Painting of Tica by Dru Blair

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  06 June 2005
Whats the problem? He is just another Hyper-Realist. Go to an art-museum and keep an eye out for realistic and Hyper-realistic Painters.
 
  06 June 2005
Perhaps there's some answers to this in his so called buffer theory:

http://www.drublair.com/workshops/buffer.html
 
  06 June 2005
I guess it's just something that I would have to see in person.

There is some really impressive stuff on his site, but this one is different. There are elements in this work that just seem way too precise. I've never even seen masters get so precise as far as hair strands and small pores on the face and I can't picture this guy cutting out a mask for every pore and strand of hair in under 80 hours.

I've seen tons of hyper real artists, but are you trying to say that this one doesn't raise a red flag in your head about being a real painting?
__________________
WWW.BONYTO.COM Don't be Evil!


DWIII Entry

Last edited by dmonk : 06 June 2005 at 03:44 PM.
 
  06 June 2005
It looks rather suspicious to me. The progression captures look contrived, as though, it were reverse engineered.



However, if this is authentic, it's an impressive technical exercise.



In regards to artistic merit, I'm not a big fan of hyper-realism -- I just don't see any creative validation in mimicry.
 
  06 June 2005
Originally Posted by danielh68: It looks rather suspicious to me. The progression captures look contrived, as though, it were reverse engineered.



However, if this is authentic, it's an impressive technical exercise.



In regards to artistic merit, I'm not a big fan of hyper-realism -- I just don't see any creative validation in mimicry.


Quoted for agreement. I was thinking the same thing exactly.

Art
__________________
character animator
Watch my short film: Pen' Pals
 
  06 June 2005
Unbe****inglievable!

The picture those three guys are posing with, I can believe is a painting. The close-up with the skin pores - sorry, I just don't buy it! That level of detail, as said before, has got nothing to do with the rest of his artwork, it's a whole new level! Come on - lens aberrations?!?
__________________
Cheers!
( ( ((DrFx)) ) )
 
  06 June 2005
From the link:

Quote: Detail of final painting showing skin texture. Subtle nuances created by an xacto knife, an eraser, and some colored pencil can build convincing skin texture. The etcetera technique also helps the believability of the skin and hair texture. Fine hair is created using my shield-reveal technique, and my split frisket technique.


It's not all airbrushed. Personally I believe it can be done, even though this is so photorealistic it's absurd. It must've taken him a million years if it's really a painting.
__________________
VFX Artist
// OSL Shaders //
 
  06 June 2005
Originally Posted by Rens Heeren: From the link:



It's not all airbrushed. Personally I believe it can be done, even though this is so photorealistic it's absurd. It must've taken him a million years if it's really a painting.


thats the thing, on his site it said it took him 65-75 hours! IMO thats just way to short of a time to be believed. I would like to believe this is a painting...if he has said it took him a year and a half, I might believe it more easily.
 
  06 June 2005
If its real, then WOWZER but it does look a little suspect, way too real. And the progress shots do look a little dodgy + he has no other portrait work on diplay at his site just aircraft etc?

but again I will eat my hat if it is real, would have really taken months than hours though. IMO
 
  06 June 2005
I would say it's a painting, and a impressive one. IMO the skin around the mouth and eyebrows have a painted look, good to see in the big picture.

Bob
__________________
http://www.bobtronic.com
 
  06 June 2005
Originally Posted by bobtronic: I would say it's a painting, and a impressive one. IMO the skin around the mouth and eyebrows have a painted look, good to see in the big picture.

Bob


I just don't see it.



If he used the instrument and materials that he says that he used, why don't we see any hint of the slightest bit of texture? If this is a photgraph of the original why don't we see any slight color variation?

I looks like a hi res digital photo.
__________________
WWW.BONYTO.COM Don't be Evil!


DWIII Entry

Last edited by dmonk : 06 June 2005 at 05:53 PM.
 
  06 June 2005
Originally Posted by dmonk: I hate to call something out like this, but I just don't buy it.


what if I make you a special discount ?
__________________

 
  06 June 2005
Too bad he doesn't provide any more "proof" online... I can't say for a fact that it is what he says it is, but I haven't seen any signs of a hoax, apart from the apparent quality of the piece.
 
  06 June 2005
Originally Posted by DrFx: Come on - lens aberrations?!?

I thought the same thing initially but this is a photograph of what's supposed to be a painting. You'd get most of the aberrations anyway. HOWEVER some aberrations will show up only on the real thing.

Correct me if I'm wrong on any of this, but check out this image.

Right earring:


There is some chromatic aberration in the image (left earring) and it seems to suggest that the center of the image is either to the left or right of her head, outside of the large close-up. That seems to correspond with the last picture on that page, showing the center of the photograph to the right of her head.

But look at the above image. See the purple haze around the bright parts of the earring? Now, I don't see that anywhere else in the picture and that leaves only one possible cause I know of and that is sensor blooming. It occurs when you take a photo of a super-bright object with certain kinds of digital cameras.
The fact that it's only visible on the very bright parts of the right earring could tell you that this is indeed a photograph of a woman and not a photograph of a painting, as it would not show up on a painting.
Unless he took sensor blooming into account, as a true master of photo-realism could do.

Perhaps the image is the reference, not the result?
__________________
VFX Artist
// OSL Shaders //
 
  06 June 2005
Maybe he doesn't spend time trying to prove it's a painting because he's too busy painting something else? I've seen some great and photo real airbrush stuff before.

A high quality airbrush in the hands of a master craftsman can make some of the most beautiful art ever seen. It's more than just cat's eyes, motorcycle helmets, and "true love 4 eva" license plates.

Why are there so many people quick to try and say this is a photo? Is it so unbelievable that someone is this talented? Come on people.
__________________
=============
Floyd Bishop

YouTube Channel
Char Maya Character Rig
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.