Revolution

[CybrGfx]

Hi!

1. Resize your image.
Everyone else does, because no one like scrolling around to look at an artwork. 800 px wide is fine.

2. To me, this is a funny picture. The character pointing is laughing and saying, "Why yes, those pants DO make your butt look REALLY big! Har har har har!"
The woman on the left is evidently the sales clerk, and is not looking to prevent laughing, as she hopes the guy does not notice that the pants are actually radioactive, which explains the green glow...

3. The standard makes absolutely no sense, since there is no whipping, convoluted, winds that would make the fabric behave that way, while allowing the flames on his backpack to glow so nicely.

4. The background is distracting from all the action happening on the catwalk skull dead center of your canvas. This is normally a hard compositional feat to accomplish, but those rocks have succeeded...

This work shows a great deal of time and effort invested in it. With a great deal more, it could be salvaged, but honestly, I think whatever it is intended to be, you call it done, and consider it a compositional study for another version. Not only will it remind you of what you want the work to convey, it will also stand as a reminder that some pants really should not be worn with a skull belt under any circumstances...

~C

[PencilEater]

1. Ok, I fixed that.

2. Yes, it may look like you said:P but the real intesion of this poses was a triangular composition...;]

3. If there had been so "convulted" wind, the fabric would have been waving in one way...sorry, but for me, your opinion for this is absolutely senseless...

4.I had a great problem with background, I should take away some contrast ans saturation from it I think...

I'm paintiong only for one and half year, I'm still learning,and need better critique than "it's bad, do it better"...

[mrbungle72]

I think you're doing well for someone who's only been painting a year. I think the banner in the wind looks fine. True, the background is too busy and sharp, it competes with the foreground, but that could be fixed - or just keep it in mind next time.
As for other people's comments - just take the tips you feel are valid, if somebody's making a weak stab at humour in order to inflate their own ego, under the guise of "helping" you, they're probably best ignored.

[wo0lF]

I think you're doing well for someone who's only been painting a year. I think the banner in the wind looks fine. True, the background is too busy and sharp, it competes with the foreground, but that could be fixed - or just keep it in mind next time.
As for other people's comments - just take the tips you feel are valid, if somebody's making a weak stab at humour in order to inflate their own ego, under the guise of "helping" you, they're probably best ignored.

I totaly agree.

Keep it up

[voltageme5]

maybe you could blur the background a bit to "de-emphasize" it and bring a level of depth of field to the piece.

just a thought. ;)

Jesse

[CybrGfx]

1. Ok, I fixed that.Thank you.

2. Yes, it may look like you said:P but the real intesion of this poses was a triangular composition...;] WHY? This is a bad composition, and triangulating is does not improve it. A GOOD composition should provide the eye with at least one clear, dominant focal point, along with a smooth visual flow around the canvas, allowing the viewer to travel around the canvas, but with the eye always returning to the focal point to start the journey again...A triangle is a bottom heavy shape, and is only effective in a composition, when the three points are all focal points. Your bottom two points are two fairly static creatures, one of which is pointing to the main focal point, breaking the visual flow imediately...

Also, GOOD triangular compositions do not plop the triangle (as well as the main focal point) dead center in the canvas. That is one of the most basic mistakes of any artist, and sadly, one of the hardest to break...Raphael's Crucifixion is constantly used as an example, when it should be used as a bad example...Read THIS article (http://jurate.atspace.com/triangle.htm) if you want to understand good triangular composition.3. If there had been so "convulted" wind, the fabric would have been waving in one way...sorry, but for me, your opinion for this is absolutely senseless...Okay, let's try it again, with directional arrows...Wind does NOT blow hard enough to make that standard whip around like that, SO close to the body, while leaving the two flames on the backpack burning so evenly. Such winds would make the flames whip around even more, since fire is lighter than fabric...
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/5740/tricompyn1.jpg

