|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 4:54 pm
Hahaha, omg, Tiki. I had never seen that wallpaper before. When I saw Oguma's face, I burst out laughing.
Also, Leaf, I wasn't fighting about anything, just stating my evaluation on the art in response to what you said about it. I simply failed to understand how calling the artwork detailed or realistic was accurate. Art is both objective and subjective, so nobody is saying it's wrong to like it.
But since you've presented the comparison of the two art styles, I shall do so. Linda is drawn in old school anime style which, in its time, was really really good. It is small, it's colors look paled and the shading is minor and very light, hardly noticeable in fact, on the skin. I also don't know what she's shooting, my first thought was it's a poor rendition of her using thunder magic, seeing as how she's a mage, but it also looks like there are ribbons coming from that "light". So I dunno. She also has noticeable anatomy errors. However, though this artwork does not look as if it was done by a professional, it does not use gimmicks to try and make us think it's good. I'm mostly talking about the textures and highlighting that FE11 art has. The Linda art is all in the same style, has nice crisp lineart, a cute pose, folds that make sense and compliment the pose, shading that makes me believe that everything is where it is, and I have to point out those fingers and toes for being well done. The Lina artwork has things that bother me far less than that of FE11 art, so I would actually have to say that I like the Linda artwork better.
However, I will give props where it's due, for that Gharnef face. It is nice.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 6:20 pm
Seeing as you're continuing in spite of what I said, I will continue as well. Newflash: people do art to show that they're good! Everyone has gimmicks in their artwork, if anything, according to the English language*, the term gimmick is actually a good thing. I don't see your point when you go on about Minerva. What exactly are these "gimmicks" you speak of? * I seriously had to look this word up, if it has another meaning, please tell me, I interpreted the word used in the context of definition #1. In your previous post, you talk about bolded lines, I personally think that they are great, they bold the picture and give a strong passionate look. Assuming I'm translating textures the same way, the textures are also fabulous, favourite being the golden embroidery. The embroidery is finely shaded if you ask me: light shades where they should be and dark where they should be. There might be minor flaws in the gold shading to the most nickpicky of artists, or people who are grasping for straws to make it look bad, but the colours on an overall glance to an art noob like me is phenomenal. The red and gold compliment each other to give a nice, regal look, the steel on the Hauteclare shines as it should, and her hair shines as it should as well. Of course, I know I must be missing something in this, but I have yet to see the problems, All I've gotten was "oh, the weapons don't match" when they look completely fine to me. Maybe saying "real" is a step too far, but with the combination of nice, thick lines to bring out the art, shades (that I can see) where they belong and great colours that give the feeling that they're trying to go for, I think it's a pretty solid work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 6:22 pm
I am very biased in the aforementioned comparison and can't remark at the moment. I have a huge soft spot for retro anime styles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 9:13 pm
I did continue. But I hope by you saying "in spite of", you're not implying that I shouldn't have just because you had made the choice to withdraw from the conversation. This isn't just a conversation between two people, after all. If you don't want to continue, you don't have to.
Ignoring the "newflash", that seems to imply I don't know what I'm talking about... Many people do artwork to prove themselves, but that is by far the only reason. And no, not everyone uses gimmicks, that is actually kind of insulting to any artist that may read what you're saying. People have styles and a method, but that is not a gimmick. Also, no, gimmicks are hardly ever seen in a positive light. I'm not saying all gimmicks are bad, it depends on how they're done. But we are not here to lead into some "what gimmick really means" debate. As for what gimmicks I speak of, I believe both Tiki and I have already very thoroughly said what these were, but we're mainly speaking of the textures and the highlighting.
The textures do not fit the artwork at all. They are tremendously out of place. The clothing has soft shading that gives hardly any definition to folds. The armor looks flat. The even heavier textured items like belts and weapons are also flat in areas (but there are some that are pretty good) and contain practically no shading to give them a sense of depth or shape. (Again, a number of the weapons themselves are still pretty good) I'm not always convinced that they're there and they do not even look like they belong in the same piece of artwork. The 'gimmick' here is that "using lots of texture everywhere will make people think it's really good and realistic". And it just doesn't work at all. And in my own personal opinion, it seems fairly lazy work. The other thing is the overuse of the highlighting. The hair looks tremendously flat here because the highlighting doesn't actually make any sense the way it's used. Like Tiki noted, the eyes look lifeless. I'm also wondering about what light source is being used, some back light would have done wonders for a piece that's striving to come off as realistic due to all the textures in use.
I disagree on the bold lines. If anything, they take away from the detail, especially in the face. And for a piece that's going for realistic, bold lines were a poor choice. I'm not saying bold lines are always bad, but it depends on the style being used or where you're going to use bold lines as opposed to crisper ones. As for the embroidery/trim, it is shaded well in some in some of the works in some places, but for the most part I'm not convinced of its shading. I also get confused when I see clothing trim having a different metal-like texture, when it's still cloth and not something stitched over top.
