[QUOTE=Rusty100;36734638]then you should know that it is highly frowned upon[/QUOTE]
I didn't do tracing aaaa
whAT IS Going ON
[QUOTE=Rusty100;36734727]whAT IS Going ON[/QUOTE]
he just said he used it as a reference but didn't draw over the image.
[QUOTE=smeismastger;36734707]I didn't do tracing aaaa[/QUOTE]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/Oj0fS.gif[/img]
Traced or not, just don't do it like this.
[QUOTE=Asgard;36734827][img]http://i.imgur.com/Oj0fS.gif[/img]
Traced or not, just don't do it like this.[/QUOTE]
I had it open in the browser and just memorized its shapes then jumped back into the art program and tried to draw it as close to the picture as possible, then I switched from browser to the program back and forth until it was ok. I am sorry don't burn me on the stage I am not trying to make a habit of it :c
yea if thats a trace its a very loose trace (usually when you overlay something to prove its a trace, it actually lines up...)
Not traced that is.
So I am not a lost cause yet?
[editline]12th July 2012[/editline]
Also I couldn't find any Cloud brushes for the program I am using (Artrage). But would these sort of clouds be better?
[IMG]http://i50.tinypic.com/kc1hj.png[/IMG]
I would say keep a similar style to what yo have now but place them a bit more like the spaghetti clouds. Now it just looks like a huge wall or some place filling like the "Corner sun" you did in 1st grade.
[QUOTE=Toyhobo;36735514]I would say keep a similar style to what yo have now but place them a bit more like the spaghetti clouds. Now it just looks like a huge wall or some place filling like the "Corner sun" you did in 1st grade.[/QUOTE]
Its just one cloud, I am going to add more.
[img]http://cocatrez.net/Air/TowingAboveIllinois/8902L_JCZ_AboveClouds.jpg[/img]
Try something like this
[QUOTE=smeismastger;36736628]Better now?
[IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/2r43dea.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Now drop the cloud shadows to the ground, that looks loads better already
[QUOTE=babyarm-bat;36736882]Now drop the cloud shadows to the ground, that looks loads better already[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/2m4vkp5.png[/IMG]
The JU-87 only carried a bomb load under it's belly, which was typically one 500+ pound bomb. May be wrong, but I don't think it was capable of carrying bombs under it's wings.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;36737329]The JU-87 only carried a bomb load under it's belly, which was typically one 500+ pound bomb. May be wrong, but I don't think it was capable of carrying bombs under it's wings.[/QUOTE]
One bomb up to 1000kg under its belly, plus four small 50kg bombs on its wings, or three 500kg bombs.
[editline]12th July 2012[/editline]
The Ju-87 series was a [I]very[/I] sturdy design, and could carry quite impressive load when needed. And deliver them with unmatched precision.
Right, just never seen any actual WWII era pictures with it carrying bombs on it's wings. Only ever seen it with that sort of setup in video games, always thought was just made up for gameplay. my bad.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;36737820]Right, just never seen any actual WWII era pictures with it carrying bombs on it's wings. Only ever seen it with that sort of setup in video games, always thought was just made up for gameplay. my bad.[/QUOTE]
Simulators rarely make things up for the sake of gameplay
[QUOTE=daijitsu;36733418]
you know I find the randomest stuff on tumblr
[t]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6x8larFHY1r1tbqyo1_1280.png[/t]
like a rough of that picture with a different signature[/QUOTE]
Yes obviously, I completely took the original drawing, but I didn't trace, I simply used it for anatomy as a rough sketch, I finished that and discarded the original image. anatomy is something I really need to work on.
and in my opinion made it slightly more proportionate.
[QUOTE=Waxer Sky;36739146]Yes obviously, I completely took the original drawing, but I didn't trace, I simply used it for anatomy as a rough sketch, I finished that and discarded the rough image. something I really need to work on.
and in my opinion made it slightly more proportionate.[/QUOTE]
dude you traced it.
[QUOTE=Waxer Sky;36739146]Yes obviously, I completely took the original drawing, but I didn't trace, I simply used it for anatomy as a rough sketch, I finished that and discarded the rough image. something I really need to work on.
and in my opinion made it slightly more proportionate.[/QUOTE]
Hate to break your hopes, but I don't see a clear difference between the two pictures, except yours being less blurry.
And yeah, tracing is bad
[QUOTE=Waxer Sky;36739146]Yes obviously, I completely took the original drawing, but I didn't trace, I simply used it for anatomy as a rough sketch, I finished that and discarded the original image. anatomy is something I really need to work on.
and in my opinion made it slightly more proportionate.[/QUOTE]
the only difference is the shape of the beak, and a liiitle deviation on the hair tufts.
[t]http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/5606/screenshot2012071213260.png[/t]
and despite being less blurry (since the other is a rough), your lines on the face were terribly indicative of tracing. Terrible, slowly drawn lines. That's why I looked it up in the first place; didn't help you named it [url=hootaloo.tumblr.com]lootahoo[/url]
if you want actual help learning to draw, please feel free to talk with us. I'd hate to see this to be your only method of work when clearly you want some recognition for this kinda drawing
i made a photo manipulpalation
[t]http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2012/194/f/c/empty_by_thejuraj-d573uz7.png[/t]
does this even belong there? I've never posted in this section before.
that's some nice detective work guys
[img]http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2012/194/a/4/korra_by_detkef-d572rto.png[/img]
because water
[QUOTE=Detlef;36741507][img]http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2012/194/a/4/korra_by_detkef-d572rto.png[/img]
because water[/QUOTE]
She looks like a man imo.
KORRA
[QUOTE=Jericho_Rus;36741626]She looks like a man imo.[/QUOTE]
I don't believe every woman is hyper feminine