I shall work on my pencil collection, then; in the meantime, would it be horribly ungrateful of me to finish this one drawing with the charcoal? I do value the advice, but given the deadline, and the time it'd take me to start anew, I feel pressing on might be the most expedient option in this case (though if I'm wrong here, let me know, and I can give the starting over bit a go, too).
No way mang, do what you want. And I didn't know it was an assignment. In that case, yeah, I'd agree with you it's best to finish this one as you've been doing, and maybe work on the next assignment in pencil instead?
Alright, I think my self-confidence is ready for another go at this (to be perfectly honest, I'm still not sure it's a good idea, but I do want it to be better):
I'm messing up on the folds pretty big-time, and in general, I think I've got too much local contrast as opposed to global contrast (lighting without a direct reference is a mystery I've never been able to decipher), but I was wondering if there was anything else, and/or if anyone could help out with the former problems.
to hell with your botp'ing shenanigans.
the problem with this isn't the medium you're using, it's the overall composition. You need one. The figures by themselves on a white background's doing nothing, and throwing in a background after 'finishing' this isn't going to do anything to help it.
considering the subject matter, this should be a really emotionally charged peice, and right now, it's got nothing.
stronger shape contrast, a dynamic light source, or even adjusting the position of the viewer would help.
I'd also suggest when you're working in value, to lay down values over the whole piece, and increase the details and sharpness as you work- instead of trying to render it part by part.
the problem with this isn't the medium you're using, it's the overall composition. You need one. The figures by themselves on a white background's doing nothing, and throwing in a background after 'finishing' this isn't going to do anything to help it.
considering the subject matter, this should be a really emotionally charged peice, and right now, it's got nothing.
stronger shape contrast, a dynamic light source, or even adjusting the position of the viewer would help.
I'd also suggest when you're working in value, to lay down values over the whole piece, and increase the details and sharpness as you work- instead of trying to render it part by part.
You've caught me--all through the process, I never gave enough (read: any) thought to the setting. I also think you're right about laying down broad values; I think having done so would have solved my problem with local/global value pretty easily. Again, the deadline (which I think technically might have passed), and my stubborn insistence that I actually enter one of these challenges means that I'm going to have to do my best to finish, as shot in the foot though the piece may be, but next time, I'll try to think of setting before character (or at least before setting pencil to paper), and I'll try to lay down broad values first. But in pencil.
EDIT: Oh, and the botp comment was actually to the hijinks that ensued when Projekt asked to be quoted, though I hadn't planned on bumping my drawing, either way.
I actually think one of your preliminary pieces you posted for this was better.
I'm not going to go look for it, but it was very vague, and sfumato-like... I thought you were going to build your work up over that, and I was stoked because it had a rembrant-esque quality to it.
Just make sure that you make the shape of spliter's head, tail, and legs distinct enough to keep him recognizable.
EDIT: If you don't do anything else, I would at least put it in a rectangular format that relates to the character shape well and work out a value structure with a hint of a ground plane similar to a rembrandt etching.
I actually think one of your preliminary pieces you posted for this was better.
I'm not going to go look for it, but it was very vague, and sfumato-like... I thought you were going to build your work up over that, and I was stoked because it had a rembrant-esque quality to it.
Just make sure that you make the shape of spliter's head, tail, and legs distinct enough to keep him recognizable.
EDIT: If you don't do anything else, I would at least put it in a rectangular format that relates to the character shape well and work out a value structure with a hint of a ground plane similar to a rembrandt etching.
I know this may not be what you meant, but I had already started the shading when I read your post. It did save me from trying to put in a rooftop background, though, and in retrospect, that would have been a huge mistake. Anyway, this is partly an "am I doing it right" kind of thing, and partly a "I will probably screw up the next bit really badly, and so I want to document this while it's at what will probably be its best."
Well, about the ear, you must remember what happened to one of Splinter's ears (or was that just in the movie? Either way I'll admit I didn't pull off the look of a scar very well, and the placement of the other ear behind doesn't help with the confusion); as for the head...*sigh*...
Mostly Photoshop (well, Gimp, but same diff); I try to match what I see on the monitor with what I've got on the paper, but I keep forgetting that my monitor isn't exactly the paragon of color fidelity (edit: and that the lights around here are really warm).
Alright, the next time I post this, it will be in the challenge thread; I've got a few things to fix, like Splinter's head, but whether those things will make the cut depends on whether I have enough time before the nebulously extended deadline, and/or whether or not in trying to fix it, I screw the thing up. If anyone has anything to point out aside from Splinter's head, please let me know; it'd be awfully kind of you.
EDIT: Oh, and that strip of lighter shade there is because I was trying to make the thing a bit more flattened out, and used a book with too few sheets between them, so the light shone through. Long way of saying that it's the silhouette of the book.
Also, you're ground plane is really flat- like SNES Mode 7 flat.
Building on the left is looking good though. like a 1950's private airport?
Yes, i was going for a f-zero look. Not really, i still need to add a bunch of crap. Ive just been putting it off because i know i'll have to deal with perspective :x
in regards to the 50s airport, this is supposed to look like old space opera themed art. So you're guess is kinda right. its gonna be funny, totally ridiculous 50s futuristic in the background.
Oh, BTW, that last piece i was doing turned to shit. i'm trying to make it look good, but its like trying to cut around a fatty piece of chicken.
EDIT: MAy as well post this. fing around with a colour palette. its looking 'okay' io guess.
This is the pose I'm sticking with, I don't even care anymore. I want to start a new picture and make sure to get the pose right from the beginning... But I have to pump this out before tomorrow for the CHOW.
