The Edited Watercolour Technique Thread...

Originally Posted by after Daniel To adopted this method [Kaburaya’s tutorial] for architectural renderings: - Two layers with linework+shadows are required, toning one bluish and the other purplish in Photoshop. A third one with jiggled lines and no shadows can also be added.

- All these linework layers are on top of the duplicate of the coloured layer w/shadows, and they are going to be in "multiply" mode. This duplicate of the coloured layer w/shadows is where all the filters are going to be applied.

- First Kaburaya applies ‘Simplifier’ plug-in filter free from AmphiSoft] (other authors recommend "Pyramid Paint” plug-in filter by Corel/KPT for the same purposes or even Photoshop’s native Watercolor filter).

- Second Kaburaya applies the ‘Paint Engine’ plug-in filter free from FantasticMachines, is applied with ‘Mountain Poster’ preset.

- Third Kaburaya applies either ‘Outliner’ or ‘BeyondEdger4’ plug-in filters available free from DCspecial.

- Create a new layer in overlay mode and & fill it with 50% gray, then apply texture filter/sandstone preset.

- Do a new layer with a sky gradient in the bottom of the stack "a la Ernest Burden III" to give everything a warmth touch and you are done!

In the Gallery Forum is a very long thread about digital watercolours. Early on it featured a tutorial that was subsequently withdrawn. That left a bit of a void for discussing the techniques hence this thread was born. Actually another thread was born but it quickly degraded into a heap of ugly-ugly bickering as digital watercolour artists and wanna-bees are a belligerent, emotional, bunch of kids. This new thread begins as an editorialized version featuring the “best of” that train wreck. It had lots of useful info & examples that deserved a dandy thread of their own. You are welcome to continue it with further discussion but in the spirit of its editorialized start, know that off-topic posts will be removed.

[Because I did the editorial stuff I used my editorial licence to spell ‘colour’with a “u” as to do otherwise might get me detention by my Canadian teacher. Sorry if seeing those u’s bugs you!] ~;-)

Regards, Ross -- Editor

Omoxx got the other thread started with this tutorial he found for digital watercolours:

http://kaburaya.pobox.ne.jp/eng/photo_watercolor_e2.htm

He followed up with this step-by-step guide that can be attributed to Daniel Kreimer over at the forums at cgarchitect.com. Daniel in his posting noted he based the steps on old posts he read here at the SketchUp Forums [heavily edited by me (Ross) for clarity and to provide links]:

Quote:

Originally Posted by after Daniel

To adequate this method [Kaburaya’s tutorial] for architectural renderings:

- Two layers with linework+shadows are required, toning one bluish and the other purplish in Photoshop. A third one with jiggled lines and no shadows can also be

added.

- All these linework layers are on top of the duplicate of the coloured layer w/shadows, and they are going to be in "multiply" mode. This duplicate of the coloured layer w/shadows is where all the filters are going to be applied.

- First Kaburaya applies ‘Simplifier’ plug-in filter free from AmphiSoft] (other

authors recommend "Pyramid Paint” plug-in filter by Corel/KPT for the same purposes or even Photoshop’s native Watercolor filter).

- Second Kaburaya applies the ‘Paint Engine’ plug-in filter free from FantasticMachines, is applied with ‘Mountain Poster’ preset.

- Third Kaburaya applies either ‘Outliner’ or ‘BeyondEdger4’ plug-in filters available free from DCspecial.

- Create a new layer in overlay mode and & fill it with 50% gray, then apply texture filter/sandstone preset.

- Do a new layer with a sky gradient in the bottom of the stack "a la Ernest Burden III" to give everything a warmth touch and you are done!

Here’s a link to a thread about my approach to digital watercolours– it includes a tutorial with graphics: Find it here at TalkGraphics.com. The tutorial is architecturally oriented but to show it can be used with almost any image - even photographic – I attach a self-portrait of yours truly. Although it has been suggested that doing a digital watercolours can take as long as a real painted one, I think if you aren't driven by perfection you'll find reasonably good quality results can be achieved quickly. I, a-big-ego-guy, think my portrait was reasonable quality -- if I recall correctly it probably took no more than 20 minutes. One night in two hours I did seven or eight ones (architectural) including all the exported views of my model. As my own standards have increased I am taking longer with them now.

