• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Video Game fan art -- when it's better than the official thing

dabookerman said:
hat's Android. He runs concept art. He is a pro, and yes, it is official art.

Awesome guy.

He doesn't run it, but he is a prominent member and teaches at the workshops. But yeah, he was the concept artist for the Prime series. So that's not really fan art.

People need to quit bitching about the Samus pic. It doesn't even look like a paintover; I think it was just used as reference.

Some really awesome stuff in here. Thanks for sharing.
 

BorkBork

The Legend of BorkBork: BorkBorkity Borking
Lime said:
Grim Fandango

6293963c2590565706d00d69bc04144d-1.jpg

Awesome Manny. I don't see too much GF stuff.
 

Tom_Cody

Member
pakkit said:
I'm pretty sure undressing videogame characters just for the hell of it is pretty boner-fueled.

1353847526801bdcc1.jpg
I love this image so much. I think I'm going to print it out and frame it this weekend.
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
karasu said:
Wow. Who is that supposed to be and who is the artist?

Sylvanas Windrunner, the Dark Lady and leader of the Forsaken Undead in Warcraft. The artist is Choi Won Chun from what I gather
 
Raging Spaniard said:
People are blowing that out of proportion. For one, 90 percent of concept art in the game industry is traced or painted over from photos so no need to overreact. Two, the guy did a fanart piece because he wanted to, so no harm done and three, that piece still takes a fair amount of skill to make even if you heavily referenced the face (layout, colors, armor, detail levels, e

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

joke post?



On point, using photo reference is fine as long as you are honest about it. Paint-overs are generally frowned upon for everything except learning. Some professionals still do it but it hurts credibility in many peoples' eyes. No way to tell if this is a paint over or an extremely accurate use of reference (i'm leaning towards paintover due to how exact the dimensions are). You can defend it all you want, in the end it doesn't matter either way because its really a matter of opinion, unless of course the artist lies about it or does'nt credit a source where appropriate.
 

Raging Spaniard

If they are Dutch, upright and breathing they are more racist than your favorite player
LaserBuddha said:
:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

joke post?

On point, using photo reference is fine as long as you are honest about it. Paint-overs are generally frowned upon for everything except learning. Some professionals still do it but it hurts credibility in many peoples' eyes. No way to tell if this is a paint over or an extremely accurate use of reference (i'm leaning towards paintover due to how exact the dimensions are). You can defend it all you want, in the end it doesn't matter either way because its really a matter of opinion, unless of course the artist lies about it or doesn't credit a source where appropriate.

Were do you work? If you're in the industry then my apologies but my experience differs greatly from yours, at the very least (and you must work for a cool studio) If you don't work in the games industry however, you're being very naive.

Concept art for game purposes its not something meant for marketing and as such, consumers never ever see it (for the most part, there's exceptions, look below). We basically are told to paintover whatever fits the image were looking for, and if you're doing a photorealistic game that means paint over photos and collage photo reference together on a daily basis. Even with other games too, Ive had many assignments were my instructions were to take screenshots from Team Fortress and paint our stuff over the image in order to get to the look we wanted.

In a game studio its not about credibility as much as it is about getting to the look the AD wants the game to have, it absolutely does NOT matter how you get to that point, and photo paintovers are the norm, sorry to disappoint you.

As a disclaimer note that I'm talking about photorealistic games, which are the majority of what the industry produces. Yeah my 90% comment was an exaggeration and places like Blizzard probably don't dabble but as an example, here, some Force Unleashed concept art:

star-wars-the-force-unleashed-20070.jpg


See the face and the arm? THAT'S FROM A VIDEO CAPTURE FROM THE MOVIE. Take the capture, clean the background, put a green hue over it, paint some details on the face and do a quick rendition of the body and you're done. Id be shocked if that took much longer than an a couple of hours and you know what? Thats perfectly fine and acceptable, hell, its smart and it was done by a mayor studio for a mayor game. If that doesn't prove my point I don't know what does.
 

CTLance

Member
It's horrible, yet awesome.
2b8p5x.jpg

Done by "torokun". I think.

2i7pgtv.jpg

Need a source for this. Filename must have been cut off at some point: Zelda_WW_In_the_Bowels_of_Hell_by_w.jpg

sxzknq.jpg

Zelda_Oot___Sprawl_by_wynahiros.jpg
 
Raging Spaniard said:
Were do you work? If you're in the industry then my apologies but my experience differs greatly from yours, at the very least (and you must work for a cool studio) If you don't work in the games industry however, you're being very naive.

