A place for questions, answers, advice and comparing notes.

You asked for one, so use it wisely.

any decent free software out there that simulates various media (pastels, oils, crayons, what have you)?

Isn’t, technically, the whole of shirt.woot a potential artist forum?

An artist forum within the artist forum? I suppose the “world of woot shirts” isn’t really just for artists, but still.

This seems a little redundant, no?

But I digress.

I made apple turnovers yesterday, and they are delicious.

Homemade or Pepperidge Farm?

I used the storebought puff pastry, since I was too lazy to make my own, but did pick my own apples and make the filling :slight_smile:

There was a post (paigeg?) asking for an artists forum that would be available for people to discuss techniques, ideas for designs, perhaps flaws in designs, not necessarily about woot derby or even daily entries. It was quoted in the moderators forums, and SuperduperSpryte made a thread for it.

NO. We need an actual, created by Woot, forum separate from the Community. Otherwise, discussions get so off-track. Or you lose a thread on something you were interested in…
C’Mon, Adder, doesn’t Threadless have a forum for its artists? Or was that DBH? Whatever - It’s a good idea.

THENque for ditching the apples and bringing the topic back. Sheesh! Hel-LO. My point. Thanks, supersprite, but I really think a forum would be more useful. Threads get dropped to the next page and…
We start over. Again.

I think forum and thread got confused.

That, or I can’t see the artist forum.

Yeah, I’m going to have to agree. Any idiot can make a thread. Not to make any connection because he isn’t, but ehalcyon already has an absolutely fabulous thread for beginners and there are many others like it.

There is plenty of room on the stylesheet between everything but woot and the pm envelope to add a new link. I can’t think of any reason the coding to add a new forum would take more than maybe a few hours.

Threadless’ artist’s forum is called it’s whole forum. People can talk about art, or specific designs, or put up critiques, or whine about how boys don’t get them, or whatever.

There are sub-forums at Threadless, but there are sub-forums at woot, too. Unless there was a totally new sub-forum posted, “world of woot shirts” is basically no different.

Of course, there’s also the fact that this is still woot. The people who give the most artistic guidance around here aren’t exactly trustworthy sources.

I know of one for the PC but for the life of me I can’t remember the name of it. I think it was this Artrage one though it no longer seems to be free.

I’m sure there’s one out there though, anyone else?

Oh Bassanimation suggested Sai Painter as well. So I thought I’d post the link here as well.

I wish Painter classic still worked on modern machines. I really love that program even without the layers.

thanks guys! some web searching also turned up an open source drawing program at i’ll prolly try it out and see how it goes.

My two cents on the digital vs. traditional divide, from here:

I’ve seen both sides. I drew a bit as a kid traditionally, but I really learned most of what I know on a tablet. If you watch some of my old tutorial videos, you’ll hear me wax poetic about my love of digital art.

I started to hit a few semi-local art meet-ups hosted by my friend Charlie Athanas featuring the likes of traditional heavy weights like Dave Dorman. I asked questions about traditional art supplies and the same curiosity that urged me to learn more about digital art kicked in. I didn’t even know what the gradations of pencils meant. Asking Dave Dorman what a 4B pencil is is sort of like asking Lance Armstrong what a pedal is. To he and Charlie’s credit, they fielded some pretty obvious questions and never made me feel stupid for asking. Dave recommend I read George Bridgman and Charlie really helped me on the art supply side of things. About that same time, I started a dialog with Coop of all people about traditional inking. Those guys are passionate about their methods and that sort of thing rubs off. I was hooked.

I learned that a five dollar synthetic brush and a two dollar bottle of ink was more accurate than my $5400 worth of MacPro and $2000 Cintiq. I was making prettier lines traditionally in a week. I felt good about my progress when Michael Cho (a fantastic illustrator and kindred spirit when it comes to all things linework) told me that most guys take years to get that level of traditional control. I was flattered. The digital practice carried over towards traditional skills. That’s my only explanation. Muscle memory is muscle memory. A stroke is a stroke, be it via stylus or brush.

I cut my teeth on digital. I see its uses. I still employ it here and there. It’s fast. But I’m pretty sold on traditional art. More accuracy, more life in the lines. They’re both tools. Learn both. Each has strengths.

Just a question of whether using a paintbrush setting is the same as downloading someone else’s created paintbrush. I’m of the impression that it is better to create ones own. Other people are of the impression that it doesn’t matter where you get one from, or what sort of brush it is.

To me it’s sort of like how jimiyo, when he first came to woot (and possibly still, I surely am not keeping track) used to make vector art available to people. There’s no reason to not make these things available if you so desire to, and it certainly doesn’t detract from ones own work if you use clipart or brushes you make yourself, even if you also sell or give them away. But to me, if you were to buy a jimiyo vector pack, or a frenden brush, and try to profit off the use of it, it simply feels like the work of the user is cheaper than the work of the originator.

