Cg Art Work Vs Pencils

VR_Jay · Very Oldbie Joined: 13 Apr 2004 Posts: 2725

Hmmm. I disagree. I like to color on the comp. And I don't think it takes less time or talent to color on the computer. Of course, you have to know the basics before you can do it effectively. You can't be a good painter without a firm base in drawing, so it stands to reason that those who are good with more traditional color mediums, like pastels and pencils, will be better at CG coloring.

I'll use this as an example. Took about 2 1/2 hours to color (including prep work).

Click here..
_________________
[img]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y47/VR_Jay/Anti_Commecial_Banners_by_Nevar530.jpg[/img] [img]http://s2.photobucket.com/albums/y47/VR_Jay/th_myvsweetkiss1xc.gif[/img]

[color=black]"Your toast is burnt and no amount of scraping will remove the black stuff!" ~ Caboose, Red vs. Blue[/color]

Physcowolf · Newb Joined: 23 Dec 2004 Posts: 3

I'm not poting this against any one in perticular, so if some one who reads this decides to take it personally, don't bother to reply.

Its actually kind of sad these days, but lots of people on the internet like to comment often, more on CGED art work then Pencil colored. Its actually kind of sad seeing as it takes, with practice, a shorter amont of time to CG somting then actually Coloring it by hand. In my Mind, this just means you've got no talent in coloring, and am to lazy to go a head and practice.
While their also people, like Chibijaime, Who do some kick as work with that I, think, straight out drawing. What that is, Is Drawing with out haveing to erase much. That or she's got a sweet scanner. While other Artist, kind of like me, and theirs some others that I don't remeber the names to, but we try and get little replies. So thats really down hearting for some other artist out their.

Cuz trust me, I'd love to have adobe or a good photoeditor.

Again, this isn't aimed at any one so don't take a defensive postion with me, I'll win. I get lots of pratice with my mom...

DaBear · Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:48 am Post subject:

[quote]Hmmm. I disagree. I like to color on the comp. And I don't think it takes less time or talent to color on the computer.[/quote]

I have to agree with Will. altough I have nothing against hand drawn and colorized pictures. love them and cg art when its done right. anyone can do crap work with any medium. for great charcol and pencil work check out Fallenangels, Lombi's, Florence's, and TerryXart's work on FAC. if you want to see excellent cg works check out Diathene's and Drew Gardner's areas. I myself work with all types of media, but most often cg work... for example and this one too. if you want to do art in any medium, and do it well, your going to bust your can and have multipule redoes before you see what you want to see...lol, and then someone will still find something wrong!

Ill be posting my version of "Buttercup" in the WIPs thread sometime tonight. I think Ill finnish it in the style I shown here above.
_________________
'It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.' - Ronald Reagan

VR_Jay · Very Oldbie Joined: 13 Apr 2004 Posts: 2725

I LOVE using charcoal, though I don't post any of those because a) They are usually too big to fit in a scanner and b ) they can leave smudges, even after you have sprayed them.
_________________
[img]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y47/VR_Jay/Anti_Commecial_Banners_by_Nevar530.jpg[/img] [img]http://s2.photobucket.com/albums/y47/VR_Jay/th_myvsweetkiss1xc.gif[/img]

[color=black]"Your toast is burnt and no amount of scraping will remove the black stuff!" ~ Caboose, Red vs. Blue[/color]

Diathene · Very bored Joined: 31 Dec 1969 Posts: 109

[quote="Physcowolf (Demon.)"] Its actually kind of sad seeing as it takes, with practice, a shorter amont of time to CG somting then actually Coloring it by hand. [/quote]
Something of a moot point, as with practise, it can take a shorter amount of time to colour something by hand than it does to colour it digitally. It all depends on your experience with the medium. If a piece of digital art took me 20 hours (which a good number of them do) it [b]took 20 hours[/b]. I don't think my work should be devalued because someone has the misconception that digital media is "easy".

