/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6618249
Draw highlight
Texture overlay
Partly erase highlight with speckled eraser?

unironically see sakimichan’s videos

>>6618249
This is something I'd like to learn too
bump for interest

>>6618249
use a textured brush or canvas
this is the only non retarded answer

>>6618249
how to run without legs?
any tips?

>>6618249
add noise layer overlay

>>6618249
noise airbrush with some zany blending mode

>>6618447
google it, retard, you can clearly type

>>6618249
Use bleeding edge tools

>>6618249
How do you do it with brushes?

>>6618249
Honestly what's the point? In the time it takes to render one such piece you can do 5 with 20% less detail which looks the same if not zoomed in autistically.

>>6618249
Paint skin tones, then Noise, then blur, then emboss. Put the emboss layer on overlay. Try a plastic wrap filter for some oily skin maybe(untested). Have each step on separate duplicated layers and playing with opacity and erasing is how you get it to look good. Adding a noise layer, selecting coler range, then painting a new layer with that selection gives you more scattered noise, blur and emboss that too. One more filter is the texturizer, with sandstone, again, new layer, play with erasing etc, use masks.
But using brushes is probably better, why don't you want to use brushes?

>>6618980
For extreme closeups in a style that benefits from autistic detailing? cartoon gross out images?

>>6618980
They're not making every dot individually, you beglet.

>>6618980
lmao retard

>>6618249
>How to draw detailed skin without brushes?
use a skin pencil

>>6618258
>speckled eraser
So a textured brush?

>>6618980
Something AI can't mimic. Also appeals to real artists, not normie coombrains.

>>6619810
What? This is probably the one thing ai will do extremely well in just a few years.

>>6619978
Wrong. All AI looks like porcelain smeared in vaseline.

>>6619988
How did it even find it's own "style"? Is it just the end result of trying to optimize it's own aesthetics to the point where everything looks the same?

>>6619988
AI is just a tool. One AI could be used to scan the picture you used for the proper areas, skin, clothes etc. Though this step could be also easily done by a human. Then another AI paints textures over it. It will take time to configure everything so it looks really good but I refuse to believe someone has such low intelligence that they can't predict this happening in the next decade.

>>6620003
>AI is just a tool
Yes, Rajeesh, we know. Redeam the needful.

>>6620009
>ever same irrational emotional driven response
Alright.

>>6620020
"ever same"??? Holy fuck you ESL niggers really can't help yourselves, you really are a pajeet, aren't you? Post your wrist right fucking now, nigger.

>>6620062
You fucking dumb nigger can't even spell "redeem" correctly. >>6620009
The literal keyword of the meme you're parroting like a computer. But good thing it's always easy to spot brown fingers pointing.

>>6618249
>without brushes
why do you insist on making your life harder?
traditional artists don't use 1 single brush for everything, so why do you think you have to?

>>6620009
>image
Kek

>>6619040
>They're not making every dot individually, you beglet.
how do you do multiple at once?
I use krita

>>6619995
>its own
lmao
It's just the average of all the art it was feed.

>>6618347
This doesn't look good, though. The highly stylized anime face doesn't match the detailed rendering and lighting of the skin.
(Unrelated, but what's with that hard line around her hip bone/oblique?)

>>6623734
>The highly stylized anime face doesn't match the detailed rendering and lighting of the skin.
Dude, c`mon this argument is so subjective and every coomer proves it. Like- come on.

>>6623734
>The highly stylized anime face doesn't match the detailed rendering and lighting of the skin
Nigger, almost every painter tones down halftones on women. Seargent said to be careful not to overstate the halftones, some painting books like Faragasso’s say to outright ignore halftones on women’s faces.
The semi-realism animu girl meme that really, undeniably sucks ass is the one where the artist doesn’t know how to pull off the face so they put the head in shadow to only have 2 tones in the face.

>>6623734
Not against your argument, but I like the rendering rather than the anatomy

>>6618354
Can you recommend a good one?

