This is important because there's two evaluations you'll have to do: 1. Is it technically working for the next stage? That's just simply did you put the paint on right, can you work with it, are the values good enough, etc. 2. Is it a good piece of art? You have no idea!
-
-
Once I'm done I can look at it as a study and think how to do it different: 1. The cactus is dumb, too straight. 2. Sky too literal blue, looked better without the clouds. 3. Rocks are great, shadow is good, plants on the top aren't defined enough. 4. Sky too light?pic.twitter.com/xiNAtp1tZE
Show this thread -
Final thing to remember is that accuracy is more a function of time and tricks than skill. If you see those photo realistic paintings that person spent 60+ hours on them and used photos the whole time, with many many layers. If it looks more like a painting, then less time.
Show this thread -
This little study is about...45 minutes maybe an hour of time spread out over 5-10 minute breaks during the day. To make it very realistic I'd potentially take this little study, the original photo, adjust it on a computer, trace it, and do about 10 layers to get it closer.
Show this thread -
And I honestly don't have time for that. I'd rather stop there and get back to my day job than labor for 60+ hours just so something looks exactly like a photo. My ADHD literally won't let me anyway.
Show this thread -
Alright, maybe I'll do another one of these next week. And I'll use a real camera for better photos. Twitter demolishes these and they're already pretty bad.
Show this thread -
If you want to see more of my art--and my constantly changing style as I explore what paint can do--then follow my instagram: https://www.instagram.com/zedshaw/
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.