BuckwolfeStarts With Them, Ends With UsRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
Eh, its kinda neat, Squidy, but the perspective in terms of anatomy is pretty wild. Apart from the winged chick's wings looking incredibly flat, and unattached to her body, the foreshortening on her body doesn't match with perspective you've chosen.
It feels really flat over all. Like you really aren't pushing, or exaggerating some things as far as you should be. Or knocking other things back enough for that matter. I'd love to do a draw over, but i'm not sure if I'm capable enough to adequately illustrate what I mean. I might give it a shot though. I dunno if I'll be of any help though.
It really does look like it has a lot of potential, though, if that counts for anything.
Shit. Its been ages since I've tried giving out a proper crit to anyone. I think my vocabulary, and general wording needs some work. I feel really rusty.
BuckwolfeStarts With Them, Ends With UsRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
Maybe that's because it was on the BotP, Flay.
Although thinking about it, I probably should have reposted it as a BotP, seeing as how I have the TotP. I just didn't notice it until now.
Overall I'd say Matt's piece is pretty well rounded, except that the number ID board (fuck if I know what its actually called) feels a little small, and tight around the figures neck. I think it might benefit if the canvas were extended a little lower, and the ID card were knocked down a bit so it doesn't feel so constricting. Or maybe play with the cropping, and try cutting off a little of the dangling ID card around his neck. Like, giving it a bigger area, but cropping off the bottom. I dunno. Its just a thought.
Maybe add a little more detail to the suit, so that it doesn't look at flat as the background.
I know this much, that date and sig are anything but subtle.
Although thinking about it, I probably should have reposted it as a BotP, seeing as how I have the TotP. I just didn't notice it until now.
Overall I'd say Matt's piece is pretty well rounded, except that the number ID board (fuck if I know what its actually called) feels a little small, and tight around the figures neck. I think it might benefit if the canvas were extended a little lower, and the ID card were knocked down a bit so it doesn't feel so constricting. Or maybe play with the cropping, and try cutting off a little of the dangling ID card around his neck. Like, giving it a bigger area, but cropping off the bottom. I dunno. Its just a thought.
Maybe add a little more detail to the suit, so that it doesn't look at flat as the background.
I know this much, that date and sig are anything but subtle.
I appreciate the comments. I'm working from his actual mugshot - he was arrested back in 38 for seducing a married woman - which is to say that it's actually the size of the card relative to the rest of him. The original photo is more than a bit blown out, so to put details in the suit I'd have to vary from the photo. I'll consider it, but I'm kind of sticking to the photos for this series because I like that theme. I don't want it to sound like I'm being lazy though: I totally agree with your compositional suggestions.
As for the signature, it's totally too big. I have no idea why I did it that large.
mattharvests painting convinces me that painting is all about value, rather than just colour.
I'm 99% sure this is a complement, i.e. that I did a good job communicating form and whatnot through value, right? If so, I thought I should add a bit of extra info: as indicated above, these mugshot paintings are from the actual mugshots taken of the musicians. All of them were originally in B&W (if I had to guess, it was cheaper for the police station?). I bring in some color because I don't like straight B&W for my paintings (I don't want to sound like I dislike it in others' work).
That said, assuming I'm correct that you like it, I appreciate the complement.
EDIT: Here's a hotlinked copy of the mugshot, to see where I'm coming from.
BuckwolfeStarts With Them, Ends With UsRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
Fuck.
I was just about to post saying that when working from reference, you should always post the reference(s) along with your piece for easier critiquing. Looks like I was beaten to the punch.
As often as I use references, I hate doing so. I feel like I should have worked up a more reliable, comprehensive visual library by now, but I just can't retain any of that shit. I always let it be known when I use references, but it always feels like a firm blow to my pride when I do so. I still have to give credit where its due though, whether I like it or not.
EDIT: Ears look even more inaccurate now, with the reference posted. Flay's initial call was dead on.
I was just about to post saying that when working from reference, you should always post the reference(s) along with your piece for easier critiquing. Looks like I was beaten to the punch.
As often as I use references, I hate doing so. I feel like I should have worked up a more reliable, comprehensive visual library by now, but I just can't retain any of that shit. I always let it be known when I use references, but it always feels like a firm blow to my pride when I do so. I still have to give credit where its due though, whether I like it or not.
EDIT: Ears look even more inaccurate now, with the reference posted. Flay's initial call was dead on.