Although I use Xara Xtreme, vector illustration software, the techniques I use likely could be adapted to other image editing programs that support ps-compatible plug-ins.

Regards, Ross

Susan posted this link to an inspiring, high-quality, digital watercolour by Robin Lockhart produced using Piranesi and Susan’s own watercolour style-compatible entourage.

Omoxx posted a link to another very inspiring watercolour artist’s work. The example by Frank M. Constatino is a real watercolour. Omoxx noted it has the qualities/style he would like to achieve with a digital approach. Omoxx provided another link to examples of the kind of watercolour style he personally doesn’t appreciate.

Last edited by Alan Fraser

Regarding the mention of purple & bluish shadow layers above in outlined steps,

Susan notes the technique relates to something she’s written about:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Susan

To be specific, I had said that I use a layer where the shadows on the sunward side are isolated and made purplish, or warm and the shadow layer for the sides facing away from the sun are made bluish. Then I used the smudge tool to soften shadow edges and I also erased away softly within the shadow to make it less "graphic"

Regarding the real watercolour example Omoxx highlighted, the one by Frank Constatino, Grant Marshall noted that he took a look at that example and suggested if Omoxx [or anyone] started with a very quick GI render they could get very close to that look with the filters listed at the beginning of this thread. Grant noted he started modelling Mr.Constanio’s scene for the heck of it, but I ran out of time.

Grant also suggested to achieve some of the qualities of Mr. Constatino’s painting it might be necessary to introduce additional colour variations since the filters won't do that for you although noting that the bounced light in a GI render will already help a lot with that.

In response, Omoxx asked how Grant would introduce those colour variations. Omoxx wondered if they could be manually painted in Photoshop with a brush or airbrush on a new layer to get the colour variation or maybe applying multiple gradients? Here’s Grants reply:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grant

Yes, soft brush or airbrush, multiply or overlay/soft light mode. If it's on a layer you should merge/flatten before you run the simplify filter, then your new colours seem to fit in better. If you can change the shadow colour in your renderer to give you slightly blue or purply shadows that helps too, but you can do that in photoshop.

Last edited by Alan Fraser

I then added my mini-tutorial, again with reference to the Frank Constatino image linked as a goal by Omoxx:

Quote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ross

Omoxx -- that example of a 'real' watercolour by Mr. Constantino is the kind I like too. You know how we keep mentioning two or more exports from SketchUp? -- Well, are you able to do something similar in 3dStudioMax? Ideally you'd export a colour only image without lines and one that is just hidden line so it's just white with lines. If max can do that then you shouldn't need any other max plugins (cartoon style etc.). Before you get to photoshop - while still in max - it is relevant to give some consideration to your textures. An approach to glass is to use a graduated dark-to-light colour so your final glass will have some reflective look. You may have to play with things like brick textures -- in close-up views a realistic brick texture could work well but not so well in further away views. The reason is the scale of the texture. In your watercolour it will look unrealistic if things like brick have too much detail. Note in Mr. Constantino's painting every brick can not be seen -- that's good. If you show every last brick it will look fake because nobody could paint that detailed. So in other words, play with your textures in Max or alternatively manipulate your colour image in photoshop etc. before you do any of the watercolour stuff. It, for instance, is generally easy to add things like a graduated or mottled sky in your editor. As a later experiment you might even try using erasure brushes to lightly rough up your image before further processing. Another possibility is a lightly mottled overlay image used to bleach out or add varying amounts of saturation to your image.

When it comes to plugins you could try something like Xpose from LittleInkPot to adjust the levels in your image. Alternatively you could do this right in Photoshop if you know how. The goal is to adjust the levels for enhanced highlights and darker shadows. After that 'Simplifier' by AmphiSoft or 'Pyramid Paint' from KPT (Corel) can be used for a posterizing effect. The goal there is to simplify the tonal variations in the image as real painters do not use thousands of colours.

