Hey all, need help with this environment piece, one of the artworks I’m hoping to submit to Alderac entertainment. It’s a remake of an L5R card called Oyo Seido, and is supposed to depict a small temple in the middle of the forest. I think it’s okay, but still lacking something, and I’d love some fresh eyes and commentary.
Judging from the results I get when I do an image search for ‘asian forest shrine’, it should have a more complex roof construction.
Also, it would probably be more interesting if it was presented at an angle.
The rays of light could be more desaturated, possibly with a blue tint.
I would like to see more detail in the foliage. Not necessarily single leaves, but it should be possible to see different masses of leaves that belongs to single trees. Now the foliage looks more like a green haze.
I’m no botanist, but the trees in the foreground looks a bit strange to me, as if you painted them without having a solid idea of what a tree trunk looks like. Perhaps you should use reference pictures when painting the trunks.
Again, I’m no expert on trees and there are lots of different weird trees out there.
What I like in this picture is the general tone and colours.
In general this looks too flat. Even if the lighting’s diffused, it still has a sense of direction, and right now, there’s no sense of lighting direction in the scene. Make your form and cast shadows more obvious. Also, where are your specular highlights? They add a lot to an image, even if you just use them sparingly as accents.
Do those trees need to be in the scene? They take up so much space but do so little for the composition.
Thanks for the advice Robert.
To address one question specifically, I put the trees there to frame the temple. I thought I was making a good composition this way by creating a triangle leading to the temple, was I not?
Framing the subject is certainly a useful trick in composition, but you have to think about why you’re using that trick in the first place. Does the tree have any relationship to the subject in some way that’s got narrative significance? For example, if I were to frame an image of a paparazzo trying to block his own face from a camera pointed at him, and the borders of the image looks like the circular shape of a camera lens, then the frame itself has narrative significance–that it is an ironic look at a paparazzo getting a taste of his own medicine. Or maybe it’s an image of a small plant growing out from underneath a pile of rubble, and framing the image are two tipped over columns with decorative carvings that’s cracked and defaced. In this case, the columns represent the ruins, and the plant is growing despite being in a desolate, abandoned place.
Also, think about whether the framing method actually makes the image “better.” Does it create some kind of visual element that’s vastly improved or made more compelling due to the framing? Does it add narrative significance? Is the framing integral to the meaning of the image, or the overall purpose of the image, or is it totally superfluous and unnecessary?
Thanks again for the critique. You make an excellent point regarding the necessity of the trees. I’ll be honest and say that at this point I am just using the trees for composition’s sake. Whether or not it makes it better is up for debate I guess, but I initially felt that it did the trick. At this point I feel like I just have to stick with it since it was so central to my original thumbnails.
There is a lack of story in the image, which makes it kind of dull. It’s something that I’ll have to think about some more. I’ll make some more changes to this and update here soon.
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.