Question for the artistically inclined.

[FamousAdventurer77]

Doesn't matter if you're a professional artist or not, went to art school or not, or what have you. I'm just curious to see what others think about this, as this is something that's bugged me for years.

Many eons ago before I became a tax accountant, I went to art school. I even had a half-paying scholarship. But because I was going in for fashion design, the following portfolio quirk did not apply to me as the reviewer just wanted to see my actual design sketches/any completed samples I did and nothing else.

I just remember this one sketching class I had to take and the professor was really good, I could tell she was really passionate about this and wanted her students to succeed. So she said to us one day, that most portfolio reviewers for art schools and jobs want to see drawings from observation, not imagination and will take them more seriously.

This always kinda bothered me because I guess I can understand the intent of that statement...but isn't drawing from the imagination more impressive? It's just that look at all the different kinds of art out there that clearly did not start with a primary sketch based on observation, and I imagine most game art came strictly from the imagination too.

Just wanted to see what others thought about this.

[ThreeOhFour]

I think the criticism I have heard the most when doing graphics for other people - no matter what the project - is "Aim for a more realistic style". I think the idea of game art coming strictly from the imagination that you mention is something that applies to only a certain range of games. Other game genres - such as simulators and the like - certainly try to follow real life very closely. I get bored playing Far Cry 2 and Crysis because the art direction is so boringly realistic

A lot of games opt for a more "gritty" feel and world, and in these scenarios the writer usually has written it with realism in mind. Particularly as games and films start to converge in places as mediums (take a look at Heavy Rain for example), people want their cast looking like a real cast. In saying that, there are plenty of films which are cinematic without needing a realistic style (Disney animations, for example).

At the end of the day, if you want to do graphics for other people rather than just yourself, particularly if you want to get paid to do it, I think it's important to have the ability to produce a reasonably diverse range of styles, both realistic and imaginative. I may dislike painting scenes with straight lines in them, but there are times when you simply have to put straight lines in because that's what the designer wants. There will be projects when you are able to run wild and really let loose with whatever style you wish to use (especially if you're working on your own stuff, where you make the rules), but at some point there will be people asking you to draw from life.

[Igor Hardy]

Depends on what you mean by "from imagination". As a kid I was convinced that artists don't use any references (observation, photos or other art) at all. They have all the necessary details in their heads and can use it freely to develop their own styles. I was crushed when I later found out that not only they use references all the time, but popular and acknowledged artists even hire "ghost artists" to work on the background stuff they are not good at themselves. As always it's all about cheating and pretending.

[Scavenger]

When you get paid as an artist (not a designer), employers want to see what you're technically capable of, not what your imagination is like. Observation is the key to imagination, after all. No use employing someone who can draw awesome scenes of kangaroos breakdancing on the moon... if that's all you can do.

They want a baseline, and you've got to express your baseline competence. Showing life drawing is part of that.

[FamousAdventurer77]

The last time I got paid for anything creative was well over 7 years ago, and fashion's a WAY different thing than visual art. Now I'm more familiar with the other side of things, telling an artist your vision...but of course their vision is always going to be different than yours...

But something else I remember from art school way back then was when we spent a class doing a "copy" of this painting and I remember thinking "Why the hell are we spending 3.5 hours trying to imitate someone else's work when we should be developing our own techniques? Or at least using that artist's techniques to do something else of our own?"

I can see where being better at drawing from observation is ideal for most jobs that demand realism in the final product, but I still thinking drawing from imagination's a more impressive feat.

[Anian]

I can see where being better at drawing from observation is ideal for most jobs that demand realism in the final product, but I still thinking drawing from imagination's a more impressive feat.

Depends, I think. Surely nobody but rare few in history have proven they can draw lifelike/real subjects without any refference. Even then, you not only use your basic techniques of drawing but a vast collection of refferences of things you remember seeing. This might sound egoistic, but I think it's quite the opposite - any famous painter or sculptor from ancient greece to renaissance and onwards, all have used reffernces and nobody disputes their talent and works.
There's like an insert from a tutorial by Adam Hughes HERE
but the quote I like is:

2. Gather reference! At this stage in my career, I love working from life as much as I can. I'm a big fan of classic American illustration, and if using reference was good enough for Norman Rockwell, J.C. Leyendecker, and Dean Cornwell, it's good enough for the likes of us.

