[aquamire]

I was sifting through some Vallejo pics on one of those fantasy art sites while I was bored one night, and I duno if I'm the only one that see's it, but he really seems to put his face in most of his pics. If you've ever seen a pic of him, I think you'd understand.. am I the only one?


------------------
/Aq
[email protected]

[craig]

I would agree, I have a funny feeling BV is his own biggest fan....he is an accomplished pro, so no matter what I say, I am out of turn, here. I know there are BV fans out there, and I intend no disrespect but after I looked through one of his books my image of him was pretty well shattered. He blatantly traces photos based on costumed models....his book went through every step!
The irony was that his design sketches (ink and watercolor) had pure flow and feeling....they were superb! Then he dresses up models, poses them, takes a photo,
projects the photo, traces it, and then oil paints......shattered....to splinters. Oh
well, blah blah blah...just my $0.00

[This message has been edited by craig (edited July 07, 2000).]

[aquamire]

Hmm, yeah, I kinda thought he did it out of his head, but it is important to remember that all of the greats did this. Well, they didn't always do it off photos, since film wasnt around in the renaisance era, but still just about every master painter used models. Tho, some find this to be bad cuz it almost seems like your tracing only without tracing paper, just the movements of your eye as it follows contours of a solid object or form.

------------------
/Aq
[email protected]

[yoszi]

this is an interesting commentary (the 2nd one) regarding masters: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0823014010/002-8352074-2935220

[Fred Flick Stone]

Who finds using models bad? Using photo reference is bad if you don't know how to use a photo correctly, but for gosh sakes, how are you ever going to learn to draw something without a control. This control is the model, the fixture that the artist will refer to when needed, if the right studying has preceded this current work of art in progress.
As for Boris, as many other great artists have, he uses himself as reference to his own images. This saves on time and costs to hire a model, although Boris can afford any model he chooses. Frank Frazetta uses his own image in most of his peices, as well as an artist named Howard Chaykin. Norman Rockwell iserted himself into the backgrounds of his images when he could, and Maxfield Parrish used himself and his wife for all his modelling, with exception to the children. These are only a few examples, but all throughout art history, if the artist is desperate for the need of reference, has very little time, and possibly no money, the best reference to work from is yourself, if you have a mirror to see your reflection from.
If any artist thinks that working from a live model is bad, he needs to get checked in to AA, Artists Anonymous, and get some help quick....

[Freddio]

"Today 99 percent of all illustrators work from photographs. It saves time and money. Students have asked me if this is cheating, First of all you must define what cheating is in the context of any given project. Its not as though specific rules are set down for the production of an illustration and if you are not following you are chating"
Borris Vallejo

"I use a camera Lucida machine to trace the photo at the size I need it, This also speeds up the procces of doing a painting, it doesnt mean I can't draw, Nor dos it mean that I slavishly copy the photo.
Boris

[General Confusion]

A little history......(First off Mr. Flickstone is absolutely right!!!! An illustrator (Boris) is a technician, who's job is to produce a product within a designated budget, under the given time constraints. So basically, do what you can to get it done. If that means using yourself as photo reference then so be it.)

Now I may be jumping to conclusions here, but I have met Boris as well as members of his family on a number of occasions. (I have mutual friends shared with Boris' son, Dorian.) Boris in my opinion, has the desire to be a bodybuilder, ya know, look like one of his paintings....(if you have ever seen him in person you could tell by his physique, he used to work out frequently with a friend of mine at a gym here in Jersey, as well as use him as a model in a couple of his paintings)

This, of course, is all heresay, but I believe Boris has used his face in his work, partly because of Fred Flickstones reasoning, but also, and probably more likely, cause he likes to see his likeness pictured on a buff body... =) plain and simple

Please all you Boris fans out there don't get upset with my comments, I am merely expressing my opinions based on what I have seen personally. I simply wanted to interject this insight as a bit of meaningless trivia. However, don't forget the big picture, an illustrator should use whatever he/she can to get the job done, so they may get paid and move onto another project. This doesn't mean he/she is not talented, hell it takes talent just listening to art directors.

Don't plague yourselves with the idea that everything you create as an artist has to be untainted by outside aides (i.e. photos, Lucidas, etc) If you want to make money, you do what it takes to get it done.

If you want to remain "true to you art" and call yourself a fine artist, then hope you find the market that "has to have your stuff" If not, latch onto a rich relative and hope they'll throw some food your way.

later

------------------
www.geocities.com/genconfusion/

[samdragon]

hmmm, I never thought in a million years I would hear the words camera Lucida again. Those things are GREAT! Lucy rules!

