Absolutely. I can listen to Jeff Watts for hours on end. It's an education in itself.

The beauty is that it is FREE and you can pause and replay and you have the best view in the world-it is priceless! I think that information like this and tutorials and demos are so often taken for granted. Just like not paying artists for their music...

Pro tip: watch series on Flixzone. Been using them for watching all kinds of movies during the lockdown.

@Hector Otis Yup, been watching on flixzone} for months myself :)

@Hector Otis Definitely, have been watching on Flixzone} for since december myself :D

Colton Gunning Thanks! I've been eating up these tutorials as I paint.

Colton Gunning I use mostly Holbein, but I'm trying out M. Graham since Watts recommended it.

That's Frank Frazetta not ERB.

Did you honestly think I thought ERB painted those covers???... Yeesh again...

John F Willis Yeah because you said so, Re-read what YOU wrote. Yeesh.

***** If I had said "...those Conan book covers." ,would you also assume that I believed that a fictional barbarian had painted the cover art? As per your recommendation, I have re-read my statement. I can see how that line would confuse a non-English major. (Mind you that's that think you are a confused, non-English speaking, military's Major) The statement was not directed at YOU, but at the author of the video, who mentioned himself ripping the covers off of ERB books. (Which I, likewise did) The cover art for one of the books by Cutter's Guild Games, could be referred to as, "one of those Mike Whitehead book covers" (Remember your English classes here; We're talking about the cover art on the book covers, not the book or the Artist who did the cover art.) So, when we talk about one of Mike Whitehead's book covers, we are referring to the cover art painted by John F Willis. Thusly, it is correctly assumed that when someone mentions "Edgar Rice Burroughs book covers" they are indeed referring to the cover art painted by Frank Frazetta. Of course, there is the rest of the statement which speaks to the fact that I am indeed, talking about Frank Frazetta's art. Further, I've known Frazetta's work since the mid seventies and am very aware of the extent of his prolific, commercial work. He was a tremendous influence on, and remains an inspiration to, me as he was one of this country's finest artists. I am in fact, a published Artist/Illustrator and I grew up with ERB's book covers secretly hidden in my sock drawer so my teachers would think I was the obedient boy they thought I should be. (which is not a bad thing) I've also grown up with many classical painters as well. All that being said, it is honorable that you would feel the need to "Voice-up" and give credit to the "Great Frazetta" who painted the Edgar Rice Burroughs Book covers when you believed it was being attributed to someone else. Hat's off to you.

John F Willis Geeez that was one long post. We both love Frazetta and that is all that really matters.

+allluckyseven Man the life of an artist is truly inspiring .To get paid doing what you love is the goal in life man .

That IS Conan

He said he uses the Winsor & Newton brand as his father did it and recently changed to Graham because Graham's binder is honey and not gum arabic and he also said that Holbein is good too.

Not can you duplicate it.. could you have done it in your kitchen on plywood

acrylic gouache i think dries glossy. It is also waterproof when it dries and you can you acrylic goauche on anything not just canvas or watercolor paper. It is also not reusable or rewettable so if you are a beginner or are on a tight budget acylic gouache isnt best because you cant reuse it once it dries on the palette or anywhere else and is harder to blend.

acrylic gouache i think dries glossy. It is also waterproof when it dries and you can you acrylic goauche on anything not just canvas or watercolor paper. It is also not reusable or rewettable so if you are a beginner or are on a tight budget acylic gouache isnt best because you cant reuse it once it dries on the palette or anywhere else and is harder to blend.

gouache is definitely much better than acrylic gouache. I use it alot myself and have done many commisions. I think ive done about 10 commissions and multiple personal pieces of varying sizes and i still use my 6 color gouache set for all of them. gouache is very versatile and you can definitely get your moneys worth out of using them if your doing commisions. It's also very cheap to get. I recommend it to every artist to give it a try!

jose luis rodriguez. At 1:30:42 he mentions Nicolai Fechin "was a Russian-American painter known for his portraits".

Thanks!

It's gouache, which is opaque watercolor (not the more widespread transparent watercolor).

thanks 'cause i am using watercolour to paint portrait

Kenji Wong No problem. Mainstream watercolor can also be used for realistic portraits, especially if you use many transparent glazes. See an example here: hajrameeks.com/gallery/elijah.html

I believe he said he was using hot press paper in at least 140 lb, and he was mixing gouache into the airbrush cup and spraying that over the gouache painting on the paper.

Hajra Meeks Thanks

Hajra Meeks Because gouache is similar to watercolour, does it have to go through all the issues that watercolour has where watercolour paper has to be wet and stretched? Can gouache be painted straight onto canvas as in acrylics and oils so as to avoid the stretching of paper, if that is the case? Thanks.

wolf727 In my experience, gouache does not require stretching of paper as it is typically used drier than watercolor. (even with watercolor, paper doesn't have to be stretched if you use paper glued to a block or thick illustration board, or if you flatten your painting afterward via dry press.) You can use gouache straight onto a gessoed canvas or plain paper or illustration board. However, keep in mind that the 'binder' in gouache is gum arabic (like in watercolor), and this is weaker than the binders in oil (linseed oil) or acrylic (plastic polymer). Therefore, you can't really paint too large or impasto (thickly) with gouache, it will crack off the page. But you can still do decent sized paintings with it used thin to medium thickness and it does not require paper to be stretched. Hope that helps.

