plz tell me what you think it for a contest made by jazza hope you like my artwork and fell free to come by my art page and comment PLZ COMMENT!!!!

I like it a bunch, but it doesn't quite seem finished. A background would do you a lot of good, and I think a portion of her iris would be visible at that angle. Not sure how I feel about the tear or the soft brushed darkness around the mirror and her hand, I think you might be better off without them. Looking great otherwise.

At 11/13/13 06:32 PM, Jester wrote: I like it a bunch, but it doesn't quite seem finished. A background would do you a lot of good, and I think a portion of her iris would be visible at that angle. Not sure how I feel about the tear or the soft brushed darkness around the mirror and her hand, I think you might be better off without them. Looking great otherwise.

nice thanks yep the black I was suppose to remove it but I decided to keep it well and the iris was suppose to be white due to the fact that her soul is dead but your not the first one to tell me this I think I should remive it too since nobody get it sloll thanks dude for the support

Now I have a sad face, too.

At 11/13/13 06:50 PM, Little-Eise wrote: Now I have a sad face, too.

why

At 11/13/13 07:03 PM, Bloodyanimation wrote:

At 11/13/13 06:50 PM, Little-Eise wrote: Now I have a sad face, too.

why

Probably because I forgot the gif.

At 11/13/13 07:10 PM, Little-Eise wrote:

At 11/13/13 07:03 PM, Bloodyanimation wrote: why

Probably because I forgot the gif.

.... actually I'm glad this has been brought up, because your gallery looks like it's a bunch of traced art.

For instance, this Joker pic isn't simply a reference of this Dan Luvisi pic, as you say in the comments. It's a straight-up paint-over. Even the canvas size lines up, which is just sad.

At 11/13/13 07:25 PM, TurkeyOnAStick wrote:

At 11/13/13 07:10 PM, Little-Eise wrote:

At 11/13/13 07:03 PM, Bloodyanimation wrote: why

Probably because I forgot the gif.

.... actually I'm glad this has been brought up, because your gallery looks like it's a bunch of traced art.

For instance, this Joker pic isn't simply a reference of this Dan Luvisi pic, as you say in the comments. It's a straight-up paint-over. Even the canvas size lines up, which is just sad.

yep like I said in the description i'm using a grid techinique so it basickly the same as tracing over I don't see the point

At 11/13/13 07:47 PM, Bloodyanimation wrote: yep like I said in the description i'm using a grid techinique so it basickly the same as tracing over I don't see the point

I don't see the point either, since you're replicating somebody else's image.
Same goes with the top picture. You're not creating anything new, you're plagiarising somebody else's photo.

At 11/13/13 07:55 PM, TurkeyOnAStick wrote:

At 11/13/13 07:47 PM, Bloodyanimation wrote: yep like I said in the description i'm using a grid techinique so it basickly the same as tracing over I don't see the point

I don't see the point either, since you're replicating somebody else's image.
Same goes with the top picture. You're not creating anything new, you're plagiarising somebody else's photo.

Not really yes i,m tracing the outline but the color the shading and stuff itss all with grid technique like the skull per instance is all mine well a nd said in the description to go and check out the joke rreal artist so i dont see the point

Well this is a bummer

Here we go again... "im not tracing the original image, i am tracing little bits of the image at a time so thats ok"

using reference is fine, drawing from life is fine, drawing over a picture or "grid system" is not... all this does is create a shitty version of the original picture that was fine to begin with, you have not added anything, you have not learnt anything, nothing...

and the reason we get so up-tight about it is because ANYONE can do it... do you think this grid technique is taught in proper art lessons?... this is the sort of thing kids are shown to draw a rocket on the back of a cereal box...

pick up a pen, grab some paper and draw something original.

and this is a little something i did for the last guy who did something similar... we don't allow it because as i said, anyone can do it, and it add's nothing. its just a near carbon copy of the original.