Follow that with something like 'BeyondEdger4' from DCspecial that will give more saturation to the edges between colours. At this point you might find it appropriate to jiggle distort your image a bit. It really depends on the image. Note in Mr. Constantino's painting the edges between colours are wavy. The jiggle will add that effect. There are many plugins that can do that. If you have access to 'Jiggle' from EyeCandy3.1 it is very good. Really all that's needed is a distorting plugin that adds waviness. Even a swirl plugin will work. Use these at very-very low settings - too much and the effect ruins it.

At this point you can overlay your linework image. For a look like Mr. Constantino's painting the linework should be very fine. This may mean exporting it at very high resolution from Max (or SketchUp for our SU friends) and then resizing it down so the lines get proportionally finer. As you probably know most traditional architecture watercolours are painted over carefully drawn pencil or ink drawings. The linework image you'll use can be filtered to look more like pencil linework if you want. I use 'Jiggle' but again any similar distorting filter at low settings can be used. I'll often process three different versions with slight variations in the settings, overlaying them one-above-the-other for a built up effect. (If you've seen some of my vespa renderings in the Gallery you'll see that lines can be effectively built-up).

To finish off the image you may want to overlay a paper textures. In the portrait I posted in this thread I overlaid a classic paper image with horizontal patterning that I had processed with 'Xposed' by littleInkPot --- I significantly increased its contrast so the background was white before overlaying it with transparency. I generally export the composite and then process it with a sandstone texture to enhance the watercolour paper look.

While I personally do all my work in Xara Xtreme -vector illustration software- all of these steps can be done in photoshop and likely other graphics editors.

Last edited by Alan Fraser

Omoxx added the following:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omoxx

What I notice in many architectural watercolours I like the most is that they don't have any vignette, giving them a more finished product feeling.

I responded by agreeing that adding vignette effects dramatically alters a watercolour. Rectangular ones like Mr. Constantino's painting really do have the sense that it is a careful study. Vignetted ones can give a much looser impression. The funny thing with digital watercolours is they both take just as long to do. The choices all come down to what you want to communicate. And there is room in the techniques for lots of personal expression and a personal style.

When Susan inquired what we meant by ”vignette” I responded with the attachment below. It is one of my quick (sloppy) digital watercolours done with what I’d consider a vignette-like approach. Although not a classic vignette in the photography sense, it's one that uses the white space for a loose un-bounded style. It is quite different in effect to the formal watercolour study by Mr. Constantino. In response, Susan posted:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Susan

Thanks Ross, but I guess I don't really see why it is so different for applying the techniques as mentioned.

You just need to do some erasing, or cutting out the background entirely and using a brush to do something with the background. With a true vignette, you would just cut out the background entirely, export from your modelling software with a very bright solid colour for the background and use it on a separate layer as a mask to create a selection and cut a clean line around your silhouette. If a softer vignette is wanted then soft erasing is required.

I replied with this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ross

Susan -- you are correct about technique not being very different for that 'vignette' effect. I think Omoxx's bringing up vignettes had more to do with the artistic expression rather than technique. I agree with him that something like Mr. Constantino's painting has a totally different feel than one that uses a vignette-like boundry of whitespace. While the digital techniques can be very similar, the mood or character of the resulting image can be dramatically different. To me, at least, the vignette ones do seem less formal.

DaveM added the following to the discussion:

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveM

My biggest challenge with presenting in a watercolour style is that I'm unable to show enough detail- i.e., my porches or trellises lose all the relief on the mouldings, my masonry looks muddy... can one of you guys show an example where you got the "looseness" of the watercolour look while still making it easy to understand what's going on?

Susan responded to Dave with this advice:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Susan

Dave, the way to handle areas of detail would be to select them out in Photoshop ( a little time consuming) and apply a different degree of filter on them.) I find that architecture in general requires different degrees of filtration than vegetation and both require a different degree than people. You could put things on different layers in SketchUp, turn the non required layers off in a single view. Export each layer separately. Assemble the layers in Photoshop one atop the other, then use your filters to different degrees as required on each of the layers before merging them and continuing with other effects.

Grant Marshall contributed these comments:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grant

I find that detail thing to be a constant problem and I haven't found a solution that works in every situation. You could try establishing specific focal points in the image and bringing up the detail there (to show what's going on) and letting it fuzz elsewhere. The eye is really good at filling in the gaps once you give it a few clues to get started.

