Oh Noes!!! I'm at it again ?!?!?
 

I must be out of my mind....
The victim:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...rtstercopy.jpg
It's progress:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...sportycopy.jpg
I started this after I had finished Fly's, but only got so far as the tank and mirrors and put it away. I was told I should do another....so, what the hell, I pullled it up yesterday and went to work. Progress to follow.....

Absolutely wondrous! Your attention to detail is marvelous. I am looking forward to seeing more of its progression

Nice! I loved watching the progress on Fly's bike. Can't wait to see this one too.

pretty nice! i think i''ll start posting my work here too. you motivate me to work on my stuff a lot more. :)

sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.


ng is playin' again.


rip 'er apart and put 'er back together better ng.

Oh Noes! I'm falling in love again... ;)

What are you doing?

:lol:
I'm drawing a Harley Sportster in Illustrator CS. Guess you didn't see the last one-took me 3 months and over 80 hours. Basically, I blow up the original to about 2400% and draw it over; sort of like making a quilt as I do a section of pixels at a time(most times with NO clue what it is I'm drawing until I zoom out to full size)

Illustrator is a pain in the but. Actually, for me personally any Vector software is a pain, excluding Flash. Have you tried freehand, corel draw, or anything similiar? Thats outstanding and very tedious work you are doing there.

so you just trace it? that kinda takes the art out of it.

Well, fine.....:mad:

It's sort of tracing, but not. It's section by section, with a LOT of guess work, since I have no clue what I'm doing until I did it.
This is the one done for Flyman. The bike itself is from a photo, the setting is made up, right down to the reflection, plus the chrome reflected a man and a red car, which had to be improvised.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...print2tiny.jpg

Here's that thread: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=99893

haha. i'm not saying it sucks. I would just be more impressed if you used the picture as a reference like someone draws a landscape from just looking at it. so in the end, it's HIS interpretation of the reference. sorta like you did on the background for Fly's bike. you see, that part is impressive. :)

I'm not following..who is 'his'?
This is the opposite of looking at it. It's interpreting strictly what's in front of you.
Fly's bike was done at 6400% mag. That means that I have absolutely no clue what I'm looking at-I have to go by individual pixels and interpret them. For the most part, I would take a pixel from the center of a group, match that color and draw the section. That section might be 100 pixels or 5...I go by intensity within a location (like, on top the outline would be lightest).
Once the bike is done I have to draw it a second time, only with no real color seperation, just generalizations of the area-that second bike goes behind the first to fill it in.
Fly's bike took 3 months, about 80-100 hours. It came thisclose to being a finalist in a recent artshow, but the second judge is 'old-school'-doesn't like digital art.

Wow thats great!!!

Unless a person has an uncanny knack for a paint by number type of layering---naturally tracing-- at least for some parts is the only way to go.

Have you tried Adobe Streamline? Its the vector tracing software package that sounds like it would save you a few weeks of work.

Many still have that 4th grade idea of tracing, but tracing in itself is an artform. For example, a woman I know does intricate paintings in which the subject matter is completely made up of poetry. Tiny letters perfectly placed to create shadows, highlights, etc., make up her work. It's not freehand in the sense that she just starts writing on canvas-she has to trace her work with the lettering. Pointellism, when used to create a scene or portrait, is a form of tracing; one starts with a sketch, makes refinements to it and traces it and fills it in with the technique.
If you've ever watched Miami Ink, there's a woman on there who does fantastic portrait tattoos and she starts by tracing a photograph. And scratchboard sketching takes several times of tracing if you want a good piece of work.

Then there's Warhol. He'd be all over this style.

Again ng, awesome work.

Thanks, Cyrnel...
Ok, gang...after a week (well, really 6 days, I didn't work on it at least one day), this is how far I got. It would have been further, but the picture moved and I had to redo the handlebars and mirrors to match up to the newer additions.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...rty2wkcopy.jpg

fuckin' eh ng..........love this stuff of yours.

4 hours today for the seat and rear fender and lights
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...tster3copy.jpg

It looks like it's just me, but I've read this thread about 3 or 4 times and the other one about the same number of times... and I still have no idea what it is you're doing. You blow up a picture of a bike so you have no idea what you're looking at and... then I get lost.

I can see the differences between the original and your work in the last thread, but I don't get what you've done. You've used a paint program to draw your own version of a picture? And what's this about tracing?

