 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 10:39:21 +0000, Invisible wrote:
> And it's not like the GIMP
> comes with a manual. It's not even clear what half the buttons are meant
> to DO...
Tooltips are very helpful.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
>> If all of the complex manipulations seen here are really done with
>> layers... hmm, it must take quite a bit of planning to make sure
>> everything is in the correct layer and not accidentally paint yourself
>> into a corner.
>
> You wouldn't believe the sheer amount of layers a graphics professional
> uses when creating images. We are talking about hundreds.
> Every single minuscule thing is usually put into its own layers.
>
> Naturally layers can (and should) be named so that you can keep track
> of what is where.
The drawing I'm working on I've got various layers; each reference on
its own layer, earlier versions still have the original sketch, the
dolphin is one layer, the mermaid another, two versions of her hair on
their own layers, the background will be its own layer, I have a few
masks so one thing can be fully drawn but partially behind another thing
without being visible through it, if I ever want to add colour, each
colour will probably be on its own layer...
What really sucks is spending an hour drawing, then realizing you're on
the wrong layer...! *sigh*
I use Alias Sketchbook Pro 2 which is relatively feature-spare, but
because of its simplicity is a lot easier to handle. I personally
loathe PhotoShop due to the culture of elitism surrounding it (it WAS
originally a Mac product), and GIMP was obviously originally for linux;
complex, unintuitive, and missing some smaller features that you still
end up using regularly. I still use PSP 7 for mundane image manipulation.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.digitalartsuk.com
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> I can easily see that if *I* ever attempted to do something like this,
> I'd end up putting two things into the same layer and then being
> completely stumped later on because those things need to be in seperate
> layers.
Ever heard of Cut & Paste? Cut an object out of one layer, and paste it
into a new layer. IIRC, it even has a "Paste into new layer" option,
that saves you the step of creating a blank layer.
--
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 10:44:58 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>
>> ...and then I remember that I can't actually draw, and just having
>> similar software and hardware to Tim wouldn't magically enable me to be
>> a supreme artist like him. And I'm probably too stupid to figure out a
>> package like Photoshop anyway.
>
> Nobody becomes an expert overnight. It takes time and practice.
>
> Jim
And in some cases, school.
--
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 19:03:44 -0800, Chambers wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 10:44:58 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>>
>>> ...and then I remember that I can't actually draw, and just having
>>> similar software and hardware to Tim wouldn't magically enable me to
>>> be a supreme artist like him. And I'm probably too stupid to figure
>>> out a package like Photoshop anyway.
>>
>> Nobody becomes an expert overnight. It takes time and practice.
>>
>> Jim
>
> And in some cases, school.
True, very true.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> Nobody becomes an expert overnight. It takes time and practice.
>>>
>> And in some cases, school.
>
> True, very true.
In case you missed it - I already tried that. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> 47cc1c7a$1@news.povray.org...
>
>> Other than the strange personal fun of the author, I can't see any valid
>> reason to do that kind of work using that kind of technique. Why give up
>> the flexibility of 3D CG, or the simplicity and feel of hand-painting ?
>
> I guess it's more an historical thing. Bert Monroy is a digital art pioneer
> and he's been famous for a couple of decades now for his photorealistic
> work. He's probably one of the first computer artists to have a real
> following. This kind of piece is really a showcase for his
> Photoshop/Illustrator skills (and books, lectures, TV shows etc.).
Visiting his site, I noticed that he made some backgrounds for "shatter", which
is seen as the first comic done on a computer. It's amusing because I remember
quite well reading "shatter" in Spirou (yes!) at the time (early eighties).
The limitations of Mac Paint gave "shatter" a very specific feel, quite interesting,
graphically (and now historically). His most recent work are rather bland
aerograph-mock stuff, in comparison.
Fabien.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Mon, 03 Mar 2008 14:52:47 -0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> did
spake, saying:
> Warp wrote:
>
>> You wouldn't believe the sheer amount of layers a graphics
>> professional
>> uses when creating images. We are talking about hundreds.
>> Every single minuscule thing is usually put into its own layers.
>
> Wow. Just... wow.
Most I've worked with is about 20 layers at a time, I've had files in with
around 100.