If you do not take the time to THINK about what you are drawing, and then dismiss the comment as "absolutely (?!?) senseless," you have a VERY long way to go in learning to be a better artist. You most certainly will not learn much if you get easily offended, instead of trying to honestly evaluate if the statement makes sense, or if you might possibly be too defensive of your mistakes...
If you are that naive about how wind works, you will also have a difficult time effectively conveying it in art.4.I had a great problem with background, I should take away some contrast ans saturation from it I think...You STILL have a great problem with the background. It is distracting and over dominant in the image, and does not help with the flow. The values are too high contrast, with the rocks far too bright for the sun being BEHIND them. Again, you need to THINK about these things...And simply look around you. When the sun is going down, stop and look around you, and notice how the light and shadows are displayed.I'm paintiong only for one and half year, I'm still learning,and need better critique than "it's bad, do it better"...Wait a minute. Didn't you type All critique allowed;]at the end of your first post? All means ALL. Soft or harsh, cursory or detailed. What qualifies as a "better" critique is very subjective, and does NOT fit into "all critique allowed." Since you have been practicing for a year and a half, you should now be experienced enough to learn that when you request a critique, you do not get to pick and choose the comments. Especially on a Public forum, such as CGS, and others. You may get many opinions or you may get none. You may not like what you read. That is fine, then ignore it. But do so at your own peril.

When you create, you create first and formost for YOU. Drawing what interests YOU.
When you ask people for a critique, you will find out what does and does not interest THEM.
You must then decide which vision the work needs to fit. You, or the viewing world.

If it is you, good. Then take the critiques you get, enjoy the compliments, thank people politely and paint on, brother.

If it is the viewing public, with an eye towards selling your art or your talents, or just for public appreciation of your work, you need to put your Ego in your back pocket, until your skills are technically good enough that you do not even need to ask for public feedback, because everyone LOVES everything you create.

Your skills are not that good yet. You know this. That is why you are here.

You need to study basic composition more carefully.
Your background work needs study, but a fabulous background is still wasted if it is in a bad composition...
You accomplish little to post work in here with an attitude. You will miss tips and observations that truly may help you learn.

~C

[fluxist8070]

First off, for only painting for a year and a half, you are in a pretty good space.
It is evident you have been studying composition because its organization reflects 19th century academic and romantic paintings. It is a nice attempt. The one thing you are lacking is visual hierarchy. As stated earlier, the sunburst is conflicting with the main character.

To help the narrative, it might also make sense to have the main character interacting with the other characters.

I would suggest using a bit of reference for the rock face in the background.
Also, go to your local museum, if you have one and check out the 19th century painting...Flemish and Dutch if possible. This digital stuff is nice, but studying the analog stuff will make you a a better painter.
If you do not have a museum near by. go to www.nga.gov. It is the national gallery of art in Washington DC. Do an artist search for Rubens, it will blow your mind...
good luck!

[PencilEater]

WHY? This is a bad composition, and triangulating is does not improve it. A GOOD composition should provide the eye with at least one clear, dominant focal point, along with a smooth visual flow around the canvas, allowing the viewer to travel around the canvas, but with the eye always returning to the focal point to start the journey again...A triangle is a bottom heavy shape, and is only effective in a composition, when the three points are all focal points. Your bottom two points are two fairly static creatures, one of which is pointing to the main focal point, breaking the visual flow imediately...

Also, GOOD triangular compositions do not plop the triangle (as well as the main focal point) dead center in the canvas. That is one of the most basic mistakes of any artist, and sadly, one of the hardest to break...Raphael's Crucifixion is constantly used as an example, when it should be used as a bad example...Read THIS article (http://jurate.atspace.com/triangle.htm) if you want to understand good triangular composition.

I will read this article...I thought it's a good composition, the character on right is pointing on the character in the middle, this one in the middle is looking at the one on the left and the "left" character's hand is on the line to the character on the right...now you said it's bad...I will practise more on small shapes

Okay, let's try it again, with directional arrows...Wind does NOT blow hard enough to make that standard whip around like that, SO close to the body, while leaving the two flames on the backpack burning so evenly. Such winds would make the flames whip around even more, since fire is lighter than fabric...
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/5740/tricompyn1.jpg

If you do not take the time to THINK about what you are drawing, and then dismiss the comment as "absolutely (?!?) senseless," you have a VERY long way to go in learning to be a better artist. You most certainly will not learn much if you get easily offended, instead of trying to honestly evaluate if the statement makes sense, or if you might possibly be too defensive of your mistakes...
If you are that naive about how wind works, you will also have a difficult time effectively conveying it in art.