Yes, the ears will definitely be reworked tomorrow. Thanks to both of you on that.
It is. When i think to paint a face im like "ok, i need my burnt sienna, umber, marine blue and naples yellow to make my skin tones".
Now, lets look at yours. You didnt really use realistic skin tones, but your value and lighting are both done extremely well which makes it so believable. Add your hints of colour, and it brings everything together.
It is. When i think to paint a face im like "ok, i need my burnt sienna, umber, marine blue and naples yellow to make my skin tones".
Now, lets look at yours. You didnt really use realistic skin tones, but your value and lighting are both done extremely well which makes it so believable. Add your hints of colour, and it brings everything together.
He's got a little eye weirdness goin' on, I'm not good with eyes myself so this is just me comparing your painting to the reference:
-his left iris goes below the lid in the photo, is much higher in the painting
-in the photo his right pupil lines up horizontally with the bottom of his left eyelid but in the painting it lines up with the much higher iris
I guess his left eye is just out of perspective with the rest of his face. Anyway I like it a lot!
Sketch of Waylon Jennings that I started and then remembered that I hate doing stuff like this because it always makes me feel like THAT GUY AT THE MALL.
Guy Bell on
0
Options
BuckwolfeStarts With Them, Ends With UsRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
Unless you stop shaving, use only an airbrush, and actually have a kiosk at the mall, you will never be that guy. At best you could be a poor imitation, which is actually somehow better than being that guy at the mall.
You have more potential than that, so show some pride.
Over all your portrait is severely lacking in contrast. I'm not sure what reference you're using (it would really help if you posted it), but you really need to be conscious of which values to push further. It doesn't look like you've concentrated too much on any one particular area, which is good. At least you haven't over worked anything. I think that all you need is a little refining in some areas, and you're Jennings homage will be good to go!
Doesn't matter. I'm gonna go live on the beach and make bad jewelry and sell it and only date girls named after gemstones (Jade, Crystal, Sapphire, etc.)
Guy Bell on
0
Options
BuckwolfeStarts With Them, Ends With UsRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
Dude. You're dick is going to get so much action, its not even funny.
I made some modifications based on comments here: notably, I've altered the ears and eyes a good deal, as well as fixing the shadows on the neck and hair.
The overall color tone is different here, but it's because of the lighting I took the photo in: it's about 1040pm here, as opposed to 2pm when I photo'd the previous version. My work space is heavily naturally lit during the day.
Doesn't matter. I'm gonna go live on the beach and make bad jewelry and sell it and only date girls named after gemstones (Jade, Crystal, Sapphire, etc.)
As long as you're never actively involved in airbrushing a bling-wearing Tasmanian devil on the back of a bulk-purchased Hanes beefy tee in a mall kiosk named Urban Stylezz you'll be fine.
word. Just as a suggestion, you can ditch the general color of my outfit (the orange) its hard to make it work with the brownish skin tone when I was working with that
I made some modifications based on comments here: notably, I've altered the ears and eyes a good deal, as well as fixing the shadows on the neck and hair.
The overall color tone is different here, but it's because of the lighting I took the photo in: it's about 1040pm here, as opposed to 2pm when I photo'd the previous version. My work space is heavily naturally lit during the day.
It looks way better, my only possible complaint would be that the disparity in texture between the skin and everything else is pretty big, but that might just be a taste thing. Love the yellows and blues.
Blue one is mostly done, but needs some adjusting in how much the texture is poppin'...and details.
I think (even though I gave myself a poly limit for all these props) I'm using too many polys for certain things, when they don't need to be that high...especially considering how low I've managed to get some others. The vases, for example, did not look right unless I used more divisions on the axes. They're each just under 200 polys.
Also olol stylization apparently my brain isn't so into that. Maybe I should just really push the proportions of things, again, after I think they've already been pushed?
On the other hand, these are just vases. But! They seem too realistically-textured when compared to Mr. Crate here, which is roughly the "look" I'm going for:
But! Maybe I'm overthinking things. Maybe not? It seems that stylized textures are more simplified than the natural "realistic" thing I naturally gravitate towards...but I just keep rendering, because I think to myself "I have to spend more time on texturing this; it can't possibly be good if I only spent this much time on it"....and then it gets over-rendered, and goes more "realistic". Blarghawglbhg
I have about half of my 20 models left to model and UV, woo! Then texture-madness occurs.
