Need Help Realistic Coloring

IT'S CRAPPY!!!! Give me useful critiques that will enhance my coloring!

You would not believe that I tried to draw this on an old Mac, then transfer it to my XP. At first the image file was corrupted, so I had to run back to my Mac and make another copy of the file. This time it worked and uploaded.

However there are a few color inconsistencies (ie the mysteriously subtle circle on her cheek) so pardon those. I blame the OS transition for this problem because I swear it looked fine on the Mac. >_<

I tried to use less of an outline and allow the colors to define certain features. Because cel-shading too ezpz. Needless to say I had a hard time, but I'm learning things as I go along so that's good.

Where's your reference photo? Oh, you don't have one? There's your problem. If you're having such a hard time doing realistic lighting, why are you trying to do some crazy green backlighting instead of a normal looking scene, without using any sort of reference to boot?

If your drawing looks crappy, try drawing it again with reference. It'll help a lot, and the more drawings you do, the more you'll remember, and the easier it'll be to draw without reference.

Here's a decent art tutorial, too: http://www.itchstudios.com/psg/art_tut.htm#color_relativity

A lot of stuff about lighting and texture and stuff. Good luck!

Hey Jim! I did this one w/o reference because it was already vivid in my head and I wanted to see how well I could replicate it in Photoshop. Turns out realistic coloring takes a lot of patience...

Thanks for the art tut my friend. Cheers.

Indeed, and that's totally fine. But drawing from references will burn the sorts of images you practice from into your head, so that the next time you want to draw something, the image will be even more vivid, and you'll do even better without the reference. I think some people think that drawing with references is a sort of crutch that will make it harder to draw without them; I think it's the exact opposite - the more reference images you have tucked away up there, the more you you have to work from when Google isn't around to help you! =D

No problem! Looking forward to seeing your next painting.

Hmmmmmm! Is that some dodge/burn I see?

*buzzer noise*

Alright, so not a bad attempt I suppose, but you really need to stick away from dodge/burn, because not only is it very noticeable, but half the time artists (particularly new ones) wind up over-using it, and it destroys the color.

There are far easier ways.

Being that this is a digital painting, it would help a lot to know what program you were using. I'll assume Photoshop? Which version? Depending on your answer, I may have some technical tips that I can give you, but I realize not every PS suite has a Smudge tool.

Aside from the regular "use refs" (which I am just as guilty of), I kind of want to know exactly what version of Photoshop you're using (if that is what you are, in fact, using).

LOLOLOLOL e-l337 needs to stop bring the smudge tool to everyone of his/her critiques. admittedly ive only seen it twice but it was back to back.

moving on.

purple and neon greek. yikes.
going into color theory, i understand thats supposed to be the right combo, but its tricky like red and green where you gotta get the tones right or else it looks like christmas or some shitty toxic waste combo.

and if its purple background, why green highlights?

if you dont already, try working with a really large canvas (mine are usually like 2000 x 1300 or some crazy shit like that) and when done, shrink down to normal size.

otherwise, its keep goin, practice, use refs

Hey, E-|337!

I used Photoshop CS, it's basically all of CS2 with less filters, I believe. I used the burn tool as little as possible because I know what overkill looks like - I used it mainly because I had a hard time with a few shadows, so I wanted you to get the main idea of what I'm trying to do and maybe you could show me the right way to do them.

So do you encourage use of smudge tool? I think it's great for blending colors actually, and creating that subtle soft effect.

Artisticjunke, what's up! ^^ Purple is not the actual bg color, it's just the contrast color so I'm not staring at a blinding white document the whole time. My taste in color isn't THAT bad! I'd normally choose a calm green, but my main color theme IS green/black so I wanted to differentiate.

And I always use a large canvas. The larger it is the bigger the file size, but also the more detail you can fit in. Plus it helps if you plan to publish a work in formats of different sizes!

Refs should be used, noted.

