showing off -new stuff by madelf

[madelf]

I really haven't posted much of my stuff here yet, but I've been meaning to. So... following Storn's (I think it was Storn) advice I'm making my own little thread for posting stuff and this is where I'll stick new things as I get to them, rather than making new threads everytime.

To start with though, I'll just post a few recent pieces I've done while trying to get my brain wrapped around digital paint. I think it's going pretty well (probably some of my best work to date actually), what do you guys think?

As a standing rule...feel free to critique, anytime. I'm always looking for ways to improve, and I'm pretty easy going. So don't worry about ticking me off. It takes a lot of doing. :D

http://www.madelf.net/sceneofdestruction6.jpg
http://www.madelf.net/vixenplus3.jpg
http://www.madelf.net/fireball.jpg
http://www.madelf.net/lostelf12.jpg

[mahubrahd]

i'll go one by one, but let me start by saying these are pretty basic pieces, and if i were the one doing em' i would try to see how i could add i little more character or drama to the pieces,

1. scene of destruction-i wont comment on your faces and anatomy at all, since i think this is a stle issue and thats a relative issue. what i do think is that compositionally you could have moved the angle and made this a worms eye view and added a whole crap load of power to it. the colors are muddy and blend together alot, you probably could have thrown another color in here somewhere to break up the monotnoy. The smoke is done nicely.

2.vixenplus- pretty basic straigh on shot, you could turn the body a little to give her more dimension, the figure is nice, just stiff. Also the hand stretched out towards the viewer is funny to me, just needs a little work to be believable.

3.fireball- not sure if this guy is supposed to be a dwarf or not, but his torso is kinda stubby. you did a good job on the perspective of the gun closer to the viewer in this piece. infact the guns are done pretty well,. again a little movement, even in a basic character drawing can add volumes.

4.lostelf- this is my fav in the bunch, basically cause, i can see the style working. the colors are dark, soft and nice, and not hindered by the anatomy. The eyes are spooky, cool but spooky.

hope i was helpful, keep up the good work

aris

[madelf]

Thanks for the input, mahubrahd.

I have to agree with you on pretty much all your points.
These are all a little static. I'd like to say that it's only because they are all character portraits, but I'd probably be fooling myself.
More action and drama is something I need to work on. Along with perspective, landscape, and lighting (though I think I'm getting better with lighting)

Anatomy... hmmm. You're worrying me. I had thought the anatomy was halfway decent on these. Was I mistaken? I know I should use reference more than I do to really pin down the details, but is there something major I'm missing?

Yes Fireball is a dwarf, just not a bearded one.

My favorite of these is Lost Elf also. And it's the most recent of the bunch. I think I was finally getting the hang of the digital medium by then.

[mahubrahd]

Originally posted by madelf

Anatomy... hmmm. You're worrying me. I had thought the anatomy was halfway decent on these. Was I mistaken? I know I should use reference more than I do to really pin down the details, but is there something major I'm missing?

what i meant by anatomy was, just moving the figure around a little. playing with the pose.

aris

[madelf]

what i meant by anatomy was, just moving the figure around a little. playing with the pose.


Ahhhh...I understand :)

[Jeremy McHugh]

Mahurbrahd makes some helpful points.

One additional thing I might consider, Madelf, would be to remove the digitally textured backgrounds. It is a bit jarring next to your unique hand drawn style and flattens things overmuch, IMO.
It says, "I am a texture filter".
I think if you were to work into each piece and create the textures by hand it would add to each piece's uniqueness. I think it would really pay off for you in spades.
Just my opinion o'course.
My opinion's value= $0.02

Thanks for showing us these! Keep 'em comin'!

