Hey :).
It's kinda hard to get constructive criticism at deviantART, when people don't know you (and you don't do some 13-year-old-pseudo-manga-drawings).
But I always got good c&c here, so I hope you won't disappoint me :).
(http://fc03.deviantart.com/fs47/f/2009/252/d/6/Bald_Eagle_by_kaio89.jpg)
This was started as a test with some nice new brushes I found. It took me maybe 1.5 hours - 2 hours. It's supposed to be the head of a bald eagle, I plan to add a lions body...or something fancy. Most detail-work was spend on the eye and the face...the rest of the head is still kinda sketchy, because I was lazy.
Photo-reference of course, just goolge for bald eagle and you'll see.
Leave some c&c, if you want! :) Thanks!
Wow, exceptional work!
The only thing I'd mention is the lighting of the beak's point; it looks like it doesn't point straight down but a bit "towards us". Just darkening it a bit should do it.
Technically it's pretty much spot ono, but taste-wise it's a bit wolf-moon t-shirt. I'd love to see it with a different background.
I wouldn't call it exceptional, but it's a good solid study of an eagle's head, and that's pretty much it.
I agree with S that the motif is a bit tacky, especially since - with the backdrop and the signature - it appears to be a finished picture
Quotewolf-moon t-shirt
Or a dolphin-waterfall shirt? ;D
Though I like it very much, how the attention is dragged to the eye of this bird. As for the composition, I think the motive is a bit too centered.
But anyway, well done!
(and sorry that I couldn't add anything constructive :P )
xD Thanks everyone! And sorry for my "tacky" taste ;D.
btw, here's my newest creation:
(http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/wolf_in_blue_foliage_kids_teens_adults_shirt.jpg)
...
nah, just kidding
I can really tell you spent a lot of detail time on the face and eye and I hope you finish the rest of the detailing becuase it does look like a bad mesh of to different styles. Since you used a photo reference I am probably wrong but the head seems a little vertically squished. But overall very good.
The eye and the area between eye and beak are really good, almost photorealistic! I agree with Khris on the beaks lighting though.
I'll finish the rest, don't worry Dervis :). And you're right, I stretched the head a bit...dunno why. I took the reference, streched it and started painting. So it was intentional...kinda.
Anyway, here's the plan for this creature:
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a147/kaio89/griffin.jpg)
Nothing original, I know. And the pose is kinda boring, too. You know, just standing and not in action, ripping some Orcs apart. It's for training anyway :).
And I hope there will be a day when I don't need that much references I need now.
References aren't a bad thing at all, and I think you've done a brilliant job with the face. Let's see how the rest turns out!
Hey kaio. I think it's a nice copy of the reference. Having a look at the works you've posted here (and on deviantart) I wonder what your point about drawing is. Is it just being able to copy something you see? I think that won't help much in creating games. If your point is to learn how to draw athmospheric backgrounds and realistic creatures and people, you should try to copy less and create more by yourself. I also copied pictures before and became quite good (I think) in it (just using the basic round brush though). However, since I stopped that and tried to create more scenery by myself instead, I have learned a lot about all the important basic stuff like lighting, perspective/plasticity and composition. It's a feeling and understanding of those basic topics that I did not get while I was just copying from references. Just my two cents. (It looks good however ;-) )
Geratuza, Kaio already mentioned that:
Quote from: kaioshin on Wed 09/09/2009 16:55:08
Nothing original
[...]
And I hope there will be a day when I don't need that much references I need now.
I agree that copying photos shouldn't be the purpose of drawing, but as a start, to get used to Photoshop, brushes, lighting, shading etc... it's useful. Also, who says that this drawing should be related to a game? Many people post stuff here that has nothing to do with game making.
Oh, just read your last sentences. Well, for me it works quite well to learn about these things when copying from photos or other reference pictures..
Well, my problem is, that when I draw without ANY reference, lighting and scaling sucks. I thought it would help me first to copy stuff, to get a feel to how things work. I'm not just copying them, the most time I spend staring at my picture, staring at the reference... does it look ok? where's the light source? and stuff like that.
You know, you can't build a palace if you can't even build a shack. 8)
And since I'm not a huge talent by nature, I have to go all the long way and learn it all from the beginning ;).
Quote from: kaioshin on Thu 10/09/2009 07:58:12
And since I'm not a huge talent by nature, I have to go all the long way and learn it all from the beginning ;).
Even people with huge talent have to learn from the beginning... ;) I could start a debate here and now about whether "natural talent" even exists, or whether some people just have a personality more suited to learning a certain skill... I don't know if many people are just born with a perfect understanding of composition and lighting, for example! ;)
So I think, therefore, you have pretty substantial talent!
Talent means to practice so hard and so long until others assume that you are talented. ;-)
I get your point, kaioshin. It's just that I believe that the theoretic approach as you describe it is not very productive. Personally, I did not learn of it as much as I believed I would.
