building has helped quite a bit and opened quite a few doors for me. It's much harder to do than just copying or just making it up as it seems to work a much larger portion of my brain and draw on many more levels of experience. It's very rewarding though too!

I like to think of it as a more procedural approach where you build as you go. What makes a Mickey Mouse or a door, a tree, or a "real cat" what they are? What describes them at the most basic level? If broken down to volumes or planes what do we have? Where are these things similar? It sounds "hippy dippy" or out there, but trying to understand things and break them down to their simplest forms and building them then back up is an invaluable tool IMHO.

I'm still working on (not that it ever stops) the story telling/acting parts that Lunatique wrote about, but I have to agree that in my limited experience those are powerful tools to take with you in what ever image or style you are trying to create. They will inform you above all else as to the "what" for the image.

I also have to agree that learning some of the foundations of art and design will help you think less about the look, and more about the why and the story telling. There are some really basic concepts that as extremely powerful and relatively easy to employ on almost any subject.

Even something as simple as what contrast means in an image can really make or break something, or take it from 85% good to 95% great. This carries over to photography, pen and ink, cg, you name it.

[Jatobi]

Yes, I understand what the true meaning of reference is. I didn't mean that in a way that only "awesome artist" don't use reference.

But thanks for the advice :). That may help to be honest. When something comes to mind, depict it on paper and translate it with lines later!!

Now, I have by no means learned any traditional art teachings, had any type of formal schooling. I have been drawing since a young age and have continued since. It's a passion. I never considered school for it, it's more of a hobby I suppose. But I do know that I need to learn certain things to progress. Do you recommend any books/videos to self teach myself those things? I know lighting has a huge role in a scene, and without knowing the foundation, as you said, the scene wouldn't look right.

jatobi.deviantart.com has some of my manga stuff. The ones I've uploaded anyway. I truely am looking to go beyond manga, I want to do more fantasy stuff.

Thanks again for the tips! Keep them coming please!

[mocaw]

Now, I have by no means learned any traditional art teachings, had any type of formal schooling. I have been drawing since a young age and have continued since. It's a passion. I never considered school for it, it's more of a hobby I suppose. But I do know that I need to learn certain things to progress. Do you recommend any books/videos to self teach myself those things?


The most important thing I received from my schooling was learning how I learn. I know it sounds cheesy, but seeing others learn, and how they did it, and comparing it to my self was invaluable. There is nothing wrong in many ways with being self taught as long as you don't let yourself get too frustrated when trying to learn something in a more formal way.

Your most likely running and crawling at the same time in terms of your skill set, so frustration is to be expected.

Knowing how you learn though is going to help others recommend and you find the appropriate learning materials. Personally I like things to be a bit more procedural as I said before. It's a very slow process, but very powerful and there are many ways to teach and learn it.

Look, a lot of us at one point were also "human copy machines". Put an image or scene in front of us and away we go. Once you start trying to tell a story though, you need to bend reality, create things that might be "real" but you don't have the right image for. Light things yet you don't have any one image that you can copy that from either. So you have to now start to understand it- not just replicate it.


I know lighting has a huge role in a scene, and without knowing the foundation, as you said, the scene wouldn't look right.


IMHO- you need to start with understanding forms before you begin to get heavily into this subject. Forms and their spacial relationship(s) will make it easier to deal with this subject. There is no harm in dabbling in it though, so long as you're looking at starting with other methods that are more of the foundation first IMHO.

Additionally, if you look at Robert's portfolio, you'll see that his images are very story driven- the way your eye is lead around isn't just some art history BS- he's using quite a bit of it to build a strong image. Even with all of his rendering/painting ability, if he didn't posses this skill first, the image would in no way be as powerful, and would more be an exquisite study instead of a work of art. Don't underestimate the "basics".

