whoaaaaa. Lips and right hand have their own weight. Would appreciate if there is a walkthrough into this. will ya?
+7

excellent picture, but it's hogging all of the screen, 640 wide remember?

anyway enough of my ramblings, +7

Way to protest against those "fake digital Sargents" !

Whoooa! Excellent work

"Relying on photographs is too convenient, too easy, and disconnects the painter from the subject ... we all know that it just doesn't feel as authentic as working from life."

Hear, hear. Way to go.

Nice work! I notice you posted some additional details here:

http://forums.sijun.com/viewtopic.php?t=36244

Excellent work there!
I'd appreciate a walkthrough as well, if you have the time. My portrait skills really really need sorting out!
Keep up the good work.

Oh my god... this is gorgeous. The style is looser than your usual work, which I think is what you've strived for. Well, now you've done it! Your wife is beautiful, and from the photos I've seen of her, you've captured a good likeness too.

it is so real and so good!

OMG... totally wonderfull .. perfect light and color.....not more to say only
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

OMFG, awesome, incredible OOOO +5!

Amazing work!! When I grow up I want to be you! =p

Ver, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very good!

Incredible +7

Pretty model
Great picture. You got my vote!

i like the idea of protesting, but i don't think this picture works itself as a protest. i mean, it's good that you explain your motivation, but if you want to make a critic, do it in a way that make those "fake digital Sargents" reconsider their attitude. now i think that what you're doing is more something like saying "come on, follow me, this is the way" and that is not also the only truth. anyway, i also prefer making the portraits from real life instead of copying a photo, although i didn't do anyone digitally, yet.

the picture is very good, although it could be more contrasted having that side light, but that's only my personal taste, i like the contrast in portraits

and people, come on, try to do some constructive criticism instead of those "ooooo, OMFG, OMG +12" and those useless comments... it's like you have some bots filling the forms of every piece with the same words....

Very good and interesting point. I think we will see more "from life" digital paintings when tablet PCs become more widespread. You just have to take your tablet pc and start painting, no need to set up you monitor where you can see the subject (and many artists still prefer to use heavy 21" CRT monitors) and so on.
Off course, that won't make the photo smudgers go away...

Whoa. Whooooo---aaaa. Just... whoaaaaa.

Eah......!+7

Very beautiful piece. Your skill is certainly extraordinary. The only constructive thing I could add is there is a uniformity of 'texture' to the image. Traditional portraiture will often include more detail (sometimes props or background) to help reveal more of the character of the subject... to take it beyond a likeness and possibly provide some interesting contrast.

wonderfully done! you've done a great job of actually capturing the personality of her, and I respect people who can paint from life like this.

I envy you in more ways than one Lunatique,you are truly blessed and talented.

it has a life of its own,very beutiful!!!!

WHOA!
great one after the quick Elena Sketch I saw earlier.... when you were about to land at an airport!
HOpe there was no giddy feeling here!

brilliant idea. Id love to try a life painting Digitally.but most of us face a wall behind the monitor when we work.Did you have a special setting??
hope it wasn't a "pain in the neck".

masterfully painted. Pose seems awkward as if she is backing up into a corner. and she seems like a wall facing flat forward, maybe a loss of dimension? maybe lighting to accent the face, my eyes are drawn to the hand b/c of light. like golum, I , too, likes shiny things.
Her body language seems to convey an awkward feeling: tense, rigid, like 'i've been sitting for hours and I feel uncomfortable' type look. It mayb the pose. thaz all. Optimist view- varagewd realism and you got that from a live pose. well done

Thanks for the comments.

The steps for this painting will be published in the D'Artiste book coming out soon. I'm sure you'll see news about it once it is printed.

I had headaches with setting up the session because I'm behind a 19" monitor against the wall. There was only one place she could sit that I could still paint her, and that's where she ended up. If I want to do another life portrait digitally, I'm going to have to figure out something for variation.

