Thank you for sharing all your knowledge with us, your workflow really inspire me, I realized which style I wanted to lean to ! I was so lost before, the more "academic" way isn't for me haha
The film industry works with a 60/30/10 rule, which (from left to right) 60% of the image has colour dominance, with 30% being an a supportive colour to the 60% coverage, and the 10% is the accent drawing the eye in.
incredible video. ur explanation of balance organized a bunch of loose thoughts in my mind. very important principle that applies to a lot of art in general
My favorite way of coloring is just starting with one color that sets the mood of the painting. Then I go for monotone color scheme since there's no way to go wrong with this unless it's value issue. Then I add a complementary color right at the focal point. For coloring lights and shadows I use a lot of color balance while thinking about color temperature instead of which exact color is the best to pick. Ever since I apply this kind of workflow my art has been looking a lot less like children coloring book.
That's some interesting advice. I too feel like my art looks like a kid colored it with wooden colored pencils. Let's say you want to paint a vampire in a moody setting and your primary color is a dark, desaturated blue. Would your skin color for the vampire then also be a desaturated light blue? Maybe a bad example since vampires are often portrayed with fairer, desaturated blueish skin... but let's say it's not a vampire but a human vampire hunter.
I started with a Wacom tablet (no screen), used a smaller and a bigger one. At some point I got a Huion Camvas (the screen version). Huiob is still a lot cheaper than Wacom, and so far it does the job. I never had a Cintique or I pad so I cant really compare. Apple and Wacom are both expensive (overprized), but Apple in particular just causes a lot of problem when it comes to PC use - not beeing able to just plug it into my PC.
Non artist and just using the pen to draw random stuff when I am bored, I got the M4 and pro pencil, mainly because my last apple last for 10 years so I see it as a proper investment
you bring a good point on question that i've been having. We are often told to study the fundamentals, study, study, but then when we apply it we don't understand how to use it cause we got caught up letting the principles be the point in our art rather than using the principles to convey the point. The principles can't be the point itself. What are you trying to express? I think this is the difference that masters do, they study the fundamentals but also know how to break or adhere to them to best convey an image.
It might be good to realise, that even when this is a very important spectrum, often expressed as 2d/3d, silhouette or coulissen or color vs lighting, it is not the only one. another thing to consider is if you want to emphasise pattern over shape or the other way around, orderedness over randomness. Both these styles lie on a very clear part of this decision. One thing I do is let order emerge from accidental patterns, then make accidents in certain shapes deliberately and overlay form again and go back and forth. One time I will emphasis a more stylised 2d look, the other a more 3d look, I leave alone the bits I like, until there is something easy to like everywhere. Of course I could have just left it, since we are literally able to like anything.. but it is more about an education of the viewer in this aspect of humanity. I, myself, may very well be that viewer later and I may need to be guided back to a balanced state as the world seems to have overwhelmed me and insight is not clear. The tools I can create for myself, might be useful to others to.. Kind of a different approach than the whole "professional" thing.
What you call benign lighting I call default lighting and your topic in this current video was good and often commented on back in the days when I posted my paintings on an art forum; memories. I like the default (or benign) when I make designs or place images that will later have lighting versions where there will be different lighting scenarios. I love benign lighting because it shows a character, object, shape, scene in its purest form without lighting and effecting it with cast shadows, etc. and shows primarily an emphasis on the design of forms and their specific geometrical characteristics. I love this topic and it's always good to have a conversation about it. Dynamic lighting is when I place shapes in a scene while telling the story itself (film action) and then the scene needs to be dynamic lighting (if such are the specifics of the scenario during the story telling) in order for the scene to catch the eye of the viewers.
Thank you very much for this video and your thoughts, this is very valuable! By the way, I'm at a fork in the road right now, becasue I'm trying to enrich my anatomycal stylization - I already have a good understanding of basic anatomy, but don't really know should I continue to study anatomy from real people and learn to stylize myself or focus more on studyning other artworks?
David Friend wrote a book called Composition. This is a book entirely about fine art compositions, often associated with strong form emphasis, and he emphasizes that you really need to focus on shape relationships. He specifically talks about how you should just draw things until you have the basics of the shape relationships and the very basics of what you imagine in your head and then to start a second draft. One of the real problems is trying to render before you've even finished sketching. Basically even if you want to focus on form you can use shapes to help you draft the idea until you get something worth developing into a draft with strongly defined forms. He demonstrates this process with surviving drafts showing how different artists developed their compositions one draft at a time.
You are truly a talented artist! Respect. But yout also realy have to learn to edit your videos :D 90 percent of this video is something you repeatedly say over and over because its like a live recording. Its youtube, if you cant capture someones attention for a period of time, they just gonna leave. Just try making an actual plan for the video. The idea, and then what makes it in points. And just cut out the parts that doesnt make sense. Is that extra work? Yes! But also lots of quality. And well, you have amazing art, and skill. So. Anyway. All the best :D Edit. Also i though you are gonna drive home some kind of a point. But it kinda came out pointless in the end. You know like a lesson. This is Rendering. This is line drawing... Very messy. Very, very messy. No structure. Alsmost no point. I realy lacked a good light rendered image at the end for the people to understand the difference...
I honestly think you have a very limited view on how it is possible to represent form in drawing and painting. Perspective, overlaps, crosscontour drawing are all ways to also show volume and also how you think about parts of a figure or object will effect the way you enclose part of what you are drawing in a way that it also appears to be more dimensional. Shadow is only one way to describe surfaces and planes and there doesn’t even need to be a super dark shadow. Sometimes a shadow can actually flatten an area more than it gives it dimension. The quickest way to „flatten“ a drawing is just drawing the surrounding contour of a shape without overlaps and ignoring the surface on the inside, which you can indicate by shapes shifting in value or color, textures, lines for example. A lot what you consider to be flat here I wouldn’t, but with other parts you point out I would agree they are more graphic/flat and less dimensional. You can get away with implying more, when you understand the surface well enough to choose what to keep. You don’t have to though. Sometimes also more can be more 😂 Less can also be less and can also be a sign of gaps in understanding. I actually think now that it can be harmful to the development of an artist if we throw around heurisitcs and phrases we picked up from others like less is more, often even putting it in the wrong context, because it lost its true context a long time ago. I think it is a big problem people still talk about rules and breaking rules in art. If a piece of art succeeds solely depends on your intentions you have and there is different tools you can use to communicate what you want to communicate.
For me what doesnt work is going for a rendered look but still keeping black lines. It´s all "painting" (no lines) or all cartoon style (all lines Kim jung gi style)
Can you make a series demonstrating how to draw effects because I'm really struggling with that? Like debris from characters and their attacks crashing into buildings and the environment. crushed debris, rocks, collapsed buildings, bruises, cuts, blood, small & massive explosions, energy beams, water, fire, smoke, lava, ice, etc. The only book I've found covering the topic is in another language in that country.
I'm going to tell you something you're not going to take seriously, but is going to resonate in your mind, in the future when you find out this person that is coming out of nowhere was right. Art style makes sense even when breaking the rules for the following reason: we artist repeat ourselfs thousands of times. And do not do studies of somebody else's art, never. Cheers.
This is why I love your videos; you casually say something that breaks through obstacles I'd inadvertently put in front of myself. Only 8 minutes in and I've learned it's not that I'm doing something "wrong", it's "what great artists understand". I get that. And I am grateful
