[x]

Browse More Like This

Download Image
JPG, 6000×6805 more ▶

More from ~bnolin

View Gallery · View Prints

Featured in Groups:

#PainterMasters

#PortraitLovers
Portrait lovers

#TheDigitalPainter
Digital Paintings R Us!

#BoldRobinHood

#We-Got-Skills
Show Us What U GOT!

Details

Submitted: October 17, 2010
Image Size: 10.7 MB
Resolution: 6000×6805

Link

Thumb

Statistics

Comments: 25
Favourites: 83 [who?]
Views: 4,517 (4 today)
Downloads: 2,515 (0 today)

[x]

Russell Crowe as Robin Hoodby ~bnolin

Fan Art / Digital Art / Painting & Airbrushing / Movies & TV

This is my first real honest-to-goodness digital painting (as opposed to the painter-overs and such I've done till now). I wanted to see how close I could come to the original photo, without using the Clone Color function at all (in Painter). I'm pretty happy with how it turned out.

Step by Step [link]

Tutorial: [link]

love 1 1

~~joy 0 0~~

wow 3 3

~~mad 0 0~~

~~sad 0 0~~

~~fear 0 0~~

~~neutral 0 0~~

~JAMsEye May 3, 2011 Hobbyist General Artist

OMG! First off I love Russel Crowe (especially in Gladiator, haven't watched Robin Hood yet). I'm blasted off by the level of details you've put here. I guess the size of the picture helps (6k pix is uncommon to me) but it's absolutely splendid. Respectably resized I could hardly make the difference, textures are perfect. Fabric itself would have driven me crazy for sure

.

It's a wonderful work!

~bnolin May 3, 2011

Yeah, that fabric took a while. I have a mind for that sort of detail, I guess. And patience. And I'm zoomed way in, like 200-300 percent. It looks pretty awful at that zoom level, but then you zoom out and it looks good!

I usually work around 5000-6000 pixels wide in landscape mode. This allows me to print nice big prints later, if I'm lucky enough to have someone order one! I use Fine Art America for that. Never sold a print here.

Gladiator is one of my favorites. It was the first DVD I ever bought. I'm going to watch "A Beautful Mind" soon, once it gets here from Netflix. Never saw that one, hard to believe. RC is great, wonderful actor. Robin Hood was okay, not as good as Gladiator. Not RC's fault though. Writing sucked.

~JAMsEye May 4, 2011 Hobbyist General Artist

> [...] I usually work around 5000-6000 pixels wide in landscape mode.

It's interesting to work at such sizes. First off, what comes to my mind is that the screen can only render a portion of the picture. And since you're zooming in, the work area is even smaller. I've realized I like to see the whole canvas in general. No problem with paper, on which I drew a long ago but it becomes less easy with digital media. Unless you have a screen matrix, of course

!

Note that in the end I often zoom in, too, for painting little details, which is what I did with «The Brave». But all in all, I need to view most of it.

> I use Fine Art America for that. Never sold a print here.

Did you sell otherwise?

> I'm going to watch "A Beautful Mind" soon [...]

I've also heard/read it was awesome but didn't either

. Good opportunity to do it now. I'll tell you afterwards.

~bnolin May 4, 2011

tho I'm using a 6000-px wide image, I zoom OUT most of the time, well below 100%, to do the general painting. Then, zoom in for details. Best of both worlds!

I have sold a few things on FAA, but I just signed up a month or two ago. I've sold original art thru galleries, back when I did that kind of work. From 2004-2010 I did "photo painting" for professional photographers. Got a few hundred per image, which was okay, but never enough business. I worked for myself. Now I'm developing a portfolio, eventually plan to send it out to publishers, etc. And meantime, maybe sell a few prints.

How does he eat, you ask? I have a working wife who is very wonderful, and supportive. Life is good.

Let me know how you like ABM.

Later -
Bob

~JAMsEye May 5, 2011 Hobbyist General Artist

Sounds interesting. Since Art is not my main source of revenue I never had to worry about that. However I consider one must be courageous to live from it, given... you know... circumstances (I'm remaining vague on purpose). It is hard for an artist to be a) fairly paid *and* b) directly. I suppose artists in general use third-parties' services, like publishers, to promote their art. A big issue, to me, is that nowadays, those [bigger] companies won't hesitate to sacrifice anything for profitability, making the problem of individual revenue even more critical. That is my own perception though I can't really verify it.

~bnolin May 6, 2011

Publishers won't take you on unless they think they can sell your images. They assume the risk. Often, you get an up-front advance, and then royalties after that. So it's no-risk. The other way I'm going is self-publishing through POD (Print on demand). No risk there, either, since it costs me nothing up front. Not sure if we're talking about the same thing here, though.

~JAMsEye May 6, 2011 Hobbyist General Artist

yes, we are. I realize I've been too vague in fact

.

I meant it must be hard for an artist to start living from his or her art without prior reference, unless she has another job to guarantee revenues. Fresh artists don't necessarily have enough budget for ads and campaigns. I'm not aware of what prices are though.

I was also rather referring to the media «industry» that has wasted (and still is to me) wasting artists in that from the budgets these companies receive out of the sales, only a few percentage goes to the artist. I just hope it's different with other arts.

What I don't like and think is unfair with publishers is you're supposed to rely on his aptitude to accurately judge from an artwork whether it will be sold (hence if people will actually like it) or not. How many works have missed fame because of this? Again there have been many singers, groups, musicians who've been denied fame although their work was good and appreciated by the public. Some have committed with other labels but how many have given up though they had a chance?

Another problem I see with publishers is that they somewhat “format” your art. In theory whatever your art style is, you will always find people who like it and are ready to buy. Going the publisher's way implies that if your art one day does not fit his tastes, then no contract. In the end, it's often and only a question of budget and profitability and quality of art is pushed to the second place if not beyond.

But I can admit this is only a preconception of mine. Maybe this reasoning applies only to the music and video “industry”. Maybe I'm just being naive, dunno.

Sorry for being that long. Hope you don't mind

~bnolin May 8, 2011

No, I don't mind. I agree with what you're saying. That's why I'm putting my eggs in two baskets: publishers and POD (print on demand, Fine Art America, etc). I wrote a book awhile back, and self-published it through Amazon and as an ebook. At first, I approached publishers with it, but they weren't interested. So I self-published, and it continues to sell. Not much, but if I hadn't published myself, I'd be out nearly $1000.

(1 Reply)

~Oktanas Apr 10, 2011 Hobbyist General Artist

fantastic job man

~bnolin Apr 10, 2011

Thanks!

More from ~bnolin

Featured in Groups:

Details

Statistics

Russell Crowe as Robin Hoodby ~bnolin

The Journal Portal

Polls

What is your preferred drawing software?

deviantART [dee·vee·un'nt·ART]

Keep in Touch!

Deviousness

Add Media

Style