HOME | DD
AquaSixio β Tutorial 14 Photoref to make the difference
Published: 2012-02-22 21:12:29 +0000 UTC; Views: 130415; Favourites: 4289; Downloads: 7776
Redirect to original
Description
FACEBOOK FANPAGE | TUMBLR | TWITTER[EDIT] Just for information, what you called " tracing " (step 3.1.2) take me ... 2 minutes of work.
There is more than 25 hours of painting after, without "use" the photoreference, as explained in... the tutorial... just read[/EDIT]
En FRANCAIS !!!
Tutoriel #14 : Photo reference
Some WIPs :
Tutorial #16 : Shades
Tutorial #15 : Adjustment Layers
Tutorial #14 : Photo-referencing
Tutorial #13 : Water
Tutorial #12 : Creativity
Tutorial #11 : Three textures
Tutorial #10 : Color
Tutorial #9 : Layer
Tutorial #8 : Cloud 2
Tutorial #7 : Arround a drawing 3
Tutorial #6 : Brush
Tutorial #5 : Arround a drawing 2
Tutorial #4 : Arround a drawing 1
Tutorial #3 : Light and shadow
Tutorial #2 : Cloud 1
Retrospection 2004 - 2012
Retrospection 2004 - 2007
Related content
Comments: 823
Hello...Just a word of encouragement and cogratulation.
Very good job (for a "non-professional").Keep it up.
PS: Drew Struzan (which is undoubtedly the most talented world respect painter illustrator working for films and posters) also working from photos that he "decal" and recompose to repainted it ...! So congratulations and keep it up.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you for your support ^^
π: 0 β©: 0
Wow......your tutorials is really...really....amazing....OoO
I really.....love you!!
π: 0 β©: 0
Whoa you have reigned controversy with this tutorial...I just LOVE how you've replied to this ever mounting thread lol
I just love your process it is wonderful. However you have definitely hit a grey area and your "tracing' which it is, technically (sorry to say) looks more like a T minus two mins and counting sketch which you could achieve by just looking at the pic...
Anywho i love YOUR artwork ( you have definitely put in the time and effort into your work) and your tutorials.... ppl will get over it so don't get disheartened
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you for your suppport
π: 0 β©: 0
wonderful. gREAT WORK!
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you for all your comments !
π: 0 β©: 1
you're welcome!!!!
π: 0 β©: 0
if someone calls this tracing then they are idiots,
artists have used models\camera obscura for ages.
π: 0 β©: 1
He put his "canvas" on top of the photo he doesn't own and traced over it. It doesn't have to be detailed to be traced. That is not the same as looking at a model in front of you and drawing what you see.
As for camera obscura, that still isn't the same thing. If you set up your own image using live models or take your own reference photos, you own those images. Norman Rockwell owned the reference images he used in his illustrations because he set up the models and poses in the first place to look off of. Yanking things off of Google image search and tracing them isn't the same thing, not by a long shot. He should at least use a rights-free stock resource if he has to draw on top of photos to get it to look decent.
π: 0 β©: 3
(sorry if this is a late comment, but I've been seeing you lots on this comment thread, and I want to ask you something)
I know this is tracing. (This is rightfully obvious, and I can sympathize with you when you see people say "this isnt tracing" when it clearly is)
However, I think they are talking about the mindset of "tracing..."
The big question is, is tracing wrong?
π: 0 β©: 1
In some ways.
It's definitely detrimental in the way it's being done here. Tracing things rather than actually drawing them is a shortcut of sorts which does nothing for your artistic development. It becomes a crutch that is very hard to get rid of.
Tracing teaches you nothing but how to follow a line that is immediately in front of your pencil. You don't think about composition, proportion, anatomy, form, nothing -- just following that line. As a result, I as well as many other artists on deviantART despise dA's tracing policy. It isn't a good way to learn anything. Some people will swear by the sun, moon, and stars that tracing DOES teach you things because THEY learned from it, but... most of them are behind the curve for their age bracket if you look at their gallery and are familiar with the common artistic development for teens and early 20-somethings. They stunted themselves with tracing.
If you must copy something (and most all artists go through a phase like that in elementary and middle school), it is much better to "eyeball" it. Eyeballing something is looking at an image and recreating it on another sheet of paper. In order to make a good eyeball copy, you have to pay attention to things like proportion, form, anatomy, etc. It also trains your eye and hand to communicate with each other. If you post an eyeball copy, though, it's proper etiquette to state the image is eyeball copied and then link to the image you copied.