Instead, if you want to learn to draw an eagle, google for 5 or 10 pictures of eagles. Look carefully at them and try to create an own one that comes close to the others, but is no exact copy of any of those. (Also, there might be tricks that other people discovered while trying to draw eagles.)
Or if you want to learn drawing sunsets, pick like 10 pictures of sunsets and create an own one in the spirit of the references.
Of course, the first pictures will not look as professional as the copied ones you are doing now. But it's a learning process, you will get better! Dare more freedom. Allow yourself to create (a lot of) less good-looking pictures, discover the flaws, practice new techniques and approaches, experiment with light and perspective, ask others for their perception of your picture... To me, this way was much more of a help than what I did before (what was similar to your approach). I just wanted to share this experience, because when looking back now, I see this time as a time of stagnancy from the point of getting skilled in drawing.
Think in the end it doesn't matter what route you take when drawing/painting, as long as you keep at it. Reference routes tend to give you a good insight into details, while keeping you back in areas such as volume, which is the basis for other areas such as lighting/shading.
One risk you run when taking the reference route is that you and your "audience", such as friends, get used to a relatively very high quality in this stage, which can make reference free attempts discouraging, as they seem very inferior in comparison, and you end up sort of stuck in a constraining reference mode.
I think it's like learning another language: in the reference route you start without any real grammar insight, merely copying phrases. After a couple of years you'll be able to converse quite well, and you know all the local phrases and expressions, but you'll still probably commit quite basic grammar errors and will have trouble formulating more complex sentences.
The construction route is quite opposite, where you focus on the grammar and develop a solid foundation, but your conversations get quite stiff, and you'll lack the local flavor.
Course, there's nothing that says that you have to stick to any of the extremes, and most follow a course along the middle, which seems reasonable.
Anyway, looks nice!
Very good points, Loomy
Indeed. :) thank you all for your advices
edit: update. I tried not to stick as much on the references for the body as I did for the head. Still sketchy :).
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a147/kaio89/griffin3.jpg)
Mhh, I continued and ask myself if the wings might be a bit too small? What do you think?
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a147/kaio89/griffin3-1.jpg)
...not anything concerning your art, but I always had an image of griffin as having front legs kind of like "hands"/claws (like being a biped sort of and not a quadriped)...this kinda looks likesome actually cut of half a lion and half an eagle together.
Btw. I like the art, way beyond my skill level in any case. ;)
If you ask me, thats some nice lookin' shiat!!!
Good job so far!
The eagle part is too small (or the lion part is too big). It seems it has to make an effort for the eagle feet to reach the groud where the lion feet comfortably do so even when its legs are slightly bent. Also, the lion's back seems to connect with the eagle part far too high up. Make the whole lion bit smaller and do something with the eagle legs (bend those knees too) and the image will improve quite a lot. That will also make the wings seem more the right size, because they are actually too small now, especially if it's supposed to be able to fly.
Would you consider putting a rider on it? I know that griffins traditionally don't let people ride them (unless you are Harry Potter), but would it not be cool with a interestingly armoured knight-type person on it? That would make this into something more interesting and evocative than a just technically brilliant piece. We've seen griffins before, but putting a person on it, designing the saddle and all the other equipment needed to steer the beast could make this into a more unique and personal piece.
I'm sure it will be great even without a rider though - my first piece of advice is a lot more important! (I think it is vital, even if you're allowed to disagree...)
Think the texture is working pretty well, but think it's quite lacking in volume, particularly the far legs, which looks lit by a special light source under the stomach.
Even if you don't use shapes to construct the image, it might be a good idea to project a sort of wire frame model onto it in your mind.
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/et_a01.jpg)
Once you know the surfaces, lighting it is merely a matter of judging the how well their angles would reflect the light source.
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/et_a02.jpg)
Getting the values down in a rough state before you begin any detail work has a few benefits: first off, it allows you to design a pleasing light setup, one that pulls the focus to the areas you want (and subdues areas of less importance), sets the proper mood, and brings out the best in the subject. This is a crucial but unfortunately often neglected step. It's the difference between party photos taken with a crappy camera vs studio photos. Secondly, it saves you a lot of rework, as you make the decisions with the greatest impact early on, basically giving you a blueprint to follow, instead of adlibbing it and having to ditch precious parts that turns out to not fit the rest.
Anyway, regardless of what approach you pick, good luck!
I definitely support Loominous' advice here. As far as the wings go, you need to consider how wide the wingspan of an eagle is normally and try magnifying that to suit this larger animal. Bald Eagles typically have a 7-foot wingspan which is massive for their size. You'll probably need double the length you've got now for the griffin's wings to seem like they're good for more than show.
I found this on deviant art, it might give you some ideas for how to approach the wings. It almost looks like he drew the wings on reverse, but maybe it will help you.
http://emmil.deviantart.com/art/The-Griffin-Tutorial-104738459
Again, thank you very much, I really appreciate all of your help. Your comments made me think about my techniques and I agree now, that just copying photos isn't a big help if you want to become a better artist. I now do much more original stuff. Maybe I'll show it here in the critics lounge sometimes :).
greetz