HOME | DD
Vertigheist — Those days...
Published: 2012-05-25 19:39:01 +0000 UTC; Views: 396; Favourites: 17; Downloads: 4
Redirect to original
Description
When there's hardly anything to do.Violetta © ~Vertigheist
Related content
Comments: 26
Yep, I know how to deal with those luckily and that is do what Garfield does,.... sleep and eat!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Was this done with pencil?
Fuck!Those lines of yours!How the hell do you do that!?It's so damn clean!Mine never come out that way!
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Take a closer look at the lines. (Especially the head/hair)
Yes this was done with pencil, but the picture and it's lines as well as details weren't drawn in one shot. They were built up from the initial rough draft sketch to what you see here.
It's a matter of the drawing process used step-by-step (or perhaps layer-by-layer) and in this case, it was done very well. ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Actually,if you've been dealing with traditional media for quite a while,you come across some pens that vaguely look or have texture of that of a pencil.Like a micron or pitt pen.Sometimes cheap ballpoint pens can even do this if you have a sturdy enough hand and don't crinkle the paper.
Well of course it was done as a sketch with pencil.It's all most impossible to sketch something out like that with clean and stable lines.Every drawing takes a process(whether it's layer or of said step)even if it's a basic one.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I've heard of these kinds of pens... Personally, I prefer a good graphite pencil (the way I see it, why buy an ink pen just for it to look like a pencil or mimic its texture when you can just buy a real pencil or graphite pencil instead for usually a cheaper price).
Pens are good for the final steps of a drawing, but it's always tricky since practically every pen (especially drawing pens) run the risk of bleeding no matter how sturdy your hands are or what they say on the label... To an extent, it's almost a matter of using both luck and skill to get a good inked line art done regardless of what you use.
Another piece of the process that can help enhance a picture like with this one, is the scanning of the drawing (the scanner itself, the picture's actual size, and especially---the resolution at which it was scanned.)
Indeed! ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It's not so much to make it look like a pencil,it's because of the flow of the pen and how it's clean and is comfortable to line a drawing with,the lines are darker and are less prone to smudge or fade or easily get washed away from water,since some inks are almost immune to water.Now unless your excessively inking one area will you have that situation or .The pens are roughly around the same price as pencils where I'm from.So I use pen,it's more efficient for my inks when ever coloring in traditionally or digitally.
Now scanning,you can have the worst scanner in the world but what really is that does the work for me in photoshop.Gimp is also a good program since it come with features very much like it ps.c:
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I do understand, but the idea sounds a bit contradictory to me since no pencil (nor pen) draws "perfectly" precise, smooth, and clear lines. Mind you I'm talking about looking at lines VERY closely to where you'd notice the textures and edges being rough, but at a normal distance your eye cannot register those details exactly in our brain so its a sort of "live-eye's resolution". I agree, pens are best for inking (hence why it's called inking) and coloring traditionally depending on what one is going for. (Paint is too unpredictable a medium for me. Color pencils and such are nice to use, but I find digital conversion sometimes loses the colors and feel of the picture when it is viewed on a lit up screen versus seeing it in real-life. Granted photoshop can help with that, but it's still has limits. Speaking of which...
Yes, it is true that photoshop has potential to fix even the worst scans, photos, etc. But at the same time, I feel that one should always at least try to get a quality scan or photograph of something they want to work with if for no other reason than simply to lessen the amount of work one would have to do "repairing" the projects' flaws from the scan or photo, before finally moving forward to the development and eventually finishing stages. Rather than relying on photoshop or other editing programs to "fix" everything that is wrong with something before actual progress is made. Saves your time. Saves your energy. Makes work at least a little easier on the artists themselves.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
But if your eyes cannot register this,how is it any different than doing it digitally?Unless like you said,you pretty much either press your eyes against the screen to admire the finer details.Any medium is predictable as a digital artist is to photoshop or SAI.As a traditional artist I find traditional art better since you can actually at least try to prove you did in since it's physically there in your hands and I feel more in control when making a picture or a poor excuse for a doodle.
I'm a bit indifferent to these things.I don't really think its neccesary to perfectly scan a pencil sketch,but in the end it's completely colored up digitally.But when I think of it again,I guess I can kind've see the point there.
I personally think that option is more fitted to people who make a business of art for the time and "energy" part.But I can guess that we both don't do it for legit reasons other than to pass time.
I'm not sure if you've noticed by now,but I thoroughly enjoy sharing opinions and views on things.c:
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The difference between eyes registering small details in what is seen, versus the the differences between a digital and traditional image are huge! Digital media is all about light, while traditional media is all a matter of pigment. Hence why when pictures are printed out, look different from when they are on the computer screen. And again screens have "pixelated resolution" so any image in digital form is made of hundreds upon hundreds and perhaps thousands upon thousands of tiny lit squares on the screen.
A good way to explain this is using movie theaters as an example. Movie theaters still use film reels for playing movies. Reason--- Traditional film does not have any "pixels" to it so the visuals are clearer than if they used a digital projection copy. (How can you tell? Easy, just look at the projections of the ads, quizzes, and other things shown before the movie. I mean even before the lights go out and they start showing the serious trailers for upcoming movies. The quizzes and such are done with a digital projection so you can see the pixels while the main movie and trailers before it are all on film.)
In the battle of digital versus traditional media, I am better at drawing on traditional surfaces, but I do like to color and refine pictures in digital media. Thus, I balance out what I do between the two. There are some things I prefer done traditionally and some things digital. However, I've recently begun to hear things about people trying to eliminate the older traditional ways of doing art such as painting--- I heard that someone is trying to develop a program that can actually simulate paint on an actual brush down to the last hair of the brush and stroke of the paint. While I'm not really fond of painting traditionally myself since I dislike the lack of control I have over paint versus the control of a pencil, I think the idea of a program trying to replace real painting is a stupid idea since there are some things that no program can replicate/simulate, and I suppose the "unpredictability" of paint is one of those things.
I can respect that. And I didn't say/mean that one should try to achieve a "perfect" scan (or perfect anything since "perfection" is really a term of absolution that no one can truly achieve in any sense of the word, though people tend to misuse it a lot, but enough about that...) I had meant that people should try to put at least some effort into each stage, piece, part, area, step, etc. of making a picture so that the final product shows the amount of collective effort that was overall put in. These things ARE noticeable no matter how good you are in other parts like coloring, formatting, etc. if the basics are neglected it will show in the end whether one realizes or not. I am glad you agreed though. ^^
Yes, for people who make a business of art, time and energy are important. I do art both to pass time and because I want to make a business out of it eventually... (I know all to well that these things take time though).
I did notice. ^^ I too enjoy sharing views and opinions, especially with others who are well informed and know what they are talking about. (which you do)
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Yep~!
Well at least your lines are so smooth, I have a hard time doing that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Bah,if you look closely their not even that smooth!They look all sketchy and are all over the place.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, at least you can make black colors look really black. I don't know how to do that without messing up the other colors.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Cus I also use the brush tool,use the color black and color in areas to make it darker!Since the lines are dark,it's not noticeable.That's how I do it!Which is probably lame way of doing the job.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's actually pretty clever. But the way I draw doesn't match when I do it though. :T
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I really don't know why I should be.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Cuz you're awesomely talented and talentedly awesome!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Out of all the hundreds out there. XP
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then you're one of those hundreds -w-
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Somewhere i just can't help but wonder why you're not incredibly famous yet..
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I guess I'm just not worthy~!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Haha, to me you most certainly are : D
👍: 0 ⏩: 1