Hi, is there a limit to how much you can submit? like can you submit like 5 paintings? I am in like a hyper productive state right now and therefor has a lot of ideas for things I'd like to make and submit.
Asked for help
I want to ask for feedback while the major attributes of the piece are still malleable. These WIP images are attempts to "study" the painting before diving hard into it. These images should show where I am at in terms of composition, values, and colors. I will begin refining (i.e., redrawing) the sketch over the work week: mapping the 3-point perspective, nailing proportions, and indicating mechanical details. I hope to complete the refined sketch by next Sunday at the latest. So, feedback regarding composition is the most time critical. Though, in the long view, I believe I will need the most help with color and light. ____________ I think I like where the composition is currently; however, there could be danger in falling too in love with one's first draft. My starting idea was that I wanted to show a pilot's viewpoint while banking through a turn, with a companion craft leading the turn. Then I remembered that I have been meaning to do a tribute piece for an esports team I flew with last year in a Star Wars flight simulator. A super group of guys! Each rebel starfighter in the image will represent one of the remaining team members. (Note: I am not fully done with the background scene. Need 2 Y-Wings to fill out the team, and generally more battlefield chaos.) I grabbed the base reference by going into the sim and trying to replicate the scene I had in mind, screenshoting my view from the VR headset. From a storytelling perspective, I want to convey the maneuver being performed, that an attack on the Star Destroyer is underway, and that the bridge/superstructure is the focal point of the attack (particularly, the Shield Generators, which are the orb-like structures). Another objective I had was to practice cropping closely for sake of immersion. I wanted to avoid the temptation to pull back and show the full Star Destroyer or push the X-Wing away, so its wings were no longer clipped by the cockpit frame. Potential problems I see with the composition have to do with rule-of-3rds, big-medium-small, and my decision thus far not to crop the cockpit more. So, the bridge/superstructure, which is the focal point, is vertically centered. And, even if I treat the window as a "frame-within-a-frame", the bridge/superstructure is still vertically centered. Counterpoint!? Maybe I am the Wes Anderson of the vertical axis? In terms of big-medium-small, the foreground X-Wing is similar in size to the bridge/superstructure. I may be able to minimize these first 2 issues if I push the perspective slightly. The bridge/superstructure shrinks and gets pushed farther into the corner of the windscreen. The X-Wing grows slightly bigger. Lastly, in terms of the cropping, the image could be claustrophobic. We are immersed in cockpit more so than in scene going on outside it. But I think there are some visual and storytelling benefits to being pulled back like this, too. I like this composition. But these are potential shortcomings, as I see them. If someone with more experience is like, "Yeah, you should really fix these (or some other things) to take it to the next level," then that is what I got to do. ____________ I think the value study came out well. This battle is taking place in a sort of nebula called "The Zavian Abyss." In game, the colors of the Abyss look unpleasant, in my opinion. So, I want to reimagine the colors and lighting scenario to be more evocative of an underwater scene. I found an underwater photograph I liked, grayscaled it, and used its values as a guide. ____________ I have the least amount of practice with color. My objective with this color study was to make sure that there was some sort of hue shift in the shadows. I aimed for a shift toward turquoise. Although, physically speaking, there isn't anything in this environment that is scattering turquoise fill light. The nebula color implies merely a deeper shade of blue for the fill light. This was a small aesthetic experiment on my part, but I am not committed to it. In the light, I tried for a very small hue shift towards cyan. But I wanted to keep the source light relatively white, so that I am not completely washing everything out with blue. The most awkward area in the color study, I think, is the X-Wing. The paint scheme is supposed to be yellow and black. It looks army-toy green. I may have done the hue shift in the shadows incorrectly. Or I did it just fine, but there are not enough lit areas from this angle to give the shadows context. If the latter is the case, I can shift the overhead light slightly to the left to light more surfaces of the starfighter. ____________ Later in the process, there will be many color and lighting effects I will be eager to explore, especially with various local sources of light, such as the explosion, blaster bolts, and indicator lights. However, these studies have not attempted to account for these effects.
Asked for help
Here is some sketches of structure on painting. I am not used to go any further because I focus on mayor decisions practice. So, what would you say I could improve till this point? It can be on anything you see related with showing form, it is what I focused on here - including lighting
Do you find yourself finding more successful references with human figures and exaggerating their proportions? Or it is with having as reference other artists works?