Ok, I know what you mean now, but really I couldn't understand you:P sorry, my fault, but I only tried to draw a nice fabric shape...ok, but if there hadn't been any wind, the would have looked flat and dull I think...I don't pay attention too such details I think...my falt

Wait a minute. Didn't you type

Sorry, I've forgotten to


at the end of your first post? All means ALL. Soft or harsh, cursory or detailed. What qualifies as a "better" critique is very subjective, and does NOT fit into "all critique allowed." Since you have been practicing for a year and a half, you should now be experienced enough to learn that when you request a critique, you do not get to pick and choose the comments. Especially on a Public forum, such as CGS, and others. You may get many opinions or you may get none. You may not like what you read. That is fine, then ignore it. But do so at your own peril.

When you create, you create first and formost for YOU. Drawing what interests YOU.
When you ask people for a critique, you will find out what does and does not interest THEM.
You must then decide which vision the work needs to fit. You, or the viewing world.

If it is you, good. Then take the critiques you get, enjoy the compliments, thank people politely and paint on, brother.

If it is the viewing public, with an eye towards selling your art or your talents, or just for public appreciation of your work, you need to put your Ego in your back pocket, until your skills are technically good enough that you do not even need to ask for public feedback, because everyone LOVES everything you create.

Your skills are not that good yet. You know this. That is why you are here.

You need to study basic composition more carefully.
Your background work needs study, but a fabulous background is still wasted if it is in a bad composition...
You accomplish little to post work in here with an attitude. You will miss tips and observations that truly may help you learn.


What did I mean saying "better critique"? I mean the post like your second, when you explainig what is wrong and why. I know my skill are not good, I'm still learning(on my mistakes). I registered here with intension to learn...really I didn't want to be rude too you, sometimes it's hard to me to write what I meant in English;] anyway, thanks for such a big post;]

maybe you could blur the background a bit to "de-emphasize" it and bring a level of depth of field to the piece.

voltageme5, I tried to desatured it, but like CybrGfx said, the composition is bad, so background won't make it better:\

I think you're doing well for someone who's only been painting a year. I think the banner in the wind looks fine. True, the background is too busy and sharp, it competes with the foreground, but that could be fixed - or just keep it in mind next time.
As for other people's comments - just take the tips you feel are valid, if somebody's making a weak stab at humour in order to inflate their own ego, under the guise of "helping" you, they're probably best ignored.

Thanks, but I think CybrGfx is right. I will try to not make the same mistakes in the future...

First off, for only painting for a year and a half, you are in a pretty good space.
It is evident you have been studying composition because its organization reflects 19th century academic and romantic paintings. It is a nice attempt. The one thing you are lacking is visual hierarchy. As stated earlier, the sunburst is conflicting with the main character.

To help the narrative, it might also make sense to have the main character interacting with the other characters.

I would suggest using a bit of reference for the rock face in the background.
Also, go to your local museum, if you have one and check out the 19th century painting...Flemish and Dutch if possible. This digital stuff is nice, but studying the analog stuff will make you a a better painter.
If you do not have a museum near by. go to www.nga.gov (http://www.nga.gov/). It is the national gallery of art in Washington DC. Do an artist search for Rubens, it will blow your mind...
good luck!