Shaun Tennant added this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun Tennant

I would also mention that with some of the detail stuff, you want to ensure that you export as huge as you can, erase lines the lines you can afford and then blur them after - otherwise you will end up with clumps of lines upon lines and it can look really messy. Also play with the level of opacity on the linework layers. I have taken to making a few different layers, making them distorted in one way or another, and changing the settings for each, so they are all slightly different. Some get the gaussian treatment, and get to be very light (10 %ish) and then some get transmutated to slightly different colours (charcoal or grey) and then again, light etc.... Again, you could always do all the linework by hand on a separate layer, using the pencil tool - and doing it as you feel is proper... this is a long process though - and hopefully you have a tablet!

Shaun Tennant noted the following additional advice for Omoxx:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun

You could toy with the free plug-ins for Photoshop by Xero here: http://www.xero-graphics.co.uk/index.htm You may find that "illustrator", "simplicity" or possibly "lithographer" might help you out. Another option would be to utilise the program ‘Deep Paint’ to get another layer for your images. In the clone function there is a linework clone that seems to do a pretty good job, and you control what ends up on your page for linework... so that may help. It is available at download.com

Omoxx thanked Shaun and noted that the Xero plug-ins seemed similar to native Photoshop’s ‘Photocopy’. Ommox did give Deep Paint a try. His first efforts are attached. Regarding the first one he commented that he finds the linework done in Deep Paint too sloppy – too grainy.

this is my first attempt at grant marshalls water colour technique, once i've got it down i'll modify it to give it my own style, i created this image only from reading posts in the forum, i have not had acess to his tutorial.

If you are still around Omoxx - send me a jpeg of your image so I can make you a line layer for photoshop - I have never seen the grain in deep paint and am unsure how you got that... I will attach one that I did in about 10 min - so it's not good - but it illustrates what I was trying to communicate, I don't think that it ended up very grainy.. not good, but not grainy..!

__________________

Shaun

I don't think I'm alone when I say I'd like to see more and more planets fall under the ruthless domination of our solar system. -Jack Handey

How do you get that linework (so clean) in Deep Paint, please?

Thanks

Omoxx,

Here is the settings that I used roughly. I don't think it matters tonnes if you go with an abstract color or original image color... then you can either paint only where you want the lines to show up and save 'er - throw in photoshop - or do a bucket paint (the whole thing) and put er in PS and erase the lines you don't want.

__________________

Shaun

I don't think I'm alone when I say I'd like to see more and more planets fall under the ruthless domination of our solar system. -Jack Handey

Thanxx a lot Shaun!

I am gonna give it a try and experiment to get thinner lines there.

Grant,

Thank you for once again breathing life into this subject, and also for all of your efforts in compiling all of the salient information.

Highest regards,

Bill

BillyGrey, I had nothing to do with the recompiling, the hard work was all done by Ross. Great job on cleaning up the thread Ross, thank you.

To help this discussion I've put the current version of my tut on my website here:

http://www.marshallarts.co.za/tutorials/su2wctut.htm

Note that the link is now all lowercase (I wasn't aware previously that linux servers are case sensitive and I had a confusing mix before).

The tut is in a very rough state at present with no pictures yet. If parts of it don't make sense don't worry, it'll get better as I work on it. I feel this version is better than the previous one which emphasised some aspects which I now no longer feel are so important.

Here's an example of what I'm currently doing with this technique:

Linework: Sketchup 2D DWG to Squiggle, brought in as Tiff layer

Building: SketchUp model to Kerkythea, quick GI render using mostly defaults

Background and foreground: Collage of several photos and quite a bit of stylus painting

My God Grant I don't know if I should drop on my knees and thank you or curse you for selling out the traditional watecolourist. You are going to ruin them/us.

In other words, this is remarkable. I'm speechless. It is just so utterly convincing. Now how long did it take? Do you think you really did save some time?

__________________

Susan Sorger

http://www.entouragearts.com

Thank you , Grant

Thank you , Ross

Grant, the context on your watercolor is amazing!

Grant,

Beautiful Image!...just HAD to capitalize.

Best and thank you, Tom.

(You have absolutely nothing to worry about concerning quickydicky wannabes.)

Inspiring, as usual -- many thanks for your work and sharing. SU community owes you a lot (as usual).