Concept art for game purposes its not something meant for marketing and as such, consumers never ever see it (for the most part, there's exceptions, look below). We basically are told to paintover whatever fits the image were looking for, and if you're doing a photorealistic game that means paint over photos and collage photo reference together on a daily basis. Even with other games too, Ive had many assignments were my instructions were to take screenshots from Team Fortress and paint our stuff over the image in order to get to the look we wanted.

In a game studio its not about credibility as much as it is about getting to the look the AD wants the game to have, it absolutely does NOT matter how you get to that point, and photo paintovers are the norm, sorry to disappoint you.

As a disclaimer note that I'm talking about photorealistic games, which are the majority of what the industry produces. Yeah my 90% comment was an exaggeration and places like Blizzard probably don't dabble but as an example, here, some Force Unleashed concept art:

star-wars-the-force-unleashed-20070.jpg


See the face and the arm? THAT'S FROM A VIDEO CAPTURE FROM THE MOVIE. Take the capture, clean the background, put a green hue over it, paint some details on the face and do a quick rendition of the body and you're done. Id be shocked if that took much longer than an a couple of hours and you know what? Thats perfectly fine and acceptable, hell, its smart and it was done by a mayor studio for a mayor game. If that doesn't prove my point I don't know what does.


So using your game's own assets for the game's own concept art relates in some way to (possibly) painting over something that doesn't belong to you for your own personal work and not giving credit?

Again I'm not taking a moral stance on the issue, but your example has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at all.

I know I said "Paint-overs are generally frowned upon for everything except learning". But its very obvious I'm talking about a situation where you are completing an original illustration and using that as a shortcut to obtain a well-realized figure. No one with any sense thinks I'm talking about commerical visualization where you are being instructed to use an image within another image for practical reasons as a quick proof-of-concept.
 

CTLance

Member
Looking through my leech folder, there are many pics that simply aren't sourced. Mostly because no source was given when I acquired them. maybe some of you know them and can tell me... ?
Stuff like this, I mean:
10p7inq.jpg

I hate it when I only have some stupid mo-po crop of what may be nice fanart.

I just love it when artists "bend the rules".
Like this: Katamari_Damacy_SOTC.jpeg

Another pic series I'd love to find the sources to, this time photographs:
15411_Pac_Man_02.jpg 15416_Pac_Man_03.jpg

Snake gets his MGS4 looks in three easy steps.jpg

If anybody recognizes this stuff, please tell me so I can update their filenames appropriately.

...and just for fun: Pac_Man_Andrew_Bell.jpg
 

Extollere

Sucks at poetry
From a design stand-point I think the term paint-over is a bit of a misnomer. Photo texture is used constantly for quick effects in almost all forms of concept art today. Generally those photos come from the artist's own camera, royalty-free stock photos, or images from IPs owned by the artist's employer. It doesn't really involve just taking some photo, painting on top of it and calling the idea your own.

There is this whole idea among art-fans and non professionals that if you use photos in anyway it's cheating. This couldn't be further from the truth, as the goal isn't to make something you can call more meritable, it's to get your ideas across quickly and effectively as most in house artists are required to produce hundreds of works or more for one project - most of them to be discarded and unused. But I have to tell you very rarely do concept artist's just take somebody's actual photo as a base for an idea and then trace over it. Even then that wouldn't be "cheating" I'd just be stealing someone's work if that work was copy written - which you would never want to do for legal reasons of course.

I would say that the 90 percent of concept art is traced comment is a very inaccurate statement however. From the experience I have I'd say most of the art is entirely hand-drawn (whatever that means now) digitally in programs like PS and Painter without the use of an underlying structure (such as a photo). Photographs are often used for texture and detailing purposes when appropriate to expedite the process - we're now at an age where digital art is so common, and more and more artwork is being produced personally for individuals that there is a cross over and it's often hard to tell what constitutes concept art from fine art, (aside from whether you're doing it at a job or not) and whether it's ok to use photos - but you'll find that the general consensus is that if the photos being used belong to the artist and the end result looks good and not shitty, then there is little complaint and no loss of artist merit - utilizing photography for aid is a skill in itself.

er...anyways done with this meaningless little rant thing.
 

Extollere

Sucks at poetry
LaserBuddha said:
But its very obvious I'm talking about a situation where you are completing an original illustration and using that as a shortcut to obtain a well-realized figure.

