Are there any downsides to painting something in black and white and then adding color to it later? I see a lot a few artists do it, like artgerm for example, and I'm not sure if it effects the quality of the painting.
Like, obviously, this painting is good, but I feel like I can tell it was painted in black and white first. That may just be bias due to the fact that I knew he did it that way.
>>2535418
I think it's more obvious in this picture.
>>2535418
Can't tell that it was originally a black and white piece but it just seems like a waste of time to paint it black and white just to repaint it with color desu
>>2535418
Artgerm is a newie
>>2535418
It takes more time, but you should probably do values first anyways because it teaches you how to do things correctly before you get to color. If you already understand then just go color. It's more difficult to make sure your values are right though which is why you might have to do that vakue checking.
>>2535426
I think it's just a way for the artist to easily see values, even if it's more time consuming. Sort of like a guide before he paints over it.
Actually, turns out he didn't do that particular picture in black and white, but here's a video how he does it in his other paintings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IB9Jui9wQNg
>>2535418
>I see a lot a few artists do it
dammit lol
>>2535431
what am i looking at here. what do you mean
>>2535444
jiyu kaze is better adding color to grayscale, looks hyperrealistic.
>>2535451
kind of looks like he's pretending that he painted that 3d model
>>2535454
Ambient oclusion, another way of painting 2D
>>2535456
yea I just researched it after I said that stupid shit
seriously how the fuck does this look so realistic. Why don't more people paint this way. It like triggers my brain into thinking it's real/3d. As opposed to just really good art, I can still tell it's 2d, but this kind of painting style just looks really fucking 3d.
>>2535458
is the magic
>>2535458
Pros paint that way, anon. That should tell you something.
>>2535464
is it supposed to be easier too? I mean seems like a really easy way to make your shit have really good lighting. I think I'll try it tonight.
do people not do it because it looks TOO 3D? I could see people thinking that way.
>>2535418
It's easier in the fact that you only have to consider monochromatic value when blocking in light/shadows. Hopping straight into color requires more in depth knowledge of color theory which is more nuanced as color is relative i.e. 50% between black and white is grey and will always be the same grey no matter the context vs. a particular red may read green in certain contexts and brown in another. This isn't actually specific to digital medium either, lookup grisaille if you're interested, as monochromatic bases with color glazes on top is pretty common in things like watercolor/gouache.
That being said, this won't just magically make your art have good colors once you throw a color mode layer on top of it. There's still a lot of fuckery you have to deal with to get the right colors to come through. Take for example, skin tones. If you want interesting skin tones, you're not going to get it in one pass of a color. You'll need to understand what colors you need to see to give the correct read that "this is made of skin" and not some matte material. This is probably why you think you can "tell" when art comes from black and white. Often times, they don't continue rendering because what they have is already passable.
So yeah, it definitely helps churn out product fast if you're not terribly concerned about having interesting color choices but to use it for more than that still requires knowledge of color and light.
Personally, I hate that look when it's not taken further. It's very industry and not particularly exciting or interesting for me. It always makes shadows look dirty and muddy; one of those pictures where you look at it and the first thing you think of is "yep, that's photoshop". It's only my preference though, I just like color a lot.
>>2535503
Kinda makes me think all the time and clarity you gained in doing only value is lost by having to constantly adjust and add different layers later, instead of just putting down colors and maybe using a black color layer to check for values.
You lose fine control over your colors, which is important for that little extra oomph. Look at some of the work of top chinese digital artist and see what I mean with that little extra oomph. If you're unable to control color/value relationships painting raw yet then don't switch to b/w techniques just because it seems easier. Continue to work straight with colors and build up a deeper sense for them.
Dave Rapoza worked with b/w techniques only for a very long time and then switched over to painting straight with colors. According to him it was a big mistake working in b/w because of what I just mentioned. It's okay if you're a hobbyist but not if you want to call yourself a professional. It was a big hurdle for him to overcome in the middle of his career. MinYum made that mistake as well early in his development (before his career really started) and mentioned that colors were scary to him at that point because he avoided deeper study for the longest time. You can see he turned that around quite nicely.
