Since I've always been about arms, I figure it's about time I actually get good at them.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Yes, it looks like I cheated and took a really easy image. I was actually saving this one for a day when I had very little time, but then I realised I struggle to give form to hills, so it became good practice.
Ohhh! I really like the direction this thread is taking! StevenM has a great, functional design I thought I'd tweak.
For the forest mockup I went ahead and added a canopy, moved around some grass and tweaked Charizard's wing and shadows. When it comes to working with a limited space, I'd advise against having long lines of pixels that touch the edge of the 56x56 box. It makes it obvious where the edges of the sprites are.
For the indoor mockup I made it a bit more efficient tile-wise and found a neat way to get Red's sprite working. There's a sort of white strip along the back wall which blends with the ground nicely. Not sure how to handle Giovanni's side and the door, though.
I also changed the cave mockup a bit. I went with some pillars of light to make the sprites less boxy and added some rocky background details. I bumped the stone platforms down a tile and tweaked the right side of Charizard's sprite a bit. What do you guys think?
stoleer borrowed an art book from my friend to work on human anatomy, so another male form again. Thoughts?
I really need to do poses.
Thanks as always for the advice, Ryu.
As far as picking my references better, what kind of things am I looking for? Just lots of mountains/hills/large rocks and no trees? Should I be avoiding things with lots of water in them?
Remake for today of a previous exercise:
I believe that I finally understand what these studies are going to be teaching me.
I originally took a massive brush and just went over the image at something like 25% zoom while squinting, but that left a lot to be desired, so i zoomed back to 100%, shrunk my brush a bit and touched up the mountain ranges (and some on the clouds and trees, but that's not well done at all).
Should I not have done that rather?
More tileset stuff, yay!
An actual mockup now that I have enough pieces:
I feel this amplifies the differences in my pieces and they all need a little work. The long grass is obviously very WIP and the short grass is probably just a placeholder, but at least I have quite a pretty scene (despite being a little disjointed). May start a thread soon actually, to get some help with this. Think I'll make a character and animal first though; that gives me something to do tomorrow and Monday.
Value practice thing:
Well this is less embarrassing, but still pretty far off.
I imagine 100 more of these though and I'll know my values pretty well.
Mr. Fahrenheit: Thanks!
Do not paint a Rembrandt, but BE Rembrandt. Of course, this is extremely difficult to do but is the highest form of master study.
just curious how you want to be someone you never met and you just know pictures of. Work of that person(s workshop, or work labeled as their work) made for clients and not even the complete Opus is at your fingertips due to time and a lot of pieces got lost (at least if it comes to "old" masters)
At the end trying to be someone else just will always end up with yourself imagining something, at least as far as I understand.
YOu yourself Imagining and acting like some idealized/idolized view of someone.
is acting in in someone you don't know and you won't ever met and you don't have valid information about his personality truly the highest form of the master study?
I think it's possible to reproduce style and even to reproduce someones ideas to a certain degree. I don't think you will ever be able to really "be" someone. You just don't share the exact view of world and experiences as this person and you might miss key experiences which were important for the artist - conscious or inconscious.
Maybe I just misunderstood or misinterpreted what you wrote, but I am curious what's the big idea behind this. I know some actors actin gin certain characters, but that sounds to me like a completely a different story.
Quite late... uhm early here.
Ryumaru, that is really impressive!
How exactly do you do a "master study"? Say if I wanted to study the work of a specific artist because I like his technique or his colours (or some such). How would I go about doing a study without just blatantly copying what they do?
For example this guy from DeviantArt: Cushart. I love the colours he uses and the way he shades his pieces. I'd love to some how transfer that into my pixel art, but I have never even done art and I haven't the foggiest idea how or why his artwork looks like that. I also do not nearly have enough talent to mimic it, but I would really like to get to that point.
Other than the obvious point of practicing a lot and reading every tutorial ever, do you have any tips on how I might be able to recognise the facets of art that I like and why I like them, and then ideally how I could transfer that to my own work? I would be greatly appreciative if anyone could shove any stepping stones my way.
Thanks for the help everyone! Here's where I ended up:
the shapes suggestion helped a ton.
I worked to make it even more chaotic, with the most noise around the center of the middle shape to draw the eye there; put it against black to make it look even bolder.
You rendered without first having a solid foundation. For the foliage, you need to think of clumps and forms, not individual shapes you can AA to look like leaves. Sometimes even with a good start you can fall into this over-individualization. Same thing goes for the segmentation of the tree which neither looks realistic or cool, but as disfigured and lumpy as the clouds.
Your palettes and technique for the most part is good, but I've seen a trend in your work of losing the whole when it comes to creating convincing forms that exist in space by poor shape design and over-rendering.
Your latest edit is a step in the right direction; you are getting good critique here and you have the ability to execute.
Thanks for the post.. That tree; So true about the texture.
I really learned something important in all this.. never work too hard rendering something without first either putting a lot of thought into it or sharing compositional sketches. Those clouds took a long while and yet they're useless.. a waste of hours. (I actually may recycle them for a transparent layer in another scene; so possibly they will serve some other purpose)
Cels: I don't know either. I didn't want anything specific as a point of interest or focal point in the background. I wanted something mysterious and dark.. but not too dark, ie the stars breaking through the veil of blackness, the semi happy colors, etc.
I actually considered putting a tower in the background but decided against it because I felt like it's been done so many times. I can think of a few games even where the object or destination is seen in the background as the character looks upon it. Although yours does look pretty cool peeping out over the clouds there.. hmm decisions decisions.
What are the divisions in those two edits of Drazelic's example for?
Rav: Glad you said you think a scene could be interesting sans a particular object of interest, cause there really was no intended focal point beyond the ledge in the foreground.. just an open scape with many possible points to look at.
I may crop it to the size in the quick edit I posted although I'll fully redo the clouds and tree. the main issues were the horizon line and the textures.. hopefully with those two things corrected I can make the image clear. Although I'm curious on peoples thoughts on focal points and whatnot.