[Tinusch]

Here's what I mean...

I have my basic sketch.



I then try to block in my colors and I begin basic shading.



And it's already a blurry, sloppy mess. How can I fix that? I just started it and it's already a failure. All my pictures turn out this way. Can someone whip up a few quick steps to show how they would start painting this?

[zaar]

I know what you mean! I have the same problem =( I don't know how many times I have turned a nice sketch into a piece of mud. I get scared of trying to finish things, because they might not turn out the way I wanted them to. I guess forcing myself to finish more of my stuff might help.

[Gimbal8]

Hi Tinusch. I know that you are aware of my somewhat similar problem that you replied to in another thread.

I don't seem to have too much trouble tightening up something to a level of detail, my problem is wanting to do that to the entire picture as a whole.

I think there is a step to take, an inbetween step, that we might be skipping. It might be a different step that each of us is rushing through or skipping over.

For example: if I where to try and block in the masses and define the areas of light and shadow etc for the entire picture I would then pick some part of that picture to tighten up. But I can't bring myself to tighten the entire picture up in a gradual way. I end up just detailing some portion of the picture all the way. By then the sloppiness of the rest of the picture looks to horrid for me to continue or something. Or maybe the task of detailing the rest of the picture starts to look too daunting. Had I just taken the time to slowly build up the level of detail throughout the entire picture it probably wouldn't seem so bad. I think the reason I end up bringing one section to a high level of detail is that I need to see that in order to be inspired to continue working on it.

By looking at your example it seems as though you put in some heavily saturated colors too quickly. That would make it a real pain to correct things as you started to paint I think. If you started with some very lightly saturated colors when you blocked things in it would make it easier to correct things as you started tightening up the pic. You know when you are sketching something and you have a whole bunch of lines that define the edge of some object, you can look at all those sketchy lines and find the ones that define the form amongst all the ones that don't. This I think is the key to the whole tightening up process when working from broad blobby shapes and trying to whiddle them down to detail. Take a look at this thread, it might help give an idea what I'm talking about:
http://www.sijun.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=006623

Also be sure to check out the 2 big speed painting threads (use the search function to find the original one). There are very good tips and information in there. Not only in words but in pictures as well.

I sure hope we get out of this rut. Gotta go home and eat some food now. Good luck.

[Bg]

Is the problem

A). this:





B). Or this:





In the example A). the first shading is done with hard edged brush and the other done with soft edged brush. (there's only one stroke used per shading) Shading cleanly is very hard without a Wacom, but if you got one, then changing to soft brushes should solve all kind of "sharpness" problems.

In the second example I added some new elements (god rays, halo effect..) so there's more to shade. If you're about to complete a pic and think the shading is okay and fits your needs but the pic doesn't look good, I think you should simplify some parts or dish the existing image and try different composition, change colours, anything

(I hope I'm not talking about entirely different thing )

[edit]wrong url[edit]

[ February 03, 2002: Message edited by: Bg ]

[Tinusch]

My problem is that my pictures always look like sloppy sketches. I can't clean them up or tighten them up without muddying them up even more. I want it to look sharpen it all up. It's hard to explain... I guess for example you could look at any of Micke's pictures. They're all so sharp and tight, even as sketches.

[VENiM]

heh, i also have this problem and i'd appreciate some kind of response if anyone could help us out! 8)

[Ben Barker]

Unfortunately I don't think there is a quick answer, or a step you're missing. Or if there is, I am nowhere near qualified enough to explain it. Maybe someone like Greg Pro or Spooge could lay it down.
But it seems to me to be a problem with how we go about making a drawing from the very beginning. It's a flaw in technique, not something we can explicitly turn on to finish the drawings, like a brush setting or a layer effect. I remember one time when Liquid added about 5 brush strokes to a blurry painting, and made it look ten times better. There was a lot more at work there than just one or two tricks.