In the case of what Aqua is doing here, not only is it lazy, it's illegal. You can't just take images off of Google that you don't own and trace them. It doesn't matter if you change details like props and clothing. You're copying something you don't own. That is copyright infringement and plagiarism, and if you do it to the wrong person or entity, you can get in a whole mess of legal trouble. Copyright infringement cases often carry damages of $100,000+ USD and prison time, and if you are convicted they will garnish your wages and whatever else they have to do until you pay that settlement back.
The only time tracing is legally acceptable is if you own what you're tracing, or if it's rights-free stock. There are websites out there that provide rights-free stock that is free to use, deviantART being one of them. There is a stock category for that. If you take an image from a PAID stock site like GettyImages or Corbis, though, you are stealing. You must pay for the rights to use images off of those sites.
People will defend tracing by saying artists like Norman Rockwell traced photos. They still aren't correct because while Norman Rockwell did indeed trace photos, they were photos he shot himself using models he hired. He owned those photos, so he could do whatever he wanted with them.
Another normal instance in which tracing is used is to trace your own drawings. It's a common production step for illustrators that is used to create a tight sketch -- by tracing your rough sketch. I personally scan in my thumbnail sketches, enlarge them in Photoshop, and then draw on top of them to create a rough sketch, then trace it to make a tight sketch, then take it into Illustrator and trace it again to make my final line work. THAT is okay.
Sorry for the long response, but it's hard to explain without getting wordy. : P
π: 0 β©: 1
No, now I need to ask a question ;D
Okay, so about "eyeballing," is trying to draw a tree from your backyard eyeballing? Or is eyeballing only when you are copying a 2 dimensional image?
π: 0 β©: 1
Eyeballing is looking at, say, official artwork from a Zelda game and trying to redraw it on another sheet of paper. Drawing a tree in your backyard would be "drawing from life." That's actually the best thing you can do to develop your skills, which is why all art schools start their foundations classes with still-life drawing (setting up objects in the room for all the students to draw).
π: 0 β©: 2
`AquaSixio , *KrisCynical and ~JoanMystique , I have learned a lot from all of you.Β
Thank youΒ `AquaSixio Β for keeping this controversial tutorial open to comments and criticism. The humble attitude you've shown throughout each of the responses I've read from you is something to emulate. Your tutorials on colors have also helped me countless times! Thank you for your contribution and I wish you the best in your journey as an artist!
*KrisCynical , I agree with most of your stance and I'm glad you took the time to respond to Joan Mystique. The "wordy" response wasn't wordy at all. I think you argued your point very well and I learned a lot from it. Thank you.
~JoanMystique , great job in asking great questions! I wish you all the luck in your journey as an artist!
π: 0 β©: 0
Oh, now that's cleared up for me. XD
Thank you so much!
π: 0 β©: 1
The thing is though although he uses other images as a rough reference (VERY rough reference) The end result is completely different ! It would be diferent if he had completely copied the whole image, but you have to understand not all of us can afford to go to art school or college, and we have to practise and learn somehow, and for some of us tracing over images helps us get a feel for anatomy and helps us practise, I cant understand why everyone is so against it, it is simply practise, and as I said before, his finished image only resembles the reference image with the outline of the people ! Nothing else.
π: 0 β©: 1
Art school has absolutely nothing to do with copyright and artistic integrity -- they exist outside the world of academia. Tracing won't teach you anything more outside of art school than it will teach you inside art school. All young teens go through an eyeball copying stage, but eyeballing β tracing. If the products of eyeballing absolutely MUST be posted, it should have credit and linkage given to the original image source. Posting it is like a pianist playing scales at a concert instead of a sonata, though. It's practice and nothing more.
These are recognizable enough that the original photographers could take legal action. He's just pulling these off of Google rather than getting them from a legitimate rights-free stock resource and that is not okay. Google is not a free-for-all grab bag that is devoid of copyrights, but that is basically what Aqua is telling beginners with this tutorial. Just grab something off of Google and trace it! It's a'ight! That is not the proper use of reference, and that is what my and other aritsts' beef is with this tutorial.