My first interaction with “digital art” was probably when I was quite young, with Mario Paint. Which was overall a pretty silly game to own, but I digress. You could, in the “game”, either use a pencil tool, which had settings you could use to change the width and such, or set it to airbrush, etc etc. Or you could use a stamp, and just stamp cats all over the place, or draw a continual line as if the cat was the tip of your pen. Were we to extrapolate this to photoshop, or a similar real graphics program, there is the basic pencil analog, and with it you can alter thicknesses and pressures and whathaveyou, and there’s a brush, which does similar, in a more brush-y way. But you can also download the equivalent of the “cat” brush, and just paint cat-lines. And if that is one’s goal, I personally don’t understand why they wouldn’t just make their own cat brush. Using someone else’s is, to me, a bit cheap. Art is for everyone. But it shouldn’t be about shortcuts. The more you can do yourself, the more proud you should be of your art. Seems simple to me.

Ditto here.

On another side of things, I used to be a very big traditionalist in regards to art. When I was in high school I was diagnosed with a muscle disorder. It struck my hands and arms literally the weekend before I left for art school. It has made working with traditional media exceptionally hard for me, as I don’t have the steadiness I once had. I also can’t work on art as long as I used to as I need frequent breaks. Digital media has literally saved my ability to do art.

I would never recommend a budding artist jump right to digital. Learn the pen and paper and marker ways to do things first. Digital media is just another brush, but you really need the real, natural tools to bring out your natural ability first. :slight_smile:

In closing, I must say, as someone who still fails daily with my own (digital and traditional) art trials, the misconception that digital art is “easy” or “cheap” really burns my toast. Digital art has it’s own grand challenges just as natural media, and believe me, the programs do not do it all for you. Art takes skill, no matter what style, or what brush, or what medium. It’s all a pain in the keester and takes practice, patience, dedication, and love. (sappy, I know, but it’s true)

About brushes/textures. Five people can download the same brush from a website, and I guarantee you each of those five people will turn out something completely different using the same brush. It’s not about the brush, it’s about the final piece of work. You know, the human aspect of art. It remains, no matter what tool is being used.

And now…pizza.

Digital art is not automatically easy or cheap. No good art is. And plenty of good art exists digitally. What I personally find to be true is that the pure-digi-artist is more apt to not know how to self-edit. When I think of digital art, I think of frivolous glow, neon light-swooshes, over-filtered messes. I think of mass-produced crap. I think of slick without soul. And while these things exist in all arts, I think it’s something which digital art lends itself to easier.

It’s like playing guitar. If you own an acoustic guitar, your flaws are obvious. Every missed chord, missed note, off rhythm… you can hear them. you know they exist. get an electric, plug it in, put a wah-wah pedal on it, get a fuzz-box… everything gets muddled. Sometimes it sounds great muddled… Hendrix was partly Hendrix for his distortion profile. But for a true amateur, the fuzz “forgives” a lot. And digitally, people see that glow and such and think “oooooo shiny!” and are fooled that there’s not much substance there. It’s not just a woot thing. I’d say there are at least 5 designs competing at Design By Humans right now for 10K that are incredibly sloppy but just glowy and colourful enough to fool people.

For me, it is all about, as you say later, the human element. But the fact isn’t a matter of giving 5 people the same brush and getting 5 different pieces out of it. It’s about giving anyone a canvas and having them build it into art. It’s about feeling a human factor. And the more you break it down to the basic elements, the more human it is. Digital art can certainly be pure. But it also exists to mask flaws and perfect imperfections. It’s not easy, necessarily. But it can certainly be easier. And the more specialized a tool you use, the more robotic it’ll feel. Give 5 people a pan and some bacon, and you’ll probably get 5 different plates of bacon, despite the simple, identical items. Replace those pans with a BaconWave, though, and you’ll get 5 identical, rubbery, slightly radioactive servings.

Ideally, we’d all have our own personal chefs cooking our bacon and artists painting the individual designs on our shirts with plastisol. Of course, our rulers might be able to buy one or two shirts with designs per year, maybe. The truth is that we don’t live in 900 AD. We have modern tools available to allow us to express our vision; without them each design would take forever to make, individually typing in the hexadecimal code for each pixel of the print file.

no1 wanted a free program that would give him some of the capabilities of the $1200-2500 software that is so widely used among graphic artists in the 2010s, by the very people whose art you purport to respect. Here’s an artist on this site asking for help trying to improve his ability to express his vision, and you criticize him for that? You ought to be encouraging him to become a better artist, not bitching at him for the attempt.