---Jeremy:)

[defcombeta]

nice, i love the falme by the way very nice, overall they work , also a bout textures , look at shirow he ha the best example of this kind of thing, and it works for him . maybe that approch perhaps. one thing the pose in the first drawing is very front on, try using slightly angled shot every so often, helps the piece along

john mac

[madelf]

Uhmmm... actually I didn't use texture filters much at all in the backgrounds of these.
I did use some filters to texturize the concrete wall background in vixen and fireball, but that was so painted over afterwards I kind of doubt that's what you are seeing.
The texture effect (at least the one I think you're seeing though I might be wrong) is a result of using the chalk tool in painter classic. That is about the only thing in that program that can lighten something without going opaque. Unfortunately it also causes the texture. While I tend to use it almost like a wash at times to lighten or highlight a good sized area, it is not a filter.

I will keep in mind that it's giving that effect though. It's good to know as I would prefer to avoid the heavily filtered look.
Thanks.

[JSpektr]

On the anatomy, it could use a bit of work. Your joints are a bit poorly defined and doughy, like you're not willing to commit to what's under the skin. This is especially apparent in the hands and wrists. The arms are a bit short relative to the bodies, and your heads are too large and squashed vertically.

The vixenplus image has the best anatomy of the lot. In general, you're doing fine, but there are some areas that can be improved.

The eyes tend to be set too far apart, or are too wide, or something. I'm not sure what it is, but they look off.

I agree on the comments regarding the static poses. Any time a figure is coming in from exactly parallel to the viewer, at a 90 angle from the ground, it looks unnatural. This is also something that inexperienced artists do a lot, so it's best to avoid it, otherwise someone may see it and overlook the good qualities of the piece.

Thanks for posting your work. You show a lot of promise, and I hope you continue putting pieces up for review. My #1 suggestion is to be more aggressive! Get some bold, hard lines in there, and see what happens.

[Jon H]

Originally posted by madelf
Uhmmm... actually I didn't use texture filters much at all in the backgrounds of these.
I did use some filters to texturize the concrete wall background in vixen and fireball, but that was so painted over afterwards I kind of doubt that's what you are seeing.
The texture effect (at least the one I think you're seeing though I might be wrong) is a result of using the chalk tool in painter classic. That is about the only thing in that program that can lighten something without going opaque. Unfortunately it also causes the texture. While I tend to use it almost like a wash at times to lighten or highlight a good sized area, it is not a filter.

I will keep in mind that it's giving that effect though. It's good to know as I would prefer to avoid the heavily filtered look.
Thanks.

Couple of suggestions here, as I work in Painter Classic a lot too. I have the pre-layers version of classic, and you may have the later version, so if yu're totally confused by my advice, that'll be why. The later version of Classic has different brushes.

I struggle sometimes with the premade "paper" textures, and I have a couple of solutions you might like to try.

1: Keep away from the chalks - they only work when you have them set to pick up the grain. Though you can lower the grain setting to reduce the effect somewhat. It does end up being the same brush as an airbrush tool though.
If you use the chalks over a big area you'll get that premade texture feel all over.

2: Keep changing your "paper" in the art materials menu. Vary your texture and the scale. That should break up the uniformity you are getting now.

3: Plenty of brushes can lighten stuff without being opaque - in fact many are better at it than the chalks. You just need to experiment some more. Try "Big Fine hair" in the regular paint brushes menu. Drop the opacity to maybe 20 and build up layers of brush work. Looks nice! Pretty much any brush with the opacity lowered will work. It's a chore, as the program won't save your settings even between using different brushes, but I'm used to that these days. I even kinda like it.

Hope that helps. :)

[madelf]

Thanks for the suggestions, Jon. I hadn't had much luck lightening with other tools, but I am new at digital, so I'm still trying to sort through and figure out what works. I really liked that chalk tool though, darn it:mad:
And I just got ahold of a copy of painter7 so now I'm completely overwhelmed, but I'll find my way through.

Thanks for all the pointers from everybody. I'll keep them in mind for my next stuff.

[madelf]

I've been doing some experimenting in grayscale shading.
Comments are welcome.

First pic...
Brush inked and inkwash shaded with acrylic highlights.

[madelf]

This one is an older pen & ink drawing with new digital shading.

[madelf]

Tried a very loose and sketchy style with this one.
Inked with pen, digital shading.