π: 0 β©: 1
Fair point I do agree 100% if you have used something as reference or traced it you defo need to give credit. But Im sorry I disagree with it not teaching you anything. Growing up I heavily relied on official artwork to draw my pictures, and screenshots so I could learn perspective and anatomy and how to draw certain things, I no longer need to do this and create something 100% my own but if I hadnt I wouldnt be able to be anywhere close as competent as I am now.
Everyone learns differently and the way one person learns to do something could be completely differrent to someone else. As long as credit is given and no money is made out of it I dont know what the harm is and why people are so against it.
π: 0 β©: 1
I teach drawing workshops to teens either via panels or being hired by high schools as a special thing the kids can sign up for. Tracing is nothing but a crutch. It does teach you how to do one thing really really well though: how to follow a line.
When you trace, you aren't thinking about the anatomical structure of the figure. You aren't thinking about proportion. You aren't thinking about mass. You aren't thinking about composition. You aren't thinking about negative space. You aren't thinking about anything but following that line that is immediately in front of your pencil. (And getting feedback for tracing is ridiculous because all you've done is trace all the mistakes in the original drawing if there are any.) Eyeball copying makes you pay attention to all of those things in order to accurately copy what you see, and that in turn begins to train your eye and brain to work together to transfer visual information to your hand. That is further developed by still life drawing at an older age.
All kids eyeball copy official artwork. I eyeball copied artwork out of the Ocarina of Time, Xenogears, and Final Fantasy X guidebooks when I was 13-14 years old. I did not trace -- I ditched that when I was 8 because it wasn't doing me any good. If you speak to 20 artists who traced all the time while growing up, at least 18 of them will tell you they regret it like nobody's business because it put them so far behind their peers in artistic development. Why? Because it didn't teach them anything.
Tracing quickly becomes a crutch because you aren't learning how to draw anything so it's near impossible to draw anything on your own without tracing it. It stunts normal artistic development and usually by the time tracers realize that, it's in hindsight which doesn't do them any good because it's too late to make up that time. THAT is why people are so against it, including the majority of art teachers.
π: 0 β©: 1
It does because I used to draw the skeleton inside the lines after I had traced it and used to draw an under the clothes anatomical view, YOU may not learn like that others do ! Just like some people learn how to play guitar with tabs rather than written music and people look down on that as well.
I think we should just agree to disagree because everyone has such a different opinion on this topic it seems silly arguing when no one will agree about anything.
π: 0 β©: 3
I already replied but no, I'm not going to leave it at that. I am going to argue the point when it comes to harming the artistic development of beginning artists. It's kind of important. You initiated the conversation in the first place.
It's not that *I* don't learn that way, it's the fact that eyeballing is by far the best and most efficient way to develop your skills while trying to do things by tracing is the easy way at first until it turns into a cinder block around your ankle. That would be the reason why all major art schools don't allow tracing. It's not "just 'cuz" or because they just don't understand, it's because hundreds of years of art training have shown it to be true. Even in the Renaissance apprentices master-copied their teachers. They didn't trace. Students STILL master-copy in order to learn.
Why is it that the people who insist on tracing always act as though the ones who discourage it are the rare ones who just don't learn from tracing? You haven't learned nearly as much with tracing as you would have if you'd ditched it for eyeballing. What you've learned is in spite of it. Tracing retards artistic development and makes work look like it was done by someone a few years younger than they actually are, always. Why? Because they stunted their own growth. The best artists will tell you the same thing: tracing doesn't benefit you. You can pretend it does, but it really doesn't in comparison to other methods and simply looking at the results in the long run.
People look down on guitar tabs because guitar tabs are not a good way to learn guitar! Learning with music is the way you're supposed to go because things like key stickers on pianos (I've been playing for 22 years) and tabs on guitars become crutches you have to tear yourself away from if you want to go further in developing your skills, and it's a bitch of a habit to break. It's why my piano teacher forbade me from using key stickers, as do most piano teachers. If you learn along with written music in the first place then you learn a lot faster, markedly even. It's harder, but that's why it's harder: it's the best way.
Having velcro shoes and digital clocks are a lot easier when you're little, too, but they're looked down upon because kids who are allowed to have nothing but velcro shoes and digital clocks take a hell of a lot longer to learn how to tie a bow and tell time on analog clocks. Velcro = digital clocks = instrument tabs/stickers = tracing. Why is this a difficult concept?