As far as comments go, I think it's more down to the subject matter, than the medium. As Bruce mentioned, I'm a digital artist, and I bet I don't get half the number of comments you assume I do, because I don't draw anime fanart.

I'd also like to mention, for what it's worth, that my art has been mistaken for oils or acrylics on more than a few occasions. Make of that what you will.

Stratadrake · Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 2:04 pm Post subject:

My opinion? People in general are more easily impressed with CG than with traditional media when seen in an inherently computerized transfer medium i.e. the Internet.

I work with pencils and colored pencils, myself. And despite that I've been at it for five years, when it comes to CG, I can't CG worth squat. CG just doesn't "feel" as intuitive, nor as tactile, as shading on a piece of paper with traditional media.

As far as quality goes, sometimes quality is in the amount of time and effort you put in to a drawing (which, in turn, can vary according to medium and technique). But more often, it's in the skill.

For example, while I tend to generally invest about 3-4 hours in each drawing, the actual time spent varies a lot, depending on the subject/background and the technique used. Sometimes it takes forever to get a decent drawing done, other times it feels as if I can just whip out a masterpiece on a moment's notice.

Normal technique:
- http://www.fanart-central.net/pictures.php?pid=148550 (2000), about 3-4 hours (actual time unknown)
- http://www.fanart-central.net/pictures.php?pid=77069 (2003), about 3 hours (actual time unknown)
- http://www.fanart-central.net/pictures.php?pid=152863 (last month), 5 1/2 hours
- http://www.fanart-central.net/pictures.php?pid=167907 (new), 2 1/2 hours
Inverted technique:
- http://www.fanart-central.net/pictures.php?pid=127992 (last Sept.) - 4 hours
- http://www.fanart-central.net/pictures.php?pid=160219 (last month) - 6 hours
Mosaic technique:
- http://www.fanart-central.net/pictures.php?pid=76727 (2001) - 9 hours

As for CG medium, I agree with what Jay, Diathene, and the others say. It's not the time you spent, it's not what you have, it's how you USE what you have.

_________________
Strata here: [url=http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/242293]Nanowrimo[/url] - [url=www.fanart-central.net/user-Stratadrake.php]FAC[/url] - [url=http://stratadrake.deviantart.com]dA[/url] - [url=www.furaffinity.net/user/Stratadrake/]FA[/url]
[size=9]Disclaimer: Posts may contain URLs. Click [url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife]at your own risk.[/url][/size]

Dogss · Would like fries with that Joined: 05 Jul 2004 Posts: 807

You need a good amout of experience to produce anything decent with digital art. You have to know what you're doing with the layers and multiplying them and all that. It takes me hours to do a full colored drawing. And that's with a cortoony style, Imagin how long it would take to add realisim!

I like to combine the two mediums. It's fun! I'll scan a pen and ink drawing and color it digitally sometimes to get an animated look. I love my Wacom tablet, though, It saves scetchbooks and a feel very comfortable with it.

P.S. WHat is the mosaic technique?
_________________
Mohawks are beautiful sculptures

Stratadrake · Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:24 am Post subject:

You know what a mosaic is, right?

The "mosaic technique" is a term I thought up on the fly to describe one of my drawings. Basically you shade blobs of color onto a sheet of paper, dice it up into little paper 'tiles', then glue them to gray or black paper background to create a mosaic.

Check the link I listed next to it for my example.
_________________
Strata here: [url=http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/242293]Nanowrimo[/url] - [url=www.fanart-central.net/user-Stratadrake.php]FAC[/url] - [url=http://stratadrake.deviantart.com]dA[/url] - [url=www.furaffinity.net/user/Stratadrake/]FA[/url]
[size=9]Disclaimer: Posts may contain URLs. Click [url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife]at your own risk.[/url][/size]

Rei-chan · Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:

Okay here...as a traditional artist, I truly understand what you mean by that. ^^ Well, to me, both CG and traditional arts are equal. Because both of them need good efforts and techniques. To CG nicely is not an easy task, and the same goes to the traditional arts. I would think a good artist should be balance with both CG and traditional arts.

