Dark Elf

Add a Comment

Comment by Lyndia Crawford on January 25, 2011 at 11:00

Hi there, this is great! knowing some of these products especially Photoshop - youve really put in the work - Impressive:-)

Comment by Patricia Genever on January 24, 2011 at 19:21

Hi Wendelien,

I don't mind you rambling on.  I have always wanted to know more about graphic art so I'm delighted you have taken the time to share your knowledge.  It gives me something to think about..  Thank you.

 

 

Comment by deborah a weaver on January 24, 2011 at 18:26

nothing wrong with the colors on the robe, go along with the glint of color in his eyes!makes one wonder what he is thiniking? Maybe put a touch of the blue in the background next time?  The subject makes me think of a royal prince or someone of royal bloodlines? Reminds me of The Lord of The Rings?  Believe me this is very well done, I could not do this digital at all!

Comment by W. M. on January 24, 2011 at 13:10

Hey Patricia!

 

It is mostly comparable, yes. In the end, it's only a simulation of the real thing, but you still need to understand what you're doing to get some results.  If you're not good at anatomy, making it digitally won't solve this problem. If your knowledge of colour is still lacking, it won't magically shine in harmony :)  In that regard, it's not different though many people that are not familiar with it do not yet consider it painting because they are not aware that it's not about simply clicking a few buttons.

 

Illustrator is very much intended for graphic design and is vector based, and photoshop is mostly aimed at the advertisement business. If you only want to learn one program, I would personally suggest Corel Painter, rather than photoshop because it's much more painting related in its behavior.  In truth, the names of the respective programs say it all :)   (Personally I paint in painter for about 98% and do my enhancements and edits in Photoshop, if I feel there is need for it, but in general I try not to.
The sad thing is that Photoshop is, as a program build, much better than Painter. It runs smooth and has great tablet accuracy, whereas Painter's is not so much off that it's annoying, but you do feel the difference when you use photoshop (sometimes I do thumbnails in photoshop because of this)  If your computer happens to be older, or not quite a powerhouse , Painter will be harder to work with because it tends to use only one or two cores of your processor and it really eats your power because the brush engine has to recalculate your every move and adjustment.  Try it out though, it may run just fine on you pc/mac. Can't hurt!

It's not easy to learn, as you say, and it can be quite discouraging in the beginning. Unfortunately I don't use watercolours in painter much so I regret I'm not able to help you much in that specific regard, but I might be able to help you with general questions.

You currently have two versions you can choose to use in Painter XI, the older (earlier Corel Painter versions) simply named 'Watercolor' and the newer one 'Digital Watercolor'  (They both come with the program together with Oils, Acrylics, Chalk, Pastel, Airbrush, Pencils, Ink, Palette knives etc so if you would like to try out Oils, you can ;D

I found that if I used too much water, or tried to erase or blend too much, my digital canvas would tear!! I was so amazed! (and a little shocked) In general the brushes need some tweaking before they behave more like actual aquarel brushes/paint.  With digital watercolour  there are some enhancements. For instance, you can choose to keep your paint wet in between sessions, and you also have the option to  instantly dry the layer of paint you just worked on.

 

Photoshop can do watercolour effects too, but you need custom brushes for it that don't come with the program, but it's not really a problem, they can be readily found on the net.  I do find they give more of a 'trick'  feeling though. A lot of watercolour effects in photoshop are post painting, and edited into the work rather than that they were painted as watercolours.

 

Drawing thumbnail variations or quick sketches may help, certainly.  Just focus on composition there. If you like that one, do some colour  tests. Do you have a lightbox/Lighttable? This may help if you would like to do several tries based on one (pencil) sketch.

 

....oh my gosh...I really rambled away there. I'm so sorry if I come across as a know-it-all because you probably already know half or more of this. It's really not my intention! Just trying to help a little.

