'>>7154809
It's not rare at all';

'>>7154809
because girls draw that';

'bro wtf am i looking at';

'>>7154809
We moved a bit too far away from composing a scene from imagination. Look at Bougereau for example, he composed a scene from imagination with pencil, even if it was just one woman in a simple pose. Then he would hire a model for this task. Now we have it a bit backwards, we hire the model and search for pretty compositions which will always end up in a more stiff end result. Same with your digital illustration, it looks a lot more energetic if you start with an imaginary sketch, instead of with the reference first.

Sure there are a lot of people who still work like this, but they are busy working in commercial fields. Look at Dave Rapoza's process for example. Fine arts got a bit lazy and also infected with a false interpretation of history thanks to retarded sight sizers. I do agree with you, but it is up to us to make a difference by creating and do more imaginary work instead of letting the reference dictate your starting point.';

'>>7154813
The work of an artist who dares draw people in odd angles, with less than ideal room illumination and who are not showing their faces perfectly straight at the camera,

For example in pic related, the spotlight (from the window maybe), doesn't fall on the people, it falls on a random car, but we can still see that the protagonists are the girls. Also half of them have their face partially invisible because they are busy interacting with their world instead of existing for the viewer (building the backside of the igloo, carrying a heap of snow up to her face). This drawing effectively captures a moment believably because not everything in it is conveniently positioned and illuminated.

This is what's rare in art for me.';

'>>7154842
forgot image,
it's pic related';

'>>7154811
Almost every artist would not have allowed the chair and the table to obstruct the woman, they would have instead drawn the two people first and then everything else in the background.';

'>>7154852
That's about composition. A chair in the foreground is not
>something happening

I would guess that about 50% of drawn, still images are depicting some action, as opposed to being a straight photoshoot type of deal';

'>>7154809
Most artists don't learn "visual storytelling" skills unless they're comic artists or animators.';

'>>7154809
>Art is supposed to capture a moment
and this is according to...';

'>>7154809
>Art is supposed to
Kill yourself, "supposed to" nigger';

'>>7154875
me';

'>>7154809
It's because art is "content" now instead of something with depth and value. Stories from the Bible, to epic poems, all the way to classic children's literature used art to add enhance the experience of telling a story. Some of my favorite illustrators are from the 19th and early 20th centuries when books were still sold and illustrators were still in demand. Words like "OC" or "original character" diminish the importance of narrative in art, especially since most of the time these "characters" are drawn posing in a white void acting as a stand-in for the artist.
Pic related is from Gustave Doré, someone I be like someday.';

'>>7154957
>*someone I wish to be like someday
Pic related is Noriyoshi Ohrai. If books aren't your thing you can learn great composition and narrative techniques from artists who painted film posters or album covers. Telling stories in a single image although more of a challenge compared to a book can be just as rewarding.';

'>>7154809
people who buy commissions dont want this. they want clearly visible characters in full detail facing the camera';

'>>7154843
I'm not paying 100 bucks for a picture of just a girls head behind a pile of snow';

'>>7154842
>>7154843';

'>>7154872
Where would one go to learn these skills?';

'>>7154872
editorial illustrators, splash art illustrators. most paid artists do need to have a story.';

'>>7154809
it's only rare to you because you follow social media artists, rather than illustrators.';

'>>7154809
>Art is supposed to
Art is supposed to have different intentions and purposes, the one you're complaining about has more to do with character design and illustration. If you want full illustration or fine art with storytelling there are lots of that too. Your picrel is not something that can be produced in great numbers quickly, and is not ideal in filling up portfolios fast.
For people who want to make a living as an artist in this day and age if you went through a fine art route you have more chances of starving to death. How many finished paintings can you do in a month for example? Meaningful art takes time and is not produced in great quantities.';

'>>7154813

Use your imagination, there’s enough of a narrative going on. Don’t expect to be spoonfed anon.';

'>>7154881
Fuck off esl wannabe';

'Once again, yet another worthless thread by a creepy nodraw incel.';

'>>7154809
you should try looking at more art and learning names of artists who aren't just on twitter or instagram';

'>>7154809
Now OP can you enlighten us what's happening in this artwork?';

'>>7154809
Image: Don't put your dick on crazy.';

'>>7155378
It’s very deep';

'>>7155388
How deep?';

'>>7154957
Western painting had a very strong narrative tradition. Most painted scenes were illustrations or interpretations of biblical stories, then little by little people shifted to the classics as source materias (Homer and the greek myths, Shakespeare). At some point (I guess modernism, but that's kinda vague) that essential connection between painting and literature was broken, that's why today most painters just do "photoshoot" scenes. Nobody from the modern ateliers (Grand Central, Florence Academy, you know the ones) can tell a story for shit, they just do boring, lame-ass close-up portraits.';

'>>7154967
skill issue';

'>>7155403
Just to add to what your saying, go onto Wikimedia right now and type in anything that has to do with the New Testament, namely Jesus or Mary and see how many images contain very similar poses or compositions (Madonna and Child paintings, for example). I find it very interesting that many artists back then were totally comfortable taking direct inspiration from statues or other artwork to use as a reference point for their poses or their own compositions. Nowadays with Twitter we have allegations of artists "stealing ideas" from others or not being original enough when we should encourage these young artists to form a tradition of copying.';

'undefined';

'"Genre paintings" are also good at storytelling - artists painting warm, comforting scenes that would typically be associated with religious imagery into the ordinary moments of everyday life.';

'undefined';

'>>7154842
>The work of an artist who dares draw people in odd angles
The lifted "hollywood kiss" leg cracked me up. This must be one of the most retarded poses ever. What makes it so uncanny is the fact that the art is actually very good.';

'>>7154957
>t's because art is "content" now instead of something with depth and value.
Imagine thinking you can't have both lol.
It's not a matter of the times we live in. It's a matter of skills.
Back in the day it was the same, you just didn't have global social media platforms where ANYONE can showcase their poor skills to the world.';

'>>7155391
"Hollywood kiss" bent leg deep.';

'>>7154872
Enlighten us oh dear faggot messiah.';

'>>7155433
you couldn't trace back then, while it's so easy to do now, especially with digital. you don't want a generation of tracers, do you?';

'>>7155463
He already did. Did you reply to the wrong post?';

'>>7154957 #
I like light novels for this reason but it sucks illustrations are seen as kiddie. Probably because publishing houses want to save money just like when Tor got caught using AI art for a cover.';

'>>7154809
My problem is I don't feel like spending 9 hours for 3k likes and 200 retweets. Or 100k likes and 3k retweets. Because either way you're just a moment on a timeline, and there's always another You below you waiting for their 3 seconds. Even if it touched someone, it's not a moment that endures.
>Oh wow this is amazing
2 weeks later you aren't even in the rear view mirror of their deepest thoughts. You happened, and for what? It's rewarding to look at art like this, it's just not as rewarding to make it';

'>>7154957
>It's because art is "content" now instead of something with depth and value.
Oh, come on. As if pinups and portraits haven't existed for hundreds of years';

'There are Portraits, a pose looking at the camera, and there is Illustration, portraying a scene from some story,defining the world through details.';

'>>7154809
We'd write novels instead if we actually had ideas.';