The pro's always say "Go from general to specific", but it's not that simple to me. Finding the right balance of how to exactly do that is a big part of what painting is all about. When I try to follow a pro's techniques I end up wasting a lot of brush strokes. But watching a time lapse, or step by step, of a good painter's work makes it seem like they knew where they were going the entire time. No effort was wasted, every dead end was avoided. Trying to break down the different kinds of skills and perceptions it takes to do that is what we struggle with in order to get better. The best way to break it down is to practice, and make the mistakes.
That's how I see it, at least, but I'm a novice looking up. Maybe we can get some PROfessional advice from an expert looking back.


[edit] No pressure though.

Oh, and maybe you should lay off the digital for a while, and try painting with something like Gouache. It forces you to make decisions, and draw lines where values start and end. Photoshop makes it really easy to be indecisive.

[ February 03, 2002: Message edited by: Ben Barker ]

[Tinusch]

I'm pressuring him.

Pro, get in here!

[Lunatique]

It really is all about knowing what you want in the first place. This means having a clear picture of what you'd like to see in the finished piece in terms of colors, value, composition..etc.

Many of the professional illustrators would actually do a fairly finished b/w piece before doing the final colored piece to work out all the details other than colors. Then, there would be color sketches to determine the colors as well. After all that is done, THEN they sit down and start the actual canvas for the actual piece.

But, it's rare for any artist to capture what's in their head. Most artists, no matter how professional, say that they usually get less than 60% of what they had imagined. BUT, that does not mean what they end up with is worse.

It's not just you, it's EVERYONE. Just because their end result looks better due to more experience/talent doesn't mean they are actually capturing what they would like to.

Here's a good example of what one artist did for ONE painting. This is Michael Whelan trying to work out how one painting should look:

His first idea was to pose the main character alone, doing several b/w studies:











Then he decided to pose her with others, doing a few more color studies:







[ February 03, 2002: Message edited by: Lunatique ]

[Frost]

Something Micke and Joachim have always told me is to sharpen my edges, my approach makes my stuff look a little sloppy, soft and bland -- my choice of brushes and my multiple-pass strokes do that -- insecurity about form translates to softness in the edges I think -- be firm and place those edges clean cut where you think they should be. Controlling edge types/sharpness may be something to work on. Color and lighting can magically make things much more lively and interesting -- lots of things to play with with regards to style. Of course, that's my take on it.

(Whelan is great.)

[ February 03, 2002: Message edited by: Frost ]

[Lunatique]

And then, he decided to change the way she looked:





And the finished piece:



Closeup:



See? It's not as simple as just sketch and paint. A lot of thought and meticulous work went into creating just one painting.

Of course, this is not the average case. Whelan is a very dedicated and passionate illustrator, so he does this to the extreme. But, I'm posting this to show you how much work it COULD take to bring one sketch to a finished painting, and how much thought can go into it.

Hope this helps.

[Lunatique]

And here's how another artist does it.

Donato Giancola works the wy Boris does. Painting by the numbers instead of blocking things in. He would also do b/w studies and color sketches, and then a very detailed line drawing, which he paints from.

Many artists would argue that painting by numbers is a bad habit, but for these guys that know what they are doing, I guess it's ok.

If you're not sure what painting by the number means, it just means systematically finishing a portion of a painting at a time, in full detail, and then eventually covering the whole canvas. It's much like coloring within the lines.

Demo 1

Demo 2

[Lunatique]

[ February 03, 2002: Message edited by: Lunatique ]

[Pro]

I saw this thread and wanted to post a comment. What you�re going through is a common experience amongst artists of all levels. As a matter of fact, I�m currently dealing with this myself. I�m doing a concept painting for a studio that requires that I finish the piece in a short period of time. Believe me there is nothing like a deadline to force you to complete something. I find myself hitting all sorts of walls and dead ends. Painting in itself is a process of problem solving. As you progress and build your knowledge base, this process becomes a bit easier. Sometimes we find ourselves stopping at a certain point for fear of failing or just not knowing what to do next. Over the years I have noticed habits that I have formed which lead to procrastination rather than to immediate handling of the matter before me. I have also learned ways to help me move on.

