Is this artist "faking" it?

[Squinky]

http://www.idraw4you.com/index.html

Okay, seriously, this guy offers a paid service where he will draw a picture you send him. I got to looking around, and it's hard not to be skeptical when looking at his gallery. The drawings look like they were made with one of those portrait booths you see in arcades...And reading his crazy requirements makes me even more skeptical.

No real point in this, just wanted to hear others opinoins....

[Helm]

no idea if he's for real. But boring-ass art.

[Kweepa]

Looks pretty convincing.
http://www.idraw4you.com/images/large/strays/HalleWipSmall.jpg
Plus the final result is pencil on Bristol Board, which would be hard to fake.
A lot of the images do have suspicious borders and backgrounds, but that could be because he's not very imaginative, or doesn't have the time to experiment, or doesn't want to risk the commission by experimenting.
I don't know if you'd call it "art". It's good technique. And it seems like reasonable value for money, if that's what you're after.

[Obi]

I'm inclined to agree, the requirements for the photo do seem a bit strange. DPI requirements? Any half decent artist wouldn't need any specific requirements to draw from a photo, digital or otherwise. He does give this as proof that the pictures are drawn but still, I'm not convinced.

I have to agree with helm, the art is boring.

[Hakujin]

Well, I took an illustration program in college, and there's a real sort of 'home market' for this stuff. You can make a few bucks from it if you're an artist who really likes 'technical' drawing. IE, drawing super realistic pictures from photos. Yes, it sounds boring, but some people really like doings this sort of stuff. It's like the math of art.

Anyway, it's more for people who want pictures of their family, etc... Like all those portraits victorian families paid for to have of themselves, etc... It's kind of cheese.

The photo specifications are kinda specious, but make sense. I mean, if he gets a lot I'm sure he doesn't want to have to deal with wonky formats. And you try drawing a protrait from a 50dpi 2"x2" photo scan! But yeah, it's not of interest to anyone but the people who submit. If I had that guys job I'd have to kill myself.

[ManicMatt]

In 48 hours though? Somewhat ambitious drawing time to make how many demands? There is also the possibility that he/she or someone did do some drawings on the site, but got lazy/money hungry and started cheating with photoshop.

That example of his/her work in progress. The baby looks like it's from a photo but the big hand does look handrawn to me.

With a thread like this I am going to have to put a link here to my friend's website who does a similiar thing. (But less commercial and less realistic, as it has his own style in the photo's he's drawn from)

http://www.acehit.co.uk/

[Krysis]

If he's not using photoshop or something, it's sad. He can use the pensils so good and does this? For me that's even worse than using photoshop for making money. All I can say is that this ain't really art. I like Matt's guy, at least he has the freedom to draw whatever he likes and however he sees it.

[Gord10]

I believe that they are made with Photoshop; it is very easy to make a real photo look like handdraw using the filters.
Anyway; this is certainly not art.

[rharpe]

Hold on everyone... This IS art! It may not be the art style you like, but it indeed is art no matter how much you may like/dislike it.

With high-end computers and photo-realistic software, this can easily be faked. BUT, if you are looking for a design (faked or not,) this could be a nice present for anyone that likes this style of artwork.

I think that, as artists, we know how long and hard we must work to get that type of quality... and it only irritates us that someone is possibly getting lots money for something they didn't actually make themselves, (or produced in a few minutes using filters, plugins, etc.) I see things like this on eBay all the time... (People selling open-source programs, OSs, etc.) Oh well, if that's his niche, se la vi.

I want someone to start a Pixel-Portrait service! 32 colors max. You may use whatever program you like.

[Nikolas]

I have absolutely no idea if he's faking it or not, but the thing is that it is a decent idea (drawing I mean with pencils and all) and he should be backed up somehow (imo)...

Boring, yes like hell.

But still he found a way to do what other people do in the street better (imo) in his house.
His prices are not sky high, by no means...

[Andail]

Hold on everyone... This IS art! It may not be the art style you like, but it indeed is art no matter how much you may like/dislike it.

It's not only about liking/disliking it. If art is anything that is put on paper, then sure. Most people would however relate the term with some kind of personal interpretation, some sort of idea, emotion or message conveyed through forms and colours. This person is a living photo-booth.

se la vi

Anglified french?