As far as stylized textures go and over rendering. Just keep in mind that if you were making this for production not only would you have a poly limit but you'd have a texture res limit as well. And for some thing like a vase or the like you'd probably at max have a 512x512 limit and that's generous for something that small. It'd probably be 256x256 and there is only so much detail that is going to fit into a texture of that size.
LittleBoots on
Tofu wrote: Here be Littleboots, destroyer of threads and master of drunkposting.
Uh, yeah, the crate and vases don't really match each other. You might want to model/texture some of these objects in the same scene so you can keep your eye on how each objects fits in the context of the others. You could even place them together in a little mini-scene so you can piece together a little bit of the "world" you're trying to make here.
Also, how are you thinking about your style? Is it just, "hey this should be stylized olol"? Because if so, yeah, things are going to get inconsistent. Things are much clearer if you nail down:
-What is the overall setting?
-Who the game is aimed towards (youngins? tweens? hardcore Ninja Gaiden fans?)
-How much time you (or your team) has and how many assets have to be made in that time (If you need 60 assets out of every artist in a month, you're not going to be able to get away with just adding on a few more hours on every item to make it extra nice...and if you did, your fellow artists (who like to go home and see their families at night) are going to be pissed because then your stuff won't match any of theirs...and you and the people you work with are going to have to put in a lot of overtime hours prior to a milestone to go back and make your shit match the rest of the game.)
I mean, I know you know this stuff because you've taken concept art classes which should cover the basics of how art direction works in a production and why doing it right saves time and money over just going in and seeing what sticks, but you might be having a disconnect between "art direction/concept mode" and "down-in-the-trenches asset production mode" here, and it's making you veer off target in the time and consistency department. Having a really solid idea of what you mean to accomplish as a whole may help reel in the model time/detail bloat...and prevent you from going nuts trying to do a million ultra-real assets in 2 weeks or however long you've got.
If you're on your own, you can't just be a good artist, you have to be a good manager as well.
EDIT: Man this rant reminds me of that old Halkun "no you are not going to be able to make Final Fantasy level graphics for an entire game by yourself" thread.
As far as stylized textures go and over rendering. Just keep in mind that if you were making this for production not only would you have a poly limit but you'd have a texture res limit as well. And for some thing like a vase or the like you'd probably at max have a 512x512 limit and that's generous for something that small. It'd probably be 256x256 and there is only so much detail that is going to fit into a texture of that size.
Spoiler'd cuz I write a lot
Yeah, I know. I've been wondering if I should knock the 512's on these to 256. I guess what I'm unsure about is where the line is drawn between the two sizes. For something like a vase, I imagine 256 would be more appropriate...but I think I opted for 512 because I thought "olol these could be really large vases", and I'd be able to show more texturin'. ......because that is in part why I'm doing all these little props - to show that I can model and texture small simple things...and I just figured that a 256 texture would offer me less opportunity to show that than a 512......but I have to also show that I understand what texture size is appopriate for what size model, rite?
I was thinking about just finishing all the prop models, and then making a kind of "line-up" scene where I can gauge the sizes of each and figure out what texture size is appropriate.
It's just....auuugh....what do you do when you have something that's perfect for a 256 texture, another thing that's perfect for a 512 texture...and then you have something in between these two? Either it's going to look over-textured if you use the 512...or it'll look under-textured if you use 256...OR you just won't use that much texture space in a 512, and it'll look fine, but oh noes you wasted texture space and that's super bad..........right? So what the hell, I'm lost there.
EDIT: Man this rant reminds me of that old Halkun "no you are not going to be able to make Final Fantasy level graphics for an entire game by yourself" thread.
Spoiler'd again
But whyyyyyyyy nooooooot? :C
In alls of seriousnesses, though...
I think I'm just being lazy. Well, maybe not "lazy" so much as "oh god have to finish these don't have time to design each one to a 'T', I'll just wing it"...which has resulted in this, obviously. ...I mean, I was thinking "stylized" without much of any solid basis, but I thought the "general style idea" was strong enough in my head to make cohesive models+textures! Apparently not.
I didn't really give myself a time limit on these guys, but I figured I could compete 2 a day, easily...maybe three, if there are a few simpler ones. After modeling a few and doing these textures, I think that's still pretty accurate. I don't want to rush through them, because in the end they're supposed to be for my portfolio...and I want them to look nice. I think doing 2-3 a day works out to where I can complete them at a level I'm happy with.