Thanks for this link, as you said I have problems with composition...It's my maybe third such big picture (before I was painting character)...I think I'm geting lost in all this composition, visual hierarchy and all this stuff :P

[Morano]

PencilEater- great nickname. I wish I could produce such a work when I was at your age, you have some great future in digital arts

now lets do some reponse for that critique here

Thank you.
WHY? This is a bad composition, and triangulating is does not improve it. A GOOD composition should provide the eye with at least one clear, dominant focal point, along with a smooth visual flo arrows...Wind does NOT blow hard enough to make that standard whip around like that, SO close to the body, while leaving the two flames on the backpack burning so evenly. Such winds would make the flames whip around even more, since fire is lighter than


so basically we have lot of blah blah blah here ,and I cut lot of that so save some space






fabric...
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/5740/tricompyn1.jpg




well,that's a very nice drawing of yours CybrGfx.Little childish understanding of nature but fine. But tell me ,since when the shape of the fabric in the wind depends of only one physical aspect of the air -pushing? have you ever hear about sucktion or streching as a result of these two to fabric surface ? the air is made of participles which basicaly ech one of it moves its own direction -it is complete chaos ,sometimes they can form streams or mass moving similar way or direction -but even then there is lot of turbulences mostly on the edges of that forms -if air would be so predictable why they would spend so much time and money for tests planes or cars in air tunnels? wouldn;t be easie r just to stand a little flag next to car and watch which direction it goes -and say "a-ha ! so teh air goes that way -that's it we got it!"

In this particular case you didnt notice that wind can actually go ANY direction ,not only from left to right so basically horizontally or from top to bottom -i know this might be shocking for you but wind sometimes blows from bottom too, YUP! scary isn't it? but very pratical when ladies in skirts are around. Can you see that huge whirl in the background? can this produce strong sucktion making air masses from entire valley go straigh t up? sure it can -that would explain those flames on backpack go up , but maybe there is more common explanaiton for that direction -of course it is , a huge amount of examples can show you how often the air masses pushed from the one side of the mountains can go thru the valley and blast oposite mountain wall with strong wind going up to mountain peak -which is BTW explanaition for those "strange" "ufo " like clouds over mountains sometimes.
now ,what is really happens in that banner is just a result on strong verstical air stream going from the bottom of the rock-statue, so it little pulls at the top, then it's fall againg towards the grown as it is too heavy , then it is pushed or sucked up again because the air force is stronger than its weight -at the end the banner is thinner so lighter, then at the very end we have some turbulences ,a reflected or bounced of the charcter air masses ...

but all this talking is rubish because none of you critique about air has no place here since you have asumed that is Earth where it is happen. I don;t know how about you but i have never seen structures like that on earth- so what if that IS NOT earth scenery? can this be possible? in ...wait a minute fantasy illustration ? Ofcourse it is possible, it is also possible to this world to have completly other physics than ours in fact it is possible that there is no physics at all .that is how you just waisted your time to critique this picture



If you do not take the time to THINK about what you are drawing, and then dismiss the comment as "absolutely (?!?) senseless," you have a VERY long way to go in learning to be a better artist. You most certainly will not learn much if you get easily offended, instead of trying to honestly evaluate if the statement makes sense, or if you might possibly be too
You accomplish little to post work in here with an attitude. You will miss tips and observations that truly may help you learn.

~C



there we have some more blah blah at the end , I ve cut it again s

[Oberyn]

P-if air would be so predictable why they would spend so much time and money for tests planes or cars in air tunnels? wouldn;t be easie r just to stand a little flag next to car and watch which direction it goes -and say "a-ha ! so teh air goes that way -that's it we got it!"

What you're talking about, and what he's talking about, are two completely different phenomena. He's talking about generalized wind currents that make sense in the scene, around a character that is roughly man-sized. You aren't going to see the level of turbulence you're describing outside of gale force winds/hurricane/tornadoes/strong dust devils/etc, and in that case he wouldn't be standing up. Yes, wind is weird, unpredictable, and fluid. It is, however, highly unlikely you'd see a windsock blown around like a curlicue, right next to a largely unmolested candle, or firepit, or something of that nature. To achieve the effect he's implying, the jets above his shoulders would need to be blowing a fairly high thrust, and right now they look like plumes of lazy flame.
Comparing that to high-speed aerodynamics testing doesn't make much sense. Cyber's critique is perfectly valid.

That being said... there's nothing to say he can't cheat a little bit to make the scene more visually appealing. He doesn't have to be an aerodynamics physicist to make an appealing piece. He just has to make it believable.