[MrColossal]

The thing non-artists don't understand is that you can make amazing paintings or drawings from your mind full of intense imagery and deep emotion but the average person will not buy that.

The average person who will buy art wants something simple and nice to look at. Don Seegmiller came to my work place and gave a little talk, basically what he said is that while he can paint like crazy, what he made a living on was painting female models. That's what galleries would accept from him and that's what people would buy.

You would be totally unfair to this person by saying "He can use the pensils so good and does this?" This is his job, you have no idea what he does in his spare time.

Art ignorance is what leads people to be impressed with a 15,000 layer photoshop file and not the finished result or the subject matter. People who buy art for their homes want boring technically pretty art.

I can't see what there is to be suspicious about with this guy's art. He does photoreal pencil drawings, he's not the first.

Manicmatt: I'm sorry to single you out but you're post is so ignorant and rude that I had too. Because doing a drawing that this site showcases in 48 hours sounds crazy to you it must be fake? You can plainly see the progression on drawing that baby but there's still a doubt that it's a drawing? Because the artist can do these drawings quickly means he's lazy and money hungry? Rude rude rude.

[ManicMatt]

I said it was a possibility. I am just looking at all the angles. If it was one drawing in 48 hours then yes sure it could be done, but I was seeing it as many drawings being done in the same block of time. Perhaps I was too quick to presume that. Just because I can see this progression, and clearly see pencil lines, how do I not know that it's a photoshop trick? I am not fully aware of how well things can be manipulated with such programs.But to re-iterate what I was saying, Squinky posed the question "real or not" and I was saying that there is always the possibility of a mixture of both. How do we know for sure this artist really did do the baby artwork? Indeed, I have had my own artwork stolen from me and then claimed by the thief to others that it's their own. And of course in our own forum we had a sprite stealer.

Yes I'm a cynical bastard, but can you blame me? I sincerely hope that this artist is for real, by the way. And if the artist was to read that people doubt his ability to draw that lifelike, he/she should take it as a compliment.

[Babar]

Perhaps the images need to be so specific in order for them to be printed out and traced over? Or perhaps not.

[bspeers]

And if the artist was to read that people doubt his ability to draw that lifelike, he/she should take it as a compliment.

Lifelike drawing is a learned skill, and it's not uncommon.  I remember the Vernon Art Gallery had an exhibit of this stuff, but with more interesting subject matter (IMHO).

When people tell me my juggling is fake, I don't take it as a compliment because I find their comments ignorant and I find people who make comments about my art without first knowing the peramaters of what is possible rude.  Sure they may be blown away by what I did and think "there's gotta be a trick", or they may think I'm some kind of "born juggler," but that doesn't make me feel as good as someone who really appreciates the practice it takes as a skill.  Someone who goes "Boy, I bet I could do that--if I practiced as much as you have!  Nice work!"  <- refreshing.

In reality, I just practice a lot and what they probably saw was nowhere near my toughest trick.  It hurts for people to just drop all the hard work I did and focus only on their disbelief--especially when it's not that impressive a trick--just a saleable one that people enjoy.

This guy's art is just for sale.  It could be faked, but why bother.  Half the sketch artists on the street could do half the level in about half an hour--this guys is much more precise, but 48 hours is plenty of time for someone who really has mastered the techniques and practices them constantly.  If he did fake, it could be easily found out by the first person to get back their print--and then there'd be all the arguments, or the court cases and his business would suffer.

I would like to see more "interesting" artwork myself, despite the hours of intensive work this type of stuff could take, but I appreciate we all have to make a living, and at least he isn't making ads for tobacco companies.  There are a lot of worse kinds of art.

If you want a photo-realistic drawing of your friend's wedding, go for it.

[Squinky]

Well, I was mostly just wondering if it was even possible to be that excact. I have never seen someone who could replicate an image excactly like that. And I don't think that I am the first person to wonder, since it is addressed in his FAQ (it asks if the pictures are photoshopped, and he says he takes that as a compliment.)