I think the other problem with "winging it" is that the models I've done so far...are pretty generic. I didn't go through a huge design-process for each one...I just, again, had a rough idea of what I wanted to go for. I figured I could make them more unique in the textures, but.....ack
~~~~~~
Hmm...maybe I'll do a "Pirates of the Caribbean"-setting, cartoony-like-WoW-but-not-that-extreme set. For....uh....teens? I don't know...WoW has a super cartoony, stylized look, but I'd imagine most of the people playing that game are around the late teens through the 20's age group...
Man still, though...the only way I imagine tying the models together now is through "sea-stuff".....like barnacles and seaweed and green mucky stuff. It's like I can't wrap my head around inventing a style for 3D objects.....if I was given a style? Hell yes, I could make things based off of that...but inventing a style that doesn't scream "you were looking at 'x' game, huh?" seems to be a real challenge for me.
Dammit why can't I just know all the answers immediately and do everything perfectly the first time??
I will ask this always.
:C
Also me not knowing this is, like, embarrassing. Especially because I'm talking to people that know the three-deez. It's like going up to a famous fashion designer and being all "HAHA, YEAH! SEWING SHIT, RIGHT? I MEAN, I SEWED SOMETHING ONCE. IT WAS A BABY QUILT, CHECK IT OUT" and I unroll it from my coat pocket and it's all falling apart and a disaster and horribly amateurish and the designer is all "wtf"
YOUR A FINE ARTIST? I PAINT STUFF TO CHECK IT OUTTT, then you unroll a sheet of slightly bendy paper from the rolling of the paper with anime eyed one winged half animal/human thingy acrylic finger painting
As far as stylized textures go and over rendering. Just keep in mind that if you were making this for production not only would you have a poly limit but you'd have a texture res limit as well. And for some thing like a vase or the like you'd probably at max have a 512x512 limit and that's generous for something that small. It'd probably be 256x256 and there is only so much detail that is going to fit into a texture of that size.
Spoiler'd cuz I write a lot
Yeah, I know. I've been wondering if I should knock the 512's on these to 256. I guess what I'm unsure about is where the line is drawn between the two sizes. For something like a vase, I imagine 256 would be more appropriate...but I think I opted for 512 because I thought "olol these could be really large vases", and I'd be able to show more texturin'. ......because that is in part why I'm doing all these little props - to show that I can model and texture small simple things...and I just figured that a 256 texture would offer me less opportunity to show that than a 512......but I have to also show that I understand what texture size is appopriate for what size model, rite?
I was thinking about just finishing all the prop models, and then making a kind of "line-up" scene where I can gauge the sizes of each and figure out what texture size is appropriate.
It's just....auuugh....what do you do when you have something that's perfect for a 256 texture, another thing that's perfect for a 512 texture...and then you have something in between these two? Either it's going to look over-textured if you use the 512...or it'll look under-textured if you use 256...OR you just won't use that much texture space in a 512, and it'll look fine, but oh noes you wasted texture space and that's super bad..........right? So what the hell, I'm lost there.
Honestly, if those vases are already at 512 I think you're fine. It's hard to know exactly what kind of texture sizes to give each object without knowing exactly how they are going to fit into a scene. Like you said, the level designer might decide to scale those up to be large vases that sit on the floor. In that case you'd need that extra detail 512 would give you. On the other hand if they were scaled down to fit on a book shelf the 512 would probably be over kill. It all depends on the context of the model in the scene I guess.
LittleBoots on
Tofu wrote: Here be Littleboots, destroyer of threads and master of drunkposting.
I don't think a "huge design process" is really warranted, just a firm vision in your head of what the world is supposed to look and feel like, so you don't spend too much time trying to figure out what the heck things are supposed to look like.
Also, guess what, not every game, artist, or style needs to be mind-shatteringly original to be successful, it just needs to know what it's doing and why, and then executed well. It's more important that you just pick something and stick to it, and do it to the best of your ability. When you go to work you'll probably wind up modeling yet another model of an M-16 for the 47th sequel to a shooter franchise or something anyway. So if you just say, "PIRATES OF DARK WATER! <slams desk> That's what I'm going with, that's what I'm sticking to end of discussion!", you'll be free to focus on just making things good, rather than assuming a company is going to pick you up as art director for a bold new franchise straight out of art school and worrying about all the shit that comes with that.