> And to think I still work on bitmaps using only 1 layer... (But then, if
> you take a photograph of something, it's all one layer, and there's not
> too much you can do about that.)
As Ben said you can copy and paste items into a new layer and indeed PSP
has a Paste as New Layer option
>> If I'm not completely mistaken, you can group several layers in
>> Photoshop
>> into one entity which then works as if it was a single layer. This way
>> you can eg. move a part of the image, which in itself is composed of
>> many
>> layers, as if it was just one layer.
>
> I can easily see that if *I* ever attempted to do something like this,
> I'd end up putting two things into the same layer and then being
> completely stumped later on because those things need to be in seperate
> layers.
Yeah that's easy to do, it's also fun to mark out an area on layer 1 copy
it to layer 2 and find you haven't got everything you thought you had
because some of the image you can see is contained on layer 0. Likewise,
as has been mentioned, brushing something out on layer 1 and finding
you're really on layer 0 and need to undo.
>> A layer mask is basically an alpha channel for a layer. That is,
>> besides having a full rgba color layer, the layer can have an
>> additional,
>> separate alpha channel (called layer mask) which is applied to the layer
>> as well.
>> This is handy when you want to show/hide parts of a layer, without
>> actually modifying the contents of that layer. And the other way around
>> is useful too: You can edit the contents of the layer without modifying
>> the layer mask, which means that your edits will never "bleed" outside
>> boundaries.
>> The layer mask is not a bitmask, but a full alpha mask. This means
>> that parts of the layer can partially visible, not just on/off.
>
> Right. So... there's a channel that controls how opaque a layer is, and
> another channel that controls how much you can draw on it?
Yeah sort of in PSP I can set a graduated mask for the alpha transparency
on a layer, but then make that entire layer 50% opaque too. If you've got
a copy of Paint Shop Pro it's well worth spending the time to fiddle I
still find things that I hadn't realised it did, and it's cheaper then
Photoshop.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> [You might recall I gave up on 3D Studio Max - reputedly the most
> powerful 3D software ever written in human history - because I couldn't
> figure out how to make it draw something other than spheres of cylinders.]
If you can manage GIMP, you can manage Photoshop a bit easier, IMO.
Especially for macro-like things, you can record actions, etc...
Photoshop is *the* program for image manipulation, and it does it well.
One of the things I really like is the non-destructive features, such as
adjustment layers; Very helpful. CS3 has even more non-destructive
editing. The software is extremely stable and mature. Gimp is mostly
stable, but I have managed to make betas crash a few times.
Elements, on the other hand I have found to be a major pain in the arse.
My wife has Elements to use with her digital camera, and I somewhat
dislike the way it works. An advantage of having Elements (it comes OEM
with some products) is that you have upgrade pricing. My father in law
was able to get CS3 for US$300. One of the few very expensive programs
I've found to be well worth the money spent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Some things that shock me about this video:
>
> - Tim manages to draw, UNdraw and then redraw lines multiple times.
> Usually in a bitmap editor, all drawing operations are final and cannot
> be undone like that. (That's what's so great about vector images - you
> can edit *everything* and nothing is ever "final".)
Undo, or he occasionally flips the stylus over and uses the eraser end.
(yes, it has an eraser..)
> - He scales objects. This generally isn't possible in bitmap editors
> without absurd levels of highly-visible distortion. (Tim even scales
> individual *parts* of objects - something I've never seen any bitmap
> editor allow.)
He's probably using a high enough resolution to mitigate the effects,
plus the scaling he's doing isn't *too* drastic.
> - Tim is able to move objects around, place one in front of another, and
> draw stuff behind objects. It's standard in a vector editor, but I've
> never seen it in a bitmap editor.
Layers. Even Gimp has layers.
> - How on earth does he do the text like that? When *I* want to outline
> something, I have to sit there for hours drawing the outlines in by
> hand. He appears to have some kind of automation that does it for him...
> And not to mention all the squishing and bending of the text, and the
> multiple levels of gradients and...
Photoshop has a means of adding effects to layers. Essentially, you open
the blending options dialog, and choose the items you want (Drop shadow,
Outer/Inner glow, Stroke, etc ...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
