A question about photoshop brushes

whtdragon

I have signed up to the forums in the hope of finally answering question and finally putting an end to an argument.

I create arkwork on photoshop, and have been known to use the leaves and grass brushes. A friend of mine is forever telling me that using such brushes is "shortcutting" on work and therefore should not be used. In fact, he belives that these brushes are unexceptable in the case of more professional works. My views (and a few of my other friends I've asked this about) Think that they are like any other tool available in photoshop, and therefore can be used.
So, I'm looking for a professional opinion on this: Are those brushes REALLY unexceptable? Here is one of my most recent works

http://fanart.theotaku.com/imgs/high/226038-20061113111853.jpg

lasa · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:10 pm Post subject:

This is just my opinion...
Photoshop purist get paid by the hour or not at all. True suffering artist.

If somebody feels that specialty brushes are shortcuts (or basically cheating) then they should also avoid all Autolevel/curves, styles, filters, plugins, patterns, and go back to using MS paint and avoid Photoshop all together.

All tools should be considered if it can ease the process. With that said, most plugins and brushes are worthless predictable and a just plain waste of time... but if it serves as a short cut to something and still look the way it need to..so be it. Why reinvent the wheel.

Case in point. I had to draw a series of muscles before and after an operation (the actual muscles no skin) Sure I could have been a purist and spent the week drawing each ribbing, using gradients, toning and shading layer upon layer or use the EYE CANDY wood filter which if manipulated makes great looking live muscles along with the liquify tool.

Or if I need to clean up some skin...first I'll try using the KODAK Digital Gem Airbrush plugin..if it doesn't do the job then lets do it the hard way. But if it works to my or my clients needs, why spend hours fine tuning..

Or the extract tool..that's my first attempt at an extraction if it works great if not roll up the sleeves...pull out the channels etc.

Or using a HAIR brush when cloning to create fly-away hair...

Being a Photoshop purist in my opition is overrated. If the results are the same...who care how you got there...I erased, or used a plugin they didn't, so what? Like using a hammer and nail on a fence, instead of a nailgun..why?

Lasa

whtdragon · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:20 pm Post subject:

I've said basically the same thing to him last night. He's challanaged me to draw somthing on paper and pencil, and without using photoshop techniques and to draw everything... every grass blade, and leaf. He told me that because I used these brushes, I'm proving to him that I don't possess enough artistic skills to draw those things in myself. I actually find this kind of funny, and I still don't think I need to prove anything.

swanseamale47 · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:10 pm Post subject:

I have to agree with Lasa, as for the artistic bit, didn't almost all the famous artists use brushes?
To me the brush is just another tool in Photoshop, I use lots of custom brushes, it's not uncommon to make one just for one job. As a photographer I'd use a filter to correct colour with film, so why not a bruch to corect something with digital?.
If it's purity he's after take him to a rock face and paint something with charcoal using your finger, that's pretty much how it all started. Wayne

whtdragon · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:28 pm Post subject:

I suppose I should point out that he isn't really a photoshop user, and does nearly everything via another program, or draws on paper. I suppose it's not surprising to see his attitude on the brushes when he doesn't even use photoshop.

grannygeek · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:35 pm Post subject:

I do some digital painting, which in our group means we don't use any specialty brushes, copy, paste, filters, etc..Just default brushes..But I've allowed myself to make some brushes of my own to use in certain circumstances..I am going by the definition of "digital painting" as told me in my group..

lasa · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 6:34 pm Post subject:

Whtdragon, Unless your friend is using a real airbrush, or tattooing...forget-about-them..

I don't know if you've ever tried Real airbrushing (not digital) that is some nasty stuff no room for error!!! Lets not even talk about tattoos...lol

Lasa

whtdragon · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:28 pm Post subject:

lol thank you. It's just he's been harping on the subject for awhile.. nearly everytime I show him somthing using those brushes, and I was actually getting tired of him complaining about it, so to prove his.. stubberness? wrong, I thought I'd take it apon myself to ask professionals, and to fianlly put an end to it all.

lasa · Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:05 pm Post subject:

I personally prefer drawing (pen/ink) and letting somebody else digitally paint it. It so happens that the person that paints my illustrations, draws like poop...she paints and makes collages like nobodies business.. So it works for us...Who's the artist?

Can your friend draw on the computer? If so, great!! if not, so what? Doesn't make them any better or worse.

Lasa

swanseamale47 · Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:38 am Post subject:

Lasa believe it or not we have a dyslexic tattoist not far from where I live! my mate was going to have Red Dwarf on his back, till he saw another mates tattoo, "Jeff and Sue" came out as Jeef and Suwe, he took one look and said if he can't spell Sue I have no chance with dwarf ! lol
Sorry for going of track with this. Wayne

Copyright © 2003-2016. PhotoshopForums.com, iFroggy Network. All Rights Reserved. Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group. phpBB SEO. Privacy Policy. We are in no way affiliated with Adobe. Photoshop, Adobe and related marks are registered trademarks of Adobe.