__________________

Paul Miller

Grant:

Took off for lunch but had to come back to add what I meant by my parenthetical...only someone who could do this image in the natural medium could do this image digitally. Not only the "look" is there, but the "eye" there is what overwhelms. I wonder too how long it took you to produce this painting, but I would of course then add all the years you spent getting to your start point.

Best again, Tom.

Thanks folks :o)

Susan and Tom,

I don't really know whether this is faster in sort of 'straight-line speed' than a trad watercolour, the only way to know would be to do the identical image both ways. With these there's very often a bit of non-billable experimenting which doesn't show up in the final result, but it makes the result better than it might have been, and the next one easier.

This method has huge advantages though. On this job I sent an earlier version of this pic to the client and first she wanted more bush closer to the deck and larger dormers, and then she needed a second view from more front-on. If this was a real WC that would have been a disaster. I might have managed the bush, but the ink lines on the dormers would have been a problem. Doing a second view, starting from white paper so it ends up 'matching' a finished one also isn't fun (much easier to work them both up together). But doing it this way the changes were no problem and the second view was pretty much already done.

As an aside, I don't know how one would pull off a job like this using photoreal renders. The vegetation would be a nightmare, whether it was modelled or photographed. This method allows plenty of 'artistic licence' to get the point across without wasting days on detail which isn't essential to the scene but will ruin the image if it isn't perfect.

Wow! amazing Grant!

What do you mean : "Backgrounds, foregrounds - adding, processing

*More to come here*>>>

importing scanned strokes"?

Thanks a lot

That looks incredible as always Grant. I have a question though. What is the white stripe along the top of the roof line? Is that whitewashed metal or something to keep the rain out? It is perhaps that only part of the image that appears flat. Great work and thanks for the new tutorial!

Chris

__________________

www.SuWiki.org - The SketchUp Wiki

Cal Poly Pomona - Landscape Architecture

Omoxx, I haven't finished that part.

It is possible to import scans of real watercolour brushstrokes (grayscale) and add them in overlay mode to make flat areas of colour look more like a painting. I have experimented with it a little and I'm not sure how useful it really is. I think it would take very good graphic judgement to make it work well. And a library of nice brushmarks.

Thanks Chris. Around here that ridge capping is usually roundy cement plaster, so mine looks a bit sharp. On the second image I darkened it a bit and it looked better.

Grant:

Damn, damn, damn!!! (I'm with Susan.)

What absolutely fabulous work.

I give up. I can't hold out any longer. I'll talk my office into buying Squiggle and join the digital ranks as soon as I get it.

Thanks for being such a leader/visionary/inspiration.

Ray

Grant,

That is fantastic work!

It made me want to reach out and feel the grain of the paper.

Pat

Thanks for your comments everyone, I really appreciate them.

Some more thought on the advantages of digital:

One of the problems of trad WC painting is that you start with white paper and build up colour in layers. Sometimes you can overlay several layers of paint and arrive at what you want, but sometimes that will look overworked and it's better to just do it right in one shot. But that's really hard to do when you're looking at white paper trying to estimate how the finished image will look.

With digital you can put in placeholder elements like sky, background, foreground tree etc and adjust them for light/dark, saturation etc and get a really good idea of how the whole will look before you begin fine-tuning the density of shadows, intensity of colours etc. Later you can replace those elements with better ones if you wish, or handpainted ones, but those placeholders make it really easy to 'see the whole picture' early on.

Another thought:

I suppose using this method is a bit like being promoted from painter to Art Director, or from copywriter to Editor. Now, instead of drawing every line and painting every stroke, you set the various applications and filters to work (after telling them exactly what you want) and they produce results, usually a few alternatives. Then you take those results and pick the best bits of them and put them together in the best way you can, sending things back for a re-do when necessary, resorting to hand techniques when it's easier than delegating. While the end result isn't exactly your handwork, it IS the product of your artistic judgement. And that's probably the most important aspect anyway.

Grant, Every time I think I have achieved a new level of quality you post something and humble me to the greatest degree. Really a beautifual image. Thanks for all of your work and contributions to the forum.

Pat

Grant...

Outstanding digi watercolour. The best I have seen...