Hi. Before rendering check your measurements and plumb lines for accuracy. Use light lines to map out shadow shapes and create a value scale you can reference to help with separating your light and shadow families (highlights, lights, light halftone, halftone, form shadow, core shadow, cast shadow, occlusion). Work on underlying structure building up from simple universal landmarks.
Hey men. How are you doing? About the portraits, I think the better ones are the second, third and nineth. Followed by the seventh and the eighth. Comparing them with the others you'll see that there is a deeper simplification of shapes while making thwm to transmit the form and light anyway. In a short amount of time, the good simplification of shapes is waht will give you the results. Lets see the first and the second one. Looks like in the second you went from big to small in a cleaner way, like without need to make a big stroke at the final like in the forehead of the first one. The problem with the first one, for example, is that you need to show in some way form when you have in the reference the face cut at the midle by the hair shadow. So it is tricky in the value arrangement. I think it would have come out better if you sacrificed the secondary light that comes from down-left. But if your goal is only represent what you see, it is a valid reference and approach. In the sixth I feel like the contrast in value in the cheekbone is too much. There you need to make the same transition than in the shoulder in a compressed way. I would say, also, that in the ones that I took as better ones there is a better and simple composition, in the use of shapes and in the clarity of them. I think you could improve mainly by observing and trying to improve the shapes and their relation from your references. Like trying a realistic one, which has its own shpes to be improved sometimes, and then maybe something a little more stylized. Now, if you got better the better ones by a better undertanding of how to reach it in Time. I mean, just by fast understanding and work. I am not sure but you could try to only get the primaries and some secondaries in the first half. And then you go for some tertiary forms the rest of time, and looking haw to improve the relations of the primaries and secondaries. But it depends on haw you actually work in this sketchy portrait practice. Hope it helps. Good luck and keep it up!
Hi @Rubén Frutos. I think it come out nicely as rendered exploration. I would choose something more simpler to focus only in the design of shapes. But it works too if you can do it naturally. Also, you used your reference but as reference, not just coping. So it is is well done in that aspect for me too. About the shape design, Im learning though. But what pops up for me is the background. You have spike-like shapes with directions that goes into several places. That's ok, but the background does, in a minor way, the same. Try to use a circle or square as background. Because of its stability it will probably be a good contrast in shape design. An mwwebe a change in hte value scale to make the character to pop up more would be better too. Hope it helps. Keep the practice up!
Hi @Shelvs Fleurima. Now I see this. Looks like you are going here for some specific style. Like a critisism for these ones, the last two have a problem with the lighting. You want to show the light source, but at the same time the forms looks like they receive the light from another direction or the light size should be too much bigger (last one). But I like your ideas. Keep it up! Plus this, work on what I wrote you and it will improve for the next month if you keep it consistent and smart. It is a matter of understanding the fundamentals more. Good luck!
Hi @vakarmalik.I think it is helpful the way in which you are studing it. It is like a master study, where you try to achive what you see and try to learn the process of the artist that you are coping of. But it is not enough. And in this case in particular, where the piece you are learning from has already a lot of simplifications. It is useful but you need to complement it with something else like trying by yourself to paint a landscape, lookins all its details and simplifing it. Well, if you are just making an study of shape design: then consume more artist that have that appealing that you found here and aspire to achive in your art. Also, if you haven't yet, look at proko's videos on perpective and lanscapes. If you are looking to understand more about shape appealing, look also for thing that are related like theory on it and other art topic like enviroments. I suppose it will influence your shapes too. But maybe it is not what you want; idk exactly. Hope it helps. Good luck and keep up the practice. PS: I have seen Sinix's video on Shape appealing and Marco Bucci on a topic like it really useful.
Hi @John Carter. I think they are nicely done! What I get from your write is that you don't like the lack of character of most of the heads, you need to look more for reality. If you are used to draw from imagination, the best way is to improve your consumption side and add images to your visual library. If you do not have any problem on trying to draw from observation, just go for it too. Also, if you want to "feel" the solidity of form or you prefer going for something with some kind of structure, go for learning what are the components of the head, from bones to muscles and skin and fat (only if you are not doing it yet. I am supposing you got used to use a really specific combination of basic forms, like a manekin. Idk). I recomend to play with references. Analize them from observation and drawing, as you prefer. To go for a perfect copy or use them as inspiration is up to you. Hope it helps. Sorry for the long text, keep up the practice!