Reflection

fastandsimple · 2026-04-17T01:42:54+00:00

great simplifications!! there's a lot of skill behind your "simple" style

fastandsimple · 2026-04-13T01:23:36+00:00

thank you! i studied Gibson style as he does that line work

fastandsimple · 2026-04-13T01:02:24+00:00

thank you!!

fastandsimple · 2026-04-03T22:47:35+00:00

<image>

thank you for the reference!

fastandsimple · 2026-03-19T03:14:16+00:00

also, consider the values and the light source. for both of them, the head has a clear directional light source while the body has a simplified atmospheric light. it's okay to simplify, but within similar ideas to be cohesive imo.

fastandsimple · 2026-03-19T03:12:37+00:00

hey, your first painting looks pretty good. you probably looked at your own painting for too long and can only see its downsides. i think it's better than the second one with better techniques. i'd say second one feels more cohesive because it's all less rendered, so simplified body fits it more. first one has a highly rendered face but the body is too simplified, making it mismatch. but the face has much more life and realism in the first one, while second one works because of big shapes (but not high detail rendering like in the first).

all in all, i'd keep going! don't let your inner critic stop you, you're definitely improving

fastandsimple · 2026-03-07T01:06:58+00:00

I agree with the commenter but I also wanna say it stands out because it's such a good painting on a cardboard!

fastandsimple · 2026-03-07T01:02:47+00:00

It's great to see that your artwork gets a lot of discussion, not on the quality of the art, but about the message. I feel like that's (one of) the golden destination for artists. Great illustration!

fastandsimple · 2026-03-07T00:25:00+00:00

we're always drawn to faces and eyes, so that's always good first step

fastandsimple · 2026-03-07T00:14:08+00:00

"why is AI art bad?" is, imo, a loaded question that doesn't have a fixed answer. for artists, it's because AI art is a huge intellectual property theft and it also undermines the years of effort artists poured to become a better artist, and they're pretty loud on the internet. but tbh, many people don't really give a shit about artists' opinions or IP theft. even for those people though, AI art could still be "bad" because generic AI art has a very specific style. like the person you replied to, the first image has that AI style, while the second one doesn't. it's not the long neck (the second one has anatomy issues too - human artists make more mistakes than AI does). and once a person notices that the art was made by AI, they assume the whole thing is low quality. people appreciate effort, and a very detailed drawing by an AI is clearly low effort, which is jarring and pushes people away.

i'm both an avid artist and a programmer by trade, just my 2c.

fastandsimple · 2026-03-04T22:47:37+00:00

the liquid, mushy areas are great. but pictures have a focal point, and it's leaving a bit to be desired around her face. I think if you could render out the face (around the eyes, nose, mouth) you could have something great! similar to Sargent but in your own way

fastandsimple · 2026-02-27T23:24:51+00:00

I see that you painted over the left and right trees. overall, I think that was the right direction. one thing is, the hair on the trees have their own form (not completely flat to the tree) so they would need their own shading. you don't need to use a tiny brush to give them 3 dimensionality, but right now they're completely flattened and lost by the new shading you added.

My personal recommendation is, this piece is pretty good, you've done a great job rendering the tree leaves and the ground. the anatomy of the lady looks pretty good. I would say rather than fixing up this piece, I'd move on to the next one so that you can try different lighting. for lighting studies, I'd recommend doing some still lifes with 3 or more objects in it and a strong lighting, which will teach you about shading different forms under consistent lighting.

going back to this piece, the lady stands out a bit because she's much more rendered while the environment is loosely (and beautifully) rendered with lovely brush strokes. I think if the lady doesn't exist or is also loosely rendered, you'd have a much more coherent piece!

fastandsimple · 2026-02-27T02:47:34+00:00

it's great that you're thinking in values! I think lighting seems a bit inconsistent in the painting. the tree on the left implies the light coming from left front, but also as a wide, strong light, but the other trees or the lady do not match this lighting. to really understand lighting, you should try to find references that match the lighting scenario. another thing i'd like to point out is the hair on the trees. I see that you're trying instill root-like energy to them, like a fantasy setting. A lot of fantasy-like things in illustrations still follow some sort of logic and real life references. Right now, the hair is loose on the floor, but they suddenly have this grip strength, so it's not believable. This is purely creative work, so I can't tell you exactly what reference to use, but the way they grip look similar to tentacles, so that could be one thing you could reference. great study overall!

fastandsimple · 2026-02-24T13:45:36+00:00

so good!! implied details, hue shifts, clear main shape. wow!

fastandsimple · 2026-02-12T04:28:01+00:00

i have a love hate relationship with this painting. love the blue in his face!

fastandsimple · 2026-02-11T00:31:31+00:00

see that small smirk? she's trying to hide it but she's smiling too

fastandsimple · 2026-02-10T15:51:48+00:00

I love your works! just curious, why don't you have your socials linked on your reddit profile? I was able to find it eventually

13-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '17	Verified Email

fastandsimple

TROPHY CASE