Friday, April 26, 2013

Mrs Green Logo

-By Serge Birault



Here's a logo I did last year for a website(I even don't know if the website is on line or not ...). So this picture no longer belongs to me.

As you can see, this picture is less precise than my usual work; Well, it was for a website (and small stickers), so I didn't have to work with a high level of details. Keep in mind your picture has to be good looking at the size it will be used.

As usual, I worked with PS.

Hope this painting is not too sexy for this blog (it seems some of our readers are easily offended by sexy pictures ...), but the clients asked me to do a sexy pin up. A red hair lady with glasses. She had to be .... voluptuous , you know what I mean ...


The concept. A very quick sketch, validated by the clients.


As usual, I started with the face. I use splatter brushes with low opacity then the airbrush, with low opacity, once again.



The hair was very simple and "cartoon".



All the denim part was not so easy to to. I started with a flat area of blue.

The denim texture was quite long to paint but challenging ...


Same technique for the watering can, I started with a flat area.

I changed the tones a little bit because the clients wanted a green background.


I did the font with Flash (saved the file in .ai then imported it in PS).


I added some details and it was done.

60 comments:

  1. Beautiful! thanks for sharing :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I like the sexy girls you paint. I think you're a legitimate heir to Vargas.

    I'll be in your workshop in Brazil! I hope you like my country! Thanks for tuts!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can't wait to come to Brazil too :)
      And thx for the Vargas legacy, it makes my day ;)

      Delete
  3. "Hope this painting is not too sexy for this blog (it seems some of our readers are easily offended by sexy pictures ..."

    It's a shame that so many guys on here are incapable of handling an honest critique...or maybe its women with opinions you have a problem with? It was so much more fun when this site was just a echo chamber for your boners wasn't it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Honest critique"? Do you mean the posts that declare "this is excellent technical work and depicts situations found within the context it shows, providing a lampoon of the behavior of the persons typically involved, but... but... boobs!!! I'm offended by it no matter how well done it is or clever, so never post anything like it again!" THOSE honest critiques?

      Simple solution if anyone finds the work offensive. And it isn't to tell artists that they cannot post what they create in their own space. Or to tell them they cannot rebut or ridicule closed-minded, easily-offended, trolling, hyper-sensitive Tartuffe's.

      Nice straw man combo though. Conflating the comment the artist made as an aside about would-be censors with either being incapable of accepting criticism or being a misogynist. And smearing all other posters or defenders to boot! Excellent trolling.

      Delete
    2. I admit at first I was a bit taken aback at the content of the image. I am definitely have a feminist bent and usually am repelled by anything that blatantly objectifies/exploits women for the sake of advertising or in the case of pin-up artists to "give boners." Had I come across the image on a website as a logo I would have been appalled. But I would have been irate at the owners of the site, not the artist who did the work. Serge was simply fulfilling his clients' wishes.

      The art work is well done and well executed and, even though her anatomy boggles the mind, it's a cartoon-ish character so we can let that slide. It works for the art order.

      Wendy, the person to get mad at is not the artist in this case, it is the client: a client who thought that the image would make a good logo for their site and so put a luscious babe on the front of their business with the obvious hope of simply getting more male traffic to their site, and as a result, exploiting women in the process.

      I always liked to say that Freelance artists are the whores of the creative world: at some point when you are not pulling in money, you have to take it where you can get it. I am not going to pass judgment on Serge because of his choice of client. Rather I am going to sit back and marvel at his skill, his technique and simply gloss over the boobs that are staring me in the face :P

      As a fellow woman, Wendy, I found your comment both vastly inappropriate and embarrassing on behalf of progressive women everywhere. It is comments like that which cause the professional art world to not take us seriously. If you disagree with what a client wants, don't take the gig. You can draw as many anatomically correct, appropriately clothed females you want.

      I myself will continue to marvel at Serge's skill so I can learn from it, regardless of subject matter.

      Delete
    3. Thomas, I'm not sure the remedy for an abrasive comment is to go more abrasive.

      I am interested in this part of your comment: "...and depicts situations found within the context it shows, providing a lampoon of the behavior of the persons typically involved..." I found your meaning a little unclear. Which situations and context? I have great respect for Serge's skills, but his oeuvre is mostly sexy women holding things.