The way you did the skeleton thing isn't beneficial to you learning-wise because you've taken away the reason for doing it in the first place: to show you what you're doing wrong while drawing bodies. You're supposed to eyeball draw a body first before trying to put the skeleton in it, not trace the body. The skeleton is then supposed to show you what you are doing wrong while drawing bodies because of where the skeleton inevitably doesn't fit correctly. Drawing it into a traced body does no good -- you'd get just as much benefit from drawing a skeleton all by itself without a body around it.
But what do I know, right?
π: 0 β©: 2
Nice move, =sonicwindartist ! Regress into a tween-age tantrum and then block the person because they dared to disagree with you. Here is a protip for you: don't engage in conversations you can't handle if you are disagreed with. It isn't a difficult concept if you have the maturity your age should carry. You apparently don't, though, since I wouldn't have expected a 20-something to act like they're 14 with the reply-and-block BS. Good show! Since I had already written a reply to you before finding out you bratted out with a block, I'm going to post it here anyway.
Need I remind you that you started up a conversation with me by resurrecting a months-old comment to say the same things several other people already said to me. I replied with the same things I said to those same people months ago (who would've thought that would have happened?), and then you bitch at me because I didn't ditch everything I've personally experienced or been taught by far more experienced artists who have been in the business twice as long as I've been walking this earth to agree with you.
"I and others are living proof that you CAN learn that way, how else could I do artwork now without needing to trace or reference ??"
Yes, and your gallery has anatomical problems among other things that are often the result of tracing to learn. Your work looks like it was done by someone who is 17-18, not 20, which is likely because of the tracing. I was refraining from saying that to support my point because it was unnecessary, but apparently civility and maturity are out the window now.
Not using reference isn't some sort of accomplishment to crow about. That is another misconception younger artists have along with the "reference means copy" thing, but God forbid somebody point that out to you since it happens to be something that is taught in art school and mentioning art school is apparently a no-no lest the person be a "stuck up prick" for repeating what they were taught. Referencing is a GOOD thing. All artists use it because our brains aren't photographic encyclopedias of everything we've ever looked at. Flat out copying or tracing photos you don't own is bad and is NOT referencing, it's copying. That was my original point, and there are plenty of people in these comments who DO agree with me because they've been educated on what proper reference is, how to do it, and how tracing is not related to any of that. I guess they must be stuck up pricks, too. How dare they go to art school.
"just because you went to art school doesnt mean you can act like a stuck up prock and pit everyone else down who learns differetly, it is YOUR opinion if you dont learn that way and dont agree with it, if you dont like it tough."
Do you act like this when your teachers disagree with you on something based on their own education, or is that something special reserved just for me?
The fact that I went to art school and thus quote what I learned there shouldn't bug you so damn much. That statement just makes you sound insecure with the "stuck up prick" being the cherry on top. I am not going to be sorry for going to art school to get my degree, so to quote you: "if you don't like it, tough." Your education is fucking important no matter what it is in, and I use mine when it's pertinent to the subject at hand. How appalling.
The second half of that statement is just you projecting your own behavior on me. I am not the one who lost my temper at being disagreed with; that was you. The fundamentals of normal artistic development aren't "opinion", they're fact. That is why they're considered fundamentals.
I did not put anyone down. I put down tracing as a method of learning because it is inefficient and harmful in the long run. Read it, comprehend it, and chill out.
π: 0 β©: 0
For gods sake dude JUST LEAVE IT youre one of those annoying people that does not shut up !! Just accept Im not going to agree with you, along with many many other people that dont, I and others are living proof that you CAN learn that way, how else could I do artwork now without needing to trace or reference ?? Because I learnt how to do it by growing up doing that ! Everyones different, just because you went to art school doesnt mean you can act like a stuck up prock and pit everyone else down who learns differetly, it is YOUR opinion if you dont learn that way and dont agree with it, if you dont like it tough. Just dont put other people down when everyones different is all Im saying !!
π: 0 β©: 0
Reality is what it is. You can comfort yourself by living in a pretend reality but it won't make it real.
π: 0 β©: 1
Im living in the real world thanks
π: 0 β©: 1
Doesn't look like it. Or you would listen to those who actually have real world experience, but that's your problem. Enjoy your alt reality bubble. At least on dA it'll feel real. It's not the professional world, but it is more comfy. You can always find someone who tells you you're right and cool.