>>6618473
Be nice

>>6618249
Nobody could answer properly, aside from a few
I think it would be hard to do without brushes, anon

Maybe using the lasso tool somehow and milimetrically painting each pore, which sounds time consuming

As >>6618258 said, I think this would be the approach, but I would really recommend you to use a special brush

I don't know any good one to use, I wish someone could share one with us instead of talking about a different topic, fighting over nothing

>>6623931
top retard
just set hrb to dissolve

>>6623749
Seriously comparing this uncanny, traced-looking coomer shit to Sargent?

It would be really simple it you weren't a massive fagit. Step one :buy a frozen piglet. Step 2b cum on it in the artistic way and stuff.. Step 3?;: draw it

>>6623942
Nobody compared it to Seargent, you retard, I said the face “not matching the detailed rendering and lighting of the skin” is a universal concept in art and not liking the degree it’s taken to in one image doesn’t mean you can claim the concept doesn’t work like a DK retard.

So...
How to draw detailed skin without brushes?
Any tips?

What brushes do skin

>>6618249
why would you want to do it without a brush for it? I guess if you zoomed in really close and placed each speckled dot individually on an overlay or hardlight layer you could do it, but idk wtf you'd want to.
I'd say dump the dream and save yourself the time. Mark Brunet I think has a skin brush that he gives out for free in a pack. KNKL might too

>>6618249
Secret micro Ruan Jia squiggles

>>6624352
This? >>6618987

Use AI

>>6625613
No, we must spend our lifetime rendering skin pores

>>6620009
i want to molest Damian

>>6619988
did ai just literally ripped off asura's artwork?

>>6625686
this is HUGE!!!

>>6618249
draw skin normally then apply a little water sprinkle bottle

>>6625686
Yes

>>6625686
>did ai just literally ripped off asura's artwork?

This is called overfitting, and yes, AI is an automatic plagiarism tool.
It works by copying pixels and outlines from multiple pictures and mashing them together.
It doesn't learn shit, all the pattern recognition is just a gimmick that fool artlets into paying $20 per month till copyright catch up and bankrupt the AI art companies.

>>6625686
>>6619988

>>6625779
You're not wrong, but that's just your average image to image every AI scammer uses.

>>6625779
>ask the AI to reproduce an image as closely as possible
>it reproduces the the image as closely as possible
>"PLAGIARISM!"

Bitches, the AI did exactly what YOU asked it to do!

>>6626176
It does this when you write just the word "afghan" as the prompt. Midjourney discord banned that word to avoid the embarrassment.

>>6626176
do not redeem

>>6620009
kek

>>6620020
Saying AI is a tool is just as irrational. You braindead nigger monkeys can't comprehend further arguments.

>>6619995
>>6619988
>>6621363
This is wrong, AI isn't that limited. Its the pajeets who use it that have no taste and only make those kinds of images.

If you underestimate it then you will lose

>>6620020
eat shit poojeet

>>6626447
eat shit rajesh

>>6626496
>>6626499
your move, bloody bastards

>>6618473
don't be like that maybe he's blind too and uses text to speach but can't watch a video

>>6625779
>It works by copying pixels and outlines from multiple pictures and mashing them together.
wrong.

>>6625779
>after eighty years of research, finally build a machine capable of complex visual pattern recognition
>"just a gimmick"
Maybe it's already mundane for you kids who grew up in the middle of it, but just ten years ago it was an open question whether computers could EVER do what they're doing now. It was a science fiction dream, right up there with interstellar space flight and human immortality.

>>6629408
>but just ten years ago it was an open question whether computers could EVER do what they're doing now
was it though?

>>6618249
With SD?

>>6618249
Draw what you see. Hard round-brush. ONLY.

>>6625686
Are you not aware that's how AI works? It just directly copies the artwork that's fed to it. It's like extreme tracing

>>6629623
The one on the left took 2 years. The one on the right took 2 minutes. You tell us.

>>6626516
NO SHIT BRO WHO WOULDVE THOUGHT

>>6629623
a-anon i dont know how to tell you but right image is worse :/

>>6626447
This. I spent the past 5 days generating roughly 30,000 generated images from a fuckload of traditional artist and it's mindblowing how accurately in can reproduce their style. If I showed anyone in this thread a fake Jean Leon Gerome, they wouldn't know the difference.