      Delete
    4. Whatever, Wendy.

      I'm sorry that the entire world's tastes don't cater to your personal agendas: (http://pinterest.com/dilliedally/)

      Delete
    5. Well, I use to paint ... voluptuous women since 20 years now. I don't want and I don't think I have to argue why I paint pin ups.
      Usually, I don't show "too sexy" here, because this blog is more about painting techniques than pin up stuff. That's why I explained the clients asked me for this kind of proportions.

      That's all folks :)

      Delete
    6. Dan, again with your famous hatred of Waterhouse and vegetarian recipes.

      Delete
    7. I really feel like I'm missing something. This site hasn't given me a single boner.

      Delete
    8. Mr. Rex, Mr. Birault made this comment in his post "Hope this painting is not too sexy for this blog (it seems some of our readers are easily offended by sexy pictures ..." That hearkens back to the recent discussions in the http://muddycolors.blogspot.com/2013/03/comic-con-curves.html and http://muddycolors.blogspot.com/2013/03/objectify.html.

      "Comic Con Curves" was the more recent of the two and my comment references that discussion. The comment summarizes the bulk of the criticism of Mr. Hickinbottom's work, which was not over skill, quality, or compositional choices or techniques, but over some viewers' personal sensibilities. The most damning statement from that thread was in Mr. Wilson's second post, "It was my hope that the blog authors might see the comment and consider whether future images ought to be shared with the entirety of your audience and kept in a personal blog." I find that chilling.

      I have no problem with anyone disliking a piece based upon personal tastes. None. There is no issue with a constructive critique or discussion over technical or artistic handling of a piece. That's expected. Whether a piece elicits commentary and what kind is worthwhile.

      However, I take exception to anyone telling an artist what they can or cannot draw or share with their friends and colleagues because that critic personally is offended. Implying the artists and contributors to the site are perverts or misogynists, as Wendy did (specifically) and conflating trollish commentary with "honest criticism" is neither fair nor demonstrative of critical thinking skills.

      Abrasiveness returned for abrasiveness given is certainly not always the best recourse. But for a trollish disregard of courtesy and context, it's fair coin.

      Delete
    9. I'm sorry but anyone who is offended by this image WANTS to be offended. There's nothing sexual about it at all. The woman in the image is covered up. So she has big boobs. So what? Are you saying REAL women don't have big boobs? Should every big boobed woman get reduction operations so they don't accidentally turn some random person on? Get over yourself.

      Delete
    10. Actually, yes there IS something sexual about this. She isn't wearing anything under the overalls and she is thrusting her chest out. In addition, the smirk on her face can portray a rather sexual tone. This logo is obviously meant to be sexual.
      The whole purpose of it is to be sexual.


      Your gorgeous shading astounds as always, Serge! C:

      Delete
    11. Are you an artist, Balgus82? Because you're really perceptive, to be able to see past the sexual component the customer and talent say is there.

      Delete
  4. Serge, great work as always. I'll have to look around to see how you use a splatter brush to do a face, lol. As for the elephant in the room (or the comment board), I can only say it accomplishes nothing to shoot the messenger (or the illustrator) for the message. The craft and skill speak for itself, and your talent speaks volumes.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 'Less precise' ... wow, to me it has a super-finished and refined look, and totally love the volumes present in the hair. Stunning piece!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry to hijack Serge's post. I have enjoyed seeing his art process and tutorials.

    Let's be honest. When a discussion devolves into the "the subject matter in this artwork offends me," almost everyone rolls their eyes. It feels a bit irrelevant; like going to a Ferrari enthusiast blog and complaining about the lack of Harley Davidson posts.

    Everyone has different tastes. There are tons of art blogs online to look at with countless styles, subject matters and tutorials; something for everyone. No one is forcing anyone to look at any particular site or post Clockwork Orange style. (As far as I know...)

    Referencing some of the earlier discussions, if the subject matter on many SF/Fantasy covers and comics is not what you like, don't buy them.

    If you want book covers/comics to change the way they illustrate and market the subject matter, buy the ones you like and tell the publishers you like them.

    If they could get every book/comic/graphic novel to sell like 50 Shades of Grey or Harry Potter, they will put whatever you want on the cover.

    Marketing people are lemmings, not early adopters.

