|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:10 am
 It looks like she's sitting in front of a big painting of a castle. It does not look like the castle is far away. Why is this? Normally with things like this, it's because the lighting in the foreground is not meshing with the lighting in the background, but here I'm not sure if that's the issue. (and if it is, no idea what exactly is the difference)
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 8:39 am
i think it would help if the castle wasn't as sharp an image as the girl is, just to provide the illusion that the castle is farther away and therefore harder to see the detail in. also the rocks the castle is sitting on are all blurry and less defined, so the castle clashes with them weirdly imo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 3:22 pm
Her colors are really vivid compared to everything else, it looks like a girl just laying on a painting (she doesn't really seem to be interacting with the rock she's sitting on either). Maybe you should dull her border lines/shading a bit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 1:59 pm
pony: Hmm... I see.
Tohomito: I don't know, the colors on the rock are pretty intense as well? I think the foreground is doing okay on its own... (though if you can think of a better way to do it, please feel free to provide a paintover ^^)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:26 am
Is the castle supposed to be before or after the wall? Is it carved out of the rock at the base or is that in front it the castle?
The age old technique for making things look far away is making it less saturated. If the castle is built on the rock not behind the wall then you can see the short distance between the woman and the base of the rock next to her feet. Maybe add something mid ground to hide the distance?
The wall brings the whole thing closer as well. Make the pillars smaller and more often to show that it is very far away and huge, maybe add tiny detail like little windows etc to give it scale because it looks like a garden wall and an ornamental castle.
To be honest its such a lovely piece I don't think many will be looking at the position of the castle.
<3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 9:20 pm
Thanks for the suggestions. Unfortunately, putting the pillars more closely together is not an option -- the entire castle is surrounded by a circular wall, and there are only four pillars around. ^^;;; There are no windows around the wall, I believe. (it's some location from the game Kingdom Hearts)
I'm not sure if making things less saturated would work for a sunset setting. I believe the trick is to make the colors more similar to the "background color" -- in this case, the color of the sunset/ sky? I kinda did that and it's still like this. gonk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Valentine Vice Captain
|
Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2007 8:54 pm
Well if I were doing it I'd have done something like this: Pardon me for taking liberties with your image but I was having a hard time describing it... This is a 5 min chop job, but I hope you can see what I am getting at? On second thought the blur effect is probably overkill - just the desaturation and the darkening would probably be better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:52 pm
I didn't have a problem seeing the castle as far away in the original image.
I was going to say try adding some atmospheric perspective, which you've essentially done with the blur effect, however, in order for the effect to work properly, the object in the distance has to have lower contrast than the object closer to the viewer.
since you've darkened the shadows on the castle, you gave it more contrast. Currently, the first image looks the most correct to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 5:27 pm
There seems to be a light seperation from the foreground to background. Where the castle actually IS it makes sense for it to be as desaturated and blurred as it is - but when you get closer to the foreground, such as the huge stone wall surrounding the entire space, it should not look as if the entire background is equidistant. What I'm saying is that things like that huge stone wall should intensify as they near the viewer, giving the impression of 3D space and less so of a flat area on top of another flat area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 6:04 am
The Iconoclast it should not look as if the entire background is equidistant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:07 am
It still is really good <3
The water wouldn't be as blurry as the castle because its closer... you can see the obvious layers in photoshop rather than the gradual fade into the distance.
It still is really good tho.
Was it a water colour originally or is it completely digital? very nice watercolour effect if so... <3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:14 pm
keiiii The Iconoclast it should not look as if the entire background is equidistant. SCIEEEEENNNNCCEEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