If this were, as you said, not Earth, or under conditions dissimilar to Earth's...
...well... everybody has their own school of thought, I suppose, but I've always been taught that you either build a scene into a world that's like ours' (i.e. something the viewer can relate to and feel part of), or if you're going in the opposite direction, you REALLY go in the opposite direction. Give the viewer an intense feel of visual vertigo. Make them feel like the image isn't SUPPOSED to make sense, like it's beyond fathoming.

Currently, this image seems to sit in between those two points.

[CybrGfx]

Thank you Oberyn, I could not even have stated that as politely and tactfully as you did.

Pity that even illustrative arrows can't get the point through to some people...You've now restated my argument regarding the standard and the flames for the 3rd time. Anyone who doesn't get understand the comment at this point is too dense to bother with.

~C

[PencilEater]

Know what? I don't understand this great debate about WIND...! Like Oberyn said I'm not aerodynamics physicist and I'm not going to analyse every crincle on the fabric...for me it's possible shape of this banner, and i like how it made up...

Currently, this image seems to sit in between those two points.

Yes, that's it...

Such analysis(abou wind) is killing the spirit of art I think...In this sake I'm with Morano...

He just has to make it believable.

THIS is great sentence...Fantasy art is to make an impossible be believeable...BELIVEABLE

I have a great request for everyone...if you will want to write about the wind, don't write anything;]

[PencilEater]

Pity that even illustrative arrows can't get the point through to some people...You've now restated my argument regarding the standard and the flames for the 3rd time. Anyone who doesn't get understand the comment at this point is too dense to bother with.

...We all know that this picture is far far away from ideal...and really I don't think it's worth a row like this...

[fluxist8070]

Pencil Eater,
If I were in your shoes...I would listen to Morano. The guy is more than just talk and arguments....he is a really good digital painter. His stuff has been featured of imaginefx...he has mad skill. He can back up his comments with WORK. If you want to judge who is giving you a good crit...I would suggest looking at the work of people who are critting you. If they have good work, then, chances are, they have good advice for you because they have BEEN there.

Anyone can blather on about the wind. If you had plans to make technical drawings, I believe that you would be on a different forum:lightbulb This is fantasy work. your banner would not have the same visual appeal if it was falling flat or streaming to one side. Exagerating physics, anatomy, astronomy, gravity, time etc is what artists do.

There are some things that you could tighten up on this image, but all in all it is a pretty decent piece of work. It has strengths and weaknesses, like all things made by humans. Don't concentrate on making everything perfect, that will get you nowhere fast.

Plus, keep in mind there is no one way of doing things... especailly making a piece of visual art.

[Algorithmic]

Hey there,
Awesome image, I think this would make a great comic cover :)
Critique wise:
The statue (a assume it is a statue...) he is standing on could use some more texture work to define the material as stone, metal... etc... Some nice stone textures would look cool in my opinion. Also the sky could use some refining... something about it seems too stiff and flat... here's a good example of how to make your sky pop a bit more: http://alexiuss.deviantart.com/art/Antonymic-Cyclone-92357304

also, this is just a preference... but I think it would look better if you straitened out that left flame on his shoulder, and where you have the flag in front of the staff (midway up) you should just stick that behind... it just looks like your trying to hard to make it look naturally curling and waving and it's ending up looking unnatural. Also making the end of the flag disappear behind the statue instead of falling in front would probably add some more depth.

Good luck! :thumbsup: (http://forums.cgsociety.org/misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=0#)

[PencilEater]

Pencil Eater,
If I were in your shoes...I would listen to Morano. The guy is more than just talk and arguments....he is a really good digital painter. His stuff has been featured of imaginefx...he has mad skill. He can back up his comments with WORK. If you want to judge who is giving you a good crit...I would suggest looking at the work of people who are critting you. If they have good work, then, chances are, they have good advice for you because they have BEEN there.

Anyone can blather on about the wind. If you had plans to make technical drawings, I believe that you would be on a different forum:lightbulb This is fantasy work. your banner would not have the same visual appeal if it was falling flat or streaming to one side. Exagerating physics, anatomy, astronomy, gravity, time etc is what artists do.

