Speaking as a writer, not an artist, calling any tools available to you "cheating" reeks of elitism. If you can make it work, use it.

>>31312
I agree. Further on the writing side, that would be like calling using a dictionary cheating, or referencing the Hero's Journey as cheating.

In my opinion, using these so-called "gimmicks" isn't a bad thing, although, it wouldn't hurt to learn how not to rely on them all the time, like actually trying to digitally paint without using the blur, burn, and dodge tools. After all, it helps to be versatile (you might find yourself using several different programs).

they call it "cheating" because it makes people not want to do it in a manner which is more concise than explaining all the ways it makes your final piece worse.

Art has a long history and the reason those tools weren't used was because they didn't exist. I don't see how they are any more cheating than using a ruler, a compass, pencil as a proportion measuring tool, tracing over your drawing on a clean paper, etc

If a program works for you, then jump on it. I like SAI and Photoshop, two very well known and user friendly programs. Does liking them make me a tool? (don't answer that)
So long as you still have to put effort into it, I don't see how it's cheating. Each art media has its different ups and downs, and while digital might be a bit more streamlined and easier, it doesn't mean you don't put effort into it.

>>31317
>>using a ruler

Fucking cheater.

Seriously though, if it works, what's the problem?

Who cares what tools you use as long as you enjoy what you're doing? These things aren't "gimmicks" or "cheating" in any way, it's simply a new method. People who think this way are either pretentious or stuck in the past.

Never put more effort into something than the joke is worth, is my personal belief.

>>31310
Honestly, my profs were all about "Okay so you'll be doing this on a deadline when you're out in the real world, here is how you use all the cheats at your disposal to get shit done on time".

Blur tool sucks because it's as obvious as burn and dodge, though. Don't touch the blur tool.

>>31328

Doesn't that mean that the biggest trick of all is doing work even if only makes you laugh?

>>31330
I'm not a unique snowflake. If something makes me laugh, someone else out there will laugh at it.

Absolutely not, that's like telling me I can't use a hammer to shape metal because that's too easy and I should do it with my bare hands. This has been bothering me lately too, with all the sneak peeks of Photoshop CS5. I keep in touch with a lot of people who happen to be graphic artists and a lot of them are saying they're worried it lessens the amount of skill needed. A tool is just a tool. Used well, a Phillips-head will drive a screw; used badly it'll destroy the screw head. Used well, image editing will enhance it's finer qualites; used badly LENSFLARELENSFLARELENSFLARELENSFLARE.

Your professor's a faggot.

>>31332
>>filename

Oh, you.

>>31333
I wouldn't go so far as to go bashing their professors like that, they have a point. Sure, you should be allowed to use a hammer to shape metal, but if the project you end up with looks like you've obviously been banging a hammer against it you haven't done a very good job.

It's important to know the fundamentals so you don't just prop yourself up with tools and rely on software, when I was looking at schools for animation, I was asking advice on where to choose and was told "well, if you go to this place you'll learn how to animate, but if you go to these places you'll learn how to use a program". With digital art tools, they're only applicable as long as you're using that specific program. Like, honestly, I'm a shitty painter but I can prop myself up and get by with Photoshop because I know how to work the tools. I absolutely suck with Painter because it doesn't have the same features that I crutch by with. I miss job opportunities because of it sometimes.

Like I said, my teachers taught us short cuts to make jobs go faster, but not until we'd done a year and a half of painting with real media so we had some bearing on how paint works. You shouldn't be exploiting tools until you know how to make them look right. My rule of thumb on this front is that if I can tell what tool you used to make something, you haven't done it right.

>>31337
>>It's important to know the fundamentals so you don't just prop yourself up with tools and rely on software

Very true. I don't think enough educators or programs pay attention to that. For future reference: I never use the word faggot seriously. I don't mean to seriously judge DUHRR's prof.

>>31338
Eh, the conversation was getting one-sided anyway, I figured it was time for some devil's advocacy.

As a writer trying to make the transition to writer/artist, I have to state my disapproval of comparing the two disciplines. Writing uses linguistics. It's object oriented programming with thoughts and ideas, using otherwise static definitions that change very rarely. Writing is more about arranging pieces that already exist into different patterns and shapes. Like memetic legos. Unless you propagate an idea across society or an influential institution, you can't make up a word and have it mean what you want it to. It doesn't stick. You're still using tools and definitions created by other people, rather than shapes, colors and textures that exist in nature, to convey your ideas.

As far as I can tell (meaning I'm not experienced enough to know for certain) art is very different. Being able to create your own pigments, your own shapes, your own shades and visuals would be like a writer that could invent new words and the meanings to them without ever having to explain them to other people. Limited only by the individual skill of the linguistic writer.