Don't repeat their mistakes and get used to colors sooner than later.
Personally I only work with b/w if a client prefers that workflow (several b/w sketches -> one detail b/w sketch -> color scheme on top -> finishing straight with colors).
>>2535834
That's very interesting, do you have the source on those statements? I'm not challenging you, I'd just like to read more about it.
>>2535838
If their sketchbooks are still up on CA.org you can look that stuff up. I don't have the patience right now to skim through hundreds of pages :D
Painting in black and white first is the most cancerous meme of digital painting. It's a completely ass backwards way of painting that gives you less control over the end result. Oh, good luck making anything painterly with it. What are you gonna do, hand color each stroke? It's fucking retarded.
>>2535834
Dave Rapoza has his own way of doing his work, taking his information at face value and saying everyone works that way is just irrational. The pros i work with all say it's personal preference. I've seen both ways work extremely well, it does not matter. Your clients are probably small companies that don't know the difference between illustration and graphic design, so it's not a fair comparison.
>>2535846
you sound like you dont know what you are talking about. yet another person on ic thinking they know how the industry works while working at walmart.
>>2535847
why so mad
>>2535843
That's good enough, thank you.
>>2535834
>Dave Rapoza worked with....According to him it was a big mistake....
He can say it was a mistake though because he has the expearence of doing it the "wrong way" for many years. It's worth trying everything to make your own mistakes and gain the deeper understanding of why something maybe doesn't work as well. Someone starting out who doesn't know shit will hear something like that and discount it (like IC does for many things) as a valid way of working. You should be trying all sorts of ways of working, you never know what you'll pick up from it.
>>2535825
Right but if you don't understand color well you'll never get the same value structure. If you try and start in straight color you'll be battling both picking the correct colors and the correct values at the same time, doubling you're challenges. Both ways of working are valid and worth trying.
It also doesn't have to be one or the other, you can paint using ambient occlusion, slap some quick color layers on it and then on a new layer paint into it with straight color, after rough things out.
And that's why you should just be trying things rather than saying "x artists said this is the wrong way to do it." because that artists only go to where they are at because they did that thing in the first place. Just try lots of different stuff and eventually you'll develop your own system for working which will evolve naturally as you continue working, one day you'll have a efficient and comfortable system of getting shit done that works for you.
>>2535851
>Can't tell the diff between valuable info and anger.
Time to go outside.
>>2535857
People always say that after I post anything, no one wants to listen. Comfort zones are why 99% of /ic/ is terrible but no one wants to admit it or practice.
>>2535854
That's true. I said what I said because I'm talking from the vantage point of focusing on value for a long time and not getting the results I want from glazing over the values. I guess that means I need to up my color understanding game.
>>2535859
>people keep saying I'm too angry
You don't say. Why do you think that is?
>>2535846
I mean an underpainting is essentially monochromatic and then you paint over it, so yes you do just paint over the strokes. That being the case this is a meme that has been around for much longer than you and I and while I also dislike haphazard use of it, it's no different than other "art memes". Poor usage is poor usage and is no fault of the technique but the artist.
>>2535865
Making a underpainting and a full blown black and white RENDERING are two different things though. I have no problem with laying in simplified values and shapes at first, in fact I think that's what you should do. But RENDERING in black and white serves no purpose, at all. It's a inferior method because it gives you less control over the end result. You can almost always tell if a artist painted in b&w first. Often they disregard hue shifts altogether, and the colors look dead and lifeless.
>>2535846
You know when using that method, you don't have to finish the entire painting in black and white before adding colors, right? You start out in grayscale or monochrome with muted colors for the sketch, which makes it much easier to set up a strong value statement and focus on the drawing and design. Then, as these problems are solved, you slowly build up your colors. Lots of artists work like that. Most notably all those chinese powerhouses like Ruanjia, Yang Qi, Zhong Fengshua etc.
>>2535869
No, but that's what I was referring to. Should have made that clearer perhaps. Look at the artgerm vid posted above. That's what I'm talking about.
