 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> stbenge escreveu:
>> I've also got to buy a new monitor. This sucker tried to die on me
>> earlier! Which stands to reason, since I bought it refurbished back in
>> '99. An LCD would be better for my eyes, I think x_X
>
> oh, LCD is already almost out of style, save your money for 3D monitors
> some years ahead. :)
Hah! I'm always behind the times. Maybe I should wait a little longer
yet and get a 4D monitor ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> stbenge escreveu:
>> nemesis wrote:
>>> stbenge escreveu: <...>
>>> My daughter is hooked as well, she's already drew and sent several
>>> paintings to the grandparents... :)
>>
>> Heck, post those too, if you want. It's interesting to see what kids
>> produce!
>
> http://i38.tinypic.com/al6w77.jpg
>
> Typical kid stuff, but you asked for it. :) Written: "Vanessa and dad
> Spring Grandma and Grandpa"
Typical, maybe, but like any art, you can see how it's unique.
> She named it. I adjusted some jittering for her brush. She chose the
> colors from the pallete. :)
I see what looks like deliberate shading in the hill 2nd from right.
>> There's be times you still might want to make a polygonal selection...
>
> It's great for technical drawing, for sure. But for my comic-like
> drawings, I prefer everything hand-drawn. :P
Not just technical drawings. I used the freehand selection tool for the
chicken and also the pan for the attached pic.
>> You've *got* to use the sculpt tool.
>
> Oh, but I've used it, yes:
>
> http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?t=143168
>
> I'm willing to try with a tablet now. :)
I knew I recognized that goomba. Didn't you post a goomba a while back
to p.b.i.?
I like the 2nd version in the 2nd image of that bald guy. Looks like a
happy old man :)
>>> one of the best things is that there's no paper waste. :)
>>
>> No doubt! All the same, I keep a ream of printing paper at hand. It's
>> such a cheap medium
>
> tell that to poor trees! :P
I know, but I try not to throw too many of my drawings out in a fit of
disgust :P
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'chicken.png' (111 KB)
Preview of image 'chicken.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> stbenge escreveu:
>> Last time I used PS was in '00. The Gimp, as it is now, is much better
>> than that IMO. Much, MUCH better.
>
> Yes. I used Corel Draw by then.
I did as well. With an 16-bit color-depth, too. I remember being
impressed by the color dithering.
>> I paint with old Gimpy all the time, even with a mouse. It's not so
>> bad. Better than anything other free app. I'm still trying to
>> streamline the Adobe Illustrator>>Gimp transition. I guess PS would
>> really help out there...
>
> Illustrator -> Gimp? Why not Illustrator -> Inkscape?
Because Inkscape is a vector art proggy, and Gimp is raster. Besides, I
hardly know Inkscape. I'm still trying to find the benefit of using it...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Tim Cook escreveu:
>> I never could get used to the disconnect between separate tablet and
>> monitor-over-there, and one being horizontal and the other vertical
>> did not help. So I got a tabletpc.
>
> The wacom tablets are both horizontal like a monitor.
Wrong axis. I meant they're perpendicular to each other, not oriented
differently in same plane. XD
>> Software-wise, I swear by Sketchbook Pro, and find ArtRage an adequate
>> simulation of real-world media (especially the pencil).
>
> I would have thought pencil is so easy to simulate that even Microsoft
> Paint is ok.
You'd think, but it's not...MS paint (unless Win7 added lots of
features) doesn't antialias, have pressure sensitivity, or paper
texture, which ArtRage happens to hit just the right look that for some
reason looks exactly like a scanned image of pencil-on-rough-paper where
other programs don't. (But then, i.e. Sketchbook Pro is more of a pure
digital thing, not trying to mimic real-world media in favour of speed
and precision.)
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:43:43 -0200, nemesis wrote:
> Jim Henderson escreveu:
>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:17:24 -0200, nemesis wrote:
>>
>>> I think I understand now. Perhaps it changes the brush format on the
>>> fly depending on the angle? Gotta try it when getting home...
>>
>> Not really the brush format, but just how it's applied.
>
> No need to try, it seemingly doesn't support tilting, from the tech
> specs. Intuos Medium is a more advanced board, and also support double
> the pressure sensitivity, though has same active area than mine.
That's what I thought - I tested the Linux driver out with a bamboo, but
I couldn't remember if it supported tilt or not - but I didn't think it
did.
> Go for that one if you can, Sam. :)
I do have to admit that I like it a lot. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:01:22 -0700, stbenge wrote:
> The Gimp, as it is now, is much better than that IMO.
Agreed. I'm not an artist by any stretch, but I find the GIMP to be
quite intuitive to use (in general).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:45:57 -0700, stbenge wrote:
>> Illustrator -> Gimp? Why not Illustrator -> Inkscape?
>
> Because Inkscape is a vector art proggy, and Gimp is raster. Besides, I
> hardly know Inkscape. I'm still trying to find the benefit of using
> it...
But Illustrator is also vector-based, not raster. At least the
Illustrator I remember using. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:45:57 -0700, stbenge wrote:
>
>>> Illustrator -> Gimp? Why not Illustrator -> Inkscape?
>> Because Inkscape is a vector art proggy, and Gimp is raster. Besides, I
>> hardly know Inkscape. I'm still trying to find the benefit of using
>> it...
>
> But Illustrator is also vector-based, not raster. At least the
> Illustrator I remember using. ;-)
It is :) But fleshing-out 'toons in vector can really speed up the whole
process, if done right.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:28:02 -0700, stbenge wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:45:57 -0700, stbenge wrote:
>>
>>>> Illustrator -> Gimp? Why not Illustrator -> Inkscape?
>>> Because Inkscape is a vector art proggy, and Gimp is raster. Besides,
>>> I hardly know Inkscape. I'm still trying to find the benefit of using
>>> it...
>>
>> But Illustrator is also vector-based, not raster. At least the
>> Illustrator I remember using. ;-)
>
> It is :) But fleshing-out 'toons in vector can really speed up the whole
> process, if done right.
True, but like nemesis, I'm still having trouble seeing why not
Illustrator -> Inkscape, the two seem to have very similar features. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:28:02 -0700, stbenge wrote:
>
>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:45:57 -0700, stbenge wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Illustrator -> Gimp? Why not Illustrator -> Inkscape?
>>>> Because Inkscape is a vector art proggy, and Gimp is raster. Besides,
>>>> I hardly know Inkscape. I'm still trying to find the benefit of using
>>>> it...
>>> But Illustrator is also vector-based, not raster. At least the
>>> Illustrator I remember using. ;-)
>> It is :) But fleshing-out 'toons in vector can really speed up the whole
>> process, if done right.
>
> True, but like nemesis, I'm still having trouble seeing why not
> Illustrator -> Inkscape, the two seem to have very similar features. :-)
It's far better for drawing mouse-only than Gimp too. It's stylized
caligraphic pen is a must. It's pretty similar to the one in the Gimp,
except your movements are sort of interpolated and thus don't end up all
wiggly with a mouse. Wiggly is also one of its many funky parameters... :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