At 11/14/13 04:45 AM, LegolaSS wrote: Here we go again... "im not tracing the original image, i am tracing little bits of the image at a time so thats ok"

using reference is fine, drawing from life is fine, drawing over a picture or "grid system" is not... all this does is create a shitty version of the original picture that was fine to begin with, you have not added anything, you have not learnt anything, nothing...

and the reason we get so up-tight about it is because ANYONE can do it... do you think this grid technique is taught in proper art lessons?... this is the sort of thing kids are shown to draw a rocket on the back of a cereal box...

pick up a pen, grab some paper and draw something original.

and this is a little something i did for the last guy who did something similar... we don't allow it because as i said, anyone can do it, and it add's nothing. its just a near carbon copy of the original.

Seriously dint tought it was so bad i,m new to creating portrait and stuff usally do cartoon type of drawing like family guy and stuff well and manga but i want totry portrait well thanks again for letting me know that i wont have receive anyrespect using this techinque

At 11/14/13 04:45 AM, LegolaSS wrote: and the reason we get so up-tight about it is because ANYONE can do it... do you think this grid technique is taught in proper art lessons?... this is the sort of thing kids are shown to draw a rocket on the back of a cereal box...

yes... in my art class we used the grid technique to do paintings at a 4:1 scale from photos that we took. In fact, if you do something on a massive scale it is not uncommon to use the grid technique, Chuck close is a good example, one that was used in the art class that i took.

At 11/13/13 07:25 PM, TurkeyOnAStick wrote:

At 11/13/13 07:10 PM, Little-Eise wrote:

At 11/13/13 07:03 PM, Bloodyanimation wrote:

For instance, this Joker pic isn't simply a reference of this Dan Luvisi pic, as you say in the comments. It's a straight-up paint-over. Even the canvas size lines up, which is just sad.

which is why computer fine-art is a joke to me and I will never trust it
>:(

At 11/14/13 07:49 PM, Escapement wrote:

yes... in my art class we used the grid technique to do paintings at a 4:1 scale from photos that we took. In fact, if you do something on a massive scale it is not uncommon to use the grid technique,

Yeah man ...if you're taking a general art class in high school school....

At 11/14/13 09:43 PM, 372 wrote:

At 11/14/13 07:49 PM, Escapement wrote: yes... in my art class we used the grid technique to do paintings at a 4:1 scale from photos that we took. In fact, if you do something on a massive scale it is not uncommon to use the grid technique,

Yeah man ...if you're taking a general art class in high school school....

college actually, painting by grid is the same as painting by reference, except one uses extra lines to keep shit proportional.

At 11/15/13 01:47 AM, Escapement wrote:
college actually, painting by grid is the same as painting by reference, except one uses extra lines to keep shit proportional.

Nah, it really isn't the same, dude. References should be used as a starting point, a means to an end. More than anything, a good reference should be a loose guide. When you grid out a picture, generally the intention is to straight up copy it.

If you're using a grid to keep constant proportions, it just means you need to practice drawing more. To someone learning how to draw, the grid method is a useful tool to build confidence, but that's about it. When you use grids you're not really learning how to draw, nor are you thinking about what you're drawing. You aren't thinking about the proportions and the overall composition of whatever you're drawing, either. You're just trying to make sure each square looks the same as the corresponding one on the picture you're reproducing.

i like the image but not the white background or the missing eye .

as for everything else that has been said on this thread ,its a perfect example of why i have stopped posting on newgrounds . even when people do post original work someone stomps all over it . i say good luck to anyone who's giving art a go weather they have to trace use a line system or what ever, at least they are having a go at something creative with their time. you people need to learn to be encouraging to new artist's instead of shattering peoples enjoyment.

At 11/15/13 02:42 AM, Darthmarius wrote: i like the image but not the white background or the missing eye .

as for everything else that has been said on this thread ,its a perfect example of why i have stopped posting on newgrounds . even when people do post original work someone stomps all over it . i say good luck to anyone who's giving art a go weather they have to trace use a line system or what ever, at least they are having a go at something creative with their time. you people need to learn to be encouraging to new artist's instead of shattering peoples enjoyment.