    A final thought: A lot of effort is put into these sorts of blog posts without compensation. It would be sad to see the artists involved abandon their efforts because dealing with them became too tedious and unrewarding.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hear hear, Christina! I have nothing but respect for any artist who manages to eek out a post about their work, to help illuminate other artists; it's easy to tear down someone, especially in a forum, and it is an incredibly brave thing to post something as personal as artwork (yes, including commissioned artwork) up for everyone to see and possibly take a shot at. Hats off to all the artists at Muddycolors.

      Delete
    2. "A final thought: A lot of effort is put into these sorts of blog posts without compensation. It would be sad to see the artists involved abandon their efforts because dealing with them became too tedious and unrewarding."

      Thanks, Christina.

      I don't think people realize how much work this blog is, especially when the contributors are already juggling busy freelance careers and families. We've come close to shutting the whole thing down more times than I can count, simply because the outspoken few ruin it for everyone else.

      Nothing is worse than spending hours on a post, only to have some idiot shit all over it. It grows tiresome.

      Whatever happened to 'If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all'?

      Delete
    3. "Whatever happened to 'If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all'?"
      Welcome to the internets! Be ready to face a mass of soft-skined debaters.

      Delete
    4. Thank you, Christina! Very well said :)

      Delete
    5. It would be fun if there were more actual trufax beefcake on the site too. Balance is such a beautiful thing, especially when Tom of Finland is involved.

      I'm sure no one would be disquieted by that.

      Delete
  7. I am now inspired to create artwork specifically intended to make sex-negative feminists like Wendy unhappy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's too bad. I think the world will be poorer for it.

      Delete
    2. Excellent, haven't even made anything yet and it's already working.

      Delete
    3. What's already working? I'm sorry, Cole, I didn't understand your response.

      On the off chance that you didn't understand mine, either, I was just saying that the instinct to run salt in someone's wounds never really makes the world a better place.

      Regarding your use of the term "sex-negative"--I don't think that phrase means what you think it means.

      Delete
    4. Sorry Adam, I genuinely believe that upsetting sex-negative feminists will make the world a better and much more entertaining place.
      I'm quite sure sex-negative means exactly what I think it means. Look up the differences between sex-negative and sex-positive feminism if you are not familiar with the terms.

      Delete
    5. You're right, actually–I was familiar with the general term "sex-negative," which doesn't really apply to your post, but I wasn't familiar with the specific term "sex-negative feminism." I've now looked it up, and understand your meaning, and can only recommend you note that most salient detail of sex-negative feminism is that most theorists don't seem to believe it actually exists.

      Anyway. I can't make you sympathize with my point of view that people who have been wounded or offended are best approached with kindness–even if you think they're lashing out at the wrong targets.

      Of course, the way you and others have been so quick to be brash and flip about all this suggests you do understand, and you're covering for a certain amount of embarrassment and discomfort. I don't know you, so I don't know. But I'm through with this thread either way.

      Delete
    6. 'So quick to be brash and flip out'?
      First of all, I came to this discussion pretty late. The only people being brash and flipping out are the offended parties, and you're the one that just ragequit the thread.
      What are you referring to when you say 'suggests you do understand'? I have no idea what you are referring to.

      Which theorists don't seem to believe sex-negative feminism actually exists? Can you name these most theorists? Your research abilities must be incredible to so quickly determine that most of the [feminist?] theorists on the planet reject such a specific proposition.
      Or did you mean theorists labelled as sex-negative feminists reject the label? That, I would have no trouble believing.
      I would have thought this very thread contained clear examples of sex-negative feminism, but if most theorists don't seem to believe it actually exists I must be mistaken.

      Being offended is just getting upset over not being able to control other people's thoughts or actions. I have no sympathy for such childishness. If someone is doing something that doesn't break any laws but upsets you, it's called 'sad day for you'.

      Delete
    7. Just clarify... You misquoted Adam.

      He did not say 'Flip Out'.
      He said 'Flip'... as in flippant.

      Totally different.

      (And herein lies part of the problem, we all read other people's words the way we want to read them, which is not always the way they were intended.)

