|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 12:44 am
geeerrrowll, gossy, geeerrrooowll. talk2hand
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 7:36 am
Well sorry, but I have to bring this up. It aches not to. I do consider it the worst thing to put something up for crit, and then give excuses to why you don't really need it. This especially bothers me: Quote: I won't stand for people saying I don't know it. Just a little pretentious? I'm not for going down the wrong road, as far as encouragement goes. 1. It's supposed to look like that. 2. I'm just used to painting oils 3. The pressure sensitivity doesn't work 4. I didn't have enough time In almost every response of her's there is a new exuse trying to invalidate the crit we give her. Seriously. Maybe I'm just reading too much into psychological motives and not really addressing her art, but there seems to be an underlying goal to be accepted, coupled with disbelief of what we're saying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 5:48 pm
that's kinda the downside to just being a critiquer...sometimes you get no say in the editorial process. i also think that the artist can take or dismiss any critique they want, it's kinda the way of the game, y'know? it does sound like being dismissive about everyone else's critiques, but i think we should also keep in mind that it should be about the piece and not what they say. if they take it or leave it is really up to them...i know i've been in that position before and at times it does seem like defending against a critique. especially since we've all got our own different ways of what we think is best.
i do think that everyone so far has given encouraging critiques. the strokes are a little bit distracting and messy, which detracts from the overall composition and gesture (it took me awhile to see where the hand at the top was coming from). i think one of the things i'd like to see is probably a variety of strokes to differentiate the different objects, since a lot of them are like the same width and stuff. pressure sensitivity would be your biggest bet if you want to come through with it being loose...get to see more of your work process that way (not to mention it adds texture). if the pressure sensitivity is biting the dust you could always do it manually. the key's '[' and ']' are the ones that change the brush sizes and you could probably 'carve' them to how you want it if you want more control by using the eraser. sometimes making things look spontaneous is a lot harder than it looks, since you kinda have to plan before acting (i still have trouble with that...i get caught in the loop of noodling to death).
i think with the arm being held up like that the elbow wouldn't go that far back if the rest of the body wasn't going to be affected. right now they look like two separate pieces, since the face is perfectly profile. if you try creating that pose you'd find that your shoulder will affect your shoulder, which would in turn show more of the neck. and depending if you want that particular shoulder to be higher or lower would affect the position and the angle of the head.
the biggest distraction to me is the watermark. you could always make it smaller and then have it just scroll all the way across your piece if you want to take a precaution to would-be thieves. then you can change the color of the text to match with one of the lighter colors in your piece and lower the opacity to make it less distracting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 3:26 am
Speaking of water marks, there's one for an invisible watermark somewhere on DA, i might have faved it for later ref.
i dont water mark my work often ( -o-;; ) but it looks like a good way to go, since i really hate looking at watermarks myself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 11:11 pm
The Dred Pirate Gossy Quote: I won't say I didn't get offended by people saying i don't know anatomy, because quite frankly, i did. I DO happen to know anatomy a fairly good amount, thank you very much. Please don't insult our intelligence by saying that our crits are fundamentally incorrect. Why did you post that you wanted crit, if you were going to say, BUT U GUYS, I AM A GOOD ARTIST RLY I AM. I DO TOO KNOW ANAOTMONY I DO TOO Yor fingers look like a bundle of sticks. Step 1. Take your hand and shape it into the position you want that guy's hand to be in. Step 2. Draw it. I'm not trying to be mean, you've got some balls to post art of that quality, then tell us that you know anatomy when you really don't. Most of us still have troubles with anatomy, but at least we know when to admit our shortcomings and then start practicing. wow. get the stick out of your a**, will you? i never said they were wrong. and i don't appreciate being mocked. fine. you don't think i know anatomy? next thread by me will be of my sketches from Figure Drawing last semester. then you tell me if i know it or not. i do admit that i need some work, it's occasionally obvious. but to say i don't know it at all? no.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 11:14 pm