Now I know you�re probably saying this is easy for me because I have experience in picture making. Well, yes, I probably have a bit more experience, but the key word is experience. You cannot expect to be successful with a painting all the time. In fact, I spend most of my time producing imperfect work that can never stand up to the image I have in my mind. People say you have to create 100 bad paintings before you can see any results. A better way to think of it is spend your time eliminating all of the wrong ways to make a picture and eventually you will have no choice but to succeed.

In picture making the trick is to plan ahead. Do your preliminary homework first. You wouldn�t go on a vacation without mapping out a route. So don�t start a painting without
formulating an approach. The great illustrator Harry Anderson had these 6 elements for a successful painting.

1. Conception
2. Composition
3. Values
4. Colors
5. Drawing
6. Painting Dexterity

These six items must all work together and are important in that order. It is the framework for professional looking art. Study each one of these and ask yourself how you can apply it to your project. Develop a plan and ask for help and advice before you start. Show your steps of composition and value study. Do a small color sketch to plan your palette. Observe and refine your working sketch and decide what medium is best to utilize for the task at hand. Hope this helps.

G.

[spooge demon]

Hey wow, thanks lunatique for the whelan stuff. I never could stand the finished work of his that I have seen, so I never looked further. I like his sketches so much better.

As far as the topic is concerned, anything that I might add has already been said.

[Markus]

This is something we all struggle with... I think. Those are great examples Luna'. Tinusch -I would suggest maybe spending some more time developing layout before you jump into the tone -- I think that's one of the main things Luna' is also saying. Man, I love Whelan's stuff but his development process is incredible...and time-consuming. I don't think I'd ever have the patience to do that much. Micke and Joachim are so good at linework they can capture the essence without any tone or color -- but I'm sure at least sometimes they have to work over and trace over their images until the linework and perspective look right. I would also suggest 3value thumbnails to experiment with different lighting -white, black and 50% gray only. Block in areas until you get a picture design in tone that seems to work for you.

There's a few examples that first come to mind for line work. Joe Kubert's at comic roughs
I think Joe has some good insight, even if you're not into comic-style artwork. Hal Foster, the creator of Prince Valiant used a similar method, but I can't find an online example. Then, Greg Pro's hydra/dragon example on his website is very good too.
I was taught, line, then tone, then color. Justin Sweet does this really well. Like Spooge, He's good enough to simply scribble before he starts building tone and shape, and here's an example of that. I particularly like the way Justin builds the tone first... then does a color mod./adjustment and begins to work with colors:

justin sweet

By the way, the Draw123 video on Monsters is not just useful for monsters. There's some great advice in there on picture-building in general. The most important for me to hear was starting small and "retracing" or "redrawing" your rough picture 3-4 times and enlarging as you go to include more detail - easy to do on the computer. I like this way of working. It's at least something to try for awhile. I bought his video(s) 'cause I figured, if Justin Sweet learned from this guy I might as well too. Darn, now I've given away the Draw123 secret

Jason Manley also had a good example of how he works this kind of methodology too. Once GFX artist is back up his example(s) will hopefully be back up as well. (Feel free to jump in here Jason )

edit
I'd have to agree completely with Spooge. I like the studies Whelan did a lot better than the final piece - lots more energy in the studies; the final piece looks very "posed" by comparison - if that makes sense. Thanks again Luna' for posting/linking those.

[ February 03, 2002: Message edited by: Markus ]

[Tinusch]

I haven't completed a picture in months. Probably longer. Maybe about a year or so. I come up with my idea, sketch it out, block in the basic colors, but then comes the part that destroys every attempt I have made. Tightening up the picture is impossible for me. I can't recover from the sloppiness and looseness of the original sketch. My edges are all muddled. The picture is blurry and sloppy and no matter how many hard-edged brushes I use I can't fix it. Can someone PLEASE guide me here. Maybe a little step-by-step tutorial or something?