__________________

Grant -- thanks for sharing your image and the tutorial. The inspiration and tutelage are sincerely appreciated.

My web browser is the new Internet Explorer7 -- one feature is a handy zoom function. In looking at your image I cranked up the zoom and was able to stick my nose right into the illustration. Seeing it zoomed was a great way to appreciate all the subtleties of your illustration.

I'm still gobsmacked! __________________

Regards, Ross from the Land of Lawn Tractors--- I'm listening to this local radio station right now.

Hi all

Just a quick question on printing. I have done a few watercolours recently which look ok on screen but not sure how to get nice (and convincing) hard copies to present to clients. I have tried printing onto watercolour paper but everything looks flat/dull and seems to amplify the faux look. The texture bumps that are added in Photoshop also clash with grained watercolour paper.

Has anyone got a good method to share?

Cheers

Scaifee

Hi Scaifee, DON"T Print on Watercolor paper for sure. First of all it is no good for your printer. Second the inks seep into the paper and give you that dull look. As you have found, if you do print on watercolour paper, you would need to skip the step where you add the paper texture since the paper already has it's own. So the net result is, don't do this, period.

To get nice saturated colours you can print on Photo Paper or on semigloss brochure paper. Make sure you set your printer settings for printing on the correct paper type and also set the print quality to "Fine". Also make sure that the color profile used by your printer is the same as the one you use in Photoshop or whatever it is that you are printing from. In fact, make sure that all of your software applications and hardware ( scanner etc if applicable) are all using the same colour profile.

__________________

Susan Sorger

http://www.entouragearts.com

Grant

I think you must have the latest update to Renderstudio! 8-)

Well impressed with your illustration

How much of it is the original su model?

BrianB

This is a tip to make the linework look thinner!. If you have a solid color linework on your layer, try blurring it just a little so your thick lines loose contrast. Then, go to Levels and adjust them so the blurred pixels gain on contrast. Some of them will then become white and you have your thinner lines.

my tribute to the master!!!

Finaly I got my hand of the sacret tutorial. The Images I post follow farely close to it.

I made 2 minor substitutions:

1. instead of the "beyound edger", I used standsrd "unsharp mask". It accentuates the edge colors and comes with the photoshop.

2. I couldn't resist but to "wigle" the color just a tiny bit.

(well, I also didn't erase the black dots from watercolor effect and I used canvas for texture - not sandstone)

Please, tell me what you think where the image could be improved.

I was looking at the WOW post (http://forum.sketchup.com/showthread.php?t=73455) in the gallery. It seems to me that the real magic of watercolor renderngs is not in the building itself, but in the entouage!

Grant, could you expand on how do you do such an amasing vegitation?

Hi Dennis,

Great, but personally I do prefer the 'sandstone' filter.

One thing I discovered regarding lines is a 're-touch/warping' brush in PhotoImpact.....I dont think there is an equivalent in PS.....which makes it possible to work over individual lines rather than as a universal filter. It works just as well with a 'lines' layer or after 'multiply'.

Attatched is an example [thanks to your good self and to Grant :)]

Stu

Over at the Gallery forum there is a thread about inspiring pro architectural illustrators. In the thread Robin posted a link to a great digital+watercolour hybrid tutorial by the well-known pro illustrator Ernest Burden III. I thought the tutorial link was a great contribution to this thread --- thanks Robin for finding it.

__________________

Regards, Ross from the Land of Lawn Tractors--- I'm listening to this local radio station right now.

Dennis -- seeing your detail showing the wall & windows brings to mind a tip that I think can be used to further improve your window glass. I see you used a mottled texture for the glass as Grant had previously suggested in another thread. The tip I'd add is make sure in SketchUp that you use texture positioning in SU to slide the textures around so all the windows don't look the same. In individual windows the textures can be slid, flipped, rotated, or stretched so once 'watercoloured' they don't look the same. If it isn't done, the viewers' eyes can easily distinguish a pattern that diminishes the watercolour effect.

In that same image I notice your very effective use of a horizontal banded paper effect. How are you doing that? If it involves an image, any chance you can share it?

__________________

Regards, Ross from the Land of Lawn Tractors--- I'm listening to this local radio station right now.