It's done all the time. Typically with photographs taken by the artist. Matte paintings are basically all entirely photographs themselves and are made for almost every realism based video game projects, as well as fantasy, sci-fi, historical movies ect....
 
Extollere said:
It's done all the time. Typically with photographs taken by the artist. Matte paintings are basically all entirely photographs themselves and are made for almost every realism based video game projects, as well as fantasy, sci-fi, historical movies ect....

It is done all the time, but not in the way it was done here.

Typically if someone were to use a photo or live model, their goal is to depict a real person in whatever situation is being depicted in the photo. You are able to see that the artist has decided to draw from life in order to capture the details, lighting, emotions, and anomalies that only a real subject can provide, and no artist can fully duplicate without. This artist wasn't doing a life drawing and putting the person in a Samus suit. Rather, he was appropriating that person's facial proportions so that his drawing "looked right" and then painted it in such a way that you would believe you were looking at a stylized creation rather than a representational one.

In other words, he wasn't depicting the woman but rather using parts of her to fill in what I assume he believes are weak areas in his abilities.

In the end its fan art and it isn't skin off of anyone's back except maybe hers, but he's going to have a hard time growing as an artist if he works around weaknesses rather than working at them. Then again, maybe he feels like using photo reference for stylized figures is as good as anything else and has no aspiration to be able obtain that quality of form with his own knowledge of anatomy. In my opinion thats a shame because he's a good painter to begin with.
 
Extollere said:
It's done all the time. Typically with photographs taken by the artist. Matte paintings are basically all entirely photographs themselves and are made for almost every realism based video game projects, as well as fantasy, sci-fi, historical movies ect....

You and Greg Land should start a comic book together...
 

Raging Spaniard

If they are Dutch, upright and breathing they are more racist than your favorite player
LaserBuddha said:
So using your game's own assets for the game's own concept art relates in some way to (possibly) painting over something that doesn't belong to you for your own personal work and not giving credit?

Again I'm not taking a moral stance on the issue, but your example has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at all.

I know I said "Paint-overs are generally frowned upon for everything except learning". But its very obvious I'm talking about a situation where you are completing an original illustration and using that as a shortcut to obtain a well-realized figure. No one with any sense thinks I'm talking about commerical visualization where you are being instructed to use an image within another image for practical reasons as a quick proof-of-concept.

My point is that as far as game concept is concerned, heavy photo referencing is pretty common, specially in the early stages. My example might not the best suited and like I said before my "90%" comment was an exaggeration, but I can tell you from experience that theres a lot of "take this photo and paint over it to get what we want" If I was allowed to post the insane amount of pieces that are just like that on the EA servers at work I would (but then Id get fired, lol)

Hell, the guys at the concept department at Tiburon get all giddy when they get to draw something, usually its photo manips all day (or matte painting, which is just a fancy way of saying "collage a shitload of photos together")

As far as the Samus piece, I agree with you, you will learn more by focusing on your weaknesses and not giving credit to the model is a frowned upon. My whole point is that in the industry, and for inhouse concept purposes, its not something that matters much in the early stages of production.

Good to get some discussion though.
 
bigdaddygamebot said:
You and Greg Land should start a comic book together...

lol I hate Greg Land. Not personally, its just his artwork reminds me of an 80's "hot babe" airbrushed on the side of a van.


EDIT: Nevermind, I do hate him:
http://jimsmash.blogspot.com/2008/02/more-greg-land-ripoffs.html
http://jimsmash.blogspot.com/2008/06/more-greg-land-tracing.html
http://jimsmash.blogspot.com/2008/06/more-greg-land-tracing_24.html

I always knew he drew from life, but i didnt know he straight-up copied other peoples' works.



AND WAIT A SECOND....I am sad about David Mack now :(
http://jimsmash.blogspot.com/2008/06/david-mack-loves-adam-hughes.html

Is it just me or are there like 20 professional comic artists working today that rip off Adam Hughes?
 
LaserBuddha said:
lol I hate Greg Land. Not personally, its just his artwork reminds me of an 80's "hot babe" airbrushed on the side of a van.


You throw in some art of a polar bear that she's riding...that shit'll get you laid, yo.

The controversy for Land is that he copied/traced images "exactly" of celebs, models and porn starlets...

So the fact that they look like "hot babes" well...that's the point.
 