[Lunatique]

I've been a long time fan of Whelans. I'm not a fan of his finished work either, as I find them too slick and has that awkward "I use reference sometimes, but sometimes I don't" inconsistency.

The reason I'm a big fan is for the same reason you guys have noticed. He is awesome at developing ideas. I love his studies and sketches. If I had just looked at his covers and never purchased his art book back in 87', I would never had discovered his talent for developing ideas. I have yet to see another illustrator go to the length he does to develop a painting that represents the content of the books so well. (Actually, Spooge, you do quite a bit of prep work too, in many cases as much as Whelan does. I have to say this--and this is just my personal opinion--as much as I like Whelan, I think you kick his ass in the areas that he fails in.)

A lot of illustrators just read the notes sent by the editor, but Whelan actually READS the books he illustrates just so he could faithfully interpret all the details/mood correctly. That, I think is admirable dedication. (Jim Burns does this too I think, but we all know Jim can't hold a candle to Whelan, with his "I extract my faces and figures from photos!" style. He also paints really flat looking colors with mostly boring composition and dead as nails airbrush rendering. Oops. I shouldn't bash a famous illustrator. I'm terrible. Not like my shit is any good. ... )

It's a bit sad that Whelan's finished works lack the stuff that makes him truely shine in his studies though. It's kind of like all his hard work end up with 70% of its original potential.

[ February 04, 2002: Message edited by: Lunatique ]

[Switch]

My first few tries with a wacom looked like that and then I realised I had to paint like I sketch, confidently and fast while thinking about light.

I found I was just trying too hard.

I treat everything I paint as a rough sketch really, it helps me to work freely
and strangley enough the boring blurry look is no longer a problem.

Don't start colouring a job thinking it's going to take forever, start the colouring the same way you start sketching, spontaneous and fast, whilst remembering the rules.

thats my take, but I'm only learning like the rest of us.

[zaar]

I asked one of my teachers today about my problem of not being able to make finished work. She said that she had also had experienced that feeling of good sketches and initial phases turning into something that doesn't feel right. But it might help to think of it as, what she called "an ugly phase", and that most painting has a phase in the middle where the sketch and beginning feels better. And the only way to solve it is to work trough it. I know that there are no truths about art, but this seems to make sense to me, so I guess I just have to be more stubborn and fight my way trough that ugly phase.

[mza]

Thanks for sharing the Whelan images... the studies are amazing.The final paintings are too much for me.
I don't understand the tendancy for fantasy art to be overly rendered...it hurts my eyes!
Maybe this is a personal preference, but IMHO the suggestion of detail, rather than rendering detail, makes for a more powerful image. (this has nothing to do with loose vs. tight painting)

One of my instructors suggests to keep all the detail in the focal area of the composition, everything else is subordinate ,and should not compete or take away from the main area of intrest...
my 2 cents

[[wakestarr]]

very interesting thread. thank you all very much who contributed with your knowledge :)

[jr]

luna, donato used to teach at my school, his technique works because he uses glazes, and everything has to be planed out thats why he can do the painting in sections method. maxfield parish use to work that way too.

[Binke]

I havent read all the replies here Tinusch, but ill just leave my comment.. and that is, I think that you need to be confident with your strokes. Dont sit nudging and running over your strokes several times. Plan ahead.
I tried mimicing Micke's style once, a few years ago, and it came to me that I had todo several tries to make one stroke look right. (ie nice, clean and sharp) and with digital its easy to go back. You should try this.

Also images looking sharp can be the result of many things. Like using smaller brushes to clean up edges and whatnot.

edit: Oh yeah, also when doing these rough sketches, dont get too rough, because then you will get lost in the mess and you dont know where to start, and it will be just a pain to refine it. It should be loose, but not too loose, it should still be planned. But I think the sketch you started with here is a good start.

ah wtf is late im rambling.

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: Binke ]