Saturday, February 23, 2008

Need Help!




Hey Guys - Here's a few different color-comps of the same piece -- could you chime-in on which (if any) read well to you? (they're numbered 1-9 on the page)

Thanks!

Anxious for input.


MG

6 comments:

Nate Storm said...

By far, i like the foreground of number 9 - the background on that one works with it as well. On a lot of these there isn't a consistent level of contrast/saturation which seems to seperate the image rather than unify it. I would take most of number 9, but maybe the midground guy from 7 or 8. I mighy also try and paint out the white highlights you have on the midground guy. The repaint you did on the foreground guy did a world of difference, why not try it on the mid?

Rayford said...

I agree for the most part with Nate on this...

Rendering: Watch those blown out white diffused highlights everywhere. I'd like to see what happens when you take the foreground character from 5-6 and overlay it on 9 at about 15%-25%. I do however like the atmospheric approach to the middle ground character in 5 and 6.

Composition: I'm a little confused as to what's happening in the background. There's some confusing tangents happening back there. Compositionally it looks as though the guy laying down is a really tiny guy next to a normal sized guy. The reason? There is no overlap to separate them as middle and background characters. Also it's hard to decipher the perspective of the scene. The guy leaning over seems to be viewed from a ground level camera and the BG guy seems to be viewed from a 3/4 down facing camera. To be honest, the more I look at it the more I think you should eliminate the background characters entirely. They add nothing in terms of communicating the idea of the piece, and cause problems to the composition. If they absolutely have to be in I'd work on solving the perspective problems. Right now they are incongruous with the perspective of the foreground characters. Does that make sense? I'd be happy to talk to you more about this. feel free to take a swing at me the next time we meet:)

Rayford said...

One other suggestion: Work on *simplifying* and confidently defining the torso on the foreground character. I'm not convinced the anatomy is working. It doesn't need to be that complex. Simple cylinders with muscle definition carved into it and a few tight folds of skin where he's bending and along the edge of his pants.

K.I.S.S.!

I hope that's helpful?

Cheers,
-Ray

Stigall said...

Well, I am going to have to say that #2 appeals to me most. I like the unified tones and subtle contrast of the background. I agree about the idea that the illusion of distance still needs a little work. Ray's comments about the guy in the forground are good - simplifying the stomach area a bit. However, I feel that your background characters may be a bit too detailed. Taking the opacity and/or contrast down doesn't create the same effect as actually painting them less ornate.

Otherwise, beautiful work, Mike!

G-licious said...

Absolutely great. Thanks for the thought and insight fellas! Sound advice all-around. I knew I could count on you guys to put your eyes on it and point out what I wasn't seeing.
"Take a swing..." (?!?) Hogwash! More like hugs and kisses!

Rayford said...

Gyyyuh!