HOME | DD
inetgrafx β Speedpaint: Stadium
Published: 2007-07-08 23:23:38 +0000 UTC; Views: 28865; Favourites: 391; Downloads: 670
Redirect to original
Description
The Montreal stadium ... well ... looks ugly from far, actually I heard people here saying it looks like a "toilet bowl"
But I went a bit closer, and found the architecture kind of interesting from a sci-fi point of view
. So I felt like sketching it ...1h 30 mins speed painting, photo-reference used, standard brush, Photoshop CS2 (yeah, no CS3 ... waiting for CS4
)
Related content
Comments: 107
Wow!! Looks like a photo when standing far away! Great Job!!
π: 0 β©: 0
Hello, I've featured your work in a new article focusing on photographers rights in the UK primarily, but also providing some international links too. Your work fitted fantastically into one of the categories that I wrote about. Hope you enjoy reading! Please promote and pass on the article if you feel it might be useful.
[link]
π: 0 β©: 0
Stares for hours at the awesomeness of the painting
π: 0 β©: 0
simply amazing.. when in thumbnail it looks like a real photo.
π: 0 β©: 0
Amazing painting, and so quick. Love the reflections of the sky on the ground puddles.
π: 0 β©: 0
I think the light and color here are absolutely gorgeous. POW
π: 0 β©: 0
wow wow wow I can't believe it's not photo !!!!!!!!!!!
π: 0 β©: 0
It'd be interesting to see that same stadium with spaceships flying around it lol
π: 0 β©: 0
Looks very real in preview mode, I like the reflections those are well-done.
π: 0 β©: 0
Man... for cryin' out loud i thought it was a photo.
π: 0 β©: 0
It's awesome how you did the light reflecting from the puddles, everything, really. I love the hard line of the stadium against the sky. Beautiful colors, too.
So, did you sketch it with a pencil, then go home and do a digital painting? Or, did you take a laptop and set up right there and paint it from what you saw? Did you take a photo?
See, I've never seen anyone do anything like that (painting a landscape on a laptop). However, I don't get out much...
Your work is beautiful.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks a lot for your comment! I see you spent quite some time on writing those! I appreciate your input!
I took a photograph from the montreal stadium. At home I tried to reproduce it in Photoshop. In my opinion it's one of the best methods to learn digital painting. By actually "copying" a photograph.
I tried sketching from a laptop, but it's more interesting at a place where you are able to sit convinient + you have a powersupply + it's not too bright ... so you wont end up outside, rather in your office or so ... unfortunately.
I hope in future, tablet PCs are going to become faster, lighter and of course more affordable.
I have seen once in a while guys at lifedrawing, using a laptop instead of a canvas. it worked pretty fine.
I used to go with some of my friends to a internet cafe to exchange painting techniques witheachother, that helped a lot too.
π: 0 β©: 0
Woah, really impressive!
But CS2? That's the worst version IMHO.. CS1 was (is!) still the best for me -- for 2 reasons: the amount of new features plus it runs so smoothly on a non-high-end system. CS2 fails in both areas for me. CS3 looks fairly promising, but I can't really use it (only 512MB RAM on my PowerBook, which clearly isn't enough).
π: 0 β©: 1
It's true that CS1 is more stable ... and actually a long time I sticked to CS1, before switching to CS2 - The first version of CS2 had some bugs that caused a bunch of crashes, independly which machine - at this time I had a Dual Xeon 2.8 GHz with 4 GB of RAM. Since they released the patch everything is fine - featurewise, there's a huge!! difference between CS1 and CS2. Photoshop in general shouldn't be used on a slow machine, like any other program that fits in this domain - similar to a 3d program, that needs resources. CS3 needs a major change, before I decide to switch ...
Thanks for your comment!
π: 0 β©: 1
True, the more ressources, the better. But even my (back then) rather high-end system (some 3400+ Athlon + 1GB of RAM) took its time with the (back then) new CS2. But since you say Adobe released a patch, I'll just have to go get it -- thanks for the heads up!
π: 0 β©: 0
best speedpaint (at least in terms of photorealism) I have EVER seen. Even when you expand the picture, it takes a moment for the eyes to figure out that the people aren't taken from a photograph. Great job here.
π: 0 β©: 0
holy, this is nice! even if a photo ref was used. very nicely done. solid!
π: 0 β©: 0
wow, Dan...this kinda blew my mind. Seriously, it's awesome. Some might wonder why...it's not extremely detailed, and the subject matter is not too overwhelming, and yet I find that this is probably one of your most photorealistic pieces, because the colours and the light are absolutely spot on. I don't even have to squint my eyes much to get the feeling of a photo. When I opened the piece it looked like one for the first second, and I think that's what's important.
My eyes don't even care that the background is so undetailed. it works. I suppose with a few hours of refinement you could totally turn this into a photorealistic, purely painted matte. Might not make sense for this subject, but you have the option here, and that's what amazes me.
Great work
daniel - a ps7 user
π: 0 β©: 0
very amazing, but wat's wrong with cs3 just so i know cause i'm using tat right now
π: 0 β©: 0
Aw man. I bought CS3. I had CS before, so it was a step for me. but they took out the ability to link layers in groups! (Well...okay, you can make "groups" for layers now, but I mean like, linking them together so your brushstrokes don't go beyond the confines of your previously established strokes) ahhh....Ah well, at least upgrading to CS4 will be hella cheaper than buying a whole new CS.
Nice Paint, by the way. I do, however, find the detail on the foremost piece of triangular-ish architecture a little...excessive, for a speedpaint. It's excellent detail, but it looks like it took a little more time than the rest of the piece. Just being nitpicky.
π: 0 β©: 1
ok, from CS to CS3 it might be a major step of course. Lots of things have been completely reworked and main concepts were changed ...
The feature that you are looking for makes now more sense in CS2 and CS3.
I guess you should have a look at "clipping layers" ... if you have two layers click in between .. yeah, in between the layers ... while holding the ALT button pressed down.
the cursor will change. once you click it will snap the top layer on the bottom layer.
Every operation that you're going to do is going to happen with the alpha of the bottom layer. I think it's better solved in such a way. Alternatively there's still the old '
Thanks for your comment!
Dan
π: 0 β©: 1
Eureka! That's exactly what I was looking for! Mucho Graci, my friend, mucho graci! Now I don't feel like I wasted 650 dollars...
π: 0 β©: 0
Truly an asset to your talent. With only one hour or so of painting, you captured everything that was needed to make this a photo-realistic painting.
I work in PS6, which is so sub standard that I can't even begin to think of doing any digital paintings, but I may have to try sometime. I guess I could create some brushes to help my work.
Anyway, this is very sci-fi to be sure! Just needs a few aliens in the mix.
π: 0 β©: 0
Awesome. I meant to comment on this a while back but DA was being screwy. It's scarily real, especially when in thumbnail. Awesome stuff
π: 0 β©: 0
That looks so much like a photograph when you first see it.
π: 0 β©: 0
very nice... and I agree that the structure is a grand thing for sci-fi usage ^^
π: 0 β©: 0
YAY MONTRΓAL ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (sorry... XD I'm French-Canadian, I can't help it) XD I hate the Olympic Stadium....but anyways! It's really cool!!
π: 0 β©: 1
*falls over dead* Dude! That's awesome! That is speed paint?! Wicked!
π: 0 β©: 0
wow u crazy mofo....
actually thought it was a foto....
π: 0 β©: 0
I really like the way you handled the glass and achieved the rainy-day atmosphere without making the piece gloomy.
π: 0 β©: 0
| Next =>