 

 

 

 

Comment by Patricia Genever on January 24, 2011 at 10:31

Wendelien, so really what you are doing with a pen, is no different to the artist that uses a brush. The only difference is that you are able to save your previous layer, and experiment more, similar to working in oils and acrylics, but  not similar to watercolor's.

At  the moment, I am wandering whether learning to use photoshop and illustrastor, since I have the Creative Adobe Suite, will enhance or stump my creativity.  Maybe my other option is just stick to drawing and maybe draw more variations before committing to my final choice, and painting it in watercolor.

The only downside is that it takes so long to learn a different program.

 

Comment by W. M. on January 24, 2011 at 2:52

Thank you Patricia! I tried for a bit of a cold and eerie look without being completely devoid of 'beauty' (though that is of course, in the eye of the beholder ;) )

In general I start all my paintings from scratch. Sometimes I scan in a pencil drawing but I'm honestly much more a painter than a draftswoman though I’m also working hard on my linework nowadays. I have the steps for this one, incidentally. I just happened to save a lot of them and realized I did that in quite even steps. If you would like to see them to clarify, I can upload it :) It has a grey underpainting for neutrality.

Yes it's possible to open photo's in Painter and draw or paint on them. You even have an autopaint function in Painter that horrifies me on many levels. I used to be part of the official Corel forum, but about 70% of what I saw there in galleries, were photographs that were first painted over with this 'autopaint' function or some other filter and then people reworked them. Let's just say I was more than a bit disappointed.  It's true digital painting has certain aspects that make it much more forgiving to make mistakes, like layers, where you sort of work on different 'glass plates' that you can just rework separately without altering the entirety of your piece (though you can of course always choose to paint straight on the canvas without layers. I try to avoid too many layers)

Then there's functions like scaling and adjusting and colour correction and of course you do not have to mix your colours from real paint, but can just pick them from the colour wheel, while actual mixing is positively an entire art in itself and requires a lot of practice, skill and knowledge.  (Painter does have a mixing pad though, for those who try to get as close to the real experience as possible)

 It’s not all a pro though. Many people that paint from photo reference use, for instance, a tool (eyedropper) that identifies the colour of the pixel of where you click on your reference photo.  This is all nice, but it does jack squad for your colour identification ability. It does not help you to properly learn how to see values either, which is already a very hard thing in itself.

Of course the same thing goes for if you trace something over. You don’t learn anything from that.  I find it a difference when people draw it first and then overlay the photo to see where they made mistakes, because then you might realize something new, but that it’s painted digitally does not have to mean it is just an enhanced photograph.

The pro is that you are able to experiment more riskily on a piece (what would happen if) because you know you can revert it to an older save, or just delete the layer or undo the steps/brushstrokes. At the same time it has the flaw that you also encounter with digital photography. Because your amount of tries is unlimited, you generally tend to fool around more which is not a guarantee for an improvement at all.  With an analog camera, you may only have 36 shots (or less) you tend to give much more attention to the quality of the shot. Once you click, you can’t undo it after all, where in digital photography you might be able to make a 1000 before your card is full and you get immediate feedback on the screen.

 

 

Comment by Patricia Genever on January 23, 2011 at 22:49

I love the light source on this one.. Fantastic!!

Wendy do you start this painting from scratch or can you also import photo's or drawings as well??

Comment by W. M. on January 23, 2011 at 16:03

I'll be happy to try and answer any question you may have regarding it :)

 

And thank you! it would be nice to be part of a friendly forum. There's so many out there with people that just throw around harsh words, sadly.

Comment by W. M. on January 23, 2011 at 15:24

No worries! I can understand it's a little confusing. Yes they are painted digitally. I used to use a pressure sensitive tablet with a pen that acts as your brush/pencil/palette knife/eraser etc, whichever you choose in a program called Corel Painter.  I just bought a new tablet though, where you can 'draw on the monitor' so it feels a bit more like real painting. Doesn't beat the real medium though :) it's just for convenience since I don't have the space or appropriate room to use traditional media.