>>3428709>The amount of people that fell for this is fantastic. Are you implying I was just trolling? I was (and still am) dead serious. The whole tryhard digital emulation of traditional painting is stupid.
Jablonski is a talented guy, but
>>3421453 - as an individual piece - is just straight boring. It seems the only allure to it is that it has a traditional, oil painted look to it. It's just a gimmick to cover up the fact that it's a boring, static, lifeless composition.
I don't think people realized that the image I posted
>>3421501 is also Jablonski, the same guy as the OP. He has a bunch of other stuff like this that isn't trying to capture some boring, classical oil painted vibe. His stylized work is so much better than his 'digital painting' stuff. Sometimes he makes more digital painterly stuff that incorporates elements from his stylized work and it really makes it so much better. However, he tends to just focus on work like in the OP
>>3421453 and other generic bullshit, which is a real shame.
