My smal project

[Lunatique]

The main problem I see is that there is an obvious lack of middle values. Your image tend to be mostly just bright values with really dark/black accents to define each objects contours and details, but there's not nearly enough middle values represented. You need to realize that all surfaces have inherent values. For example, in a black and white image, what's supposed to be a deep red color should actually look like a dark grey in the image, a typical orange would look like a medium grey, and so on. Think about the inherent values of all the surfaces in your image and depict them properly.

[Broda81]

Thanks....constructive and to the real opinions are welcome.
Let's try with this version, not yet finished for lack of time ... but please assessment

[Lunatique]

It's better, but you need to push it even further. There's still way too much contrast on the micro-level instead of a well-planned tonal composition on the macro-level. Don't have so much really dark values on almost everything. Only use very dark values in areas that absolutely must have it. Same with really light values--they're all over your image.

Do this experiment--take a selection of paintings you really love. Now, convert them all into B/W. Now study the values of those paintings. I'm sure you'll see very clearly what I'm talking about. A good piece of artwork has excellent tonal composition for the entire image, instead of a clutter of high contrast everywhere.

[ryansumo]

In addition to Lunatique's comments I find that I'm having trouble focusing on the main image of the woman riding the bull-thing because all of your values are so light. You can push the background back and move the image of the woman to the fore by simply darkening the background and then highlighting the areas you want to accentuate. I had a lot of fun doing this for like 5 minutes, and I think you can see that it helps the eyes focus on teh woman much more readily than with your original image.

I actually quite like the image btw, it's a very interesting scene, although to be honest I'd leave the parakeet out of the top left. It's in a very awkward position and really doesn't help you composition-wise. If its important for the scene maybe it's better if you find somewhere else to put it. If not I'd readily suggest just painting over it.

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h100/endlessthirteen/mayapaintover.jpg

[ryansumo]

Oh and if you don't mind my making anther suggestion I think it would be interesting in terms of story if the captured conquistador could be staring at the dismembered head instead of staring wildly off into space. While I realize that the idea may be that the conquistador has lost his mind, I think it would be visually more interesting for the viewer to see him interacting with other elements in the illustration. :)

[BillyWJ]

The problem here is one of texture, there are only two textures throughout the piece - busy, dark lines, or shiny, smooth surfaces. There are no differences between skin, metal, plant, feathers, or cloth.

Take the ox, for instance. They are hairy, covered in hair except for around their mouths (are they even native to that part of the world? I believe the Spaniards introduced them, and from what I recall, natives did not generally ride animals, they walked, or rode in litters carried by slaves). You've rendered it smooth, with bright specular highlights. This causes it to merge with every other smooth surface in the painting, because it's essentially identical - and there's no sense of depth, because all of the smooth surfaces live in the same frame in the composition.

Add in a very confused and scattered lighting plot, and the eye is overwhelmed, it has nowhere to rest, there's no focus. You have the same lighting on 4 figures, and they are all in the same frame, but should be in separate frames according to their depth in the scene.

You should try and redo the scene in a new document, but only use large, loose blocks of grey tones, so you can study where the lighting should be, and where things should be spacially - then work your lines, and then detail it, with an eye towards more detail on the focus - the woman - and not equally all over the piece. You can (and should) be able to lead the viewer to the things in the painting you want, with composition, detail, lighting, and texture. By controlling the level of detail, you can make the composition stronger.

[Broda81]

thanks for some helpful words , ...will be helpful:D , but on this time i dont,t have a time to improving the 'my small project', becouse i made new:D


Sory for my English.

[Broda81]

...i color...evaluate

[Lunatique]

You are still making the exact same mistakes in values in this new one. You need to stop making every little tiny area so contrasty going from very light to very dark values, and not all surfaces should have such light values in the highlights due to the local colors. For example, a matte surface with a dark local color (for example, red, navy blue, or other deep colors) will not have really light values for the highlight. Also, not all surfaces reflect light at the same strength--some surfaces are glossy and some are matte, and some are semi-glossy. They all reflect light at different intensities.

You really need to learn to manage your values, control the surface types in your image, and learn how to construct effective tonal composition for the entire image at the macro level, instead of obsessing with the micro level only.

[Broda81]

ok..thanks...it may be better :surprised

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.