[IMG]http://orig08.deviantart.net/6bc3/f/2015/364/e/c/happy_new_year_by_maniac_kagesenshi-d9m5252.jpg[/IMG]
It's almost New Year. So Happy New Year everyone!
[QUOTE=MakoSkyDub;49422694]Thanks
This is not a bad simplification, and it's a nice comp. The paint job has some issues, I think you can push this with some good decision making into a really worthwhile little piece. direction:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/0OoDBEb.gif[/img]
[img]https://i.gyazo.com/655a239ad079d5bb73b1f1fd486e9719.png[/img]
In the original, you have a blitz of texture and fragments of contrast in every bit of the image. These qualities draw the eye, so you want to reserve them for the focal area(s). With that in mind I knocked back everything outside of where we want the viewer to look - There's still a nice gap of sky tucked up in the corner, but I've arranged the patterns of light so that the eye will slide back down to the main focus. Now we have a much more compelling picture, making good use of the base composition beneath with the way we treat it in the execution. However we can take it further than this - we've got a strong focal point and everything else working for it, but it's empty. Pleasing but empty. There's nothing to arrest our attention on that patch of ground, no storytelling, no payoff. Therefore:
[img]https://i.gyazo.com/7079377cb84eca81692f6d0ad2a0fc61.png[/img]
Not a thrilling protagonist but it doesn't have to be, the piece is strong enough to be worth a second look just by virtue of good decisions applied to it.[/QUOTE]
Thanks man, awesome crit. I took what you said and took half an hour to try and apply it to my painting and I think it did improve it overall. What you said about the high contrast everywhere definitely made it a bit of a seizure for the eyes.
Before and after -
[img]http://img03.deviantart.net/cd5f/i/2015/364/d/d/1_hour_forest_sketch_by_jallenthenovice-d9m17e7.png[/img] [img]http://img03.deviantart.net/d7bf/i/2015/365/d/9/forest_post_cc_changes_by_jallenthenovice-d9m5qpo.png[/img]
Not sure it's as good as it could be (I think the sword is too far to the left but I painted it all on 1 layer lol) but I definitely think I've learned from it. Cheers.
Big improvement. Something that has arisen though is this very clear-cut shape which is so distinct that it's stealing the show from the sword a bit imo (in blue):
[img]https://i.gyazo.com/2e41335c1cbc8b45c2800d48d40949fb.png[/img]
You can see if you shrink it that the sword is naturally blending into the rhythm of all of these short vertical sliver shapes you have everywhere (in pink above)
[img]https://i.gyazo.com/a0fc3a46f874d0a27ff847f8f888edf2.png[/img]
So the big statement is that shape, and the rock popping inside of it. You've put the bright sword against a dark trunk alright, but as I said it's completely analogous to all of those other slivers so it doesn't end up standing out very strongly. One other thing, you seem to have lost consideration for your shadows - the quality of the light tells us that the sun is pretty high in the sky, yet you've got a very long shadow for the body of the rock which has a more late evening look to it - and the tree on the right has only a tiny dribble of a shadow in comparison lol. good form following up on it anyway
I don't think the piece needed any sort of sci-fi or fantasy focal subject and it was nice as simple nature scenery but maybe that's just personal preference.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxvTVB7_XrA[/media]
Made a short dance video to a song I like. Not the best look lol but I like the video. Enjoy if you enjoy ^^.
[t]http://puu.sh/mf8O3/e950905828.jpg[/t]
I started a new sketchbook (bullshit book to put it more aptly)
I don't remember when, but I guess it was a Friday
[QUOTE=nox;49428306]I don't think the piece needed any sort of sci-fi or fantasy focal subject and it was nice as simple nature scenery but maybe that's just personal preference.[/QUOTE]
Well that comes down to what you want to say exactly with your work. I agree that there's no reason to care about the cube or the sword, I'm just trying to give advice that everyone can benefit from and cover as much art theory stuff as is feasible in a short time.
I suppose as a disclaimer I should say that if I ever steer the actual message of a piece in a different direction than it had initially, then that was incidental to explaining theory coming into play. So it's less about the critique being bound to any one painting, and more about demonstrating stuff you can apply throughout your work.
Plus I suppose I was less mindful about changing the message of this one because it didn't have much of a message, being a photostudy.
So this isn't art at all, but I took my phone apart and installed this LED that lights up when the screen is on and just wanted to share.
[img]http://puu.sh/mfywn/c7c6baf633.jpg[/img][img]http://puu.sh/mfywh/796ab27d69.jpg[/img]
Rock study, crits?
[IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/49828537/Art/paints/Studies/010116rocks.png[/IMG]
[img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32719274/IMG_20160101_211349.jpg[/img]
[editline]1st January 2016[/editline]
i tried
[QUOTE=kirederf7;49435425]Rock study, crits?
[IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/49828537/Art/paints/Studies/010116rocks.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
I'm not a fan of the gritty textures slapped over them, but the overall formations and colors look great.