[CGmonkey]

Do you actually think professional illustrators just paints whatever is in their head? It's an evolutionary process that grows out of a small idea. Look at this perfect example of James Gurney's process of an illustration:

part 1- 7.
http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2009/07/utopiales-poster-part-1.html

http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2009/07/utopiales-poster-part-2.html

http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2009/07/utopiales-poster-part-3-maquette.html

http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2009/07/utopiales-poster-part-3-maquette.html

http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2009/07/line-drawing.html

http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2009/07/utopiales-poster-part-6-washin.html

http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2009/07/utopiales-poster-part-7-painting.html

[Jatobi]

I don't think all illustrators come out of their head with what they do, but some are able to do just that. I'm unable to even draw manga out of my head =P. But I understand what you are saying and that is a great example.

Duely noted.

Continue with the advice please, very helpful.

[mocaw]

Here is the thing. 99% of people who look like they're pulling something out of thin air with any creative skill are not. It might be the first time they've played that tune, the first time they've sketched XYZ etc. but what you're not seeing are the hours of practice and knowledge building and thinking that lead up to that point.

For every artist that revels in the lime light of those not familiar with the creative process, there are at least a dozen that are angry when so much lip is given to "creative genius" and talent. These people know that the creative act they are currently doing is an accumulation of knowledge and skill developed over X amount of years up to that very point.

True- some people have better balance than others, and some can hold a pencil better, but once you're past that basic level there is a lot of hard work and thinking at play and to pretend otherwise is to A- let yourself off easy and B- not give credit where it's due IMHO.

I've known too many "talented" people who blamed their lack of skill on a lack of "genius". We call them under achievers- and in some cases they are just plain lazy.

If you go to a half way good art school, or start a viz job of any kind, you should quickly realize that you are swimming in talent and that it's a given if you're going to be in this field. Talent+interest is merely the starting point in a creative life IMHO.

[bonestructure]

I don't know a single accomplished, professional artist who doesn't use reference images. Sure, we may be able to construct a scene which comes completely from the imagination, but in reality we're pulling things we've seen and are familiar with out of memory. For example, I'm contracted to do a scene this year which takes place in a stable. Well, I grew up on a farm. I know what stables look like. But that memory is still a reference image, just internal rather than external.

As far as external, most artists I know have a huge file of images, called a morgue file. Just thousands of photos of anything that catches our attention. Mine has landscapes, furniture, interiors, walls, floors, people, animals, pretty much anything and everything, and if stacked up would be close to three feet tall. You take a piece from this photo, a piece from that one, a person from another, a sky from another, a chair, a clothesline, a screen door, and you combine those various bits and pieces using your artistic sensibility to place them in the composition. My last book cover I needed to create a particular kind of house, with a particular look. I could not have created that house accurately, as far as architecture, without my reference images. Mind you, I didn't duplicate the reference image exactly, I made my own version of it, suited to my needs. But it was still basically the house from the reference image.

If you try to do a piece of art completely from your imagination, chances are it won't have any reality, it won't look right. Those solid references are not used on a whim, they're necessary to create the world of the image.

[bonestructure]

"Now, I have by no means learned any traditional art teachings, had any type of formal schooling. I have been drawing since a young age and have continued since. It's a passion. I never considered school for it, it's more of a hobby I suppose. But I do know that I need to learn certain things to progress. Do you recommend any books/videos to self teach myself those things? I know lighting has a huge role in a scene, and without knowing the foundation, as you said, the scene wouldn't look right."

I am both a professional writer and artist. My mentors have been Erle Stanley Gardner, Bob Bloch, JN Williamson and Piers Anthony. I mention that because I want to be able to tell you this with some authority rather than as simple opinion.

The act of creation is mostly hard damn work. It's labor. The thing that makes the difference is that we love what we do, and no matter how hard the labor, we enjoy it and find it fun.

As far as opinion, it's also my opinion that to be a truly good artist/writer/creator, one must make one's self vulnerable, be very honest about one's self, expose one's self good and bad. That enters into the work and gives it content and power and meaning.

I'm one of those people who highly recommends art training. Not everyone thinks that's important. I disagree. My opinion. But I had many years of education in art. That education won't help you create art. What it does is teach you the principle concepts and the basics of technique. The advantage of that is that after several years of practice, you enter something of a zen state wherein you no longer have to think about things like composition, color balance, scale, etc. You just DO them, automatically. You get a sense of knowing where to place things in the scene, what kind of light it needs (though switching to 3D from traditional art makes that a new problem to solve). When you don't have to concentrate on these basic things in the image, your mind is freer to focus on the creative process of the image.

