[Leo]

Hello folks!

just walk around the forum and found that most of dudez aren't happy with Painter. someone said bout bad brushes... someone talking bout the lag, layers, paint-effects and so on. Also i see a little number of picts done in painter (mainly from Jason Manley, Don and Veb)... there are many reasons maybe, but it's not important.

i'm always been interested in painting programs especially if you're trying achive photo-realistic images. So i give a Painter try (don't ask me where i've got reference =)...



-leo

[SoMK]

Man, don't ask me if he looks like thegladiator guy or if the pict seems a tad streched but, the TEXTURES are like woooow :pp
EXCELLENT beard !!

------------------
SoMK
====
In The Beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

[travis travis]

You got the reference here:
http://www.raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/ag-ap295.html



for a minute I thought you were just posting the render, but it could be a digital painting copy, and if it is, wow! you should post some steps of your process

update: oh, and I don't know about Painter, but Maya doesn't suck!

[This message has been edited by travis travis (edited March 06, 2001).]

[Binke]

There seems to be something wrong with (his) left eye.

------------------
Art Dimensional

[morphgfx]

I never had the chance to get my hands on a copy of painter to try it out... perhaps i'll get a cheap one at ebay some day...

pic looks awesome... I think his face is to narrow eh... thin... eh don't know... damn english language , his nose is to deep or the eyes are to high, not sure about that; his ears are both a tad to long at the top and, yes, their obviously is a prob with his left eye. Excellent textures though and a cool presentation of the possibilities in Painter. Don't know if you wanted the pic to be criticized, as you posted it in "finished works", sorry.

[OkkE]

One word: great!

It just looks great! Almost as if he could step out of my monitor

[immi]

Damn, Leo, that looks goddamn awesome! I was wondering when we were going to see more Painter stuff from you as I was really impressed with your Matrix picture.

While the likeness isn't totally there, I love how there's a real sense of realism, yet at the same time, it has a real nice painterly feel to it. Ie. It doesn't just look like a photograph.

Man, the textures on the skin...awesome! Do some more

[Jason]

I think you made your point. ITs not the program, its the person working the program. Yes?

[biggunn01]

you've just made me embarresed to show my stuff. i just did two drawings in painter for the first time and they suck compaired to what you just did. if you wouldn't mind take a look at them and give me some pointers.
wes

------------------
WESLEY GUNN
www.mpstudios.net

[Waldo]

If you did that in Painter and Painter sucks, then I'm going to have to get me a suck-ass copy and get to work. From what I understand, and someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, the issues concerning Painter are the lag and the somewhat troublesome interface. Don Seegmiller says it's a must buy and most of the others that use it and use it well (as Jason pointed out) say it is much better in replicating the actual act of painting more so than PhotoShop.

Great pic, Leo. His face seems a bit elongated, but you've captured skins tones and textures very well...


edit - Painter 6


[This message has been edited by Waldo (edited March 06, 2001).]

[garuda_x]

i tlooks like the g;ladiator that rides the "short" bus. his eyes are too close together.... head looks like a crushed mellon... but nice shading and what not. work your proportions and foundation first. the put the detail.

[Awetopsy]

chee.... click... wow.

simply put, Wow...

wow.

*twitches*

[sacrelicious]

Leo, this is great, it's like I could reach out and touch it.

And, as a side note, that 3d render of Russel Crowe is pretty sick. I've seen it before and I'm still amazed.

------------------
What is your obsession with my forbidden closet of mystery?

[TJFrame]

Many of Painter's brushes are simply impossible to reproduce in Photoshop. For example the properties and interactions of the oil brushes just can't be done in Photoshop at all. You can dial in the color variability of a brush to more closely simulate an actual "dirty" brush. You can fiddle with the way the color smears with other paint, how it fades out etc. way more than Photoshop. The watercolor tools also can very realistically mimic the real thing. The "Just add Water" tool blurs things in realtime the way you think it should work - not like Photoshop's crappy blur/smudge tools. You can rotate the canvas too. I also like the paper materials features - they really work as compared to lame photoshop plug-ins. Having said that, even though Painter has made an effort to be more Photoshop "compliant" with its interface, its still a cludgy pain that scares most people away. If only Photoshop would rip-off the critical features of Painter, we would have a single, ideal digital painting app.

Obviously you can get fantastic results with just Photoshop - it's just much much easier to imitate traditional materials (if that's your goal) in Painter. Do what I do - load up your machine with a shitload of RAM and hop back and forth between them. Painter generally respects Photoshop's layers so you don't have to sacrifice too much!

-TJ

[This message has been edited by TJFrame (edited March 07, 2001).]

