NORMAL
[IMG]http://www.wduwant.com/index_uploads/uploads/dc9a05197f40.jpg[/IMG]
BIGGUR PIC
[t]http://www.wduwant.com/index_uploads/uploads/355f4eed141a.png[/t]
-snip-
[sp]This should seriously be on Digitalero[/sp]
Usually the point of bathing is to cover most of the body in water.
There were some nude poses back in time, too. Maybe less nude than mine, but still.
I don't see any reason why should I post this on DE since this is just artistic and nothing sex-related.
whatever it is, it's got terrible amounts of empty space even if the scenebuild is nice
Yeah, I had no idea what should I add. Before I added lighting, it seemed like there was plenty of stuff.
-snip-
Super empty, weird ass multidirectional shadows and super flatly-glazed lighting.
Take a corner of the bathhouse, three of the women and add actual lighting, preferably three overhead and one underlit.
Well, as other people have pointed out, this [I]is[/I] a good concept. It only needs a couple of fixes.
Very nice scenebuild, though.
Boobs I guess
bretty hot
Put Zoltan right in the middle of the pool as if he's sticking only his eyes and forehead out of the water like the perv that he is.
If you still have the scenebuild, put some pots with fauna, candles, or pillows in the empty spaces. Some paintings on the walls.
Hey, as long as we hate it, the actual scenebuild looks good. The only bad thing are the big amount of empty spaces
[QUOTE=rama2299;48876942]as long as we hate it[/QUOTE]
You speak on behalf of Facepunch gay community?
Because I can't see why anyone would actually hate it, since it's not portraying any sexual act or anything. Just some boobs.
[QUOTE=Trek;48879639]You speak on behalf of Facepunch gay community?[/QUOTE]are you implying that homosexuals can't stand seeing the privates of the sex that they're not attracted to or is that just bad sarcasm
Oh yeah, I forgot how dead serious you people get whenever there's a mention of homosexualism, feminism etc.
Or rather dead-butthurt.
Straight into my fap folder.
[QUOTE=Trek;48879919]Oh yeah, I forgot how dead serious you people get whenever there's a mention of homosexualism, feminism etc.[/QUOTE]just checking if you're being willfully ignorant or not
the results are inconclusive
[QUOTE=Trek;48879919]Oh yeah, I forgot how dead serious you people get whenever there's a mention of homosexualism, feminism etc.
Or rather dead-butthurt.[/QUOTE]
I think it's more in the line that this forum section has been turned PG13. So anything involving genitals is out of the question no matter what anyone might think about the merits of the picture.
It's a rare image that gets a pass on this and it generally must have very high artistic merits and reasons for the nudity.
This one despite being nice doesn't. There's no reason to get full on nudity and it could instead be tastefully hidden. Either by the water being higher, none of the women facing the camera and a lot of other things.
Implied nudity is fine. Actual on screen nudity is not.
nudity is okay but all those nude models suck, or at least the ones that everyone uses. i would assume because there's probably just one model that hasn't been updated since 2008 or whenever which people just hack onto disproportionately good heads. also when you have lots of naked people you can see the asset reuse pretty much at a glance which basically restricts their use to background elements or single character shots
Do you mind if I edit this a bit?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