While I've used Audrey Hepburn as inspiration for my Catwoman in the past, it's dangerous to rely only on the reference you can find in books or online. Your resources are limited. Find your own, if can. The lovely lady in this pic is the fabulous Ashley Taffar (you can see her on page 205 of my book COVER RUN). She shares a few facial features with my take on Catwoman, so I like to use her as a face model! While not matching the final drawing exactly, this angle was close enough! I eyeballed the mouth and eyes. If you're inclined to ask "How do you eyeball something, Adam?" the answer is "Learn how to draw!" Reference is an aid, not a substitute.

3. Some nice body reference will help as well. Seen here providing more than just nice body reference is the wonderful Riki LeCotey (she's so pretty, she's on page 204, twice!). I'm not running all the pics I took, because that's too much space-wasting here. Suffice to say, I never use ONE IMAGE as a source for reference. I use an arm here, a leg from another, a face from somewhere else. It's all about the final art! In this shot, I like the basic pose, but ended up using arms from a different shot.

Besides most jobs don't really want your imagination as much as they want you to realise their's. 

[Snarky]

I tend to think the process doesn't matter, only the product. Artists have always used models and references, and they've always used their imagination to alter reality and fill in what doesn't exist.

The classic book Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain argues that one of the biggest challenges of becoming a competent artist is to learn to see what things look like (the Scandinavian title translates as "Drawing is Seeing"); to strip away your preconceptions about shapes, lights and colors and just recognize the patterns they form on your retina, so that you realize that a "red" apple is not all one color, or that a hand in perspective can look completely different from the idea you have of wrist, palm, thumb and fingers, for example.

Drawing from life and from reference is, the book argues, crucial to develop this way of experiencing and understanding the world, and to practice the techniques for how to render it.

On the other hand, if the finished product follows references slavishly, that often doesn't look good, either, particularly people traced from stock poses. (You see a lot of this in comic book art, where artists such as Greg Land are notorious for tracing, to the detriment of their reputations.) If your source is well-known, and you don't transform it fundamentally, people are going to recognize it.

[FamousAdventurer77]

Indeed, we all need references (unless you're coming up with something that doesn't entirely exist! But I guess even then it's based on something you've seen.) I just didn't get why literally COPYING a painting was supposed to be an important lesson. Drawing from still life, then moving and changing life like people and scenery I can totally understand but the painting copy left a bad taste in my mouth for some reason.

As for the actual element of the work, I suppose it depends. Some things are better off realistic-looking while others are better off to let the imagination run wild. The latter's more applicable if you're lucky enough to be mostly working for yourself.

[Erenoth02]

Art can open new pathways into the mind, but it takes a great deal more patience than most are willing for, for me my oil painting class has opened up my mind to new thinking and especially helped me with my creative writing. Im not the best artist but for me it opened my eyes and I found it to be a very relaxing task.

[FamousAdventurer77]

I envy anyone who can paint. Maybe it was because I wasn't really taught how and totally didn't get it when I attempted it myself, but IMO it's a tough medium to work with that can get expensive.

But now that I really think about it, drawing from observation pretty much IS a more important skill, but it's okay to let your imagination run wild to fill in the blanks.

[Dave Gilbert]

In terms of doing art-for-hire, if you show you can draw something from observation, it shows you have the discipline to take direction.

Last year I was canvassing background artists for Blackwell Deception, which like all Blackwell games is very urban with lots of city buildings and such.  I was so impressed with one artist's portfolio that I hired him on the spot.  His portfolio was full of gorgeous, imaginative fantasy landscapes - forests, mountains, quaint little villages, and other environments that defied classification.  The guy had talent,  but the guy couldn't draw a building to save his life.  The results were a horrible mashup of google-image photos and Photoshop filters.  Suffice to say, the artist didn't last long. :-/

[FamousAdventurer77]

I think it also depends on what type of drawing one is best at? I definitely can't draw buildings to save my life without the help of a rectangle tool like in Paint and Photoshop, I'm best at drawing structures with rounder edges. Some folks also can't draw people, but can draw other life forms much better.

I think filtered photographs are fine for freeware games where you have a small/no development team (ditto right here! Though I'd rather attempt most of it myself then save filtering for areas and objects where I'd need it.) but commercial games where you're trying to stay consistent with a particular style...nope.