As var as books or materials, I'll recommend the same things I always recommend. Get all the books by Burne Hogarth you can find. They're all still in print and available for the most part. He was a comic book artist, but he was also an amazing artist. His books concentrate mostly on anatomy, but he has one on wrinkles, one on lighting. I learned a lot from his books. Even his books on anatomy can be usd to learn how to deal with creating other geometries.

Past that, get a good book on the principles of composition, and something on color balance and using colors.

[Jatobi]

Awesome advice! Really appreciate it!!

[mocaw]

...You get a sense of knowing where to place things in the scene, what kind of light it needs (though switching to 3D from traditional art makes that a new problem to solve). ...

Sorry I don't mean to de-rail this thread but...

I think that this is where direct lighting techniques are helpful IMHO. Vray and such can produce fantastic images, but creating mood and adding light effects that re not anywhere real, but help tell the story are harder for me to do when using lighting techniques that "bounce it around" like in reality. I'm more and more use to creating images- not re-creating reality. Does that make sense?

I found the Jeremy Birn book invaluable for this reason:

http://www.3drender.com/light/index.html

If you have a basic understanding of film/photography and composition then it's helpful. Direct lighting is more like "painting with light" and illustration IMHO since you're breaking real rules when you want for reasons that pertain to telling the story/concept.

I often have clients ask me for NPR renders that look like certain forms of illustration. Without using direct lighting techniques you'd be SOL trying to get them even close IMHO. Not everyone wants "photo realistic" as it doesn't always "illustrate" and idea the best!

What has been your experience in this area bonestructure when using 3D?

[dbclemons]

Not everything you make needs to be a "masterpiece." If you're being blocked by the concern that whatever you start must end up as something significant, toss that aside. In fact, in terms of releasing your imagination, that would be like trying to force yourself to sleep, which defeats the purpose. Just relax, and in this case, paint or doodle or whatever. Every good idea starts from something very simple, so don't feel you have to force it. If it doesn't go anywhere, chalk it up to experience, and start over again. There's always more where it came from.

[bonestructure]

"I think that this is where direct lighting techniques are helpful IMHO. Vray and such can produce fantastic images, but creating mood and adding light effects that re not anywhere real, but help tell the story are harder for me to do when using lighting techniques that "bounce it around" like in reality. I'm more and more use to creating images- not re-creating reality. Does that make sense?"

I agree, somewhat if I understand what you're saying. I'm an illustrator. I don't want my images to look photoreal. If I wanted that, I would take a photo. I have great respect for the artists that do photoreal, but it's not what I do. I don't use lighting to duplicate real life. I use it to achieve what *I* want to achieve. Oh, I've been bitched at about it. Oh, you shouldn't use an omni light for a bounce or a highlight when you're using a Vray light. Yadda yadda yadda. I don't care. If it looks the way I want it to look, full speed ahead and the hell with what anyone else says. I get criticized because my images don't look photoreal, but only come close. Well, no one ever stops to think that that's exactly what I want. I'm creating art, not a photograph.

[Jatobi]

Advice keeps flowing and I keep jotting notes lol.

Now, one more question.

I use Adobe Photoshop CS4, I'm thinking about picking up Painter 11. I got the trial for it, and omg it has so much potential. Until I do get Painter, what brushes should I look for to do some digital painting, but have that classic feel like it was painted on a canvas? If know you what I mean.

I like all of the different brushes in painter, they are great.

I have a few days to dwindle about and draw starting Sunday. We'll see where my hand takes me :).

[Jatobi]

So I have a new noobish question to be answered, if you please.

I recently played through the game "The Witcher" and was astounded by the artwork portrayed on each loading screen. They are beautiful. Here's the question, what form/technique/style is used to create such a painting? I'm very interested in doing work such as that. Its simple, yet complex in the same way. Random lines put into places in place of texture. This is one of those loading screens, http://www.rpgcodex.net/images/screenshots/witcher/loading2.jpg, and another which truely point out what I mean by the random lines, http://www.rpgcodex.net/screenshot.php?file=witcher/loading1.jpg.

