Results 16 to 30 of 1741
Thread: Computer Art
September 2nd, 2006, 08:11 AM #16
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Charter Member, Restore Pluto Initiative
You people who think about serious topics, ignore this post:
In the age of straight razors, do you suppose young ladies opted for the hot wax treatment or tweezers? I can imagine a lovelorn lass beautifying herself with tweezers, chanting: "he loves me...nhhh!; he loves me not...nnnnhh!"
Imagine her horror to discover on the last tweak he loves her not.
September 2nd, 2006, 09:02 AM #17
My not liking the anime ones so much is usually due to the faces, which are stiff and doll-like, (I'm one of those people who find small talking dolls in horror movies much more scary than big monsters.)
In this case, though, it was not the face of the model, nor her hair blowing in the magical wind, as HE noted, but her body, which was grotesque and contorted in strange ways. I do not find malnourished, bone-deformed, twisted breast bodies particularly attractive, even if you make them nearly naked and give them a sword.
Kevin has now fixed her breasts, thank goodness. Now, how about giving her a torso that's wider than her arm?
September 2nd, 2006, 09:52 AM #18
But, KatG, she is just fine as is ... after all, Olive Oil girls need to feel appreciated, too.
September 2nd, 2006, 11:33 PM #19
You see, different strokes for different folks, and all that... But at least Kat did like the chair.
Well, it being a three day weekend in this neck of the woods, I'm not where my primary computer is. And this computer I'm on now is lacking in A) horsepower and B) requisite software for me to create some new art. It does have Bryce on it (the software I used to create my book covers), but I don't have any models here (and I'm on a dial up connection, so downloading some isn't very practical...) I did create a little piece of funky art in Bryce to post, just to keep things moving, but I can't seem to get the FTP software to cooperate to upload it. So.... Let's just chat for a bit, shall we? I promise some more stuff as soon as I get back to the barn.
As a topic question... What do you like to see in fantasy art (we know that gothic doll faces are right out, but aside from that...)? Are you partial to action scenes? Creatures? Fairies? Castles? Contemplative? Melancholy? Narrative scenes? Abstract? What attracts your interest when looking at a picture?
September 3rd, 2006, 08:40 AM #20
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Charter Member, Restore Pluto Initiative
Every piece of art has at least a 1,000 words, right? The best art lets you in on what's going on - The Garden of Earthly Delights - or it sets you to wondering what's going on - Whistler's Mother or Mona Lisa or Girl With a Pearl Earing. or The Scream.
You could do the valley of refuge in BrianC's Rose/Thorn and it would be cool scenery but if you placed Eleanor hiding from Feah, then you have a story. If you haven't read Rose/Thorn, shame on you!
If you did the approach to Sabakushi or the grand ball room therein and omitted the characters, there would be a story waiting. Of course, you've already done that story. But give me the images and I'd see a different story, as would KatG and the Dazzler.
I don't know what I like till I see it.
September 3rd, 2006, 09:08 AM #21
Originally Posted by Hereford Eye
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- In the Shire
- Blog Entries
Oh for information HE, they had a huge firework display last night at that place down the road we visited
September 3rd, 2006, 03:52 PM #22
Emotional faces in turbulent moments are the best. I also like dramatic poses, like Boris Vallejo's work. (Ok, so I got a weak spot for hunky guy poses, too )
September 3rd, 2006, 05:25 PM #23Originally Posted by Dazzlinkat
HE: Yes, I comcur completely that each viewer really does bring a whole new 'experience' to an image. I recall the two robot ladies image (where I was messing around with the depth of field). You and KatG had quite different ideas about what you were seeing, both of which were different than mine. We all bring our own experiences to whatever it is we're viewing (or creating), and that makes for some interesting conversations, to say the least! (Now, we have to see if we can get KatG to write a gothic doll face story to go with one of my Anime pictures...)
September 7th, 2006, 08:57 AM #24
Aha! I see that SFFWorld returns after a couple of days hiatus, but sans the last post I put up here. Must have been a nasty outage... Anyway, here's the picture I put up as a "placeholder" while working on Dazzle's Boris picture (which is almost done, just needs some touching up). This one is just a little contemporary scene. Yes the colors and outfit are funky (meant to be so), but I particularly like her head and the hair on this one...
September 7th, 2006, 09:44 AM #25
You know,all of the scenery that you do is always very nice, sometimes quite breath-catching, but I think that I agree with KatG that the people are very often doll-like. I think I know why. It's not (usually) the pose or the clothing but it's the skin. There is almost never any flaw to the skin, not a freckle, a mole, a line, none of the little imperfections that we come to expect in a living person. I think that's why they often seem like dolls.
Last edited by BrianC; September 7th, 2006 at 09:46 AM.
September 7th, 2006, 10:13 AM #26
No scars, missing ears, missing teeth...
September 7th, 2006, 10:33 AM #27
I'll agree with you both on that. The skin textures vary quite a bit in quality, with the best ones being created from actual photos of real skin. However, there aren't as many of those as I would like, and they don't always have the right coloration for what the rest of the scene is like. The other thing that inhibits showing off all the detail is the size of the images here on the computer screen - some of the models actually do have decent skin detail, but it gets lost at 72 dpi when showing a model full length on the screen. On a close up, or on a printed image, a lot of that comes back.
Here's a close up of the Meadow girl. This particular skin texture is not terribly detailed, but there is some, with some slight blemishing on her neck. The lips look pretty good.
Now, if you want to see some real texturing, Juzza knows of where I speak. I'm working on a character for him that is far more grizzled than our Meadow girl here. However, I don't know if he'd like the fellow to come out for public consumption yet...
September 7th, 2006, 10:38 AM #28
September 7th, 2006, 11:04 AM #29
It varies by model and what Kevin does with them. (In the old thread, we had a couple of discussions about this, with Kev getting quite techie on us.) If it's a distance shot, where the figures are smaller, it's not going to matter much, and some of the action shots as well. But the close-up portraits, you're going to notice. Sometimes Kevin uses very realistic models, and may age them up a bit, using light and shadow to add depth, plays with their hair, etc.
I do actually like some of the anime figures -- I like anime -- but sometimes that sort of look doesn't go with the very detailed clothing Kevin is using or very realistic backgrounds. It clashes, and thus, for me, makes the figure in portrait less interesting. (Although, having a cartoon character placed on a photo background can make for some interesting art.) My favorite of all the ones he's done I think remains "The Airlock" with a woman sitting in front of an airlock/hatch, wearing a slightly improbable but not entirely unbelievable outfit. While the face of that figure is not entirely realistic, the lines, lighting, etc. all work with the background, so the picture fits together for me.
The more anime models are very flat in the face -- the cheekbones and features are not very well developed, just quick, pointy lines, the basic shapes of the face. The eyes are usually large and round, making them appear glassy. The lack of developed features makes the figure seem very young, child-like or doll-like, regardless of the skin texture.
In the placeholder picture, I think the figure basically works and is realistic enough to match the background, though the eye color is a bit much. But for me on this one, the lighting on the figure is off. I think Kevin was going for dappled light on her, but it doesn't quite work, especially as she's standing in a pool of deep shadow. There's a spotlight on her belly that should splay to other parts and does not, and so looks very strange to me.
September 7th, 2006, 11:23 AM #30
I get the biggest sense of 'doll-ness' mostly from the eyes. They are almost always wide with the whites very prominantly bright. Very little 'eye' expression.