Drawn! The Illustration and Cartooning Blog

Not only her work is ridiculesly good, she is also adorable. Look at her blogs, all they are full of surprises :)

aaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwesome

I don't quite get it. This looks like a great way to practice digital painting... but beyond that what is the point of this presumably painstaking and slow process of making an image from a photo reference that looks as if it was a photo directly and quickly altered in Photoshop?

wow, cool works on her website, really.

She has a ton of energy, and her photography skills are terrific. The lack of sketchbook material and studies and the few available drawings makes it look like her digital paintings are simply well processed photos. The end result is interesting, especially the series of motion blurred photos that have been "paintified". The "how-to" series looks like the usual reverse process fake.

As Cali Rezo ex manager on "Immortels ,and reading the comments, I think maybe I should give some details about a few things I know about the artist?
She began to paint highly realistic character textures for 3D characters. She is truly one of the best artists I ever had in my teams...Then she used her truly amazing skills to paint with references, OK, but she always insert in her paintings some other elements, or put her characters in another context. I would say the concept is very close from the way Velasquez used to work : using her vision of reality to give a message.

Jeah, Mr. del4yo, right, Velasquez, no doubt... Who, as we both know, never began to draw without having a tiny apple and a Z fixed on the left side of his palette, gently caressing these each time he thought, something had gone wrong, a brushstroke wouldn't fit, etc... Now, poor Velasquez, wrong century, it didn't work once... That he nevertheless has left us some of the most wonderful paintings of art history seems to be a good reason to call him an artist... And it seems to be an even better reason NOT to call somebody who, with all the help, photoshop offers, just manages to (nicely) do the job of a copy machine, an artist as well...
Hmmm, sorry for my terrible shool english... And santé, Mr. del4yo, ex manager, i bet you ____ the artist, don't you? Oooo, wow, wait a minute, now I know, you ARE the artist, right? Because it looks so much less fishy to paint all those sexy little girls in bathtubes or showing off armpit etc. if you are a woman...

I love her work. I don´t agree with other writers like Patternjuggler and mcdoubt. Photoshop can´t do the things sho do. It's such a great difference between the machine and the human hand and mind. And if you can't see the difference it's a pity. Of course she's an artist. An artist with great skills both in observing, in thought, in composition, light, color and painting. I'd love to be able to make things like that.

I love her work, she's just so gifted.
She does paintings from the 21century with the tools that exist, as painters from before painted from their time and place.

I think, mcdoubt has been a bit drunk, lately (and I know, he's lost his password in the meantime, so, good by mcdoubt), but I would say, he's not so wrong anyway; for everybody who's got time to look a bit closer: for example "Bermudes - 2005 / Image 10 of 31", which you can find in the portfolio under "2005-06 - Autoportraits / Self-portraits" (second row, image 6), you can see birthmarks on Mrs Rezos back, which of course she could have put there, but did she really? There are lots of examples like this, little "mistakes" you make, processing a photo into a "drawing"; Of course I can only guess how Mrs Rezo works exaktly, at least those huge eyes seem to be "painted" freely, but mainly she "photoshops" photos, and her "making of" is just a fake; Velasquez?(lol) (http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/v/velazque/)