If you say people mostly CG arts, yes, I do agree with you. But if anyone with good skills in traditional arts, surely they will notice her/him. ^^ Anyway, I hope my words didn't offence anyone here and please forgive me if I do. ::bows::
_________________
~Care to join me with my doujinshi projects, dearest Malaysia fellows?~

CyberkittyKG · Member Joined: 13 Sep 2004 Posts: 46

I think the reason CG art can be more impressive than traditional art when seen over the internet is because it's created directly on the computer without having to make the transition through the scanner (which may butcher your art in the process, creating flaws in color and making unnoticable marks on the hard copy blatant), and because it's a digital medium, it appears cleaner, with finer details, on the monitor screen.

I would also like to mention that a lot of my CG art looks much better on the screen than on paper, so it works both ways...

And I agree with a lot of people here; using a computer to create your work doesn't necessarily mean than it'll be faster. I use Ulead Photoimpact to create my work (a program that's not quite as advanced as Photoshop, I'm sorry to say...it doesn't have the layers tool), and after using this program for a while, even the shortcuts I figured out with practice still don't quite cut down on the production time.

Talin · Has No Life Joined: 15 Aug 2004 Posts: 498

[quote="Stratadrake (Strata)"] when it comes to CG, I can't CG worth squat. CG just doesn't "feel" as intuitive, nor as tactile, as shading on a piece of paper with traditional media.

As far as quality goes, sometimes quality is in the amount of time and effort you put in to a drawing (which, in turn, can vary according to medium and technique). But more often, it's in the skill.

For example, while I tend to generally invest about 3-4 hours in each drawing, the actual time spent varies a lot, depending on the subject/background and the technique used. Sometimes it takes forever to get a decent drawing done, other times it feels as if I can just whip out a masterpiece on a moment's notice.

[/quote]
You took the words right out of my mouth.

I love working with colored pencils, thats basically all I work with, besides woodless graphite.

Beatlechick90 · Posted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 2:10 pm Post subject:

I don't think I've ever CG'd something in my life. I rarely colour drawings anyways, but when I do I use pencil crayons. I had a good coloured pic of Josie and the Pussycats, but when I scanned it in the colouring didn't look good at all.
_________________
[url=http://dollyrockersinc.piczo.com][img]http://pic.piczo.com/img/i122379787_59088_3.gif[/img][/url]

unfocused · Moderator Joined: 17 Jul 2004 Posts: 6983 Location: Texas

I Think I know where Physcowolf is coming from. I do mostly pencil stuff, I'm just so incredibly comfortable with that than anything else. I've done a little coloring with my computer, and I think some of it came out fairly nice. But mostly I do sketches. It gets me angry when I see "Number of views: 79" and have absolutly no comments. And when someone does some crappy CG and gets *faved* 10 times for just that, because most people don't know how to CG.

I think you are all looking at it wrong... it [u]IS[/u] actually easier to CG than use traditional media, in a way. With computer generated work, you can draw a circle and gradient the damn thing to make it look better than it looked before you even scanned it into your computer. CG is basically a form of an upgrade, you have to draw something first if you want to CG it, right? Maybe that's the whole hype about CGing. Even [i]I'm[/i] hyped about it (I'm paying a guy 100 bucks to CG a little drawing of mine.

I'd like more comments to, but that doesn't mean I want descent CGers (heh, never seen it written that way) to get less comments. I think CG is easier because no matter how nontalented you are, you can learn to CG like a pro faster than draw like a pro. Ask Lazycarter how long it took her to learn how to CG the way she does, then go ask TerryXart how long it her to learn to draw the way she does, then come back and tell me, 'cuz I really wanna know.

-You don't need talent to do either media well, just practice.
-You aren't a better artist if you can do both media well, just more skilled.