[Leo]

okee i repaint him a bit... thx for the input guys and girls

TJFrame: you're captured the point - brushes is the main power. Yes, i can do this or that texture in ps but i'll need a lot of time and patience!

sacrelicious: yeah, agreed. that render from korean guys just breaking traditional '3d feeling' (i mean those plastic surfaces or shiny spaceships etc.)

garuda_x: fixed...

biggunn01: wrong! - don't be afraid to show your in-progress or completed stuff - just make sure that you've worked enough hard on it. Also i can suggest to visit artists like Don Seegmiller, Vebjorn Strommen, Shane Caudle and Jason Manley (well i never saw his personal page but you can catch his art in Black Isle studios' products). They all have great painter expirience and you can find some useful stuff on their pages.

Jason: exactly! please, don't make me wrong - i'm not trying to say that everybody here sucks nah... just tried myself at 'photo-real' attempt and the 'program-compatibly'. Yes, i'm still study with painter... just explore bout 5-10% of his features/abilities. The first time i start, i thinked bah! these guys sucks! i just can't draw... interface is one of the problems and it was really slow compared to ps etc.

immi: thanks man! hehe... you still remember that matrix pict

morphgfx: no prob with crit... fixed some points =) ...or maybe not

travis travis: eek mmm... yeah. Maya dosen't suck . As for step-by-step stuff, you know, last time when i post it at forum nobody was interested so i drop the idea.

well, thanks again for all the crits folks,
take your time and keep painting!

-leo

[sock]

OMG, all the hairy-texture-stuff loooks awwwesoome

his hair, his beard, the clothes, aaargh!!

congratz



------------------
sock - go my way, or the highway

[ghi]

painter isn't photoshop. painter is a completely different program with a different degree of interface use. i use painter almost exclusively and find that photoshop is not very user friendly at all. it doesn't render brush strokes fast or smooth, doesn't have great wacom support and it has limited brushes. painter has a 'gel' layer that makes colors transparent and glazing effects can be done, photoshop possesses no such layer attribute. painter has the BEST airbrush effects and support for the wacom airbrush stylus. as an airbrush painter originally this was the most significant feature that made me favor painter over photoshop.

photoshop has robust layer management. something i'm sure will be improved upon in the painter 7 upgrade. the vast majority of complaints about painter are actually hardware related but users seldom want to acknowledge it. it's important to build your computer around the software you intend to use. i use a G4 400, os 9.0 with 512MB ram, 300MB allocated to painter 6. i have great success with painter. i generally work with 15MB-25MB files at 200 dpi with all brushes set at the sizes that will allow for rendering the smoothest and fastest. basically all i use photoshop for is scanning, formatting and genuine fractals.

ghi

[This message has been edited by ghi (edited March 07, 2001).]

[Jason Manley]

nice copy...I agree with most of the above statements..

texture copy ...very patient and well done.

proportions need work. ask yourself what he is feeling in the pic and then look at yours and ask yourself what yours if feeling...expression wise. adjust accordingly.

THE 3-d render of russell crowe(not to discredit it at all...just thinking about how it was done)... looks like a cut and paste job from photoshop. the eyes...forehead..cheeks...who knows what else is all looks like copy paste and blended edges. you can actually see the shape of the cut and paste on his forehead if you look closely. the lighting on the head is different than the lighting on the body....the piece is well done...dont get me wrong...but take a look at the hands and how the far hand is all broken and contorted looking....if he can model that head that beautifully then why cant he make a well constructed hand with nicely positioned fingers?

as far as the copy of the render goes...very nice...but in the future Id do one of the more nicely done gladiators by a master like gerome or do a carravaggio master copy...here is a couple links...keep up the good work!

jason manley

check out the judith beheading Holofernese here http://www.artrenewal.org/museum/c/Caravaggio_Michelangelo_Merisi_da/page1.html

gerome link http://www.artrenewal.org/museum/g/Gerome_Jean-Leon/page1.html

and a whole bunch of good paintings!
http://www.artrenewal.org/museum/contents.html

check out the frederick leighton section...great paintings...great reproductions

[Drorak]

Wow, that's really very good Leo. The colors and contrast are so vivid. But he looks more like Russel Crowe's brother (the unpopular one that nobody knows about).

As for that 3D render by that Korean guy, it is simply amazing. I didn't even know you could do that with 3D software, pretty soon they'll be able to replace actors on screen with 3D models and the audience won't even know.

Jason, I'd like to think that you're wrong about the cut and paste thing. But you might be right. It looks so real that it could just as easilly be a photograph of the real thing. Now if only the guy could animate it.

[Strawberrysauce]

no way! have u seen that Korean guy's web site?!?!?!

by the look of his other work, id say the Russell Crowe Pic is most definitely a 3d model rendering, as his other work is just as amazing!!!

God of MAYA, bow down and worship him for he is the chosen one!!

------------------
----- SHAMHEAD ----

[Drorak]

Yeah, it's no cut & paste.

He even explains a bit how he did it. http://www.soanala.com/eng/process/gradiator.htm