Also I personally find these spots unfinished and deserving of a bit more polish. The apparent brushwork there is not the appealing variety, IMO, but overall it's very well done. Solid lighting and I personally find the texture just fine.
[t]http://puu.sh/mgoSr/443c029fa8.jpg[/t]
Everyone talking about subjects and compositions and techniques and here I am tracing the outline of other pictures just to practice drawing simple fucking lines on a tablet because I have the hand eye coordination of a dying moose
[img]http://i.imgur.com/IuOYINM.jpg[/img]
Tracing is basically as far from helping yourself grow as an artist as you can get. It's fine if you NEED to make something for whatever reason and do not possess the ability, but if your goal is to become an artist you're only hurting yourself.
Just go through the motions like everyone else who's ever set out to become an artist has done- practice on a piece of paper with a pencil or a pen- draw real objects to work on your observational skills and perspective, draw from reference images to figure out how to create specific things. Start from simple linework and don't try adding value until you're comfortable with line. Then, once you've gotten a grasp for value move on to color.
Basically- what you've just posted is you trying to tackle a handful of different skills all at once while you've mastered or become competent in none- You've got to build your foundations and climb your way up the metaphorical ladder of artistic progression.
I've done the same- try to use shortcuts to skip to the fun part, but I realized that I'm just hurting myself if I don't go through the motions and do the boring work- exercises like gesture drawing, reference work, etc etc
[QUOTE=Biscuit-Boy;49432225]So this isn't art at all, but I took my phone apart and installed this LED that lights up when the screen is on and just wanted to share.
[img]http://puu.sh/mfywn/c7c6baf633.jpg[/img][img]http://puu.sh/mfywh/796ab27d69.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Is that a 6S? Is there a teardown/guide/parts list somewhere? That's amazing.
You can tell it isn't because it doesn't have that little '6S' badge on the back. The kit for the 6S should be out soon though.
Here's a teardown guide: [url]https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPhone+6s+Teardown/48170[/url]
And here's the preorder for the 6S kit : [url]http://theunlockr.com/product/iphone-light-kit-mod-iphone-6s/[/url]
If you look at the light kit for the regular 6 there's a how-to video, but it's out of date in regards to removing the battery adhesive so make sure you check the iFixit guide for how to properly pull the adhesive out.
French Jesuit, 1650 AD
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ef3Z2Az.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=kirederf7;49435425]Rock study, crits?
[IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/49828537/Art/paints/Studies/010116rocks.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
I like how nox and biscuit seemed not to notice the little guy in the shadow lol
[QUOTE=nox;49437855]French Jesuit, 1650 AD
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ef3Z2Az.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
There seems to be a lot of this from people in here - leaving linework in the final painting. It's really dragging down this piece in my opinion, having this odd transition from painting to cartoony drawing with half flat colour...
Don't have a minute to spare for a decent crit at the moment sorry guys haha
First landscape in months aaaa
[IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/83454840/Images/Untitled-1.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=MakoSkyDub;49438720]
There seems to be a lot of this from people in here - leaving linework in the final painting. It's really dragging down this piece in my opinion, having this odd transition from painting to cartoony drawing with half flat colour...
Don't have a minute to spare for a decent crit at the moment sorry guys haha[/QUOTE]
If you're referring to the hands and face being flat, that was deliberate. I didn't just forget to give those parts depth.
Hey guys, I haven't been in here in a while and I feel like I should, here's some stuff that I've worked on that I already have photos of.
sketchbook stuff
[t]http://40.media.tumblr.com/0dbc7c713324799eb841dfb549bf571f/tumblr_o0cf6j0wZq1v3m06bo1_1280.jpg[/t][t]http://41.media.tumblr.com/99311d604af0062480cf0b1d0136f8c3/tumblr_o0cf6j0wZq1v3m06bo2_1280.jpg[/t]
[t]http://40.media.tumblr.com/e8ce9ff1c76a73446f983599e9874744/tumblr_o0cf6j0wZq1v3m06bo3_1280.jpg[/t][t]http://41.media.tumblr.com/31ac8e4393a54c521d691ae1bd8126be/tumblr_o0cf6j0wZq1v3m06bo4_1280.jpg[/t]
a perspective project that I'm not too proud of
[t]http://40.media.tumblr.com/ba30884a5275513ad5988f25ced43a6b/tumblr_o0cf5eYBtF1v3m06bo1_1280.jpg[/t]
uh.... this..
[t]http://41.media.tumblr.com/b8e4432f52b5e4a17c48e78d506882cb/tumblr_o0cf5eYBtF1v3m06bo2_1280.jpg[/t]
and this.. (I like this one)
[t]http://36.media.tumblr.com/cdfa1b3e120f38bd705532fe296f7c6d/tumblr_o0cf5eYBtF1v3m06bo3_1280.jpg[/t]
and my drawing final
[t]http://41.media.tumblr.com/ff63360dac7ceb8e4cfbfa750ce58e10/tumblr_o0cf4lXdTv1v3m06bo2_1280.jpg[/t]
& details..