This post has been edited by Wark_Ento on Oct 25 2009, 05:41 PM

Aight, you're trying to deal with several big problems at the same time and relatively for the firstish time. I know this may not be the very first time you tried realism, but it's one of the first times and given that, there's a lot of assumptions firsties make about it. Trust me, it's how I started out.

the issues: One, you're trying realism without reference. This has been stated and restated and noted, so I'm not going to lecture you again. Suffice to say, if you don't find it religiously when trying to paint it, you're not going to succeed at it and you'll waste ten times the time trying to fix something you don't know how to. The big thing to understand is that there's no level you will reach that will allow you to go completely without reference. There's an assumption that reference is somehow a copout and that true pros don't need it. Not true. I Still use it no matter what.

Two, you're trying two very unnatural lighting setups on skin tones without reference and without understanding how skin works in natural light to begin with. Skin is translucent and bounces light, it also has blood running through it which also produces other effects. But to take that and then put unusual lighting situations (TWO of them, even) is quite the leap of physical math to get those hues correct. Ahem, especially without reference. ;}

Three, the blur tool. Though I use it occasionally to take the edge off something, generally the tool just screams digital and amateur. The true marks you want are based off knowledge: that you *know* where the highlights lay and how the anatomy of the musculature and skeletal features lay, and that you *know* how the light turns on that form and what the colors are doing to describe it. You might think that blurring it makes it look more professional and illustrated, but really those are the Rose Goggles of Greater IllusionTM. When you start seeing form, you'll start seeing why the tool and the method is more of a crutch. ;}

Is that to say it's the spawn of evil and there is no place for the blur tool? No. However, I will say that once your hand skills get to a point where you know more where to place your strokes, you'll find less and less use for it. That's why I define it as a crutch and something that younger artists (myself included at one time) cling to early on. I'm just trying to give you heads up on it before it becomes a habit to break. ;}

So as for your picture, there's a whole lotta work that can make it more 'realistic' if that's the goal. If you're into making it a cool picture, then just keep painting however you want to. If you're into painting something realistic to improve your skills, then I think there are other methods that will help you get there faster and with less frustration and more accuracy. ;}

If that's the case, the usual help is the daily diet of life drawing. It can be anything: stuff on your desk, what's out your window, go to a museum and paint the sculptures, paint portraits of your pets and family, whatnot. I know of a few resources of showing folks that have improved by doing this, but it does take time and works best with daily or at least semi-daily effort.

This doesn't mean you'll be restricted from doing anything off-the-wall and 'fun'... it just means there will be focused study time and the more unstructured stuff bookends the study.

Lemme know if you'd like some directed work. I'll try to guide you (as well as the other fine folks here in MT), but my time lately has been sporadic. I'll help where I can. :}

This post has been edited by Merekat on Oct 25 2009, 09:27 PM

Hi Merekat, thanks for taking the time to reply! I really appreciate it.

I understand what you're saying about the blur tool being a crutch. Thanks ; )

And yes, I need references. They should help me a lot.

I have a few questions...

- Where can I learn about natural lighting on skin tones, the bounce of light off skin, the effects of blood in the skin? I'm assuming more photo references will help in this case...is there any place online where I can start off quickly on this?

- How much time do you personally spend on daily life drawing? One minute? Five minutes? Half an hour?

~Wark.

Look around you. Everything is reference. The best way to examine how light plays on the human skin is to examine your arm, or your friend beside you, or that chick across the room chewing on her gum brainlessly like a cow. Lights are everywhere - therefore, so is reference for lighting.

Photos can help, but finding actual *artistic* references online... a tad more difficult. Art Morgue is an interesting site I just recently stumbled on while looking for references, so you might want to poke around there for a bit.

Just try not to get stuck in the crutch that you *have* to use photos as reference. Photos are great, but they can never truly replace the human eye in a natural environment. Keep in mind that you can use family and friends as reference images as well. I know a few of my instructors that do that (and even use some of the students as references too~).