I think you need to leave this place if you only plan to bash us for giving helpful critique and advise and saying what is wrong.If we didn't opened our mouths and only said "ALRIGHT GREAT JOB,MAN!" the user would have tough "Yes I'm doing this right" and continue using the tracing technique with that tough.I also would like to point out that the certain user understood his/her mistake and accepted what he/she was doing wrong(Unlike you).

At 11/15/13 02:42 AM, Darthmarius wrote: as for everything else that has been said on this thread ,its a perfect example of why i have stopped posting on newgrounds . even when people do post original work someone stomps all over it . i say good luck to anyone who's giving art a go weather they have to trace use a line system or what ever, at least they are having a go at something creative with their time. you people need to learn to be encouraging to new artist's instead of shattering peoples enjoyment.

Dude, we are here to help people grow as artists, its not always easy and not everyone is going to hold the artists in question hand and guide them like Mary poppins. You've really got to get thicker skin and learn to take criticism better. Most of us here aren't trying rude or unnecessarily dickish, a lot of us are blunt or often don't word out critiques in the nicest possible ways (its a lot easier to point out flaws than point out strong points), but they're not trying to be hostile. I would strongly recommend sticking around, Darth, there's a lot to gain from this community, its not perfect but I can say from experience that it is a great way to improve your art; just look at the personal art threads that have been going for a few years.

At 11/15/13 02:40 AM, Little-Eise wrote:

At 11/15/13 01:47 AM, Escapement wrote:
college actually, painting by grid is the same as painting by reference, except one uses extra lines to keep shit proportional.

Nah, it really isn't the same, dude. References should be used as a starting point, a means to an end. More than anything, a good reference should be a loose guide. When you grid out a picture, generally the intention is to straight up copy it.

If you're using a grid to keep constant proportions, it just means you need to practice drawing more. To someone learning how to draw, the grid method is a useful tool to build confidence, but that's about it. When you use grids you're not really learning how to draw, nor are you thinking about what you're drawing. You aren't thinking about the proportions and the overall composition of whatever you're drawing, either. You're just trying to make sure each square looks the same as the corresponding one on the picture you're reproducing.

I need to put a*here and say that grid IS useful and different to tracing when doing paint studies in real life(havent tried digital with it) as it helps replicate the object/person so the painter can focus on the actual tones. I did a year of it in paint class in uni, and it was really useful. Again the purpose of the class wasn't learning anatomy or human proportion that was more for a different class and using a grid to lay everything out sped up the process to copy it to as accurate as possible so you could stat learning monotone, warm and cool colors etc.
Not arguing your point completely, but putting it in the side not that yes it's useful for studies. Could be useful in digital studies too, if you also not allow yourself to use theye dropper tool to pick up colors.

At 11/15/13 01:47 AM, Escapement wrote:

At 11/14/13 09:43 PM, 372 wrote:

At 11/14/13 07:49 PM, Escapement wrote: yes... in my art class we used the grid technique to do paintings at a 4:1 scale from photos that we took. In fact, if you do something on a massive scale it is not uncommon to use the grid technique,

Yeah man ...if you're taking a general art class in high school school....

college actually, painting by grid is the same as painting by reference, except one uses extra lines to keep shit proportional.

If you use a reference (in this case a copy righted one) to draw the exact same picture with the same composition, thats plagiarism. You can't sign it and call it your own. Also grid method is used to RECREATE a work, whether you or SOMEONE else originally created it. If you RECREATE someone elses work through grid, its not your work it's fan art

At 11/15/13 05:36 AM, Lucky wrote:
I need to put a*here and say that grid IS useful and different to tracing when doing paint studies in real life(havent tried digital with it) as it helps replicate the object/person so the painter can focus on the actual tones. I did a year of it in paint class in uni, and it was really useful. Again the purpose of the class wasn't learning anatomy or human proportion that was more for a different class and using a grid to lay everything out sped up the process to copy it to as accurate as possible so you could stat learning monotone, warm and cool colors etc.
Not arguing your point completely, but putting it in the side not that yes it's useful for studies. Could be useful in digital studies too, if you also not allow yourself to use theye dropper tool to pick up colors.