This painting is weak in many ways--and believe me, they are most obvious to me than anyone else. But this is where I'm at skill-wise for now, until I struggle more and improve. Maybe one day I'll get there.

i believe you'll get there too. gambatte. =)

I don't know why but I took that "fake digital Sargents" for me. And I don't know why again but I think I'm not the only one in this case. Let's speak the truth for once: I do use photos all the time for ref' and you do too. I even do paint-overs and I think YOU TOO. And so what ? I don't see no problem since you take the photo by yourself. I mean, EVERYONE on this GFX board is a fake digital Sargent, and so are you mr Lunatique.

To me, thinking it is the real thing taking my subject from life and not from a photo ref' is a non-sense. And I'm sure even Sargent would say so. Why ? because what matters is not that you are able to reproduce what you see before your eyes with accuracy. What's important is what you have in your mind. Your own universe is important, not your ability to paint from life. This is ridiculous ! I'm sorry but I have to admit I am shocked when you quote Craig Mullins. Mullins has enough real painting skills and anatomical knowledge to rise above most of us and say such provocative things. You don't.
Understand me well, I'm not criticizing your art which I happen to like very much. My crit goes to the fact that with your protesting text you are rising above us all and say you wanna give us a lesson. Be Craig Mullins, be a Sargent if you can and come back with the same lesson. Then maybe I can hear it. Maybe.

very nice work and u captured a personality in the portrait..the eyes have emotions in them..nice lighting too..

now about working from life as opposed to a ref. i too don't think that makes a big difference..anyone who worked from both knows that it depends on the subject..sometimes working from life is actually easier..cuz u get richer detail and lighting specially with still lifes..but i do agree drawing people from life would be harder..but that's cuz they usually move..lol
i think working digital is totally different from traditional..people always try to compare both..but they're just 2 different kinds of art..
i mean anyone who paint digitally could be called a fake artist..why..so simple..because we have an undo and redo option...in traditional if u make a mistake u might end up working on the whole area again trying to blend it or fix it

so my point is this is still a digital painting and that's all it matters but as long as u start from scratch (not overpaint) it's always art.. ref. or from life not very important..it's the medium and end result that really matters..just my opinion

I think im gonna cry, beautiful piece, beautiful subject! MAX Points!

Quoting from a comment above:

"Relying on photographs is too convenient, too easy, and disconnects the painter from the subject ... we all know that it just doesn't feel as authentic as working from life."

=======================

That being said, I don't see where this piece has gone beyond what others have gotten from photo reference, smudged over or otherwise - it doesn't look like a piece done from life, but from a photograph.

Don't get me wrong, it's a terrific piece, but it's no Sargent (not spontaneous looking enough, too controled and exacting) - perhaps it's not intended to be, but the name was mentioned.

If one is going to draw parallels or try to put a piece up of what separates them from a "pretender", make it look different... "better, stringer, faster" than the pretender if you really want to convince us.

I just got thru looking at Suno's latest offering and am delighted at how "realistic/surrealistic" (not phtographic) yet non-conventional it looks - going beyond the photo reference.

She's often labeled with the "airbrush" look, but if you've ever seen the softened edges of a Bouguereau original then you get the sense that it's less an airbrush effect and more the soft edges one sees when painting from life, albeit with her modern flair and background work. (no, not drawing a parallel between Bouguereau and Suno).

And the good ones who have worked from life enough can even incorporate that into their photo referenced works so the onlooker would never be able to tell.

Livingrope- I know your works, and I would never for a second group you together with the "fake digital Sargents." You're better than that. I don't see you smudging photos or painting over photos, so I don't understand why you would feel that I'm talking about you. To clarify, I do not paint over photos or smudge photos. In fact, I much prefer to paint from imagination--and if you just take a look at the non-portrait type paintings I've done, you'll see that.

I don't for a second think that I'm anywhere near the above mentioned great artists. I talk about them in the context of aspiring to follow their path and hopefully one day get close to their level. I'm nowhere close, and I have so much more to learn. I also don't believe I'm "rising above" anyone. There are super-talented artists all over the internet--I'm just a second rate nobody.

I paint what I paint for my personal reasons--if I happen to share my thoughts and motivations by typing it out in words, it was a choice I made to share those thoughts. If they offend or are taken the wrong way, maybe I'll just post pictures and not say a word from now on.