The Dred Pirate Gossy Well sorry, but I have to bring this up. It aches not to. I do consider it the worst thing to put something up for crit, and then give excuses to why you don't really need it. This especially bothers me: Quote: I won't stand for people saying I don't know it. Just a little pretentious? I'm not for going down the wrong road, as far as encouragement goes. 1. It's supposed to look like that. 2. I'm just used to painting oils 3. The pressure sensitivity doesn't work 4. I didn't have enough time In almost every response of her's there is a new exuse trying to invalidate the crit we give her. Seriously. Maybe I'm just reading too much into psychological motives and not really addressing her art, but there seems to be an underlying goal to be accepted, coupled with disbelief of what we're saying. who sounds pretentious here? i'm not disbelieving you at all. I'm giving reasons, not excuses. wait. why should i even care if you think i'm giving excuses? i got the advice i wanted; i'm done for now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 11:14 pm
Page Boy Speaking of water marks, there's one for an invisible watermark somewhere on DA, i might have faved it for later ref. i dont water mark my work often ( -o-;; ) but it looks like a good way to go, since i really hate looking at watermarks myself. invisible watermark?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 11:19 pm
crazy spork i am that's kinda the downside to just being a critiquer...sometimes you get no say in the editorial process. i also think that the artist can take or dismiss any critique they want, it's kinda the way of the game, y'know? it does sound like being dismissive about everyone else's critiques, but i think we should also keep in mind that it should be about the piece and not what they say. if they take it or leave it is really up to them...i know i've been in that position before and at times it does seem like defending against a critique. especially since we've all got our own different ways of what we think is best. i do think that everyone so far has given encouraging critiques. the strokes are a little bit distracting and messy, which detracts from the overall composition and gesture (it took me awhile to see where the hand at the top was coming from). i think one of the things i'd like to see is probably a variety of strokes to differentiate the different objects, since a lot of them are like the same width and stuff. pressure sensitivity would be your biggest bet if you want to come through with it being loose...get to see more of your work process that way (not to mention it adds texture). if the pressure sensitivity is biting the dust you could always do it manually. the key's '[' and ']' are the ones that change the brush sizes and you could probably 'carve' them to how you want it if you want more control by using the eraser. sometimes making things look spontaneous is a lot harder than it looks, since you kinda have to plan before acting (i still have trouble with that...i get caught in the loop of noodling to death). i think with the arm being held up like that the elbow wouldn't go that far back if the rest of the body wasn't going to be affected. right now they look like two separate pieces, since the face is perfectly profile. if you try creating that pose you'd find that your shoulder will affect your shoulder, which would in turn show more of the neck. and depending if you want that particular shoulder to be higher or lower would affect the position and the angle of the head. the biggest distraction to me is the watermark. you could always make it smaller and then have it just scroll all the way across your piece if you want to take a precaution to would-be thieves. then you can change the color of the text to match with one of the lighter colors in your piece and lower the opacity to make it less distracting. thank you! that's what i was hoping for: something actually helpful and worthwhile! calling me a whiney brat (in a lot more words) doesn't do me a thing. i'm seriously considering grabbing my youngest sister and wrapping her up in a blanket and posing her. if i do, i'll post the sketch and compare (oh jeez that'll be interesting). and i'll definitely try the watermarking bit. using watermarks is relatively new to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 1:16 pm
just a precaution...invisible watermarks can be easily taken off by just simply resizing the picture. it's probably a good idea to have maybe a signature or something in addition to the watermark just in case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 7:55 pm
crazy spork i am just a precaution...invisible watermarks can be easily taken off by just simply resizing the picture. it's probably a good idea to have maybe a signature or something in addition to the watermark just in case. ....i still have no idea how they work. how the hell do you make an invisible watermark?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Valentine Vice Captain
|
Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 4:26 am
Paper Nefertiti fine. you don't think i know anatomy? next thread by me will be of my sketches from Figure Drawing last semester. then you tell me if i know it or not. Ability to draw what you are looking at right at that moment is a good thing, yes. It does not indicate that you have any idea what you are looking at, nor did it seem to help this piece much if at all. I am firmly with the Gossy on this one. If you knew anatomy half as well as you seem to think, this picture would be in a much better state. My crit to your technique is to get over yourself. If you want to improve you must be able to accept that you need improvement. If you look at that picture with an open mind you'd likely realise that the anatomical knowledge that you are so proud of is not represented in this image. If you get defensive we just get more offensive, so stop it before it starts and relax.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
