Not bad at all EyeSeeBlack!
Completely agree with Jaime’s comments. I would actually lose the horse and rider altogther. A little light bloom on the foreground elements and some of that mist coming into play at the base of the rocks on the right to tie it all together and it will be a really nice job!
Thanks for sharing!
Nick
A very nice painting. I particulalry like the palette.
I have dabbled in matte painting but Im never sure how or where to obtain ref images.
Can you give some idea where you obtained the images for this piece?
Great work, The final turned out really nice 
But hows that horse going to get down?! 
Keep up the good work!
Ok,
Pretty
The black levels are varying across the painting especially in the foreground. Remember things further away are lighter and knocked back compared to foreground. Check the fence to the bottom left as an example.
Different hot points on the castle, white, yellow, orange? uniform them a little, especially where they’re angled towards the same direction.
The lighting around the castle is pretty, but in some areas reminds me of a 1970s dance floor. See the foreground element, left.
Background mountains are a little bland, very flat, could do with a little more definition.
Purely asthetics but … is that knight stranded? poor horse looks like he’s about to take a very big leap of faith!
One tree with leaves another without?
Waterfall to the right looks very painterly.
Why do i see so many paintings that are over sharpened and finished with a photoshop film grain?
Background sky looks nice, and over all pleasing composition, though you could do with bringing the castle more to the center, just a little.
Not bad, but could be refined
Dave.
The horse and rider is a statue i think…?:shrug:
this piece has a bit of a lotr rivendell feel to it…
Yeah you’re right, it just reminded me a little of this http://www.dusso.com/images/mp02/MP45.jpe for some reason, don’t know why heh…
good job
I guess I find myself wondering why the light-play across the foreground is not consistent with the other layers of depth … particularly since there seems to be just a hint of the more-appropriate treatment along the leading edge of the fence.
There’s also an obvious visual inconsistency in the first crop … “obvious,” at least, when one points it out. On the right-hand side of the frame, the large size (hence, close proximity) of the jagged wooden tree, plus the improbably-placed waterfall, plus the very great distance of the knight-in-shining-armor, simply cannot be reconciled one against the other. They basically share the same rock wall: hence, they are impossible.
The second crop, therefore, is much the stronger … and it does just fine without the distracting details present in the first. “Merely answer me why the edge-light on that fence-line should be so, and I shall be happy.” Better yet, give this area uniformly the same kind of color-treatment that is seen elsewhere, by presumably the same setting (or rising) sun. The absence of both the waterfall and the (inexplicably, unlit) “brave knight” is not to be mourned.
If you look closely the branch on the right is not sprouting from the cliff, it’s coming from off frame in the close foreground, at a proximity similar to the branch on the left.
I think it’s fine. The lighting treatment in this matte creates more depth within the image. Photographically, it’s perfectly natural for foreground objects to expose as dark with a glancing highlight or bounce light as seen here.
Don’t be afraid to push FG>MG>BG more in your future paintings.
Depending on the humidity and therefore photons in the atmosphere,
things do often fall off a lot stronger/quicker than we tend to think.
Just a thought for upcoming personal pieces you might be working on…
