>>5741730Of course something doesn't just become better by itself just because you drew it without reference, it depends on skill level.
My main issue is with stiff, somewhat uncanny feeling art like by Suzanne Helmigh. She can paint excellently and realistically, but she heavily relies on photo references, and it shows with stiff poses, weird expressions and so on. Having internalized these things or at least having enough knowledge about them to change a reference that it actually looks natural is clearly superior. I should've said "only being able to copy from reference is bad".
I also don't believe in supreme talent like KJG is supposed to have. Is it really a coincidence that the guy that has the greatest capability is also the guy that grinded it to insanity, not even bothering with texturing or coloring in 99% of what he does, just grinding the same. one. thing. over and over? Or that someone like Peter Han is almost on his level, actually almost indistinguishable, except with fewer large scale arrangements, or that Riccardo exceeds KJG's anatomical knowledge, coupled with painting from imagination?
That said, I still think it's lame using references. It's not fun at all, it feels restrictive. The only way I could see myself using references is by looking at a small detail, and transporting that into completely new context and perspective