>>6625779
>>6625686
>>6630892
That's not how AI works. This is one of those Chinese AI that turn non-anime pics into anime. They just fed someone else's work to see the results. I'd say it did a better job at the rendering but it didn't understand the pose.

AI doesn't work by copy and pasting. They create random noise, and then from the noise they create the image. If you feed it an image, it'll apply noise to the image and try to recreate it.

>>6629659
Then you wouldn't be drawing. You wouldn't be making art. OP specifically clarified that they were an artist. Not a comissioner/ prompter/ buttonpusher/ bugman. There is an obvious distinction here and every rational person in here knows the difference. No amount of self delusion on your part is gona change the fact that you are not an artist.

>>6631692
He asked how to do it without brushes, unless he was talking about dry medium I can only think of AI

>>6631604
>it doesn't copy paste literally, it copy paste in a different way, so it doesn't copy paste ok?

>>6631547
That's including developing the whole suite of programs to do it. Actual processing after the software was developed was not 18 months. Plus the image they printed is several orders of magnitude more detailed than the right.
So anyway, whoever said "but just ten years ago it was an open question whether computers could EVER do what they're doing now" is just plain wrong.
>>6631551
The image is intended to be sarcastic/mocking

>>6631547
That's including developing the whole suite of programs to do it. Actual processing after the software was developed was not 18 months.
>500 hours(20 days) of rendering to produce the finished painting, which contains 148 million pixels
So that's like "10k" res. If they only made a 512x512 and upscaled like the right, it would have taken a fraction of the time.
>>6631551
The image is intended to be sarcastic/mocking

>>6631803
not >>6631604 but let's read the post together, ok anon?

>AI doesn't work by copy and pasting.
Ok, so it seems ai that creating a copy and placing it in.
>They create random noise
so like a static on the old tv, random values
>and then from the noise they create the image.
oh, so no copy was ever made
(addendum: it 'recognized' an image in random noise and proceeded to 'fix' it till it's done)
>If you feed it an image,
oh, another sentence, that's seem to signify another case when someone does place an image
so like you said copy and paste
>it'll apply noise to the image and try to recreate it
so corrupt the image with noise and 'fix' it.
See anon, he said that those are two different cases using a common mechanism.

>>6632107
>the AI
>from absolutely random shit
>created images
>just like that
>random

>>6619988
>>6625686
It could be Img2Img at low strength so it doesn't change it so much

>>6625686
damn look, what we've been saying since september

>>6629623
>It literally looks better years ago
OH NONONONONONO

>>6632115
I don't know what you want.
It's literally taught to reconstruct images like the ones it gets in it's training set.
The only way it can successfully reconstruct from nothing(noise) an existing thing is if it's fed multiple times images that are extremely similar.
If for example that one photo of Sharbat Gula or Tank Man are fed into it thousands of times (because popularity), it will output something close to the original if asked for it. These problems can be somewhat mitigated by rejecting multiple copies of images, but I'm not even convinced that they should be fixed. Copyright law is retarded and anti-human anyway.

A more preferable solution is maybe some sort of visual hash index, so user could look up if image is based on some other work or not.
After all humans do the unwitting copying too. It's called cryptomnesia.

>>6629623
SOVL > Soulless

>>6632347
>I don't know what you want.
An AI that actually draw arts by itself, with real inteligence
>It's literally taught to reconstruct images like the ones it gets in it's training set
now do it like everyone else
>Copyright law is retarded and anti-human anyway
Good morning sir
>After all humans do the unwitting copying too
Not I don't need to look at 1000 pictures of a stick figure to know that's a human. AI needs 1000 pictures of a stick figure to know that's a human
>It's called cryptomnesia.
>psychology pseudoscience
oof my man

>>6632665
>real inteligence
Doesn't exist.

>>6632781
>the algorithms used for habitat selection, metastasize into art
the fuck does this mean? This is the same shit as quantum physics, only 3 people on earth know what they are talking about, and everyone else just parrot whatever they hear pretending to sound smart

>>6632781
>pointless introspection
Introspection is an adaptive advantage and evidently selected for.
>DNA produces nothing but itself
Incorrect

>>6632789
>the algorithms used for habitat selection
Your ability to tell whether a particular natural area looks comfy
>metastasize into art
Evolved into the ability to appraciate art
The word choices also imply several things. "Metastasize" can mean "change" or "transform", but it's usually used to describe a cancer spreading to a new body part. An "algorithm" has a clearly defined purpose, and it definitely isn't sentient.
The sentence is saying that art is a worthless offshoot of a simple animal survival mechanism, and that this development has been a disaster for the human race.