Extollere

Sucks at poetry
LaserBuddha said:
It is done all the time, but not in the way it was done here.

Typically if someone were to use a photo or live model, their goal is to depict a real person in whatever situation is being depicted in the photo. You are able to see that the artist has decided to draw from life in order to capture the details, lighting, emotions, and anomalies that only a real subject can provide, and no artist can fully duplicate without. This artist wasn't doing a life drawing and putting the person in a Samus suit. Rather, he was appropriating that person's facial proportions so that his drawing "looked right" and then painted it in such a way that you would believe you were looking at a stylized creation rather than a representational one.

In other words, he wasn't depicting the woman but rather using parts of her to fill in what I assume he believes are weak areas in his abilities.

In the end its fan art and it isn't skin off of anyone's back except maybe hers, but he's going to have a hard time growing as an artist if he works around weaknesses rather than working at them. Then again, maybe he feels like using photo reference for stylized figures is as good as anything else and has no aspiration to be able obtain that quality of form with his own knowledge of anatomy. In my opinion thats a shame because he's a good painter to begin with.

Get off your high horse man. Every great artist in history has had weaknesses or faults. They have all worked around them or included them into their styles.. but not everyone can see that. Michelangelo faked anatomy, Gibson and such inkers vignetted images where they couldn't figure the structure, Frazetta used to paint huge areas of smoke around objects he couldn't figure out how to draw correctly or use photo reference of himself to aid his works. The point for any artist is to produce a good looking image. There is nothing wrong with using any aid possible to achieve that (short of blatant plagiarism) unless you are competing in some kind of ARC Renaissance painting contest or going for strict easel painting from life. Picking up a reference for inspiration, insight or visual aid is probably one of the most helpful things you can do as an artist if you need to further the expression or strength of your images - studying or not. Once you realize that very few representational artists (and stylized) worked entirely from imagination with no visual reference (Even legendary artists like Norman Rockwell, Maxfield Parrish and Mucha worked almost exclusively from photo reference shot in their studios) then maybe you'll get of this artist's merits bend you seem to have.
 

Extollere

Sucks at poetry
bigdaddygamebot said:
You throw in some art of a polar bear that she's riding...that shit'll get you laid, yo.

The controversy for Land is that he copied/traced images "exactly" of celebs, models and porn starlets...

So the fact that they look like "hot babes" well...that's the point.

Yep. However if you take a much better artist such as Adam Hughes - who also photographs and shoots his own reference in studio. You can't tell it's there because A) He's a really good fucking artist to begin with and B) he uses the photos as an aid, and draws them more interpretively so you can't tell the gesture was taken from a photo. It isn't just a literal copy like what Land is doing.
 
Extollere said:
Get off your high horse man. Every great artist in history has had weaknesses or faults. They have all worked around them or included them into their styles..

I stopped right here once I realized you weren't an artist.

Yes, every artists has something they aren't as good at. You want to go somewhere like Massive Black and spew this shit about working around your faults? Do that if you want, deviantart will probably be around for a long time. They hand out asspats like books at the library over there. If you really want to be a great artist though, you have to confront and overcome your weaknesses, and get OUT of your comfort zone or you might as well find something else to do.

The rest of your post rambles on, but I'd like to thank you for pointing out that most great artists in history drew from life. I never realized this (I am in fact, clinically retarded) and feel bad for decrying the practice. ...Oh wait, I went into great detail about the proper utilization of live figures in the service of art.

The point for any artist is to produce a good looking image. There is nothing wrong with using any aid possible to achieve that (short of blatant plagiarism) unless you are competing in some kind of ARC Renaissance painting contest or going for strict easel painting from life.

Definitely not an artist. There's nothing wrong with using anything if it means a good looking image, unless of course you are in some diabolical contest of skill! You and Greg Land should suck each others' cocks.

Picking up a reference for inspiration, insight or visual aid is probably one of the most helpful things you can do as an artist if you need to further the expression or strength of your images - studying or not.

Nope. Using it as a learning experience helps you. Using it to "get by" to finish a piece not only doesn't help you, it hurts you.

Once you realize that very few representational artists (and stylized) worked entirely from imagination with no visual reference

Again, nothing anyone here asked about or disagreed with. All this means is that you disagree with my point yet don't actually understand it. Either that or you do understand but are throwing out strawmans left and right like caltrops out of desperation.
 

