I'm glad someone is bringing this up. I noticed the guy from Iran (that this person stole from?) or whoever made these portraits, because he/she had done a portrait of Richard Armitage (whom I fangirl hard for ) and while I think the guy can draw, many of his artworks look like he applied a filter to a photo, but he's passing them off as original digital paintings.
People who draw and paint freehand (whether digital or traditional) are more apt to have WIPs that look like this: or this: (If they are better at drawing than I am, they won't have as many proportion errors as I do at the start, but the "progress" will usually look similar.) Usually a genuine artist who is drawing and painting "from scratch" will have big blocks of color area, or sketching lines, structure/alignment lines, and that sort of thing. I suppose there are a few artists who don't work this way, but most artists I've ever seen do.
When I see a "WIP" which is too perfect, too neat, I suspect something is up. It's not "proof," but I suspect strongly. And when the finished portrait is identical to the reference photo, even down to little strands of hair, and trivial wrinkles in the clothes, and background texture, to me that is a strong indication that they're either doing a photo manip or they're tracing very carefully. I can sometimes get the basic features of a face to "match up" with the photo (if you line them up in Photoshop) but never do I get every itty bitty hair strand and the texture of the fabric exact, and all that crap. That's simply not human, IMO.
It gets even better! she never even made ANY of the works herself [link] they all belong to this person: shahin Artist of the week - Nov. 23 to 29, 2008 Male Iran Country: Iran scrolling down shows multiple works that our stephanie has uploaded as her own, ill make sure to contact him and inform him about the fraud.
They're nice pics, if only she had been honest about how they were made.
I mean, if she had said something like: "I made these to work with faces, colours, and digital tools, and I think they turned out rather awesome!" everyone would have just congratulated her on the nice results.
I can't believe, this is the second time, when I follow an "artist", who don't her drawings put on dA. It's not fair! I know the feeling, when I think she is very talented and I can't draw so good than she, and after I know, her drawings aren't real. It was my mistake with the other artist. But the other artist has more than two thousand followers, and this artist has just 100-200. I saw under her drawings, she used PS and SAI, and I thought, she used these to make the skin more realistic, or make a background etc. I don't know how have this artists bravery to put edited drawings as his own. But I think it's good, when here some people, who notice these things, I think it helps for the artists, who can't see, which drawing is not real.
I've seen this sort of stuff so much it doesn't even make me mad anymore. It just makes me feel sad. Sad that the artists feel they're not good enough, or progressing fast enough, that they need to try to trick people, and even more sad for people who get so disillusioned when they find out an artist they admired was deceiving them.
I think it's funny, but kinda a kick in the balls to real artists (painters, digital painters and photographers alike) that there are actually businesses that offer the same services and people buy into them. You know, the "turn your beloved family moment into a painting" and the masses buy into it and hand over hundreds of dollars because they think an actual artist looked at their photo and painted the same on canvas detail to detail instead of running a few Photoshop filters over the original file and selling it back to them in printed form
Ahh I'm so glad I know how Photoshop works. The media and commerce world is saturated with Photoshoppers delivering false promises that I know are visual lies not to buy into. Whether it be weight loss products using an "after" shot which has been photoshopped to make the model skinnier than they actually got, skin products where any remaining blemishes where airbrushed out anyway, hell even homes for sale where the front lawn in the picture had an obvious "cloned" pattern from an attempt to make it look fresher because half of the real lawn was dead. I spot these sorts of things so easily these days
Well, it looks like she ran a filter over it in some digital art program...
You can report a miscat. But that's about it.
As for her blocking complaints- she's not really going to get very far if she tries to do art professionally. She might find one or two people who want her stuff, but not really. So don't worry about it. It'll bite her in the end.
I'd tend to agree with you. If those were real oil paintings, there's no way she'd submit 8-12 in a 2 month period . I knew someone who did celebrity portraits with real oils and she took 2-3 months to complete one. I think all the person above is doing is taking a photograph- putting it in PS or Sai, smudging it around and adding a texture :/
Because I'm a geek, I wanted to explain a little more about oil painting. I do "real" oil paintings (of celebrities too! ) and usually it doesn't take that long for me. (Some oil paintings can take that long—it depends on the techniques and style of the artist.) I usually have several paintings going on at a time. I add a special medium with my paint which safely dries the paint faster, so I can work on it the next day. I can get a painting done in a week (if it's not too big) if there's a deadline. Also, there's a type of oil paint called alkyd (fast drying oils) which can dry within half a day usually. Some artists paint alla prima, all in one sitting.
I can do simple oil sketches in one sitting, but I don't think I could paint a good likeness of a person like that. Others can, though. So the speed that this person that this person is doing the paintings is not a smoking gun for me, it's how the work exactly matches up to the photo (even down to hair strands and little folds in the clothing). The person she ripped off--I fear that they did photoshop (or Corel Painter or whatever) filters over a photo for some of their portraits. Some of their WIP tutorials don't look real either.
I don't care if someone wants to mess with a photo of a celebrity on the computer, or trace it, or whatever it is, but when they try to pass it off as hand-done or drawn freehand, it's not just lying (and that annoys me), it leaves new artists with a false impression of how "perfect" such artwork can be. I wrote about this in one of my WIPs: [link] I take this seriously because I think it's doing a disservice to artists who are learning to draw or are struggling to draw and paint. These 'fake' WIPs or 'tutorials' showing bogus "this is how I did it" crap are horrible on so many levels. Not only are they a lie, done to get praise for the faker artist, but they're potentially harming artists who are trying to learn.
yeah, I agree - I really think the guy she stole the work from is just doing smudge/filters/ etc in Painter :/
The person I knew took so long because her oil paintings were very large- and she worked full time. ( SO some days she couldnt work, or other days not for too long- and maybe she was just slow who knows).
Yeah, I think the guy is smudging/dodging/filters. I think some of his earlier works are "from scratch" but the later ones are just digital wizardry passed off as from scratch.
Yes, some oil painters do take a long time to complete a painting, especially if they're big paintings! It can be very time consuming. There are some techniques where the artists "builds up" layers of paint, thin layers, and that takes time. Other methods are much quicker. Usually we have several projects going at one time, so we can be working on one while the other is drying.