I can definitely see where you're coming from here; the way I wrote it made it seem like there is absolutely no value in using the grid method. I was mostly aiming my comments towards artists who are just starting out, like the OP, who use it as a shortcut to make realistic art, but without actually knowing what they're doing. You know, the kind of new artist who would take another artist's caricature of himself, and call it their own.

For me, it comes down to whether or not the artist is leeching off of someone else's work and ideas, and if they can do basically the same quality of work without, say, gridding it out. If they can't, then they should learn how to before they start using it again.

At 11/15/13 08:35 AM, 372 wrote:

:Also grid method is used to RECREATE a work, whether you or SOMEONE else originally created it.

i get it if the original piece was not yours, but why, if the original piece was yours (say a photo), and you use the grid method to paint it at a different scale, are you all of a sudden not a real artist? or at the very least, not that good?

At 11/15/13 02:40 AM, Little-Eise wrote:

:If you're using a grid to keep constant proportions, it just means you need to practice drawing more.
:You aren't thinking about the proportions and the overall composition of whatever you're drawing, either.

i disagree, proportions mean, line, color, and value, using the grid system keeps all of these constant, just because you work square by square does not mean you don't keep the entire composition in mind.

but i feel like this is becoming a pointless discussion, as there are just different views of the validity of the Grid system.

been browsing threads, posts, blogs, comments about this for a while now... and came across this...

CONFUSION: You are causing confusion with the public. People will see your art and confuse it with the other person’s. This does not help either one of you.

DIMINISHES YOUR RESPECT AS AN ARTIST: People may not respect you as an artist. They may claim that you can’t do it on your own, that you have to steal from someone else. This does not contribute to your success.

STUNTS YOUR GROWTH AS AN ARTIST: You will never grow as an artist if you are outright reproducing someone’s art and style. To grow, you must challenge yourself and cultivate your own look.

ILLEGAL: If you are knocking off another’s work for financial gain, you are violating copyright laws. You could be sued and/or get very bad publicity from it.

- Source Here -

and the main issue we have is respect and stunning growth, we want to see what you can create, not what you can recreate.

here is some more pictures of what i'm saying..

the top line picture are basicly copies of the original art (on the left side in both cases) the artist has added nothing, nor has given any credit to the original artist, this sort of re-created work should be kept in studies and or sketch books, if you post them on-line always give credit and links (if possible) so people know you are working from reference.

underneath we have a piece by J. Scott Campbell and as you can see he even put the reference with the picture for us. also note, this is not a copy, this is done in his own style using the picture as a loose reference. this is acceptable.

so lets wipe the slate clean and start again?

well once again ive been kicked out of the art portal for voicing my opinion , so much for america land of the free!!! ( as long as you keep you gob shut huh!)

At 11/15/13 10:40 AM, Escapement wrote:

At 11/15/13 08:35 AM, 372 wrote: Also grid method is used to RECREATE a work, whether you or SOMEONE else originally created it.

i get it if the original piece was not yours,

I never said it made you a bad artist to use it to create your own art? I was just stating that all the grid method does (in this context) is recreate an already existing piece.
So you're agreeing with me...

At 11/15/13 02:39 PM, 372 wrote: So you're agreeing with me...

and i very well probably am, there is so much shit going on in this thread idk wtf is going on anymore.

At 11/15/13 10:56 AM, LegolaSS wrote: underneath we have a piece by J. Scott Campbell and as you can see he even put the reference with the picture for us. also note, this is not a copy, this is done in his own style using the picture as a loose reference. this is acceptable.

Actually, sorry to burst your bubble Leggy, but this is not the case for these pictures here. His image is actually the cover for The Amazing Spider-Man #601, and that picture is actually a cosplayer replicating the cover.