π: 0 β©: 2
Yeah, lady, don't be rude and think you're better than everyone else even though you weren't rude in your comment and didn't say you think you're better than everyone else! It upsets people with fragile egos and forces them to have to call you childish names and project all of their behavior on to you so they can make themselves feel better!
She really hit the nail on the head, man. Experienced artists never want to help anybody, ever. It's just them being MEAN! Nobody here wants to get better at art, stupid. If you do something for fun, you automatically don't want to get better at it. She apparently doesn't, so none of the other millions of deviants here do, either! The professionals on this site just need to LEAVE. DeviantART doesn't need any stinkin' ~professionals~ or the years they've devoted to their craft. There's absolutely no need for deviantART to be ruined with these dumb professional artists sharing their work and wanting to help beginners improve by showing them better ways to learn and how to avoid bad habits. The nerve of those people! Seeing professional work doesn't inspire beginners to want to get better, it gives them inferiority complexes. Geez! How inconsiderate! Nobody needs any stinkin' ethics, either. Copyright is stupid! Plagiarism is, too. Pish posh.
Seriously though, her reply to you here is one of the silliest responses I've ever read. Yeah, let's boot all the professional artists off of here if they disagree with her about anything. Bad habits and artistic integrity don't matter. Even if it hurts the kids on dA who DO actually want to improve and want feedback from experienced artists and professionals, it doesn't matter. Those issues aren't important to her, so they shouldn't be important to anybody. Those stupid professionals just need to pack up and leave. Talking about better ways to learn bursts the little bubble she's built where everything she thinks is absolutely correct, factual, and should NEVER be challenged. Being disagreed with upsets her and we can't have that. DeviantART needs to be structured around her personal opinions and preferences and anybody who isn't in sync with that can take a hike. While we're at it, let's get rid of anybody who is more skilled than she is or is/has been in art school, too. They're probably "stuck up pricks" anyway just like the professionals.
She doesn't see the blatant copying of the "references" here so that means there is absolutely no chance of it possibly being there and nobody should disagree with that notion, question it, or see things differently, period. If you have training to see stuff like that? Go screw yourself, you "stuck up prick". She doesn't think that's a bad habit to encourage so nobody else should, either. Because it isn't. Period. You disagreed with that, so now she's going to get unnecessarily rude with you and block you so you can't respond.
Because that's the way all grown ups handle differing opinions and the experienced trying to help the inexperienced grow.
π: 0 β©: 1
Those who want to live in a bubble often cry when their bubble bursts against the harsh needle of reality. The bubble is nice while it lasts, but reality is what it is.
π: 0 β©: 0
Just as well im NOT a professional artist and dont intend to be then isnt it ? God what is wrong with you ? No need to be so damn rude to people ! Let me guess, youre another 'professional' artist who thinks they are better than everyone that isnt ? Well I got news for you you arent !
A vast majority of people on dA ARE in fact hobbyists and just create artwork for fun and share something they enjoy doing. Its people like YOU that take the fun out of it ! Not even constructive criticism, or anything about this picture for that matter, you just felt like taking a jibe at me when you dont even know me or anything about me.
Why dont you bugger off to another art website with the rest of people like yourself on here, and leave everyone else alone who is just here and doing this for fun !! Its none of your business how people do their artwork, and if he didnt upload this tutorial no one would have even GUESSED he had used a silhouette of a person from another picture as a reference, thats how vague his final product looks in relation to the one he used for reference !!
π: 0 β©: 0
Alright, all the profs I studied under and all the teachers I've associated with are wrong. Cool beans.
π: 0 β©: 0
Hey, i don't necessarily reply to this message, but i read a few of your stuff. I see that you do have a point in your statements. For example in my current school I am studying animation and we would be expelled for plagiarism.
However (I'll speak to my art teachers and professionals to be sure) Cyril's images are not enough to be called plagiarism. I may be wrong, but as I said i'll make sure. All our teachers of course say that we need to create everything on our own, but if there is an idea that we do use (when allowed) or image and put a lot of our own work into it (in Cyril's case around 95%) it is counted as your own work. (however we do have to credit the artist who's work we used)
Also do you notice around the world? If people have a similar logo or anything to someone, it is naturally considered as their own as long as they change something in it? Ofc i also heard some people sue others for it etc (but those were cases when it was obvious).
