In my latest digital painting I received a lot of comments about how photo realistic my painting was. When I said there was no photo manipulation involved I know there were doubts, so here are the steps to prove those individuals wrong and show how it was done. Oh and I figured everyone else would enjoy it too.
I did use references, which explains the realistic aspect of it, but I blame most of that on Photoshop filters.
Here's the original:
[link]I hope everyone enjoys and thanks for looking!
|Blog|
| Adobe Photoshop CS4 | Artwork © to me, Lindsey W. (*SephirothsHeart)|
`ChewedKandi has certainly gone out of her way to keep the vector community on the right path. Always making sure that her talents are infinitely scalable, Sharon has put her bezier curves to excellent use, and firmly anchored herself as an inspirational leader. We're absolutely delighted to bestow the Deviousness Award for June 2013 to `ChewedKandi. Congratulations, Sharon! Read More
Sta.sh
I just love your egg concept.
let's follow the 'original link' now.. and see. if I'm right part of the flash light was made with it... I don't believe in this blur around it, should I ?
Also, this is a digital painting done with Photoshop. I treat it the same way as oil painting, but the program really simplifies the painting process.
I followed the link from MyFace picture, tagged as "deviant ID" and believed it was oil painting. You got me !!
I miss understood your "No photo manipulation, it's all painted"
Reaching here I didn't paid attention to "Digital Art / Drawing & Painting / Photoshop", and thought maybe you used Photoshop only for the last two steps.
Was about to follow "Here's the original: [link]" and thought I would find a picture of your original "oil painting" with the version of the camera flash light you managed to do using oil...
Painting blur is damn difficult; even if some manage to do it
Wonderful painting anyway ; I now understand better.
Just kidding, thank you very much.