Of course, to be fair, you're the one who wanted to go towards a singular "look" for these props, which may or may not be totally relevant in a portfolio...though it will be when you start actual work. So I guess make a decision on how stressed you want to get over the consistency based on how important you think the practice will be.
Also if you're hitting your time deadlines what are you freaking out about so much anyway you silly girl.
Eh, its kinda neat, Squidy, but the perspective in terms of anatomy is pretty wild. Apart from the winged chick's wings looking incredibly flat, and unattached to her body, the foreshortening on her body doesn't match with perspective you've chosen.
It feels really flat over all. Like you really aren't pushing, or exaggerating some things as far as you should be. Or knocking other things back enough for that matter. I'd love to do a draw over, but i'm not sure if I'm capable enough to adequately illustrate what I mean. I might give it a shot though. I dunno if I'll be of any help though.
It really does look like it has a lot of potential, though, if that counts for anything.
I'm feeling the flatness, yeah, Buck, which is why I'm hating it. The wings in particular I'm unconcerned with as they're not actually her wings per se but just a spell. (Allusion to the Spirit of Redemption; it's half of a gift for a massive WoW geek).
Given that I've spent a fair bit of time on it and am running out of time on it, I wonder if I couldn't tighten up the after-thoughty background to make it look a little less flat.
Shit. Its been ages since I've tried giving out a proper crit to anyone. I think my vocabulary, and general wording needs some work. I feel really rusty.
Posts
It feels really flat over all. Like you really aren't pushing, or exaggerating some things as far as you should be. Or knocking other things back enough for that matter. I'd love to do a draw over, but i'm not sure if I'm capable enough to adequately illustrate what I mean. I might give it a shot though. I dunno if I'll be of any help though.
It really does look like it has a lot of potential, though, if that counts for anything.
Shit. Its been ages since I've tried giving out a proper crit to anyone. I think my vocabulary, and general wording needs some work. I feel really rusty.
Steam handle: Buckwolfe
Why is no one paying attention to this? I like it. :^: The ears are really flat though, you need to fix that.
Although thinking about it, I probably should have reposted it as a BotP, seeing as how I have the TotP. I just didn't notice it until now.
Overall I'd say Matt's piece is pretty well rounded, except that the number ID board (fuck if I know what its actually called) feels a little small, and tight around the figures neck. I think it might benefit if the canvas were extended a little lower, and the ID card were knocked down a bit so it doesn't feel so constricting. Or maybe play with the cropping, and try cutting off a little of the dangling ID card around his neck. Like, giving it a bigger area, but cropping off the bottom. I dunno. Its just a thought.
Maybe add a little more detail to the suit, so that it doesn't look at flat as the background.
I know this much, that date and sig are anything but subtle.
Steam handle: Buckwolfe
I appreciate the comments. I'm working from his actual mugshot - he was arrested back in 38 for seducing a married woman - which is to say that it's actually the size of the card relative to the rest of him. The original photo is more than a bit blown out, so to put details in the suit I'd have to vary from the photo. I'll consider it, but I'm kind of sticking to the photos for this series because I like that theme. I don't want it to sound like I'm being lazy though: I totally agree with your compositional suggestions.
As for the signature, it's totally too big. I have no idea why I did it that large.
I'm 99% sure this is a complement, i.e. that I did a good job communicating form and whatnot through value, right? If so, I thought I should add a bit of extra info: as indicated above, these mugshot paintings are from the actual mugshots taken of the musicians. All of them were originally in B&W (if I had to guess, it was cheaper for the police station?). I bring in some color because I don't like straight B&W for my paintings (I don't want to sound like I dislike it in others' work).
That said, assuming I'm correct that you like it, I appreciate the complement.
EDIT: Here's a hotlinked copy of the mugshot, to see where I'm coming from.
I was just about to post saying that when working from reference, you should always post the reference(s) along with your piece for easier critiquing. Looks like I was beaten to the punch.
As often as I use references, I hate doing so. I feel like I should have worked up a more reliable, comprehensive visual library by now, but I just can't retain any of that shit. I always let it be known when I use references, but it always feels like a firm blow to my pride when I do so. I still have to give credit where its due though, whether I like it or not.
EDIT: Ears look even more inaccurate now, with the reference posted. Flay's initial call was dead on.