If you have read anything about Boris, you would find that he used his bodybuilding friends very frequently for models. Or he used to in his early days...anyway...he would change the heads on his figures with different models, he would have a model for the figure and then a model for the head.
As for using photo reference, I think it's harder. A photo is 2d and flat where as the real thing isn�t, you have more freedom with an actual model.
Some great comments here about this stuff. When you have tight deadlines, you'll take what ever you can find for reference. Which brings up another idea. It's a VERY good idea for people to have a morgue, a collection of reference material, textures, photographs, and magazine clippings. These are great for idea starters and they can save your butt when you're in a bind. I have about 4 inches of magazine clippings and a box full of photographs. It's great to have this stuff around to dip into when you need ideas or even reference for a texture. Don't for one second think all the big artists just crap out a perfect rendering of metal or rust. If you have ever seen images of Rockwell working, you'll see he has tones of photographs for reference, he loved the camera and used it alot.

[TJFrame]

Frazetta kicks the crap out of Boris in my ever so humble opinion. Frazetta's work is dynamic, fresh, and charged with energy and drama. Look at a bunch of his stuf and you will see that he often leaves out stuff like bowstrings and horse bridles, yet I don't notice these anomolies becuase I'm too busy droolings over his amazing layouts,fantastic colors, georgous lighting, and dead-on accurate anatomy. How can you beat his moody and subtle backgrounds that are indicated with just a few prefectly placed brush strokes?

Frazetta, in my mind, has the most amazing raw painitng ability of any fantasy artist, hands down. Not only does Boris's stiff and labored work pale in comparison, but after comparing a true Frazetta to knock-offs like Brom and Bisely you come to realize why his originals sell in the hundreds of thousands and Spectrum Magazine gave him the Grandmaster award.

[synj]

yeah and 99 percent of all humans suck my sack before they go to sleep at night too eheh

[craig]

I don't think working from models is bad, and I don't think using ones likeness is
bad. These things are essential.
The point that I was attempting to make, and missed the first time, was that BV's
finished oils appear "tight", and although
they are technically flawless, that in my humble opinion, is the one flaw.....they feel constrained, lifeless. I only noticed this after seeing his watercolor sketches, which I thought had much more feeling and vitality. He probably used models for those, but he produced the work directly from looking at the model....not projecting and tracing the photo. If you don't have a model then you produce the work from looking at the photo (or your reflection in a mirror). I think that Frazetta, Rockwell, and others (that all used models) have a strong feeling and vitality in their work that sets them apart from BV. BV is an outstanding accomplished artist, his study sketches prove that to me. And, of course,
when you are trying to make a buck, there
is no such thing as "cheating"....if I ever
am blessed enough to go pro I will probably
eat my words with a fork and spoon and be a
tracing fool....gawd hehp me. Sorry if I
offended anyone.

[Rinaldo]

Just a couple of things that come to mind:

A few people have said stuff along the lines of "It saves time and money" to use photo ref. I find this rather amusing becase to my mind and through my experiance using a photo takes a lot of time. you have to shoot develope, trace, etc. And the thing is that the paintings often don't look all that "real". sure they have that three dimensional look but they are also rather lifeless (not allways the case but I've seen it in most cases).
I'm not talking about studying from life here. Photo's let you understand anatomy and particular poses, but tracing and trying to get the right lighting in a studio are very time consuming.
I think you will find that a lot of really good artists don't use photo ref in the way that Boris does. Frazetta was a photographer, but he didn't trace photos. I think he said that he had all the picture's he'd ever taken, stored in his head.

the other thing that came to mind was "where does it stop". I was reading a book on John Ennis (the book was concering digital art as he was one of the first Illustrators to use a computer) and it turns out that the guy takes a photo, scans it, puts it on a background layer, and starts painting over it until it's all gone. He does actuialy take the photo out when he's finished, but ummm... errr... ahhh...welllll.....
*decides not to comment so as to appear politicaly correct*.

My point is, when does it start to become a drawing and not just a touched up photo.

Not condemning, just thinking:\

[aquamire]

Whoah, didn't expect this many people to respond to this little observation. Anything with the name 'Boris' in the subject seems to get a response, heh.

Anyways, you make a very good point Fred. I guess I'm being a hypocrite here, I've used myself for reference. It was an observation I made, and I guess I never realized how often this is done. Nontheless, I believe Boris creates some amazing stuff, regardless of using his head, and well, his want-to-be body in his pics. I still like Frazetta more tho.




------------------
/Aq
[email protected]

[Nex]

Rinaldo:

If I were a paid illustrator I would not give a thought if other artists consider my work as cheating or not if it earns me money.
If you live from illustration, tracing or whatever necessary that does that does the job quickly and clean is valid. (without violating copyrights of course)

You can consider using a computer cheating, because you can erase all and start over again from the same sketch.. or just work with layers that you can add and remove at will-

So condensed: What does the job is valid.

I agree to the argument however that pictures from photos always look less dynamic than from life.


------------------
- Nex

http://on.to/nex