I still lack the imagination to create things straight out of my head. Even adding my own ideas to a work that I'm creating from a reference don't result in seamless integration as I would hope. So when I'm painting from a reference, I tend to copy it exactly. Because for the most part I'm not knowledgeable enough to have my own style that makes sense. It is my goal to ultimately discover my own style and brand. But I'm a long way from that goal post. For now, I can only recreate what is already out there which means I'm not adding anything new to the world. *Sigh*.
When I posted this on my page, a lot of people had trouble differentiating between the real picture and my art. My reddit post was also removed from r/Art because the moderators thought I had uploaded a photograph! It was certainly gratifying as that meant I was able to imitate almost perfectly. Amazing, right? But sometime back I read a comment that left me pondering. Is realistic art of real world any good? To a viewer a painting that would evoke the same emotions as a photograph is of little value. Barring the art techniques, any person with a camera can capture what an artist painted. That means unless I create something unique, something that can not be captured in the real world, realism in my work is useless.
But it's the only technique I've mastered in Krita - the only set of brushes that help me paint this make sense to me. Like I said I've got a long way to go.
Комментарии