I respect your opinion, but this is the industry I see from my own school. It is not allowed to copy, paste or claim other artwork as your own. It is called plagiarism. In this case he does not claim the images were made entirely by him. This tutorial proves it. Not just that, but he input so much changes into the image that it has a right to be called his own work.
Usually when an artist traces over a silhouette of a human from a photo, it is done to capture the human emotion. Since its Cyril's prime goal, it makes sense what he does.
By the way my step dad was a professional painter. He would draw in the style of Dali on canvas in oil paints. He has perfect understanding of anatomy, be it animal, human or even objects/buildings/architecture. He was so talented he could build furniture. Well that said. When he was commissioned to draw portraits by big people in the country he would take a camera obscura/projector and light it over his canvas to draw over the basic face lines of a person (from a photo). Then once he did his pencil drawing he would turn off the camera and painted for days and days. It was HIS work. He did use the reference by clipping the photo next to his canvas, but his skill was his own.
I do not assume, I know that what tracing Cyril did takes about 1 to 2 minutes. If u look closely most of his images take over 12 hours to create, not by just his comment of timing, but the look of the image itself. As a fellow artist you should be able to see it.
This is my opinion and view on this subject. I already know yours. So I will appreciate kindly if you don't try to change mine, I am not trying to change yours either. I just believe there is a little more to this topic then what u mentioned.
PS: I'll check with my teachers on this and if I am wrong about the earlier statement I will let you know.
π: 0 β©: 0
I think the thing people says about you tracing is somehow true. I mean, reference-using is quite the same with tracing, in my personal view. Although I'm not sure about the others.
I just think that they shouldn't hold that against you. We, as artists, have our strengths and weaknesses. It's our duty to help one another improve in our arts. That, I think, is the whole point of you doing tutorials, right?
And, I would just like to say. Your art is very beautiful and inspiring! I will keep supporting you! 
π: 0 β©: 2
It is technically tracing, reference-using can mean just painting from looking at the picture. But this is it - I bet AquaSixio could do this picture without tracing, just having this picture opened in second window. But what for? The outcome is the same and "tracing" is faster. And no licences are broken here.
`AquaSixio Thanks for this tut. I love you works!
π: 0 β©: 1
I know this is an old comment but I think you're incorrect on some things that could land young learning artists in some trouble.
Just because something is faster doesn't mean it's okay, particularly when it comes to things like this. That is besides my point, though: the problem here is that young artists who see this will think tracing images they don't own under the mistaken guise of "referencing" is the right way to do things when it isn't; it's detrimental to their development and it then turns into a huge crutch for them because they didn't learn how to properly reference in the first place. Cutting corners like this is not something to encourage.
If the original image is recognizable in the final piece then it most definitely violates licenses and copyrights. The artist behind the Obama "HOPE" poster was sued for copyright infringement and plagiarism because he traced an image that belonged to the Associated Press. It was easily recognizable in the artwork, and he lost the case because of it. This is encouraging habits that are risky at best, legally speaking.
π: 0 β©: 1
If you trace other's art - yes, it's illegal. If you trace a pose from a picture looked up in google - its okay for me, and I don't think there is a law to forbid it. But for further tracing than the pose or objects I would advise using stock photos. Besides, I mean here tracing as if to use as a reference - so, then ADDING many of your own work to achieve look and atmosphere unique to your style, like AquaSixio did.
π: 0 β©: 0
I agree with you, weaknesses and strenghs exist, we can't forget, we have to play with them, we are humans
π: 0 β©: 0
i love your tutorials~ Thanks for that!
π: 0 β©: 0
You know, I highly disagree with the tracing haters. I believe they have their heads so far up their....well you know. Anyway, i find it's a great way to learn a pose/lighting/etc. As said in other comments, it is used in art school and many professionals also teach this. Don't let them get you down 
Btw, you have amazing tutorials which have helped me immensely! Thank you very much for the time you have put into all of these.
π: 0 β©: 1
I know this is an old comment, but I gotta ask: Why does all expression of disagreement have to be caused by hating or jealousy? I see (mostly) teenagers on dA say that and it's almost always false. People sometimes disagree just because they disagree, not because they have an ulterior motive.