      Delete
  8. If yopu read my comment I did not criticise the art what I criticised was Serge's snarky comment directed at those of us that have criticised artists choices to depict women in a sexist manner. Thank you all for perfectly illustrating my point. Serge wanted a fight when he typed his line "Hope this painting is not too sexy for this blog (it seems some of our readers are easily offended by sexy pictures ..." and I foolishly went for the bait but I stand by what I said. As for the art itself it is technically well done but the subject is over done and ulitmately boring.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. His comment wasn't snarky at all. It was sincere (and accurate). Mind you, English is not Serge's first language.

      Delete
    2. "I did not criticize the art..."

      Putting paid to your initial post citing "honest critique". The fact that you saw his comment as "wanted a fight" rather than a rebuttal of prior commenters' censorious posts with which you were already familiar illustrates _his_ point to dramatic effect. But that must be ultimately boring, over and done.

      (edited for formatting error which dropped a word)

      Delete
    3. For what it's worth, I found it snarky, too.

      I do give Serge some benefit of the doubt due to English being his second language. But claiming that his message was perfectly sincere and accurate AND may have been misconstrued because of language seems like a mixed message to me.

      Delete
    4. I don't know Mr. Birault, but if his command of English is like that of any of the Europeans with whom I work regularly, then regional idioms aside, I'd wager his facility meets or beats half the people on the morning commute in any major metropolitan English-speaking city.

      As far as snark goes, it was pretty gentle. On a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being Mr. Rogers and 10 Ambrose Bierce, I'd rate his "incendiary" comment at a 2. I suppose a reader's thin skin could add a point or two, a reader's willful disregard of context another point, and a personal grudge or pet agenda another couple points. So, a 7 to someone looking to find fault and be angry?

      Still not "wanted a fight" territory.

      Delete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Wow Dan it's pretty creepy that you went searching for my pinterest page and then posted it here. My tumbler is a lot more interesting so you might want to check that out instead because I rarely go on pineterest. I would provide a link but you seem to enjoy stalking people so I'll leave that to you, you weirdo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ad hominem. The traditional cry of the troll revealed in the light.

      Disabling your previously available profile after your hyperbolic and insulting posts have been rebutted is an interesting tack. Wiser to do so _before_ the posts. Then people can't click on that name link and learn anything about the person making salient or specious comments. That way, when you claim "stalking" it might make a little more sense. You know. More sense than declaring a site moderator a stalker for information you had already made accessible on the Internet.

      Keep expanding the definitions of words and they lack any meaning.

      Perhaps the hysterical accusation of "stalking" and slur of "weirdo" simply reveal 'you're covering for a certain amount of embarrassment and discomfort' and 'should be approached with kindness.' If so...

      (Imagine a heartwarming, conciliatory, and uplifting comment in this space, full of validation and wonder at the unique miracle of the reader's person but phrased so that no parsing by any person or group of any background or experience could take offense or misinterpret in any way)

      (((HUGS!!!))) Everyone has an off day once in a while!

      Delete
  11. Wow Wendy. You had the making of some valid arguments, albeit poorly outlined, a bit emotional and easily perceived as an attack, in the beginning but now you just look like a little teenage girl. I'm not sure how you can mistake research as creepy or name calling as helpful. Even if you feel that this is the correct forum to present your personal arguments disparaging those who work so hard to bring us an incredible resource is simply wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  12. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

    ReplyDelete
  13. This is for the Wendy-girls: Use the time you spend criticizing other people, and use it to learn, draw, paint...whatever you like. Or simply, get a life. Serge, great work and great tutorial, thanks for the time it took to prepare this tutorial.

    ReplyDelete
  14. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I don't understand!! why people judge?? Don't like? do not look, don't comment, go away... No one have the right to criticize others work just because they do not like it...

    I'm a woman and I do not feel a bit disrespect by any type of work, Serge or other artist!
    You know why?? I do not feel weak with this type of work where women have big boobs, big ass and they are beautiful.


    And by the way, Serge work is amazing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    and I'm glad he spent so much time and effort to write this article and work his magic.