Steam handle: Buckwolfe
Yes, the ears will definitely be reworked tomorrow. Thanks to both of you on that.
It is. When i think to paint a face im like "ok, i need my burnt sienna, umber, marine blue and naples yellow to make my skin tones".
Now, lets look at yours. You didnt really use realistic skin tones, but your value and lighting are both done extremely well which makes it so believable. Add your hints of colour, and it brings everything together.
*two -thumbs up*
Well then all the more thanks.
-his left iris goes below the lid in the photo, is much higher in the painting
-in the photo his right pupil lines up horizontally with the bottom of his left eyelid but in the painting it lines up with the much higher iris
I guess his left eye is just out of perspective with the rest of his face. Anyway I like it a lot!
You have more potential than that, so show some pride.
Over all your portrait is severely lacking in contrast. I'm not sure what reference you're using (it would really help if you posted it), but you really need to be conscious of which values to push further. It doesn't look like you've concentrated too much on any one particular area, which is good. At least you haven't over worked anything. I think that all you need is a little refining in some areas, and you're Jennings homage will be good to go!
Steam handle: Buckwolfe
Steam handle: Buckwolfe
Go for it!
Steam handle: Buckwolfe
The overall color tone is different here, but it's because of the lighting I took the photo in: it's about 1040pm here, as opposed to 2pm when I photo'd the previous version. My work space is heavily naturally lit during the day.
As long as you're never actively involved in airbrushing a bling-wearing Tasmanian devil on the back of a bulk-purchased Hanes beefy tee in a mall kiosk named Urban Stylezz you'll be fine.
if you don't mind
It looks way better, my only possible complaint would be that the disparity in texture between the skin and everything else is pretty big, but that might just be a taste thing. Love the yellows and blues.
Blue one is mostly done, but needs some adjusting in how much the texture is poppin'...and details.
I think (even though I gave myself a poly limit for all these props) I'm using too many polys for certain things, when they don't need to be that high...especially considering how low I've managed to get some others. The vases, for example, did not look right unless I used more divisions on the axes. They're each just under 200 polys.
Also olol stylization apparently my brain isn't so into that. Maybe I should just really push the proportions of things, again, after I think they've already been pushed?
On the other hand, these are just vases. But! They seem too realistically-textured when compared to Mr. Crate here, which is roughly the "look" I'm going for:
But! Maybe I'm overthinking things. Maybe not? It seems that stylized textures are more simplified than the natural "realistic" thing I naturally gravitate towards...but I just keep rendering, because I think to myself "I have to spend more time on texturing this; it can't possibly be good if I only spent this much time on it"....and then it gets over-rendered, and goes more "realistic". Blarghawglbhg
I have about half of my 20 models left to model and UV, woo! Then texture-madness occurs.
Tofu wrote: Here be Littleboots, destroyer of threads and master of drunkposting.
Also, how are you thinking about your style? Is it just, "hey this should be stylized olol"? Because if so, yeah, things are going to get inconsistent. Things are much clearer if you nail down:
-What is the overall setting?
-Who the game is aimed towards (youngins? tweens? hardcore Ninja Gaiden fans?)
-How much time you (or your team) has and how many assets have to be made in that time (If you need 60 assets out of every artist in a month, you're not going to be able to get away with just adding on a few more hours on every item to make it extra nice...and if you did, your fellow artists (who like to go home and see their families at night) are going to be pissed because then your stuff won't match any of theirs...and you and the people you work with are going to have to put in a lot of overtime hours prior to a milestone to go back and make your shit match the rest of the game.)
I mean, I know you know this stuff because you've taken concept art classes which should cover the basics of how art direction works in a production and why doing it right saves time and money over just going in and seeing what sticks, but you might be having a disconnect between "art direction/concept mode" and "down-in-the-trenches asset production mode" here, and it's making you veer off target in the time and consistency department. Having a really solid idea of what you mean to accomplish as a whole may help reel in the model time/detail bloat...and prevent you from going nuts trying to do a million ultra-real assets in 2 weeks or however long you've got.
If you're on your own, you can't just be a good artist, you have to be a good manager as well.
EDIT: Man this rant reminds me of that old Halkun "no you are not going to be able to make Final Fantasy level graphics for an entire game by yourself" thread.
Twitter
Spoiler'd cuz I write a lot
I was thinking about just finishing all the prop models, and then making a kind of "line-up" scene where I can gauge the sizes of each and figure out what texture size is appropriate.