Someone saying "hey, you're teaching young artists a really bad process habit that quickly turns into an artistic crutch" doesn't mean the person has less skill than Aqua or is jealous of his work. It means exactly what they said: they don't agree with what he's teaching here.
Art schools don't teach students to trace images they don't own. Doing that will get you expelled for plagiarism (which happened to an illustration student two years below me at the time because she traced and painted an image of an Orca Whale off of Google that she didn't own). Tracing is used to transfer your own images to another surface or create tight sketches of your own work. That is not what Aqua is doing here.
π: 0 β©: 0
I've been reading over the comments about the tracing controversy that is going on here and I would just like to contribute my 2 cents:
1. To address the tracing bit that occurred within the tutorial, I honestly think to get the same kind of image, the artist definitely has enough skill that he could have just sketched it out by looking at the photo for a couple of seconds without needing to import it into photoshop and 'trace.' I think he should have more confidence in his abilities, really. I see nothing wrong with very beginner artists using this technique to sketch out their reference, however, it is something that should not be depended on since it can hinder your development to see.
2. For the accusations that this artist is selling his work and can be sued for copyright, there are artists on this very website that sell fan art of copyrighted characters and no one really makes a stink about all of the violations there.
3. Finally, the argument that the artist needs to be able to draw from imagination is a ludicrous and immature idealization of how artists create. Professional artists have been using references and models for ages. That is how you achieve accuracy in your style. I do think, however, that credit to the places where he gets his photographic reference should definitely be given.
Evidently this artist is a very imaginative and talented person, to have illustrated this concept of a bird stealing the music from a child's broken piano. I also would like to mention, I have used the tutorial for water that is posted here and it was very useful, since I'm only starting to learn digital painting. Keep up the good work. Thanks~
π: 0 β©: 0
Great Work
[link] " />
π: 0 β©: 1
Opps by mistake. 
amazing tutorial by the way
π: 0 β©: 1
this is amazing
so simple.
i use references all the time. observation is an amzing way to learn, especially when it comes to drawing. though i never trace over them except to practice and get the idea of the diminsons in my head as i did with apples in my new snow white drawing (never have been apple to draw apples for some reason).
i don't understand why ppl are getting so worked up over this. this isnt even tracing. tracing involves drawing. you are clearly painting. you are just making an outline. ppl are just jealous bc they wish they could piant like you.
even if u trace the outline of the main object in the picture, what about all the other objects in the picture. u did not trace those. and yet they still come out so realistic.
they are made that you can make something so amazing out of something so simple. you can take a beautiful picture and make a completely different scene that is so much more beautiful.
that is what a true artist can do. keep doing what you are doing. you do not need to know how to draw to be an artist. your eye for color and detail is splendid
π: 0 β©: 2
tracing involves drawing. you are clearly painting.
If a utensil that makes a mark is used to draw on top of an existing photo, it is tracing. It isn't magically NOT tracing just because digital paint is being used. It doesn't need to be traced directly in detail in order for it to be considered a trace.
even if u trace the outline of the main object in the picture, what about all the other objects in the picture. u did not trace those. and yet they still come out so realistic.
That usually means whatever is being traced is the artist's weak point. It looks to me that he can't draw anatomy and people by simply observing references, so he has to trace them instead. People can be amazing at rendering realistic objects but not be able to do the same with humans or animals.
you do not need to know how to draw to be an artist.
...what? As an art teacher all I can say is that is absolutely not true. It's a nice idealistic thought about art, but it isn't true.
Unless you're a photographer or 3D sculpture artist (and even that is debatable for sculptures), you need to have a strong foundation in drawing in order to be strong in everything else. Trying to do visual art without being able to draw is like building a house without a foundation underneath it. It's going to crumble. Painters know how to draw. Fashion and interior designers know how to draw. Even computer animators have to know how to draw EXTREMELY well. ALL artists, if they are at a certain skill level, know how to draw. It's just the way art and artistic development works.
You absolutely cannot get through art school without being able to draw. Every art school in the country that's worth it's salt covers drawing and still life drawing in its foundations courses, and it isn't just a coincidence, it's because it's integral to everything you do beyond those foundations. It's why you see amazing drawings from masters like Rembrandt, Da Vinci, and Picasso. They were painters, but they had awe-inspiring drawing skills.
π: 0 β©: 2
<= Prev | | Next =>