Metroidvania

People called Romanes they go the house?
Thread needs moar pics, and maybe small titles to help some who haven't played certain games. :p

I would post some of my Samus ones, but most of 'em appear to have been posted already.
 
Extollere said:
Yep. However if you take a much better artist such as Adam Hughes - who also photographs and shoots his own reference in studio. You can't tell it's there because A) He's a really good fucking artist to begin with and B) he uses the photos as an aid, and draws them more interpretively so you can't tell the gesture was taken from a photo. It isn't just a literal copy like what Land is doing.

Wait a minute, this is right! How could you post this after your previous post? My only nitpick is that it isnt necessary to hide the fact that you are studying real figures, and I wouldn't say that Hughes is intentionally disguising it.
 

Forkball

Member
I always liked Falcoon's art. He's so awesome that SNK even hired him.

top766.jpg

top816.jpg

top823.jpg

top967.jpg

top692.jpg

top696.jpg


He has a pretty big portfolio. Most of his game characters are from fighting games, but he also has some other random game characters and a lot of really interesting original designs.
 

Extollere

Sucks at poetry
LaserBuddha said:
I stopped right here once I realized you weren't an artist. [...]

Definitely not an artist.

Ok wow. If you are a working or practicing artist have fun with your non-existent career. The last thing you ever want to do when making a point to an artist is to tell them they are not an artist. If you are neither then great job - nice attitude...

LaserBuddha said:
Nope. Using it as a learning experience helps you. Using it to "get by" to finish a piece not only doesn't help you, it hurts you.

Couldn't be further from the truth. Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

(P.S. - If you have seen any of studio Massive Black's videos - as you mentioned them - then you would hear some of the artists talk about using photos for ref many times - you can even watch some of their featured artists do this in the videos as they describe the process... while making some very fine finished pieces).

Anyways good day to you.


Prick.
 
:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Okay, the idea that you shouldnt use references as a crutch when you dont know how to draw something properly COULDN'T BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. Doing anything in service of making an individual piece look better, rather than trying become a stronger artist, is totally the right way to go.

You are saying this. You are actually saying this!
(In between repeatedly accusing me of being against any use of reference at all, of course.)

I really can't believe someone could be this divorced from reality. You've never looked at bad fanart and realized it looks bad because someone was copying a drawing or photo rather than learning how to visualize the human body in three dimensions? Even bad manga art is usually "off" because the artist is imitating shapes and silhouettes rather than thinking of the subject as a (deformed) 3D object.


Then again, maybe this is all confusion due to your insistance that I am against reference. I AM NOT AGAINST REFERENCE. Is that plain enough for you? Can you still pretend I'm against all use of reference when I put it in bold like that? lets see.
 

Extollere

Sucks at poetry
LaserBuddha said:
You are saying this. You are actually saying this!
(In between repeatedly accusing me of being against any use of reference at all, of course.)

Then again, maybe this is all confusion due to your insistance that I am against reference. I AM NOT AGAINST REFERENCE. Is that plain enough for you? Can you still pretend I'm against all use of reference when I put it in bold like that? lets see.


No, I've only accused you what you've accused yourself of, which is that it's somehow inherently wrong to use a reference or to use photos when working on a finished piece and that it's only appropriate when studying - or that somehow the use of a reference for a finished piece will hinder it.

You're wrong about this. Hundreds of top name professionals prove you wrong. History proves you wrong too. Quit acting like a kid.
 

Arcipello

Member
Raging Spaniard said:
My point is that as far as game concept is concerned, heavy photo referencing is pretty common, specially in the early stages. My example might not the best suited and like I said before my "90%" comment was an exaggeration, but I can tell you from experience that theres a lot of "take this photo and paint over it to get what we want" If I was allowed to post the insane amount of pieces that are just like that on the EA servers at work I would (but then Id get fired, lol)

Hell, the guys at the concept department at Tiburon get all giddy when they get to draw something, usually its photo manips all day (or matte painting, which is just a fancy way of saying "collage a shitload of photos together")

As far as the Samus piece, I agree with you, you will learn more by focusing on your weaknesses and not giving credit to the model is a frowned upon. My whole point is that in the industry, and for inhouse concept purposes, its not something that matters much in the early stages of production.

Good to get some discussion though.

I work with 5 other concept artists at my studio and apart from collecting photographs for inspiration on colours and atmosphere none of us actually use photos in our work, and yes we are now in the early stages of production and its all very concept art heavy. i guess we just put more emphasis on the art aspect of it.
 
Top Bottom