DigitalDust - I totally agree, that's why I say this painting is a failure. That is also why I need to keep trying.

Um... Suno is a *he*.

I am sure Rob Chang has the ability to paint a "photographic" portrait from life. As for the controlled style, it's his style, I don't see anything wrong with it, or the fact that because it's "too controlled" it couldn't have been done from life.

And calling all digital artists "fake artists" because we have Ctrl+Z is total bull! That's like saying watercolour is a more legitimate medium than say, pencil, because you can't erase your mistakes. But wait! You can lift colours once applied, or even cover it with white acrylic or whatever. But no one would call that cheating.

i don't wanna turn this into pointless argument..but
peachy: i didn't call all digital artists "fake artists"..i'm just giving an example of how someone can be picky and call all digital artists fake..and i'm trying to say it doesn't matter how u did your work (as long as u start from scratch) at the end it's still a digital painting..a pencil drawing or whatever

anyways i do like this piece and lunatique's work..in fact Scythe Wolf is one of my favorite paintings..

PeachSticks said: "Um... Suno is a *he*."

You are correct. My typo. My apologies to him.

PeachSticks: " I am sure Rob Chang has the ability to paint a "photographic" portrait from life. As for the controlled style, it's his style, I don't see anything wrong with it, or the fact that because it's "too controlled" it couldn't have been done from life."

I'm sure Rob has the ability to paint just about anything he wants - he is very talented. That has nothing to do with my comments. I don't see anything wrong with his "style" either - I didn't say that because of the style it couldn't have been done from life - don't know where you got that(?)

My comments to Rob have to be taken in context and not as general statements and had nothing to do with results of painting from life being "controlled" or not.

Sargent painted from life but had a very loose, painterly style - Rob's is rendered more tightly. I've seen "paint overs" and "photo smudges" that have been no less or more successful than Rob's piece here, so my suggestion was merely that when one holds a process up for scrutiny, perhaps they should demonstrate how their process gets "better" results. I've been to Rob's site and feel some of his pieces do this - this one doesn't, and in context of how it was presented (scrutinizing a method) I would hope for something different.

This isn't a slam on Rob, but from a commercial perspective, who gives a damn "how" it was done? Most commercial clients/art directors just care what the end product is - plain and simple. The "how" is more important to the artist and they can approach it any which way they prefer - I have no problem with that.

If I get a commercial assignment from a client and a deadline for "X" dollars and I can get the same result in half the time by doing a paint over instead of from scratch, what does business and common sense tell me?

If I want to paint for the "joy" or "fine art" of it, I can do that on my own time - time I might not have if I'm being a "purist" and "suffering" for a commercial assignment. I've done both as situation dictates - I don't see a problem with it either way. That may sound callous or like a sell out, but making a living has helped me adjust a lot of my takes on "reality".

=============

Lunatique, you are far from a second rate nobody, and I think you know that. You do some wonderful work, and it's not about not expressing your thoughts and opinions. You shouldn't think you have to censor yourself because someone questions your opinion with their own - we've all got 'em.

But I gotta tell ya, if you're going to play with fire...!

I have no gripes with your art - it's very good. I'm just starting to try my traditional art skills in the digital realm and believe me, if I could digi-paint a tenth as good as you at this point I would be elated.

This piece is not a failure by any means - it's only in the context it was presented I think has raised some eyebrows.

You can't please all of the people all of the time...

Let's stay on topic and use the insite message system if you disagree with Lunatiques 'fake digital Sargents' statement.

Working from live model is great as far as traditional art is concerned. I don't see it pratical at all when it comes to digital medium; for instance, with the strong natural light depicted in this pic, i wonder how you managed to see the actual colours on the monitor sreen, not to mention the reflections...

that said, it's a damn good job!!

_quote:

---

 Martin wrote on 02/24 @647nLet's stay on topic and use the insite message system if you disagree with Lunatiques 'fake digital Sargents' statement.n

---

I thought that was the topic. Rob posted art with commentary and thusly makes the commentary as much a subject of critique as the art.

From his comments as an artist always looking to improve, I think he wanted and deserves more than "ooooo, OMFG, OMG +12"(as previously stated) so he can improve, whether that be art or a view on art.