Hajra Meeks Thank you kindly for responding and replying in detail. You wrote that with gouache, "you can't really paint too large..." What did you mean by that? Did you meant that literally one cannot paint gouache for large paintings of sizes around 40" or beyond? I started off in acrylics but I wanted to go into oils. However, sadly, I decided not to go into oils due to the fact I discovered that linseed oil and walnut oil are highly flammable and combustible - not needing a flame to set it off. I did not like acrylics due to the fast drying speed and the difficulty in "blending". Hence, I was looking at watercolours and then gouache - gouache being slightly closer to acrylics and oils. Here is a link to my first "completed" painting and you can perhaps see the style I was doing at the time and why I wanted to go into oils but sadly cannot: denniswrowntree.deviantart.com/art/Coffe-Pot-and-Cup-542217971 I have just purchased two cheap watercolour and gouache sets so that I can try the two different styles before I make some major purchases for best quality paints. I looked at some of your work and I was quite impressed with your style - beautiful art. Once again "Hajara Meeka", thank you for you detailed reply and in taking time to share your experience with others. Peace to you.

***** girls? gil elvgren

Who s the Gibson guy?

***** I believe it's Charles Dana Gibson and he created the colors on his own

Hadoken The same wet technique as Bob Ross.

Robert Shyan-Norwalt I doubt it, Bob Ross usually painted thick, no underpainting there. Frazetta almost always has an underpainting which is either in the browns or immediately in the hue he needs. The weird thing is that he seems to be covering this with more washes and builds up much like Jeff is in this gouache video or like a watercolor piece, but used oils instead. That's not possible without letting the layer underneath dry, at least to my knowledge, but in many cases Frank didn't, he'd paint washes over wet paint, at least that's the legend.

although not dry, during the drying process oils tend to go tacky, its the timing of the next layer that allowed him to work fast, and the medium he used to thin his paints. These kind of techniques were well renowned in classical art textbooks, but obtaining them are a pain. The point of tackiness allows the under painting to retain its form while creating the milky gradation that newer mediums make easy. At-least this is my understanding of the medium. He was a artistic genius so maybe there are many possibilities I have missed

+daniel boyle I wouldn't have a problem if it was easy getting the paint tacky at any time. Then again if this is a matter of medium plus a strategic planning of pigment, thus taking advantage of more faster drying pigments going first, I'd understand. If you could direct me to any info you have I'd be grateful. However there's quite a few things in the Frazetta story that are weird, one of them being that by looking at his art you can see many paintings started with pigments that just generally don't dry fast, yet he's gone in with the same method as with others that do. And the mystery here is that he's not painting ultra thinned out washes all the time, he's got thin passes that have plenty of paint, that won't get tacky in say 30 minutes and this goes in succession of layers. Of course there is no doubt that much was done in many sessions but there are many pieces, some of the famous ones too, which were done over "a cup of coffee" in the presence of close friends of his like Roy Krenkel or David Winiewicz, people who swore that this guy just took a panel and went at it and by the end of 8 hours BOOM, Conan. That's why I'm looking for the paint laying method, it's good to keep it interesting on one hand and also it's good business on the other. Taking a week to produce a fantasy illo that'll pays $100 isn't good business. I don't purpose to know what the surface of these paintings looks like nor that there's not plenty of B.S. in some of Frank's myth (like the I don't use reference thing) but on the other hand you can just tell that lot of this is done in one or two settings just by the fervor of the painting. His genius I'll attribute to his design, aesthetic choices and the visceral level which they hit you, but not the fact that this guy could supposedly control a razor sharp line of paint, thrown over a wet layer of paint that's like greased olive oil and control for edges on the top layer without affecting the still sleazy wet lower one, that's defying physics.

Believe I read somewhere he used to scuff heavily with other brown hues to speed drying time, the slower drying hues is an interesting one, ill go digging through my books to see if i can pull anything of relevance out for you. as far as mediums, im not sure what he used, unrefined turp is pretty traditional for classic oils but again ill take a gander for you, always happy to help a fellow artist. EDIT: I know for a fact he got through a lot of liquin from documentaries. In my technical books it describes the use of drying salts for speeding up drying. In modern day this would be a cobalt drier, which rapidly decreases drying times. This kind of additive would line up with the time at which he was learning art. He would also work on un-primed poster board due to his time in comic books, this kind of medium is extremely porous The best thing i can recommend is to explore these yourself, you may find the answer you are looking for.

+Brian Kilpatrick i think it was originally a live stream

+UnicornsPoop Rainbows Then you really, really missed out. If you have any real interest in learning as an artist then you need to watch this...