I'm not arguing about use of color. These have been mostly previously established by the original character designs. I'm not sure why you're connecting weapons not matching to use of color... that has to do with the intense texture next to soft shaded clothing and skin as well as cartoony style face, not color.
I don't think it's absolutely horrid work. But I don't think I can consider it solid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:21 pm
I respectfully throw in my two cents, here.
After really looking back at this thread and taking a look at Minerva's art, I'm simultaneously perplexed and unnerved by what I'm seeing. Photoshop users will note that, at 100% resolution, it's easy to note where the simple shortcut of Overlay for texture was used on her official art. For those unaware of the technique, look to any of the textured areas- specifically, look to the lace that she wears, the snake-skin belts, the gold trim on her armor, and the bright red ribbons on her axe.
My issue is not with the textures, so much as it is with the unity of the piece. Compare the softness of the skin coloration (easily done through soft brush, 0% hardness, aided with Dodge, Multiply, and Blur tools) and the hair with the texture of the headband. You'll notice that her headband, though patterned, is generally untouched by the textures; it's an abrupt change from the aforementioned pattern, but an acceptable one. Move a few paces down, however, and her clothes yank the style from anime to attempted realism. Compare the soft 'flatness' of her face to the sudden attempted three-dimensional ruffles of her collar, and your eyes are shocked; either the collar looks extremely fluffy, or her face looks as flat as a bulldog's.
The gold trimmings, at least, handle texture fairly well. Yes, it's a bit harsh in places, but that's how metal turns out- pure shiny finishes rarely last. The rest of the armor, however, lacks any sort of shadow definition besides soft-shading, leaving it with the look of cheap plastic. The glow of the belts is overemphasized, the texture is too pronounced, leading to another case of eye shock. The attempted realism tie to anime style falls flat again when you look to her glove, and the axe in her hand.
Try this: Look at the bottom half of the axe, without looking at her hand. It looks three-dimensional, though the bright red ribbon on it makes it look a little trashy, for a war weapon. Look specifically at the stave of the axe (the handle).
Now look at her hand, and how the stave looks above her hand; ignore the rest of the axe. The three-dimensional illusion falls flat in accordance to the coloring style of the hand.
Look at it all together now, and you'll notice that your vision now flips the stave of the axe from three-dimensional to flat, like an Escher stair etching.
The gold trim on her lavender-shade cape is jarring, at best; tacky and too bright, at worst. With the light source on the upper part of the armor contradicting with the glare of her cape, the shine of her boots, and the shading on her face, I need to question how much effort was taken in the coloring. If handed the lineart, a relatively new Photoshop colorist could knock out this similar coloring style and still maintain a consistent light source, just by using a gradient tool as a base and working from there. With a Multiply, Dodge, and Overlay layer (used in conjunction with the aforementioned brush settings and a Blur brush), an artist relatively new to the program could color it to make it a more aesthetically appealing piece by tying all of the elements in the layout together.
The lineart had potential, but coloring (and effects) killed the beast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:47 pm
Edit: Never mind, Kurai helped clear thing out for me, we can all go to bed now.
Which also doubles as my "Okay Rath, I'll stop trying to pretend to know art, and not ever bring it up again to save my dignity".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:59 pm
Thank you for pointing these examples out in easier terms, I appreciate it. Although there were some terms that proved difficult, I was still able to follow the examples you gave in a clear and concise matter. I will comment no further, as I can see errors in the piece now, and can respect people who look for technique in art versus the colours and boldness like I usually do. However, I still do like FE11 OA artwork the most, I guess even in light of contradictions in artwork, a person can still like it, in the same context people like the melting clock or the stairs maze, eh? I'm not sure why FE11 artwork stands out more than other art for me, but whatever may be the reason, I'm sure it's most likely about the colours and the at least attempted (albeit not 100% successful by far) realism of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 10:54 pm
I've wanted to say my opinion on Shadow Dragon for quite a while actually. I liked the game in general, but some things just didn't sit for me. The requirements to get most of the gaiden chapters was just STUPID. Sacrificing units to get ones that aren't really worth it most of the time? Ugh. I also didn't really like how pretty much everyone had craptacular growths. Sure there are people with GODLY growths-stares at Wolf and Sedgar-, but most of the time...ugh. Other than that, I really liked the game. Some of the reviews are harsh, but I will agree on the points I've already made. I do like the fact that they included wifi, and made the online shop USE THE MONEY YOU GAIN IN GAME. Good god, some other games do that ALL WRONG. For their first forray onto the DS, I say Intelligent Systems did pretty damn well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