Lastly, I see a lot of you saying that it takes you just hours to finish something. That's hard to believe, because it literally takes me days, and in a few cases, a week to finish something. Yeah, it HAVE finished drawings in a matter of hours, but not many at all. Do you all just add up all the hours you actually worked on a peice rather than adding up the time it took you from the moment you started it to the moment you finished it? It does take me days to finish something, but I don't have the time to draw something start to finish, I have a life inbetween, so stop rushing me with the requests!. Anyway...

P.S. I've finished a 6 foot mural of the Virgin Mary in just over a day. But this took me 3 days to finish (including hours inbetween the times I actually had my pencil to the paper for both peices, well, pencil to the [i]wall[/i] in the case of the mural).
_________________
"edit : i luv james" - Layzcarter

Diathene · Very bored Joined: 31 Dec 1969 Posts: 109

[quote]It gets me angry when I see "Number of views: 79" and have absolutly no comments. And when someone does some crappy CG and gets *faved* 10 times for just that, because most people don't know how to CG.[/quote]

If that's the case I [i]really[/i] want to know where I'm going wrong ;p

[quote]I think you are all looking at it wrong... it [u]IS[/u] actually easier to CG than use traditional media, in a way. With computer generated work, you can draw a circle and gradient the damn thing [/quote]

Compass and screentone anyone?

Seriously though, using preset tools like that takes little to no skill, and for me at least isn't regarded as digital art so much as arsing about. Gradients are horrible and in the vast majority of digital art communities are reviled amost as much as the dreaded lens flare.

[quote]CG is basically a form of an upgrade, you have to draw something first if you want to CG it, right? [/quote]

Right. And to do that you need artistic talent, And when you apply colour with CG, you need as good a grasp of colour theory as you do when you apply colour with natural media.

[quote]I think CG is easier because no matter how nontalented you are, you can learn to CG like a pro faster than draw like a pro. [/quote]

You can CG like a pro all you like, if your observational, sketchwork and linework isn't up to scratch you're still going to end up with a sub-standard image. I've seen some dazzling colour work but the basic drawing was so disproportionate it couldn't be saved.

I'm always curious from whence this particular assumption comes, anyhow. Have you CG'd for long? What standard would you say you were? How long did it take for you to get to "pro" level/when do you expect to be that good? How do you define "pro" anyway? Socar Miles/Linda Bergkvist/Kyena? Or are we talking dime-a-dozen airbrushed manga fanart?

[quote]Ask Lazycarter how long it took her to learn how to CG the way she does, then go ask TerryXart how long it her to learn to draw the way she does, then come back and tell me, 'cuz I really wanna know.[/quote]

Didn't ask me but I'll tell ya anyway - 6 years, and still learning daily.

[quote]
-You don't need talent to do either media well, just practice.
[/quote]

True to an extent, but if you don't got the talent there's only so far practise will get you.

You'll have to excuse me, I'm rather defensive about my medium of choice Smile

Stratadrake · Posted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 6:14 pm Post subject:

[quote]Didn't ask me but I'll tell ya anyway - 6 years, and still learning daily.[/quote]

Hey, that's about the same amount of time since I started drawing (pencil/colored pencil), too....

Coincidence? Methinks NOT Laughing

_________________
Strata here: [url=http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/242293]Nanowrimo[/url] - [url=www.fanart-central.net/user-Stratadrake.php]FAC[/url] - [url=http://stratadrake.deviantart.com]dA[/url] - [url=www.furaffinity.net/user/Stratadrake/]FA[/url]
[size=9]Disclaimer: Posts may contain URLs. Click [url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife]at your own risk.[/url][/size]

HeavenlyKunoichi · Very bored Joined: 31 Dec 1969 Posts: 182

[quote="unfocused (James Garcia)"]
Lastly, I see a lot of you saying that it takes you just hours to finish something. That's hard to believe, because it literally takes me days, and in a few cases, a week to finish something. Yeah, it HAVE finished drawings in a matter of hours, but not many at all. Do you all just add up all the hours you actually worked on a peice rather than adding up the time it took you from the moment you started it to the moment you finished it? It does take me days to finish something, but I don't have the time to draw something start to finish, I have a life inbetween, so stop rushing me with the requests!. Anyway...