It's just....auuugh....what do you do when you have something that's perfect for a 256 texture, another thing that's perfect for a 512 texture...and then you have something in between these two? Either it's going to look over-textured if you use the 512...or it'll look under-textured if you use 256...OR you just won't use that much texture space in a 512, and it'll look fine, but oh noes you wasted texture space and that's super bad..........right? So what the hell, I'm lost there.
Spoiler'd again
In alls of seriousnesses, though...
I think I'm just being lazy. Well, maybe not "lazy" so much as "oh god have to finish these don't have time to design each one to a 'T', I'll just wing it"...which has resulted in this, obviously.
I didn't really give myself a time limit on these guys, but I figured I could compete 2 a day, easily...maybe three, if there are a few simpler ones. After modeling a few and doing these textures, I think that's still pretty accurate. I don't want to rush through them, because in the end they're supposed to be for my portfolio...and I want them to look nice. I think doing 2-3 a day works out to where I can complete them at a level I'm happy with.
I think the other problem with "winging it" is that the models I've done so far...are pretty generic. I didn't go through a huge design-process for each one...I just, again, had a rough idea of what I wanted to go for. I figured I could make them more unique in the textures, but.....ack
~~~~~~
Hmm...maybe I'll do a "Pirates of the Caribbean"-setting, cartoony-like-WoW-but-not-that-extreme set. For....uh....teens? I don't know...WoW has a super cartoony, stylized look, but I'd imagine most of the people playing that game are around the late teens through the 20's age group...
Man still, though...the only way I imagine tying the models together now is through "sea-stuff".....like barnacles and seaweed and green mucky stuff. It's like I can't wrap my head around inventing a style for 3D objects.....if I was given a style? Hell yes, I could make things based off of that...but inventing a style that doesn't scream "you were looking at 'x' game, huh?" seems to be a real challenge for me.
Dammit why can't I just know all the answers immediately and do everything perfectly the first time??
I will ask this always.
:C
Also me not knowing this is, like, embarrassing. Especially because I'm talking to people that know the three-deez. It's like going up to a famous fashion designer and being all "HAHA, YEAH! SEWING SHIT, RIGHT? I MEAN, I SEWED SOMETHING ONCE. IT WAS A BABY QUILT, CHECK IT OUT" and I unroll it from my coat pocket and it's all falling apart and a disaster and horribly amateurish and the designer is all
you throw a tray of Lean Cuisine in the microwave
Honestly, if those vases are already at 512 I think you're fine. It's hard to know exactly what kind of texture sizes to give each object without knowing exactly how they are going to fit into a scene. Like you said, the level designer might decide to scale those up to be large vases that sit on the floor. In that case you'd need that extra detail 512 would give you. On the other hand if they were scaled down to fit on a book shelf the 512 would probably be over kill. It all depends on the context of the model in the scene I guess.
Tofu wrote: Here be Littleboots, destroyer of threads and master of drunkposting.
Also, guess what, not every game, artist, or style needs to be mind-shatteringly original to be successful, it just needs to know what it's doing and why, and then executed well. It's more important that you just pick something and stick to it, and do it to the best of your ability. When you go to work you'll probably wind up modeling yet another model of an M-16 for the 47th sequel to a shooter franchise or something anyway. So if you just say, "PIRATES OF DARK WATER! <slams desk> That's what I'm going with, that's what I'm sticking to end of discussion!", you'll be free to focus on just making things good, rather than assuming a company is going to pick you up as art director for a bold new franchise straight out of art school and worrying about all the shit that comes with that.
Of course, to be fair, you're the one who wanted to go towards a singular "look" for these props, which may or may not be totally relevant in a portfolio...though it will be when you start actual work. So I guess make a decision on how stressed you want to get over the consistency based on how important you think the practice will be.
Also if you're hitting your time deadlines what are you freaking out about so much anyway you silly girl.
Twitter
I'm feeling the flatness, yeah, Buck, which is why I'm hating it. The wings in particular I'm unconcerned with as they're not actually her wings per se but just a spell. (Allusion to the Spirit of Redemption; it's half of a gift for a massive WoW geek).
Given that I've spent a fair bit of time on it and am running out of time on it, I wonder if I couldn't tighten up the after-thoughty background to make it look a little less flat.
Just nice seeing you around again.