On the time issue: I'd recommend trying to spend at least an hour doing life studies. Maybe not every day, but when we do open model sessions at my school, we usually draw for about 1.5 hours out of a two hour period.

Best of luck!

I did a life coloring this afternoon, does that count? I think I see what you guys mean now. This IS very useful!

It's a countdown timer. 1 hr approx.



Crits/tips? It was hard for me to do w/o a varying of hard/soft brushes and some transforming and polygonal select-deleting to get it to look less wobbly and more aligned. Also the actual angle of the reference was slightly different, but...I tried.

~Wark.

This post has been edited by Wark_Ento on Oct 29 2009, 07:05 PM

I'd wager to say it's a life study, because you are looking at the light qualities, which is what you need.

You've already learned a lot just from this one experiment, I can see. The only thing that bothers me is the sharp corners of the shadows, in contrast to the rounded off corners of the timer itself.

Keep trying. You've got a great start on this, so keep it up man.

First off, I like the fact that you tried to keep this visually simple. It's a good approach. Also, the use of polygonal tools is obvious, but not necessarily bad because it helped you keep a sense of perspective in check.

The first thing that bothered me was how sharp the edges are on the cast shadow. Shadows are sharpest when they're close to the object that's causing them, but as the shadow stretches out farther away, their edges get fuzzier and less distinct, and the depth of the shadow is also lightened as well.

It's clear you probably didn't freehand the shadow in yourself. You also took an hour to make it. That's not necessarily wrong or bad...but it reminds me of something that plagued my art for a long time when I was first starting out. There's an urge to be accurate, correct, or to make everything seem 'perfect.' It tends to lock you up and make you indecisive. Your confidense sets the standard for the piece. What you feel and think will go into the painting in ways that the viewer will pick up on, whether they're aware of it or not. Lack of confidense causes people to chicken scratch at their paper using 20 indecisive strokes, when one bold confident one would suffice. Accepting that there will be mistakes made and that making mistakes and trying to deal with them is actually an opportunity and not a hindrance to your work. The sooner nne accepts that, the sooner their brain is freed up. It's obvious you want to improve; your asking for critique. Rather than nitpicking particulars, I have a suggestion:

If you want to improve your art and free your mind of these trappings (that is if you're plagued by something similar to what I've described above), I'd recommend sitting down and doing very quick speed sketches every day in addition to your normal drawing. Try drawing an object to the best of your ability in 5 minutes. Then try it in 60 seconds. Do a bunch of those. When you constrain time like this with enough sketches, you'll notice that you stop focusing on details and general things that are the foundation for good design. They will suck, especially at first, but that's another point of trying this out. You accept that not everything you do is brilliant. In fact, I think of mistakes almost like toxins infecting the body and the way to get those toxins out is to draw them out. That's why practice is so critical. You bleed it out of your system. Make the mistakes and see that as a step for becoming something more.

You may be discouraged at first (I was), but do a series of these kind of sketches every day for a week. It may surprise you. Eventually, this exercise is really fun.

Anyway, do sketches like that at a quick speed and when you get used to that speed, cut down even more time, and then at the very end, give yourself the original 5 minutes. You'll be surprised at how your work will change. (use this as an exercise; don't completely replace your other studying with this method; it isn't an end all, it's just an approach I find useful). Hope that helps.

This post has been edited by Miss Wiggle on Oct 30 2009, 01:29 PM

Hi Miss Wiggle, and E-|337 again!

The shadow bothered me too. I suppose I could have made it fuzzier.

Speed sketching sounds like a great idea. I'm thinking it should force me to outline things quickly so I will understand basic forms, ESPECIALLY of the human figure. Sometimes I have a hard time drawing men and an even harder time drawing women. To which everyone's reply here would most likely be, "Use a reference." And I agree. : )

But do you recommend these exercises more with a pencil or a tablet?

With anything. Paint, pencils, digital, markers, whatever you feel like. The principle applies to just about everything, even sculpting and stuff like that.