    ReplyDelete
  16. is it just me or everybody is to damn sensitive these days ...

    hey wendy it would be great if you could sue an artist for emotionally scaring your inner soul and stomping onto your personal beliefs, by just looking at their work, ha?

    but until they pass out a bull**** bill like that, which i'm sure they will in the near future, why don't keep your preaching for someone who actually cares about it? (NOBODY)

    Serge beautiful work man, and very educational at the same time, can't w8 for the next one :)
    and please remember to ... MAKE THEM BIGGER, MAKE THEM GIGANTIC, MAKE THEM CRUSH A CITY, MAKE THEM SO BIG THEY HAVE TO CALL OUT GODZILLA TO SAVE THEIR PUNY LIVES!

    keep it up,
    Vanja

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "MAKE THEM BIGGER, MAKE THEM GIGANTIC, MAKE THEM CRUSH A CITY, MAKE THEM SO BIG THEY HAVE TO CALL OUT GODZILLA TO SAVE THEIR PUNY LIVES!"

      This cracked me up. XD
      Thanks for making me smile. C:

      Delete
  17. >see the post
    "oh hey, nice drawing! and the plains on face is awesomely done too!
    Hmmmmm, i should try that one , it would help on my process"
    >see comment section
    "am i still on the same post???????"

    ReplyDelete
  18. There is no requirement that any viewer like a particular work. This site features lots of subjects to suit a variety of tastes and styles. Wendy is as free to dislike a work and say so (and why) as anyone else is to laud it and heap the artist with accolades. It is neither "wrong" nor "right" if a given work appeals to any individual or is distasteful to them. It is "wrong" to tell the artists what they can and cannot post or malign them (and the readers) because a given work is not to an individual's liking.

    This site is an Art buffet. Many things that will please most people, but not everything will please everyone. Yes, I'll enjoy the (fresh) salmon and the roast and broccoli and grilled tomatoes, but I will have nothing to do with those Brussels sprouts you love. (Gag! Yuck! Nasty things)!

    However, just because you made a plate of those putrid sprouts along with stewed beets, boiled turnips, and some god-awful liver doesn't mean you're stupid, ignorant, smelly, bigoted or evil. It doesn't mean you aren't entitled to enjoy them. It just means you're tastes are very different from mine. Eat and be happy. Tell me "yum! THIS is great stuff!" We have no problem, unless...

    Unless, when you look at my or my neighbor's plate you say "You shouldn't be allowed to eat THAT! You're a horrible oppressor-ist for liking that stuff! Anyone else who eats that is a Bad Person too! Disputing my specious arguments is assault! I really hope they hear me yelling in the back so the cooks who prepared it stop setting it out at this buffet. Your food offends me and other Very Righteous People!"

    That IS wrong.

    Ultimately, we're guests at this buffet. Some days the chef's special will be appealing, others it will be a pass. But just because it's not to our _tastes_ doesn't mean it's unworthy of being offered.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Feminism and the portrayal of women in media are extremely important issues. If people can not be respectful toward each other about these topics, then I don't think we should be having a discussion about them.

    Please do everyone a favor and lock the comments section here.

    With obvious interest from the community about the topic of feminism in commercial art. I would love to see a post made specifically about it in the future. That way, if people are going to be vitriolic, they won't have to hijack poor Serge's thread to do it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Been there, done that.

      Delete
    2. Was there some blow back from locking the last slap-fight?

      Delete
    3. Last time, people were being truly disrespectful and making unsubstantiated assumptions about the artist's intent. They were also doing so under anonymous profiles, As a result, we don't allow anonymous posts any more.

      I don't think it's fair to lock a thread just because I don't like the opinions that are being expressed. There are more good points being made than there are insults being made. I'm not going to lock a potentially insightful conversation just because a few idiots want to ruin it for everyone else. If I started doing that, this entire blog would cease to exist.

      The same thing goes for deleting posts.
      Censorship is a very tricky thing, and it's something I avoid at all costs.
      I could have just as easily deleted Wendy's first post, and completely avoided all of this. But I didn't, because although I don't agree with her, I still respect our reader's opinions enough to let them speak their minds.

      That's not going to change.

      Delete
    4. Well said. Thanks Dan. We all want Muddy to stay around for a long time and get a little antsy when people start attacking you all. I love a good hard discussion but there are limits.

      Delete
  20. This picture isn't sexist. If it was I would have had her cooking my dinner and cleaning at the same time. You ARE aware that across the land there are women voluntarily taking off their clothes for money right? If your sensitivities are affected, jump off. Go look at a blog with kittens and amish women with buttons so tight they're going blue in the face, leave the real art to the people who want to learn and enjoy it for what it is.

    ReplyDelete