(?)

yeah +5 ;]

Nice job d00d! Hands came out great. I haven't read through all the crits but I only think the shoulders could use a bit of color love.

lunatique, you did a skilled work. ...but it is obvious, that you are used to drawing from photo reference. you used your experience in drawing and modulating colors and shades as it is on photographs.

some might disagree, but in my perception of reality photorealism differs from naturalism. if you look at pictures by rembrandt, da vinci, henri gervex, bouguerau or an early picasso, then they are absolutely naturalistic, but dont look like photographs at all.

that means, that drawing from life means learning to draw from a new perspective and abandoning every photorealistic experience to me, what you did not achieve.
skilled, photorealistic work though

greetings, loxi

I think the work above is well done. I have never tried digital painting, and honestly am intimidated by it, having been a more traditionalist untill recently. Yes I would agree that much of the new wave of digital savants creating wonderful peices of work are making us trained artists wary of the competition. Photography, painting, even sound recording has been dominated by digital work as of late. However, and this comes at a sidelong cautious step into the fringe, IF an individual can compose and make the elements in a peice of work look good, along the same lines of the traditionalists fundamental layouts and pattern development etc etc, they are demonstrating a skill. Making a peice of art "feel right", is a great step in itself to becoming the next generation of artists practicing in a new medium.

My only complaint is the depreciation of the value in the works. The fact that I can not appreciate the amount of energy and time spent on a peice of digital work over a traditional painting or drawing.

The above peice has artistic appreciation due to its feel of real artistry. I like that.

As far as the lighting element has it, it would add depth to the figure had there been a greater contrast with the light in this image... not so much as to creat a chiaroscuro effect but just to high light and remove the flat tones a bit more...

Beatiful in any case...

this is absolutely *looks for a word and fails*....

kewl!!! lovely model

Great.

it is very realistic..!! I like the hairstyle..its so smooth . her eyes are beautiful too Great work really...!

This is amazing! Especially good if you painted it form life. Full mark

Wow! I've been doing some life drawings as well, mostly with traditional media. I have yet to use digital but after seeing this, I have to give it a try. Wow!

Think everything was alreay said... just wanna say I Loved it!!!

This is the illest portrait i have ever seen in my life, i realy love the way you have painted her, and especialy her hair is realy nice.
it looks like it was a directly photography but still you can see if you look close at it that it realy is a painting.

I also want to give my applaus for the shadows you painted it realy nice.
Keep on doing your thing i think your gonna be famous on your paintings one day.

Dubish

Your piece and your wife are gorgeous, no mean to offend,

i was going to add a little criticism but it seems you are on a totally different level than i am.

so i feel i have no right.

Great job

This is, by far, one of the most impressive and beautiful works I have seen in a very long time. Technically spoken, it immediately discloses its nature as a formal painting, to the eye of the viewer, through the lighting, depth and the grace which it owes to the beauty of the subject and perception of the artist, thus it reflects an absolute interaction and the great cooperation between you and her.

It is simply plain but then again very elegant, not overly ornamented with too much detail that'd serve as eye candy and let the artist to put him/herself up by silently saying "look at my details, I rule!". The nearly photo-realistic quality and the effort spend on it is incredible. You are absolutely mastering your talent whilst you completely focus on your work, give yourself and mix up your entirety to it. A painting with soul, so to say.

Many artists out there have to learn a lot from you.

You've got a great feeling for shape, great painting skills and color sight, and a GORGIOUS wife.

You've got it all man!

+10

A Masterpiece, nothing short of Incredible. The lighting... is awesome, the lustre of her dress makes it look like silk too. Certainly painted with love. An eternal snapshot of beauty and elegance, Brilliant!!!

Stunning!!!

Will a 'WOW!' do for now? +10

Very worked well... I very liked them lips it...

There are still un smudged bits on the arms that look exactly like it does with a photo that hasnt been smudged properly. Not acusing you anything just be more carefull

your wife is a very beautiful lady! you are one talented human being! damn what a couple!!!

Damn you are good in everything, making you another list for my fav artist