I don't want to become dependent on tools to create the things I want to create. I don't want to have to reply on the burn, dodge and flare tools in order to make convincing, realistic fire. I want to be able to make lovely pieces using nothing more complex than some charcoal sticks, a flat edge to serve as a ruler, a wheel of pigments that I can manually mix and a surface flat enough to serve as a canvas. Caveman style.

The more practical the application of the art, the less the means matter. The less practical and more personally expressive the work, the less gimmicks or cookie cutter tools become important.
[/uninformed_opinion]

>>31338
but he's a total dick, thats partially why i asked

>>31379
It's better for you in the long run to learn the basics without using cheats, yes. Like how you should understand animation fundamentals before you pick up flash and start tweening everything. You can use all the shortcuts you want after you know what you're doing, but for the sake of learning you should try doing things the hard way.

Like I said, I'm a shitty painter who uses photoshop as a crutch, but my buddies who actually learned everything the hard way can sit down and crank out something like this on one layer in a couple hours. http://gh-graphics.blogspot.com/ that's the difference strong foundations can make.

>>31379

I can't say without knowing him in real life. My old English teacher was a bro, I thought at least, but everyone else thought he was a dick. idklol

>>31310

Real artists only draw with their own blood on their own ripped off skin.

If a ruler is needed, the said ruler must be maid of their own bones. Everything else is cheating.

>>31397
What it comes down to is, learning to paint with shortcuts is only going to hurt you. If you're okay with that, then whatever.

It's the painting equivalent to "don't try to make your 'style' until you learn structure and anatomy". People aren't saying you should NEVER draw cartoons/anime/whatever, just that you should learn how to do something properly before you start worrying about cutting the corners off.

>>31310

Check on conceptart.com, there is a guy named cryptcrawler, that sells "a hostile takeover" check the preview video, he uses a shitload of smudge tool.

then there us yuni on Deviantart, which uses the BURN tool.

yes the burn tool to help her shade.

Smudge, burn and you can sometimes even use dodge, even that crawler guy used it.

It is whatever the artist want it to be, sometimes the artist can even state he does so to anger people, not to troll(since many artist that I met dont even know what that term means other then some monster) but to get people emotional about it, thus in their mind they have "created something that stirs emotion"compared to a boring man with a pose.

They kinda remind me of the guy who drew the mohammed cartoon, not to offend or troll, but just to stir emotion and follow a certain concept. In this case to follow said style and not change it, but to make other people follow it instead.

But as I said, they are a lovely bunch, and the only other interesting people in my little town is a couple of people who discuss what type of engine fits with a old run down volvo.

>>31403

Maybe i dont got the whole spirit of the thread. What kinds of shortcuts are we talking in here? How to draw a head without a circle?

>>31412
>I ask this because a majority of my art professors consider blur tools, coloring the painting in black & white first then coloring it, layers, etc. to be "cheating", so i want to get your opinions on it.

>In my opinion, using these so-called "gimmicks" isn't a bad thing, although, it wouldn't hurt to learn how not to rely on them all the time, like actually trying to digitally paint without using the blur, burn, and dodge tools.

> A tool is just a tool. Used well, a Phillips-head will drive a screw; used badly it'll destroy the screw head. Used well, image editing will enhance it's finer qualites; used badly LENSFLARELENSFLARELENSFLARELENSFLARE.

>It's important to know the fundamentals so you don't just prop yourself up with tools and rely on software

Out of curiosity, did you read the thread?

>>31413

Eh, most of it.

>>31414

>>31417

>>31406
>Dat picture
My spine hurts just looking at her.

>>31430

Check out wasp boy 3 pain proof prince, its not safe for work I think but that picture I posted is a drop in the water compared to that.

http://yuni.deviantart.com/gallery/#_browse


Going ontopic, for some the basics are shortcuts, since they think its better to learn it slowly, as they will learn every detail then. Of course that is their opinion.

>>31434

We had a lot of people in my illustration class believe this. That somehow using digital means made you lesser, or that someone who traces the outline of a body to fill it in for practice was doing it wrong.

Of course when you point out that people like rembrandt (spelling?) chose to trace using the camera obscura, and then have his apprentices block in most of the painting for him they all shut up. Art is not special, and the people who believe that using special paint tools to enhance their images are tools are...well, tools.

There are some things I do find cheating, like tracing over another person's work, or taking certain things such as other people's images/designs as "stock". Or when people copy images from Hogarth's books and put clothes on them ;D

Really all those tools you mentioned OP have been used by almost every artist. The only difference is that your teacher is a tool who wants to feel special for not "cheating" versus improving his techniques.