CC September

[Zipfelzeus]

Zipfelzeus "Literally all master paintings you ever saw were not done from imagination"... Well, not really. Many artists, especially in the Peredvizhniki movement would frequently fill in large areas of their work with stuff that didn't exist. Repin probably being one of the most famous examples where many of his faces in his larger works never really existed. This isn't to say that he in no way didn't use reference, rather that being able to draw form one's imagination has always existed however it was done out of a necessity when other means weren't available (or in the case of Repin, for aesthetic reasons)

The examples of reference posted in this thread are very poor examples within the context of what's actually going on. If one wishes to develop the skills to be able to paint what does not exist, does it not make sense to isolate this challenge and dedicate one's time to solving the problems that appear without distractions? Read what genosgrande has said, he does this to weed out that which he does not know. He hasn't said this is portfolio work that will be used to get professional jobs, he hasn't said that all he cares about is the final product, rather it looks like this is an exercise in creating something from his imagination in order to learn something. So why do you guys jump down his throat about it? He hasn't dismissed the practice of using reference as a tool or that the study of reality is an important practice if one wishes to recreate it. He just wants to try his hand at something and you can't help yourself but preach "the one true way".

"If you don't use reference for your longer illustrations you're really just wasting your time struggling and the final result will definitely suffer" what if the extra time spent is to solve problems that otherwise wouldn't be solved by doing shorter paintings? I know that solving something on my own without reference has greatly helped me in the understanding of many subjects, even if the final image could have been better and been made faster with reference, the value exists in what is learned.

The response to someone just saying that in their imaginative work they'd prefer not to use reference is kinda fucked up. When did this become verboten?

Please Tristan don't jump to conclusions here. If the OP wishes to do this painting completely from imagination
that no issue for me. If he wishes to do 20 more paintings completely from imagination that is fine too

I made this post purely out of worry that the user didn't really understand that reference doesn't necessarly mean
"copy things exactly from a photo because you can't get them right."

Reference can sometimes provide just small pieces of information that are important. Which is what I was getting at.
Repin for example did studies of models before his pieces and then included them. (http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.de/2016/03...ssion.html)

I do have to say that my statment: "Literally all master paintings you ever saw were not done from imagination" is not correct or at least not how I meant it. Of course a lot of work including the scene and faces are done somewhat from imagination but there is most of the time a lot of preparation and study reference done beforehand. Which I think is so rarely discussed. I sometimes get the feeling that "reference" comes purely down to "looking up a photo when I can not get it right"
Which I'm trying to debunk here.

And I'm sorry if I put this assumption in genosgrande mouth. I do think genos know  that reference is important just
the sentences like:  "I heard Dave rarely uses reference though." (Which isn't really true, he uses some sort of reference
all the time. Im one of his latest streams he painted a pig monster and he had some sort of pig thing in his room serving as
"reference") "I just don't want to become reliant on figures."
made me feel that he somehow viewed reference as something of a crutch.

Sorry again genos. My post was not meant to talk down on you or in any way a attack on your current painting.
I wanted to show you that for large illustrations with complex compositions, providing the right amount of reference
is an important step of the planing process and that since ages. Even if certain painters and movements choose to do
more painting from imagination. (But in someway I'm sure you knew that already)

I know that this piece isn't your great master piece of ages but just a piece you're doing fore september it's just:

You see there is this thing lingering around that reference is somehow "cheating" because you didn't make this yourself.
And I think it still hold true for some of people, especially beginners.
I didn't jump on your thread to lecture you specifically. I just saw the oppertunity here to make a post about the
importance and complexity of using reference and the creativity that can come from finding the right reference. For example:
For Dave's Shredder piece, he put cardboard in front of his face and made a photo of himself :D
Master Dave Cardboard Face

Again sorry for derailing your thread. And again this was not meant to be "OMG this stupid user doesn't know how to use
reference ahah what an art n00b" Which I never meant to imply. You see people like hearing themselves talk especially on
the internet and especially when they think they have something smart to say. Which I am no exception of. I just felt
inspired to make a post about reference use yesterday night, because it's something I struggled with in the past. And as a
human being we like to project our insecurities on to other people.

I hope this makes my post intentions a bit more clear.