yes :)I admire his works greatly. For a mad murdering maniac he knew how to draw the eye to the right bits. And you have to consider what things were like before. Now we take that stuff for granted (Hollywood etc. having copied the lighting many times), but compare his work to a Giotto, or even a Raphael, and see how much drama and danger he injects into things.
*takes sip of water and settles down for more amiable discussion*
(*takes sip of water and settles down for more amiable discussion*
revmoola was thinking about a software problem,
Fri 13 Mar 2009, 13:07,
archived)
actually, no, you're right.considering the flat colours that were used at the time, I guess he was miles ahead of the rest.
Did you read about the camera obscura theory? Apparently it explains why he never made preliminary sketches.
In other news, no-one paints water like Aivasovsky. Absolutely beautiful.
EDIT: I refer the honourable gentleman to this
(Did you read about the camera obscura theory? Apparently it explains why he never made preliminary sketches.
In other news, no-one paints water like Aivasovsky. Absolutely beautiful.
EDIT: I refer the honourable gentleman to this
b3th Not shit. Not mod.,
Fri 13 Mar 2009, 13:15,
archived)
re: that water paintingBLOODY HELLFIRE! :)
( revmoola was thinking about a software problem,
Fri 13 Mar 2009, 13:27,
archived)