I took a gouache class and the teacher said Renaissance painters used to use brown underpaintings, but eventually people learned magenta gives a more realistic result. I always think about this but have no idea if it's true; anyone else hear something similar?
>>2535867
>says a pleb who's probably been doing art for less than 5 years and thinks he knows everything.
>>2535418
People need to just try things and experiment. Learn that 99% of the time (especially on IC) when someone tells you an absolute statement about how "this sucks" or "this is cancer" they're most likely full of shit and you should just experiment and try things on your own. Every time someone says "this can't be done." or "this doesn't work" you can probably find someone who does it exactly that way and makes it work.
The very idea that there is a "correct way" of doing art or that one way is totally wrong is just retarded. Thats line of reasoning is what's cancerous.
>>2535980
nice projection
>haha bro idk just try stuff
what a useless fucking post
>>2535874
Artgerm uses color balance, what point are you trying to make here?
>>2535838
Not that guy, but search for "underpainting" and reasons why people working in oil (but really any painters) do it. It's never really made with black & white, but already with color palette that will be in final painting.
>>2535982
no, seriously, you don't know what you're talking about.
>>2536044
not even that anon retard, it's just painfully obvious that you're super far up your own ass.
>>2536064
I'm not that anon either, fuckboy.
>>2536073
so youre just stupid then?
>>2536082
>>2536092
thank you for confirming
>>2536095
>Anything anyone says to you will be considered stupid because you lack the thought process to function outside of /ic/
y-you sure showed me
>>2536099
good thing we're in /ic/ then you stuttering retard
>no u
>>2535847
I've never liked arguments from authority or the personal preference mentality. Thats not to say someone can't prefer working one way or the other, its that they stop their reasoning short.
Method "x" can be objectively faster (if you know what youre doing). So, working in grayscale > colour does require more work, its an unneeded step that I struggle to defend for anything outside of an initial sketch.
I feel as if the statement from "professional artist x" should be "I prefer working in grayscale because i've not taken the time to learn to use colour properly." - Thats intentionally biased to make the point.
>>2535418
greyscale work that has colored afterwords with adjustments and lighting layers tends to have a very distinct washed out look to it, there's nothing bad about this per-say it just biases the end product towards a certain result. you can avoid this by either doing a greyscale sketch to determine the values beforehand & then doing the final in color with that information in mind like >>2535465
or you can start with a limited warm/cool palete, use that as an underpainting and then further develop the colors on top.
if you're working in greyscale because you don't understand color, none of this matters; learn color.
http://huevaluechroma.com/
>>2536140
Wow it's been a long time since I've seen that image. RJ has come soooo far since then it's insane.
>>2536121
art directors tell me working from greyscale is no different than working from color. anons from 4chan tell me greyscale bad, do color only, be like RJ and KGJ. idk about you but i'm ok with listening to pros instead of high schooler kiddos
>>2535426
It helps with values.
>>2536252
Art directors are rarely professional artists. They say greyscale is good because it's a faster and more flexible workflow for most illustration and concept work. It's good to know how to work in greyscale for that reason.
However if you're more interested in a better final image, skip the greyscale and jump straight to color.
>>2536252
As I said, I don't like arguing from authority. You're doing a "he said she said" - If your art director said that spinning on your chair helped your blood flow through to the creative parts of your brain would you believe them?
If you think about the process of painting in number of marks made, if you had to make 1 mark in grayscale then again later in colour - i'd say thats a slower process. If you can think and work in colour, why make more work for yourself?
whats funny is rapoza actually made a blog post recently talking about everyone is different and there is no one right way to do things but you guys are taking what he said probably a long ass time ago to justify elitism where it doesn't belong.
http://daverapoza.blogspot.ca/
Fact is there is no right or wrong way to do things, there will be advantages and disadvantages with every method and you just have to find the one that works for you.
>>2536274
the ones working at treyarch are pretty pro. are you for real bro?
>>2536277
we're talking about digital are you dense mother fucker. all it takes to go from greyscale to color is color balance, you get a faster result with solid values. stop being fucking stupid.