If you could point me in the right direction I'd much appreciate it. Google the witcher loading screens for more of them. Hard to explain exactly what I mean. The way the person painted them, the style, is what I'm looking for.

[Lunatique]

I'm actually right in the middle of the writing the surface treatment portion of my upcoming workshop, where I detail all the different uses of brushwork, line quality, textures, expressive surface treatments vs. clean and detailed...etc.

Essentially, it's all about understanding the relationship between shapes created by larger brushes and the marks made by smaller brushes, and determining where to create visual interest and where to keep things simple.

If you like that style, then you should check out Craig Mullins work. He pretty much pioneered and popularized that style in the digital realm. Just about all the digital artists in the industry today doing that style were influenced by him.

That kind of sensibility more or less originated from 19th century artists like John Singer Sargent (who is one of Craig's main influences), Anders Zorn, Joaquin Sorolla...etc, where the brushwork is usually more loose and expressive, borrowing from the sensibility of the impressionists, but still trying to capture light, form, and colors in a more realistic manner than the impressionists. Today's artists like Richard Schmid, Jeremy lipking, Morgan Weistling, Scott Burdick...etc continue that tradition, painting in alla prima, with expressive brushwork and from life--usually in one session. Also check out Pino--he's pretty crazy with the brush too, and his color sense is pretty unique.

[Jatobi]

Wow, Craig Mullins is simply amazing. Thanks for the names Lunatique, you've been a huge help. In regards to the style itself, is there a proper name to call it by to do more research on it? I really do like it. As I said, after playing through that game, I've been captivated by it. Its driving me, makes me want to paint when ever I see anything like it. The more I see, the more I want to do.

Anything to help me along the way is helpful. Starting with those names, was a huge help in itself!

Thanks again!!


***Edit***
For those interested, I have been searching for Craig Mullins works when I came across this tutorial. http://www.gfxartist.com/features/tutorials/7731 really good looking tutorial for this type of work. Hope to find more.

[Lunatique]

The only name that kind of comes close to that painting style would be alla prima, which means direct painting, usually done in one session. The inherent immediacy of that painting approach means you can't take too long and render everything to be amazingly detailed and smooth--the idea is to capture all the major important essence of the image--the lighting, the colors, the shapes, the mood...etc, and to do it in one sessions means you have to pick and choose where to put detail and where to keep things simple by merely suggesting instead of spelling everything out blatantly. While the looser painting style is an inherent characteristic of alla prima painting, that style of brushwork is often borrowed by artists who don't necessarily paint alla prima, but are attracted to that expressive brushwork style, thus implementing that brushwork style into non-alla prima works. Like I already mentioned, the 19th century impressionists also had similar sensibilities. Sargent was heavily influenced by the impressionists, and it really shows in his work. Out of all the names, the one you really need to study is Sargent, as he's pretty much the one that everyone names as their major inspiration and influence. I also highly recommend you buy one of Richard Schmid's DVD's, as they are simply amazing. To watch him start and finish a painting in realtime, and with the result being so brilliant, yet taking only a fraction of the time that lesser artists would take while trying to cram in a bunch of useless detail--it's really a revelation. The sea captain one is one of my favorite, but all of his painting DVD's are brilliant--I have most of them.

[Jatobi]

As always Lunatique, thanks a ton! I can now start my research. I've been looking at Sargent and Frazetta since you've mentioned them :). They are really great artists. Let's see what I can learn!

[Jatobi]

I've been reading Loomis' book on figure drawing, what a help it is. The plan, the vanishing points, the setup of 8 heads. Lot of things I've never known, makes things a lot easier. Setting up a person, male or female, seemed a lot harder than it should be, and now I know why.

Loomis books = win.

[Jatobi]

Alright so I got Painter 11 and liking it so far. Question is this: which brush should I use to get the feel of craig mullins? I've been trying them out and have yet to find one that fits it. I've tried the oils but they just don't feel right.

[Lunatique]

Please read this thread about such questions:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=112&t=219283

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.