And again, it's not an end all solution to every artistic qualm you'll have, but it really helped me bust out of my shell and get some quick experience.

Take it from me though: Speed sculpting is a pain in the ass. Period, end of discussion.

For Wark? You can do these studies with anything. Pen or pencil on paper, colored pencils, markers, heck, even paints if you wanted to. Charcoal is another great medium to play with too for exercises on light (because you have to "subtract" instead of "add").

Charcoal is a bit messy though, so keep that in mind if you try that out.

Thanks E-|337

I decided to do skin shading practice + frontal male anatomy practice for roughly an hour using a reference.

Crit everything, I think it's safe to say my male anatomy is not so good. I realize now that the man needs more hip! I was trying to shade like in one of Spoonifur's tutorials, just to see where I could get. The shading is not very cleaned up.

Also, does smudging the color pallete help at all?



This post has been edited by Wark_Ento on Nov 2 2009, 07:15 PM

Okay, "using reference" doesn't mean just sorta gathering color picks using the eyedropper. If you want to use reference, it's the same as life drawing and still lifes: you need to get correctly what you need for the direction.

For example, you're trying to learn male anatomy. But all you did was get a pic and use the eyedropper for a palette and didn't have a useful reference at all for the pose you painted. Frankly I love your photo. But if you're going to draw the reference, then draw the reference. I expect you to directly try to copy what you see there in that photo... in that pose, with that lighting.

Furthermore, don't use the eyedropper. That's crutch #2. ;} Colors are so subtle that just TRYING to get them right is a heck of a lesson.

So what I suggest is take *this* photo and try to directly copy it without tracing and without eyedropping. If, after you're about 75% done, you want to copy your work and overlay it on the photo to see how close you got, then you can. However you cannot then correct the issues with it overlaid, you have to eyeball the corrections. ;}

Yeah, it's boot camp. Do your pushups. ;}

Oh, and try to keep the painting under 2 hours to start since this is new. I'll start decreasing the time on you as you start getting the swing of it.

This post has been edited by Merekat on Nov 2 2009, 10:30 PM

I always use crutch #2 getting the colors right can be flippin hard. (guess that's just one more thing to work on)

Hi Merekat! Can you explain more about how eyedropper use is a crutch? I don't really understand.

I'll draw the reference the way it's shown then. That should help me with anatomy at that angle, at least.

And keeping a painting under 2 hours is no problem for me, at least in my current stage of digital art. I don't really know how to do good details.

The idea is that you should be able to pick the colors yourself without making the software do it for you.

This is especially important since image compression often gives you weird eyedropper results anyway.

Yep, this'll also help you later should you be doing color work not on a computer - you'll have had practice picking good colors by eye instead of letting the software do all the work.

Though, uncreative, when I do use the eyedropper, I tend to have it take a sample over a large patch of pixels, in order to get the closest thing to the color I actually wanted. I've never really thought about if that actually works out so well, though.

I do that too, but I'm a bit suspicious of the results sometimes. If you want something accurate, it's probably better to eyeball it anyway, since you want it to look like your eye perceives it rather than its actual color. Photos in particular have a lot of impure color (the real world is more complicated than pure tones, after all) and the eyedropper just doesn't realize that sort of concern at all.

For example, my skin has an average color you'd see it as having, but any random area you pick off of it isn't going to accurately represent the overall impression it would give off, due to blood vessels, lighting, and other variables. If you wanted just one color to work with at first, you'd have to figure it out yourself.

To answer the eyedropper as a crutch question:

You need to understand the concept of cool and warm color tones.
How different tones/colors can affect each other.
How a shadow or highlight can be grey or blue instead of a darker skin tone.

How nighttime could mean a palette of purples and blues and not darker flesh color.

And it is something that you can only learn right with time, practice, and observation. Not an eyedropper.

Ahhh, I see. Both excellent explanations, thanks!
I should really look into color studies, but I just hate coloring so much >.<