I'm not trying to be condescending or disrespectful, I would just really like to understand what it is you're doing here - if you don't mind explaining it to me like I'm a 6 year old. :)

-Tamerlain

Ok...best way I can describe it is like putting together a quilt, but with a mouse, on the computer, in Illustrator CS.
You have the pattern (the picture) and the pieces (the pixels within the picture).
I blow up the picture on my monitor to 1200-4800% enlargement, which gives me a very small section to see and work on. Now, each pixel is a different hue within the context, so I determine what I want that context to look like finished-maybe I'll use a gradient and a pen tool or seperate 10 or 30 pixels and use a central hue and the pencil tool, then draw over it using the mouse ( and I'm a lefty, doing this with my right hand to further confuse you :D ) I then pull back to about 400% and refine the section. I do this until the bike looks like a bike. (The yellow background is to show me where I screwed up). 90% of the time I use the eyedropper tool to choose the colors I need. In the case of the previous bike, much of the chrome had to be done by choosing from color pallets because it was reflecting its surroundings-red car, a man, green trees. Since this one is a promotional photo, it's completely devoid of those distractions.
After the detailed bike is done, I draw it a second time, only with no detail-all the black is black, blue, blue, etc and place that second bike under the first drawn one.
Now I have a solid drawing.
Once the bike itself is done, I then select the entire finished piece, put it into Photoshop and construct a scene around it.
The picture here shows the outlines of each drawn section, in blue:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/ngdawg/draw.jpg
It is a form of tracing as the photo is behind the drawing, but the drawing (or tracing) is interpretive. For instance, the original photo had the word Sportster across the tank(not seen here because I'd filled in the tank and didn't save the original as it was).
The movie, Polar Express, among others, is a 'traced' film, much the same way the bike illustrations are, but, of course in a MUCH more detailed and ambitious way. It was filmed completely live with the actors, then computer-traced frame by frame.
Hope that clears it up!

The very fact that I see America Online in the tray makes Baby Jesus and I weep.

A neat idea, however. :)

Well that makes quite a bit more sense. :)

Thanks for the explanation and goodluck with this bike.

-Tamerlain

Took a few days off and started up again today:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...tster5copy.jpg
I'm using more gradient mixes and the pen tool more in experimenting.

Shmeksy.

Fucking character limit.

What's that mean in english?

That'd be sexy. As in cool looking.

what the fuck does he know eh?


i'm lovin; your work ng........keep it comin' baby.

Your wish is my command, Fly....
It's been a month (with a few days' respite to rest the wrist)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...tster6copy.jpg

damn fine job..........can't wait til you're done baby.

I'm just curious, why are you going in so close instead of tracing over at the normal percentage? Or at the smallest are you can cover but still minimize the points your using?

The closer I get, the more realistic the results. Below is one I did a year ago at 'normal' range:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...hedgiftsma.jpg
Although I'm going for a more realistic concept, I still take liberties with what I see. For instance, the pipes on the one I'm doing now were done with a 3 or 4 shades gradient rather than pulling up every tone and shade in them individually. On the other hand, I used a gradient on the rear wheel when it wasn't necessary, which is giving it a more 3D appearance than the original shows.

That is excellent. Thats why Im curious. So you obviously know your way around vector software. Why are you going with the pixel by pixel approach?
Do you mean going in that close will help you achieve more photo realistic results?

Yes, but, as I said, with some 'interpretive' interjections. So far, all I've done is remove the 'Sportster' logo that was on the tank and I'm working on a couple of possible flame graphics to replace that.
Once I decide on a scene to put it in, it'll all come together a bit more clearly.

So are you creating squares up close? The reason I'm asking so many questions is because it sounds like an interesting experiment to try.

No, not creating squares or tracing pixel by pixel. More a group of pixels:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/ngdawg/demo.jpg
I also changed the tank to gradient rather than color selection...not sure if I like it that way or not.
If you look closely, you can see where I'm at with it so far. I have a long way to go-maybe a bit more than halfway.

I'm going to give this technique I try; Im too curious now not to. Are you taking an image llike a jpeg and enlarging it the maximum amount it will go?

What DPI are you starting out at?

The interesting thing about doing something like this is by using vector, there should be the ability to actual create small minipictures (almost) within the big image that could only be seen by getting close to them. Taken a step further if the final dpi is high to produce a quality print at a commercial press; it would definatley be something new, or at least take concepts that have been used further than before.

I always use 300dpi because this will be printed, probably about 11x14 or so.
The last project I had printed on canvas-it came out fantastic.
Yes, the image is a jpeg and was 72dpi. In order to make the illustration, the picture has to be blown up; this one I've been averaging about 1200-2400% and then making corrections and changes at 6400%(Illustrator's maximum mag).
The idea of incorporating smaller illustrations into the larger is intriguing...maybe the next bike! Did I just say the next bike???

ngdawg, this is really good work - I can see you have a steady hand. That brings me to the next point: try one free-hand! I think if you are able to match it that nicely with the colors and shapes, you should try one without an underlay - just open a blank backdrop and try to do it free-hand. For instance, I drew this picture a while back in Photoshop with a regular ball mouse, while looking at a printed-out picture of this character from one of my favorite animes. I think you should give it a shot!

<a href="http://www.appstate.edu/~jt52439/spike.jpg">My free-hand photoshopped version</a>

I don't think I could do it freehand! I draw and paint, but nothing compared to that! I've done a few small freehand things in PS, Illustrator and Fireworks to play, but nothing worth saving.
Latest update:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...g/bike1028.jpg