There are some things that you could tighten up on this image, but all in all it is a pretty decent piece of work. It has strengths and weaknesses, like all things made by humans. Don't concentrate on making everything perfect, that will get you nowhere fast.

Plus, keep in mind there is no one way of doing things... especailly making a piece of visual art.

Yes, I talk about my images with morano...but I've lost a will to paint...I won't work on this image anymore. I'm sick of all this composition and flow stuff...Thanks for comment, cheers...;]


Hey there,
Awesome image, I think this would make a great comic cover :)
Critique wise:
The statue (a assume it is a statue...) he is standing on could use some more texture work to define the material as stone, metal... etc... Some nice stone textures would look cool in my opinion. Also the sky could use some refining... something about it seems too stiff and flat... here's a good example of how to make your sky pop a bit more: http://alexiuss.deviantart.com/art/...yclone-92357304 (http://alexiuss.deviantart.com/art/Antonymic-Cyclone-92357304)

also, this is just a preference... but I think it would look better if you straitened out that left flame on his shoulder, and where you have the flag in front of the staff (midway up) you should just stick that behind... it just looks like your trying to hard to make it look naturally curling and waving and it's ending up looking unnatural. Also making the end of the flag disappear behind the statue instead of falling in front would probably add some more depth.

Good luck! :thumbsup: (http://forums.cgsociety.org/misc.php?do=getsmilies&wysiwyg=1&forumid=0#)


Thanks;] In the first version I've painted a great hole in the sky...I looks really great (the depth was good),but then my ps crashed, and everything gone...then I've painted this whirl, but it's not so good...I won't work on this anymore, I will have a lesson for the future work

[Bouke285]

Being new to art myself I had to notice the comment made by pencileater. "I have only been painting for a year and a half." This right away hints on the fact that pencileater isn't looking for honest crits as much as he is, loving comments of amazement. In all honesty even I can see that this composition sucks the background does not fit the image at all. Having two characters pointing at the focal point doesn't make any sense. How will your eye go from the focal point to following the arm of the pointing character, back to the focal point, over to the other character, and then decide to go back to the focal point?

My suggestion take the all of the crits you can get don't listen to the people slamming the critique you have gotten. All critique is a valuable resource and the ignorance morano and fluxics have shown proves that you should not be listening to their advice.

[PencilEater]

Being new to art myself I had to notice the comment made by pencileater. "I have only been painting for a year and a half." This right away hints on the fact that pencileater isn't looking for honest crits as much as he is, loving comments of amazement. In all honesty even I can see that this composition sucks the background does not fit the image at all. Having two characters pointing at the focal point doesn't make any sense. How will your eye go from the focal point to following the arm of the pointing character, back to the focal point, over to the other character, and then decide to go back to the focal point?

My suggestion take the all of the crits you can get don't listen to the people slamming the critique you have gotten. All critique is a valuable resource and the ignorance you have shown along with fluxics proves that you have no interest in hearing the truth

I think that you didn't read all this thread...Do you really think that I'm not care about all the critique? So tell me, why did I started a new thread and started to discus a composition in my next art with CybrGfx..? I remember every critique, and I really care about it. Morano says that too much,maybe, but I want to be better. I'm not a student of any artistic school, so I'm learning on my mistakes...

[CybrGfx]

PencilEater, you show that you care about your work in MANY ways.

You show that you care with the intense amount of care and detail that you put into your art. Even is misplaced, or not as effective as you intend, the effort is visible.

You show that you care, in that you DO listen to critiques, you do NOT whine and cry when something negative is said, and you ARE willing to discuss different points of view than your own. You will advance MUCH farther as an artist than the majority of over-sensitive whiners.

I am sorry that all the discussion of Compositional elements has robbed you of your motiviation on this piece. That is the risk you take when you post your work online for comments by viewers. I do hope that you learned some valuable things to take with you into your next work, and that you soon find the inspiration to start a new piece.

~C

[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.