[/quote]
I agree with most of you on the subject of cging. But to Unfocused it can take an equal amounts of studying/practice to get a good picture. However alot of people learn cging quickly because they have a previous background in art. Almost all great cg artists can do great traditional art (Well line art/sketches at least Razz

)

And it really does take a long time to cg. I am not even that good at art (still growing Razz

) but this picture took me 7 hours to color

http://www.fanart-central.net/pictures.php?pid=180729

and it's not even a good piece. But people who are extraordinary at cging can take just as long as you. I mean if my craptastic picture took 7 hours to complete just imagine how long it took for these beautiful pictures to be completed

http://www.deviantart.com/view/1516973/

http://www.deviantart.com/view/5772843/

CyberkittyKG · Member Joined: 13 Sep 2004 Posts: 46

[quote="Diathene (Naomi)"][quote]
-You don't need talent to do either media well, just practice.
[/quote]

True to an extent, but if you don't got the talent there's only so far practise will get you.

[/quote]
That's what I've been trying to expound into people's heads all these years. Wink

But anyway... geez, Unfocused, you have a real grudge against CG. But tell me, have you tried using the medium yourself? If not, please don't berate something you haven't even tried.

And by the way Odera I, those are some amazing CG pictures!

HeavenlyKunoichi · Very bored Joined: 31 Dec 1969 Posts: 182

Yea, those artists that drew those pictures really do work hard on their pieces. I remmeber on deviant art I saw a piece that took someone more than 2 weeks @.@. I will try to find it I think I put it in my favorites.

lucifer · Very bored Joined: 08 Aug 2004 Posts: 133

I think CG and Handywork has the same amount of merit, though CG work is somewhat cheaper after all the supplies are owned.

My brother shrieked at my $230 dollar Copics, I usually go through my markers very quickly...I really shouldn't do posters with expensive markers.... ^^'

I'm not really sure what takes me longer though. I waste much time ranting to my sister coloring by hand and I waste much time chatting while coloring on the computer and neither ways look that amazing....

But through the magic of the undo button and all that jazz, CG does give more room to experiment, unless you make multiple copies of a drawing(my copy machine's ink just doesn't feel the same as my ink and it can't print to the edge of the paper which is really annoying), I really can't experiment too much with the coloring one picture. Though when I couldn't decide character colors before I had computer skills, I would have to draw them over five times or more and color them all...which is a lot of work...

unfocused · Moderator Joined: 17 Jul 2004 Posts: 6983 Location: Texas

[quote]But anyway... geez, Unfocused, you have a real grudge against CG. But tell me, have you tried using the medium yourself? If not, please don't berate something you haven't even tried[/quote]

Yes, I have tried it, with Photoshop. Does this mean I can [i]berate[/i] all I want? Razz

I have no grudge, Physcowolf started all this, why pound on me? Wanna see the best CGist I've ever seen? http://www.organicmetal.co.uk/pages/index2.htm Here's a quick link directly to one of his picks http://www.organicmetal.co.uk/showart.php?..._12_17_18_48_07 He is one of my favorite artists, so believe me, I have no grudge, I like CG, just not my own. And as a counter to ya'lls theories of being able to CG with talent or practice, how do you explain this: I know how to draw better than someone without talent, been doing it for 17 years (don't let that fool you, I'm not an old man) but I can't learn to CG fairly. Tell me if you think I have any ounce of talent http://fanart-central.net/pic-138350.html If I do, then why can't I CG to save my life? Why?

Anyway, my whole thing is that CG is too cartoonish. I like stuff that looks real. You can all (even you, CyberkittyKG) shut me up right now, just show me a CGed picture that looks like a photograph of something real (a person or place). But it's gotta look more real than this http://www.fanart-central.net/pic-151759.html There's gotta be one out there.

And yes, Strata, it [i]is[/i] a coincidence.
_________________
"edit : i luv james" - Layzcarter