Bring the left shoulder closer in to the torso. On one side he has broad shoulders and on the other he is kind of a stickman type. I don't buy the fore shortening with the legs. Try putting his far foot on like a TNT plunger or a barrel or something. Also the forearm on the gun arm is mucho short. I really like the head a lot. If you can't finish it at least you got an avatar for later use. Good luck.
Sketch. Pen, watered down acrylics on watercolour paper.
the line quality gives this a charm your digital stuff doesn't have.
but it's still really wonky.
the biggest issue is that the sidewalk appear to be on a plane that's tilted, different from the plane that the street is on. the car looks to be sitting at about halfway between those two planes.
There are also issues with scale, for example the sign outside the cafe seems to be about as big as the door to the building itself. Also, the car in the background is gigantic.
Honestly, I kind of like those inconsistencies, though. It gives the picture a lot of personality. It doesn't seem like you were going for a super realistic look anyway.
That picture is c quick concept piece. I have to do a bunch of illustrations for a book assignment for uni, due end of the year. The inconsistancies are partly because its 'quick', but it's more so i was too lazy to grid it up proparly. Very, very piss poor effort on my part.
the line quality gives this a charm your digital stuff doesn't have.
but it's still really wonky.
I agree. I am only just starting to prefer working with traditional tools. Its faster and frees up your mind better than the computer. But you're right, its really wonky. Nothing a ruler cant fix i hope.
Posts
No way mang, do what you want.
to hell with your botp'ing shenanigans.
the problem with this isn't the medium you're using, it's the overall composition. You need one. The figures by themselves on a white background's doing nothing, and throwing in a background after 'finishing' this isn't going to do anything to help it.
considering the subject matter, this should be a really emotionally charged peice, and right now, it's got nothing.
stronger shape contrast, a dynamic light source, or even adjusting the position of the viewer would help.
I'd also suggest when you're working in value, to lay down values over the whole piece, and increase the details and sharpness as you work- instead of trying to render it part by part.
Back Notebook:
It will be pasted to, eventually, maybe. I was planning to paste more down on it first, or atleast painting over the ugly red cover.
You've caught me--all through the process, I never gave enough (read: any) thought to the setting. I also think you're right about laying down broad values; I think having done so would have solved my problem with local/global value pretty easily. Again, the deadline (which I think technically might have passed), and my stubborn insistence that I actually enter one of these challenges means that I'm going to have to do my best to finish, as shot in the foot though the piece may be, but next time, I'll try to think of setting before character (or at least before setting pencil to paper), and I'll try to lay down broad values first. But in pencil.
EDIT: Oh, and the botp comment was actually to the hijinks that ensued when Projekt asked to be quoted, though I hadn't planned on bumping my drawing, either way.
I actually think one of your preliminary pieces you posted for this was better.
I'm not going to go look for it, but it was very vague, and sfumato-like... I thought you were going to build your work up over that, and I was stoked because it had a rembrant-esque quality to it.
Just make sure that you make the shape of spliter's head, tail, and legs distinct enough to keep him recognizable.
EDIT: If you don't do anything else, I would at least put it in a rectangular format that relates to the character shape well and work out a value structure with a hint of a ground plane similar to a rembrandt etching.
edit: wow that looks extremely different from when I was painting it
holy shit does it look like vomit
I know this may not be what you meant, but I had already started the shading when I read your post. It did save me from trying to put in a rooftop background, though, and in retrospect, that would have been a huge mistake. Anyway, this is partly an "am I doing it right" kind of thing, and partly a "I will probably screw up the next bit really badly, and so I want to document this while it's at what will probably be its best."
You've got splinter's head too round and short, though. You have a capabara's head and ears, you need a rat's head and ears.
also, is your work that warm or is that photoshop?
EDIT: Oh, and that strip of lighter shade there is because I was trying to make the thing a bit more flattened out, and used a book with too few sheets between them, so the light shone through. Long way of saying that it's the silhouette of the book.
You might also want to extend your format towards the top a bit. His head's really close to the top.
Also, you're ground plane is really flat- like SNES Mode 7 flat.
Building on the left is looking good though. like a 1950's private airport?
nah they didnt. at least, not with a paintover.
Yes, i was going for a f-zero look. Not really, i still need to add a bunch of crap. Ive just been putting it off because i know i'll have to deal with perspective :x
in regards to the 50s airport, this is supposed to look like old space opera themed art. So you're guess is kinda right. its gonna be funny, totally ridiculous 50s futuristic in the background.
Oh, BTW, that last piece i was doing turned to shit. i'm trying to make it look good, but its like trying to cut around a fatty piece of chicken.
EDIT: MAy as well post this. fing around with a colour palette. its looking 'okay' io guess.
WCK, it's lacking a certain sense of depth. Maybe darken the building immediately behind the one in the forefront.
FUCK
This is the pose I'm sticking with, I don't even care anymore. I want to start a new picture and make sure to get the pose right from the beginning... But I have to pump this out before tomorrow for the CHOW.
haha everyone laugh at the hands I draw!
I will try to fix it up.
26 more to go.
the line quality gives this a charm your digital stuff doesn't have.
but it's still really wonky.
the biggest issue is that the sidewalk appear to be on a plane that's tilted, different from the plane that the street is on. the car looks to be sitting at about halfway between those two planes.
Honestly, I kind of like those inconsistencies, though. It gives the picture a lot of personality. It doesn't seem like you were going for a super realistic look anyway.
I agree. I am only just starting to prefer working with traditional tools. Its faster and frees up your mind better than the computer. But you're right, its really wonky. Nothing a ruler cant fix i hope.
cheers for the comments fellas.
I suppose this is a good time to ask what to do with background colors. I am 100% clueless on it, and haven't been able to find anything online.