New Yorker cover drawn on iPhone
The cover of this week's New Yorker was created using an iPhone app, Brushes, by artist Jorge Colombo.
The drawing was created by Colombo in just an hour, while he stood outside the Madame Tussaud's Wax Museum in Times Square. "I got a phone in the beginning of February and I immediately got the programme so I could entertain myself," says the artist on the New Yorker website, where a film of his process can also be viewed. "Before, unless I had a flashlight or a miner's hat, I could not draw in the dark." Colombo also stated that drawing on the phone had the advantage of allowing him to draw without being noticed, although he does mention one drawback of phone painting: that when the sun is up, it is hard to see, "because of the glare on the phone".
Some of Colombo's other iPhone drawings are shown below, and more can be viewed on his website, here.
I really like the drawings, they have the feel of paint, wonderful texture. also the use of colour just right!!
I don't think I can do that with my LG Viewty.
Fantastic. Great composition, colour and contrast. This is the kind of stuff that will be hanging up in the national gallery centuries from now.
really nice work.
Stef Kardos, a Disney artist, has similar work with, I feel, a stronger use of colour:
I am not really sure if I like this. Don't get me wrong but the only interest is on the medium (ie iPhone), whereas they are probably are not as spectacular as other works from the same artist that I see on his great website.
Great attempt thought so congratulations for that.
Really cool. i think the illustrations are great . I would love to use them for my next design lecture at the Graduate School of Business in Cape Town South Africa.
I have not read this issue as of yet, Unless there was an arrival on this artist inside it seems as if The New Yorker was not so concerned with the image but more with the novelty of how it was created.
i love the way that in the film you see all the layers building up - like a real painting!
There are a few here that work very well, however, the rest have the same problem as I have found when attempting to replicate the style of a paint brush on a computer. The brushes always look wrong, and they do in many here.
That said, I thought the last one here, Subway & 42nd, has an excellent feel, and I can see how the iPhone offers immediacy to artists.
I really dislike this, if this cover was created on a computer everyone would be disgusted. This takes a few seconds to make in photoshop, he took a photo os a crepe or hotdog cart and applied a few brush strokes. This is nothing groundbreaking, in fact it is a very sad attempt at creating marketing buzz with a current technology for an outdated, out of touch publication. This is not any different if you took a photo on your phone and applied a black & white filter to it.
Completely hate it, and am saddened that anyone thinks this is relevant or in the least bit worth considering as art.
sorry to burst your buttons Evelio but it wasnt done through manipulating a photo. Theres an interview with him on the internet and he describes what he does and he does them in a few hours by hand. I know this is going to be disapointing to tell you that he actually did it with his fingers on a freaking 6" IPhone screen as his canvas. just give credit where it is due and stop hating.
Like them too. Very Edward Hopper-esque, though.
Interesting that the first usage of iPhone digital art are given over to replicating traditional painting styles. Nice, but feels a little backward!
Check out the lady http://www.theopenconsultancy.com
Mathew, I went back and read a few interviews to get a better grasp on his process. I was wrong in the use of photos, but still feel that this is fun but not art, this is a digital etch a sketch. The buzz is more about the tools than the piece itself. I am not hating, but expressing that just because it's on the new yorker doesn't make it good. Stand back and look at it for what it is not once considering the tools used, it isn't great on it's own without the fact that it was done on a phone that's more a computer than a phone.
... and there you have it folks! Rapturous welcome, doubting Thomases, instapunditry. The haters ("I hate it") and the lovers ("I love it" - presume that's in there somewhere). New Yorker writers will no doubt next week tie themselves in meta-analytical knots only slightly less complicated than the uni-bloat minds trying hard - too hard - not to be quoted. To paraphrase my artist father "Art snobs fuck off."
|Channel 4's NewsWall presents the news, in GIFs (9)|
|Sagmeister & Walsh and the robbery that never was (15)|
|RightsInfo: the online guide to human rights (3)|
|Our picks from Pick Me Up 2015 (3)|
|Graphic designer? GD& want to hear from you (3)|
|If Apple can, why can’t you?|
|See the other side to homelessness|
|How Fredrik Bond achieved an 'epic strut' for Moneysupermarket.com|
|Volvo LifePaint: awesome new product or PR stunt?|
|New Honda ad is a feat of technical wizardry|