I still am skeptical, but don't really care, heh. The image that shows him creating the image could very likely somehow be faked, but it dosen't really matter. In his FAQ he also says he is an artist from Oregon, but later on in his blog refers to himself as Billy Oregon, conspiracy I say! Heh.

I am also skeptical, because he links to no gallery of his doodles, or personal type drawings. You can't tell me he dosen't just draw normal pictures sometimes, and a person with this skill would make something worth showing off.

As a wannabe artist, I applaude him for being able to make money off his talents, but can see that it is quite tedious. Even if it is a computer image (which it very likely may be) it is a good value, if you want that sort of thing.

[MrColossal]

I still am skeptical, but don't really care, heh. The image that shows him creating the image could very likely somehow be faked,

Why is this likely? Are you skeptical of everything like that? The photos LGM posted in the critic's lounge, is it likely that those are faked. That they are actually very skillfully edited poser models placed on backgrounds pulled from Google Image Search?

LGM didn't even give us a behind the scenes shot so we could see him holding a camera, then again that's not proof enough because that can be faked too!

I am also skeptical, because he links to no gallery of his doodles, or personal type drawings. You can't tell me he dosen't just draw normal pictures sometimes, and a person with this skill would make something worth showing off.

He has a link to his deviant art page which also has a link to other art he does with coloured pencils.

http://idraw4u.deviantart.com/

http://billyoregon.deviantart.com/

Even if it is a computer image (which it very likely may be)

Why?! I just don't understand why it is "very likely." Does he have a special printer that holds a pencil and prints these images out?

http://www.pet-portraitartist.com/

Here's another artist he links too and she works in colour! Of course, by works in colour I mean she opens photoshop and applies some paint daubs filters and then prints the image out on canvas with a special printer that uses acrylic paint and then mounts the canvas.

RAR RAR RAR! anyway... I'm done now...

[Squinky]

Why is it likely?

Becuase they look to precise. Like Andail said, if he could do this, he would be a human photo booth, which, incidentally, they have machines that take pictures and make them look like this. LGM does great work, and you can see his influence in them. You cannot see any artistic or human influence in Billy Oregon's work.

Deviant art page

Full of more images that look like pictures, given a sketchy look. Not saying they aren't good, but it just adds to the mystery.

I know how you feel about this, and I repsect that, but can you at least see that there is a chance that these are faked?

[MrColossal]

No I can't see your point really. I understand that this may be something you've never seen before so you just assume it's impossible but I don't see that as a valid assumption. That's just ignorance [and I don't mean to be mean by using that word, I just mean that you obviously haven't seen a lot of this type of art.] Haven't you ever seen Matte Paintings for movies? Those things are HUGE and they are amazing and they trick you every single time you see them in a movie.

http://www.deviantart.com/view/27743003/

from his deviant art page, I can very easily see the coloured pencil strokes in this drawing.

http://www.deviantart.com/view/33104991/

And this is so obviously a drawing.

if we take this to another medium:

http://www.highend3d.com/gallery/architecture/exteriors/gallerylarge.php?id=649

http://www.highend3d.com/gallery/characters/3d_photoreal/gallerylarge.php?id=643

To me there are obvious 3d "tells" that these images give away. But show them to people that have no prior experience looking at this type of art and you will fool them.

edit:

http://www.deviantart.com/view/28414225/ and here, a much bigger version of the step by step

[Vince Twelve]

I think it's fairly clear that this guy is not faking.  He is drawing these by hand. 

My uncle Kent Bellows was doing amazing things with pencils up until his recent death (and often selling them at prices exceeding $100K).



Another with nudity

This one that was on the cover of the Gettysburg review isn't a pencil drawing, but still photo-like:



Another that wasn't pencils:



If I go to a museum that is showing one or more of Kent's work, you can see people stick there nose right up to the canvas and say things like, "that's gotta be a photo."  "It has to be a fake."  But they're not.  I've seen many of his works in various stages of completion.  He just has an incredible technical talent coupled with his great artistic talent.

So, this photo-like rendering talent is not unique.  Again, I think it's fairly clear that the iDraw4u guy is not a fake, but he's definitely wasting his talent.  It takes true artistic talent to turn this technical talent into real art.  This guy doesn't seem to be trying.