>>2536274
>Art directors are rarely professional artists.
lol
>>2536289
You've still added another step to your workflow? That or entertain me a little further and show me a case where a simple colour balance results in an image that needs no more editing.
Yes, i'm being pedantic to make a point that you still have to take more steps in order to add colour to grayscale.
>>2536389
did you not bother to watch the video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IB9Jui9wQNg
now shut the fuck up.
>>2536399
You take no time to address fact, I went to to the effort to break down my reasoning.
>>2536389
That video only serves to prove my point, he has to spend an extra 20 minutes adding colour to an image. He also talks about how adding colour to glows and effects is tough, so thats done IN colour afterwards.
I can understand his process being used on images like the thumbnail for the video, it also stamps itself heavily on that image, its fine. The discussion is whether or not its an extra layer in a workflow, to which the answer is clearly yes.
>>2536432
good luck in college.
>>2536472
Is this where i say something droll,
>post your work
Thanks though, after all this time i've spent online I still feel inclined to attempt discussion, this was a solid reminder on why I shouldn't waste my time.
>>2536488
your argument is that you should skip the greyscale step completely and move straight into color. that's fine, but if you're not an aged artist, you will more than likely fuck your values. you're not wrong, you don't need that step, but to argue that it shouldn't be used is stupid. if you aren't taking your time to refine your work then why go full into color and render shit work?
>>2535418
Take a portrait photo in color into photoshop. Make a copy and desaturate it, and keep the original version with colors for reference. Now try to match the skintones of the original with all your layer effects and coloring sliders and brushes at your disposal. Paint over, use any tools you like. Not that easy huh? Wouldn't you say it's almost impossible, without a LOT of work? Yeah, that should give you a pretty good idea just how much control you're giving up if you're rendering in black and white.
>>2536491
I'm the other anon, but really, you usually do underpainting in limited palette beforehand. If you work with monochromatic colors you still have pretty solid grasp on values because of palette.
>>2535422
How are you able to tell? I'm an art newbie and I really don't see it...
>>2536539
It's hard to explain because I'm a noobie too but I just see it. If you look at those colorized versions of old photos you might be able to see what I mean.
It's like the colors are just kind of off
>>2536539
Palette is really muted in Saitama painting. You wouldn't say that colors are lively. Also in areas where there is relatively big shadow yellow with black mixes...strangely.
Regards, other Anon
>>2536491
Sorry for not being clear. My argument was mostly about the amount of work required and that I don't really see a reason to have that as your workflow. If you're able to use photoshop and get the results Artgerm does, why not work in colour - he knows what is needed.
The thread is about the downsides, I aimed to be as objective as possible and I consider that it is a negative as it is more time consuming for a result that is trying to emulate colour. It's basically semantics as its a "this takes longer, its an extra step" way of thinking.
The way you're framing it is that is used as a bandaid if your knowledge of colour is weak which is when i'd say it shouldn't be used. I'm all for thumbnails being handed off in value or quick compositions done that way as its excellent when used like that.
What i'm trying to say boils down to;
It's an extra step added post rendering with nuance being added later not during. It requires reworking.
This step could be removed with a proper understanding of colour - and if you have a grasp on colour, what place does a value only approach have past thumbnailing. If it really is preference then it's a strange preference to have past sketching.
>>2536334
Would you stop shitposting, m8
>>2536288
Are you? I've worked in the industry for five years now and the only art director, who was an actual professional and turned to art directing and managing just because he enjoys it more, worked at a high profile concept art outsourcing studio. Everyone else either failed and settled or never painted much in the first place.
>in b4 show your work
does it look right? i used lumi shade in sai. with 3 different layers of color, or does it seem to weird looking
>>2536277
Actually with art arguments from authority completely work in regards to technique as long as the authority arguing is arguing to do what they do because their method objectively produces their work.
>>2537182
Kind of looks like a big dick being encased in a pair of breast.
>>2536984
what industry? mobile games doesn't count.