>>6632797
All evolutionary dead ends were selected for, at some point.
Also, it's specifically referring to the "junk" DNA with no obvious purpose, that's currently assumed to have accreted from viruses your ancestors had.

>>6632665
>An AI that actually draw arts by itself, with real inteligence
You do realise your brain is not a monolith, each part of your brain has it's own function, right?
These complex systems approximate these a parts of your brain that is somewhat able to visualise verbal cues, for example I say 'pink elephant standing on red and white beach ball' and provided you know what each of these words means (and you don't have some form of mental disability) you probably have some nebulous image of the scene I have just described.
That's nowhere near like real drawing and I don't think anyone should be pretending it is, but building these systems is a necessary step on the road to real artificially created art.
>critical of copyright, must be an AI shill
Sure, no one before this started ever criticized copyright as being too restrictive. That's why Creative Commons Licenses and Pirate political parties never existed before this shit hit the fan.
>I don't need to look at 1000 pictures of a stick figure to know that's a human
1000 images at 24 fps that's only 42s of looking at images, are you sure that before you were 3 you didn't spend at least that much time looking at stick figures to figure out what's going on?

>cryptomnesia.
>psychology pseudoscience
it's a common phenomenon
what next? will you be questioning intelligence like this lit-crit smartass over here >>6632781 ?

>>6631579
Everyone obsesses with hands and misses the real giveaways that they are really using subconsciously

Its the simplicity, and inconsistency overall in skill, lighting, or composition

>>6632815
>Your ability to tell whether a particular natural area looks comfy
>Evolved into the ability to appraciate art
Complete nonsense. The first drawings were used as a communication tool, and then evolved into language. All what you are saying has no scientific ground
>>6633972
> You do realise your brain is not a monolith, each part of your brain has it's own function, right?
and it's different from a machine, nice
>critical of copyright, must be an AI shill
yes, or just morons
>will you be questioning intelligence like this lit-crit smartass over here
yes, what he posted is just bullshit

>>6634191
>and it's different from a machine, nice
no, it makes it similar not different

>copyright reservations
>just morons
I mean thanks for a (you) but with this level of interaction why even bother?
guess this thread went off topic for too long, see ya on the other side

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFe9wiDfb0E

>>6634828
>it makes it similar not different
machines are different from humans in every single possible way.
>Oh I just kind of see and arm with my minds eye after watching and arm, that's totally the same and copy pasting the noise of billions of picture to create my own
NO. A machina, that doesn't even understanf the data it process, unlike humans, are so fundamentaly different that saying its "similar" jsut prove how little you understand about both AI and the human brain. I want REAL intelligence, machines that UNDERSTAND what and arm is. I don't want to give machines 1 billion pictures of stick figures to understand that a stick figure can be an arm, because humans simply don't do that.
> mean thanks for a (you) but with this level of interaction why even bother?
ok moron

>>6634881
But isn't the eye just creating images in the brain at (x ∞)/s? We take those images in our brain generated faster than any AI can do and form our understanding of the world around them. It's like babies have no concept of object permanence until they form enough experience aka mental imagery to know that objects don't disappear when they are hidden.

>>6634881
>and arm

>>6621027
>pixel art

>>6618249
>How to draw detailed skin without brushes?
Here you go. Wait I cheated because I used HARD ROUND BRUSH and Airbrush welp I guess OP is right it is impossible without brushes.

Anyways as said I used only HRB and Airbrush to create this I also used layers with soft light blend mode where I rendered some perilin noise and reduced it to 50% opacity did some minor overpainting a little with HRB and Airbrush. Took like 20 minutes or so. It is not perfect but serviceable.

>>6636023
Here are the layers so that you can see could have slapped a few more layers to make it even better but got no time. Could do better with special brushes but it is possible.

>>6636023
The thumbnail makes it look muddy