[t]http://40.media.tumblr.com/58739039fd0ea6a29b4543138ee71a35/tumblr_o0cf4lXdTv1v3m06bo1_1280.jpg[/t]
so yeah!
[IMG]https://41.media.tumblr.com/1559fbafc7fe2a3f66e85d4bcae9738a/tumblr_o0ciigJWzV1rzx4geo1_1280.png[/IMG]
toying with colors.
I did a 3 minute pickle [thumb]http://i.imgur.com/tsWRHLZ.png[/thumb]
[QUOTE=nox;49439498]If you're referring to the hands and face being flat, that was deliberate. I didn't just forget to give those parts depth.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't implying you had forgotten anything, I was saying it would be a much better piece if the whole thing was in paint (or the whole thing was in line). Even if the whole character was cel shaded on a painted bg there would be some haphazard logic to it haha
[QUOTE=MakoSkyDub;49444288]Even if the whole character was cel shaded on a painted bg there would be some haphazard logic to it haha[/QUOTE]
Every Disney animation before CGI begs to differ.
[QUOTE=nox;49444402]Every Disney animation ever begs to differ.[/QUOTE]
Disney animation has consistency where moving objects are cel shaded and static objects are watercolour (or similar). They don't really do images where one chunk of a whole object is cel shaded and the rest is watercolour. It looks inconsistent and has little practical reasoning to back it up. We've had 70 years of cartoons to get used to the conflicting aesthetics of actors and backgrounds. We haven't had any years to get used to conflicting aesthetics within a single actor. So it looks off
[QUOTE=Maloof?;49444447]Disney animation has consistency where moving objects are cel shaded and static objects are watercolour (or similar). They don't really do images where one chunk of a whole object is cel shaded and the rest is watercolour. It looks inconsistent and has little practical reasoning to back it up. We've had 70 years of cartoons to get used to the conflicting aesthetics of actors and backgrounds. We haven't had any years to get used to conflicting aesthetics within a single actor. So it looks off[/QUOTE]
I think you misread his post, I'm not saying I don't have work to do to get that look to work right and look consistent, although it's not something I planned to refine anyway, but mixing cel shaded or flat colored foreground characters with painted BGs is something that's been pretty standard for a very long time so to say that there's "haphazard logic" with it is kinda naive. Like yeah, I get it, it doesn't work when you're mixing fully rendered with flat on the same character, lesson learned, but mixing the two in the same scene isn't unheard of.
I think if you just added a tiny bit more line work to other areas it would look fine. For example the pebbly shore he is standing on could use some defining lines. I think it is just a bit too jarring when only two small areas from what I can see have it (the hands and face).
Though it could be argued that the line work being jarring is to make it a focal point, but with the composition being very simple it is unneeded as we are already attracted to the focus point in the picture. If anything try adding more line work to the foreground on the character and the ground around him, would make a much more pleasing transition if you want that style and it would back up the idea of it being used as a focusing mechanism. I got a pretty little treat on the way for this thread btw c;
[QUOTE=Maloof?;49438965]First landscape in months aaaa
[IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/83454840/Images/Untitled-1.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
This is nice at first glance, I think you could easily take this up a few notches though. A few issues that jump right out:
[img]https://i.gyazo.com/38b57ec04decf4f388af917e6d038cbb.jpg[/img]
In red - with these areas in particular you're showing a tendency to leave things unfinished. There's a line between [I]loose[/I] and [I]rough[/I] that you need to cross over before you call it a day. The main difference I think is the skill of the artist - a more experienced painter might do the same amount of work but the marks better express what is there and so it doesn't look rough or sloppy, it just looks "loose" and we're all envious. So until you're banging out more spontaneously pleasing brushstrokes I urge you to put in the extra work to get things looking nice. That doesn't mean rendering by the way - a rock can still be done in two or three strokes - but do those strokes over the old ones multiple times if that's what it takes to make it read better.
In pink - big issue with scale here. You've given us a tree in the foreground on the crest of a hill, and then wayy off in the distance down the hill and over the plain you've roughed in absolutely massive trees which look like they're intended to be fairly normal in scale.
n.b. even if you did intend those ones to be huge, you've thrown the viewer off by putting a small tree in the foreground. if you;'re playing with scale you need to give visual reference so it's comprehensible - that could be a scatter of tiny houses under them for example (still would be odd with the small tree in fg though).
In cyan - This is the same issue actually, scale and recession with distance. The stream goes over the crest of the hill, comes back into our line of sight off in the distance - but it's the same width? If it's a stream it should be dwindling out of sight down there, and if it's actually a big river that it should take up the whole ground plain visible in the foreground and reappear down below at the size you have it.
Lastly I think you should have a look at a few photographs of trees for ref - yours look a bit
Did a quick paint addressing these points and with a couple of other ideas in there -
[img]https://i.gyazo.com/44d64a0b698660390c125b2ccbb0a53b.png[/img]
no time to elaborate now... just food for thought
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