>>2536541
there's no change in saturation between light and dark areas of an object. also, each surface is one single colour and doesn't take into account things like subtle changes in hue on a single surface or reflected light.
>>2536551
It could actually be faster to do if your doing it grayscale first, if it takes you 5 hrs to do the painting in color without this step, but only takes you 4 hours to do grayscale first than edit the color in with gradient filters in 20 mins; you just saved yourself 40 minutes.
maybe you'll say you should be able do pure color just as fast but that's not how it works in reality, I've never seen an artist just do color out right perfect with no mistakes. The reality is the more things your juggling at a time the slower and more mistakes you'll make.
I could make the same argument about doing line art first, you should just know form perspective ect; perfectly and go straight to painting with no under sketch and it'll save you time.. But the reality is for most people it'll just cause them to make a bunch of costly mistakes and take more time to fix in the long run.
>>2537780
Your analogy only works under the assumption that painting in b/w is the most efficient way to get accurate values, just as drawing with line is the most accurate way to establish structure (which it objectively speaking is). I'd argue that's not the case since values change with different hues and saturation levels. Simply put, rendering in black and white gives you LESS, not more, control over the end result.
Again take up my black and white photo challenge and see how well you do. You'll likely fail miserably. i.e. desaturate a color portrait photo in photoshop and keep a copy of the original as you try to color the desaturated version (a perfect black and white rendering) to match the skin tones of the original. It's virtually impossible.
>>2537787
I don't think perfect accuracy with values is important, what matters more is just relative values even if it changes too much you can mess with levels by itself , I'd even argue it gives you more control in a certain way, since you can mess with the colors more and not rely on getting everything perfectly the on the first go.
There are so many working professionals who do the gray scale to color method it's just plainly absurd to call it objectively wrong instead of just saying they both have advantages and disadvantageous.Control is not the only factor that matters, flexibility, consistency, time , these are all important as well.
I would take your challenge but honestly I just don't give enough of a shit to put the effort in.
>>2537803
It's tiring to continue to see the "Professionals do it so it must be x" attitude.
If we want to talk realistically, then you'd do thumbnails and colour comps as part as your early draft, you're finalising a lot of your image in the planning stage. As for flexibility a lot of that can come from Layering surely? Technically I could apply that thinking to the grayscale > colour workflow too, if you're setting up shadows on a clipping mask then you can easily add more nuance to that area.
What we can say "objectively" is that a grayscale to colour workflow will require reworking in order to not have it be obvious in the end result. It also results in a loss of control and vibrance in an image in a negative way - if the intention is to emulate colour. Colour will require more knowledge upfront to yield a result that makes use of colour.
The factors you consider important aren't mutually exclusive and are mostly elements that can be resolved outside of colour vs grayscale like layering, planning, experience, skill. Basically I see no gains to be had from limiting myself to grayscale past the rough stage.
>>2537895
Colors don't matter if you can't get the values right.
>>2537978
With all the talk of art directors and "professionals", I thought this was being discussed with a certain level of skill being met. If you're learning then yes, learn to use values... and learn to use colour too? What a banal comment.
honestly in a lot of the digital/concept art industry it's used as a method of pumping out pieces faster. I only learned of it from a friend who worked painting images for card and mobile games. they wanted her to get a FINISHED publish-worthy piece every day plus thumbnails for the next day, so using this method (esp for images that would be shrunken down) was appropriate.
I mean there are many different 'skills' within art, and then even those are divided. Using this method doesn't mean you don't understand color theory. It just means you are applying it a different way and your results have different limits than someone painting straight to color. So if you WANT to jump straight into color, you're going to have to train that skill from scratch.
While yes, I would say it's potential is limited (that's just my opinion tho) and beginner artists should refrain from using it until they can paint straight to color, it is a completely valid workflow that may or may not work for you. And it DOES save a lot of time once you've mastered it. So if you're fighting to keep food on the table, or have a large quantity of art where the quality isn't as demanding, yeah, go for it.
I mean to me, painting straight to color in a digital medium is just one path to a finished image. In the same way being able to paint digitally doesn't mean you'll be able to paint in acrylics.
