pouët.net

Unrandom scene graphics

category: general [glöplog]
Click -> click.

Surely I'm not the only active graphician left. Post stuff.
added on the 2007-09-14 14:26:06 by doomdoom doomdoom
I clickz0red and I liked. :) Iris still sucks though. ;)
added on the 2007-09-14 14:34:57 by StingRay StingRay
We do.
added on the 2007-09-14 14:51:14 by doomdoom doomdoom
:D
added on the 2007-09-14 14:53:44 by StingRay StingRay
VERY decent! All this time I had no idea you were Doom/Iris. Shame there aren't more graphicians of your calibre any more. I miss scene art!

Nice one. ;)
added on the 2007-09-14 15:25:22 by Premium Premium
Has anyone else noticed how most graphics/digital paintings now have gone from the airbrushed (sometimes plastic) style to a more hand painted look. Why is that? Something to do with wacom tablets?


Pandur: Neat!! You make it look so easy, but my head starts spinning as soon as I open a 3d program.
nice videos, how did you capture them btw? O_O
added on the 2007-09-14 21:32:26 by psenough psenough
Interesting if I ever wish to start pixeling or modelling on PC (the second seems easier).
added on the 2007-09-14 21:39:47 by Optimus Optimus
pixeling ? have I missed something ? just saw photoshop n 3d here ;) both nice btw.
added on the 2007-09-14 21:41:42 by titus^rab titus^rab
great impression!

it should be a compo genre by itself :D
added on the 2007-09-14 21:50:12 by Zest Zest
I want to be a graphixian!!!
added on the 2007-09-14 21:52:03 by Optimus Optimus
nice! sweet to see some creative talent! unfortunally the only thing creative I do is dancing and I'm not very good yet...
added on the 2007-09-14 21:58:20 by thec thec
ps: Camtasia. It's very easy to use, but insanely bloated.
added on the 2007-09-14 22:14:08 by doomdoom doomdoom
speed painting is impressive too :)
added on the 2007-09-14 22:19:53 by Zest Zest
Repaints of photos usually fail to impress me.
added on the 2007-09-14 22:28:47 by doomdoom doomdoom
Quote:
Repaints of photos usually fail to impress me.


Why? What they lose in creativity, they make up for in detail. Although I didn't think that Jackie Chan one was that great personally and doesn't really back up my theory.
It takes practice, maybe even skill, but if a machine can do it perfectly in a straightforward way, why would I want to watch a person doing it? It's not creative.
added on the 2007-09-15 03:16:31 by doomdoom doomdoom
doom: but imagine all the years of their life they wasted prefecting their copying technic! how can that not turn you on? ;)
added on the 2007-09-15 04:19:40 by psenough psenough
I have mixed feelings on the copying thing. I love to see a really good one, that shows lots of skill and work. But I hate it too, because I know that with a bit of imagination that time and skill could have produced something new, which would rule 10x more.
added on the 2007-09-15 11:44:36 by psonice psonice
I LIKE YOUR COPIED GRAPHICS VERY MUCH, YOU ARE VERY GOOD AT OVERPAINTING MR WADE*COUGH COUGH* I MEAN SHANE :)
added on the 2007-09-15 12:54:48 by uns3en_ uns3en_
Copying is great for studying shapes and becoming familiar with lighting and so on, but just perfecting the technique doesn't make you able to draw anything at all without reference. Apart from imagination you need to be able to visualize what you're about to draw and mentally project it into 2D, and that takes years of practice (and some people supposedly just can't).

Most of those people copying pictures on Youtube wouldn't know how to draw without a reference.
added on the 2007-09-15 12:55:12 by doomdoom doomdoom
and i dont care if you use grid or not, it still is very homo and uncreative
added on the 2007-09-15 12:55:17 by uns3en_ uns3en_
yea those who copy at youtube can't do shit without refence. anyway, draw some cartoonish shit or something else, but just working like human scanner is fucking homo/uncreative.
added on the 2007-09-15 12:57:21 by uns3en_ uns3en_

login