I would appreciate some crit and suggestions for improvement on this painting I just finished in Photoshop. She is a mermaid loosely based on one of the coolest-looking fish ever, the lionfish (http://www.africanaquatics.co.za/images/fishpics/LIONFISH.jpg) ^_^
Thanks!
The original: http://crabshack.bythegoddess.com/ags/Lionfish.jpg
Latest version:
(http://crabshack.bythegoddess.com/misc/Lionfish2.jpg)
Marry me! :D
Awesomeness! The notes do look a bit out of place but everything else is fantastic! Shouldn't the hair be wavy? And maybe you can add some tiny golden fishes around the image.. or bubbles. Still - awesomeness!
Don't leave the notes in.
don't marry Krysis, marry me!
Don't wait any longer, Ivy posted pics of herself, do the same! ;D
It doesn't look really watery though... like Krysis suggested add bubbles, fishes, something.
Very nice, very nice
Hrm... already mentioned but bubbles from the instrument. maybe make the background a bit more distorted, as if you were viewing through water.
Thanks for the replies ^_^ (and proposals *lol*)
I will take out the notes.Ã, Putting bubbles in is a good idea, and I'll experiment with adding some small fish too.
I don't want to distort the background too much, maybe just in the light coming down by adding some wavy textures.Ã, I'll try it out ^_^Ã, I'll probably increase the light as well.
The hair should probably be wavier, but I wanted her hair to evoke the fanning of the lionfish's spines.Ã, If I made it more wavy, I think it would lose some of that.
Thanks for the suggestions so far, keep 'em coming! ^_^
thats just beautiful. i wont even try criting. :o
:o I hate you
may I suggest:
(http://kafkaskoffee.com/junk/edits/Lionfish_ericedit.jpg)
make her more wet maybe?
Things take are UNDER water usually tend to look "wet" when they get OUT of the water.
Or do they?... :-\
Very nice pic, btw :)
If it's based on the lion fish, do the spines still inject you with deadly poison if you get too close?
Quote from: LimpingFish on Thu 29/06/2006 21:40:27
Things take are UNDER water usually tend to look "wet" when they get OUT of the water.
Or do they?... :-\
Very nice pic, btw :)
I don't think realism is something one should be shooting for when it comes to this art style.
:P
To me, the highlights you added, Eric, though nicely done, detract from the matte "softness" that some fish appear to have underwater...
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Lion_fish_melb_aquarium.jpg)
...and create a shell-like finish, making the bottom of the creature appear more like that of a shrimp or lobster.
imho, I would suggest maybe using a subtle faint gradient, of a contrasting and complimentary colour, along the darker sections as a possible highlight.
:)
I would show you, but alas I cannot draw. :P
Thanks, everyone ^_^
MrColossal: Thanks for the paintover ^_^Ã, Similar to what LimpingFish said, I think the shine is a tad too hard, but the suggestion of adding more highlights is a good one, and I will do so.
LimpingFish: I must admit I'm slightly confused by your highlight suggestion... do you mean add a slight orange tinge for the dark red/purple bands?Ã, That might work, I think I've seen something like that in tutorials, but I know very little colour theory and have never used complementary colour highlights before... I will give it a shot ^_^.Ã, Or did you mean something else?
Redwall: Yup, shark protection! ^_^
Mordalles: Thank you ^_^
Buloght: I hate you too ;)
Nope, thats exactly what I meant ;D
Quote from: MashPotato on Thu 29/06/2006 23:19:37
Redwall: Yup, shark protection! ^_^
I don't think it's shark's she'll be worring about... we can rent diving equiptment...
So cute :) If I drew this, I would make her eyes different, like the eyes of a female human. But guess you wanted her eyes to look like fish'.
And some more notes would be really good.
You could keep the notes, but you should change them a bit. Right now they look very fixed and neat.
As to what you could change them to, I have no idea. make them liquidy and bigger perhaps?
All of a sudden, there are votes for the music notes! ^_^
Gord and Babar, I already took out the notes, but thanks for the input. Please tell me if the bubbles are a good substitute.
Akumayo: Okay, the spines are protection against sharks AND scuba-diving AGSers ;)
Here is the revised picture, not too many changes:
(http://crabshack.bythegoddess.com/misc/Lionfish2.jpg)
-added bubbles
-slightly stronger highlights
-cleaned up some lines
-the light source is more wavy
-gills
Feel free to make more suggestions ^_^
She's gorgeous. It's a really unique way to draw a mermaid, I'm quite impressed. I'm sure you could have a future in illustration, if you wanted.
I don't actually have any crits about the drawing, I just wanted to point out that I like the way you did the outlines. It's very "edgy" in comics nowadays to do outlines in a darker version of the fill colour or even with a gradient in them, as opposed to just using black. As I recall they're called "knockout" lines or something. I keep trying to replicate the style, to limited success.
Do you use the pen tool to get those neat lines? I try to use the paintbrush tool in photoshop and everything I draw turns out fuzzy. :P
First off:
Bloody fantastic piece! I only have some (tiny) issues with the lines around the "legs" area. They seem to make the shape less smooth. I'm not sure how to explain what I mean ... maybe less "organic" is a better way to say it? Having said that, and considering this was done by hand in photoshop, they are almost perfect!
Secondly:
Quote from: MashPotato on Fri 30/06/2006 16:48:55Feel free to make more suggestions ^_^
Here's a suggestion ... come work with us on Amulet of Kings!! ;)
Keep up the great work!
Oh ... and I vote to keep the notes OUT of the image!
Great pic again!
As with the previous, it's tricky to give suggestions since your aim is pretty unclear.
For instance, at the moment the colours do seperate the subject from the background effectively, but do at the same time create the effect of two seperate elements layered ontop of eachother, rather than of a character in a setting.
There's no real way for people to know whether these things are design decisions, or issues that if pointed out n "corrected" would enhance the pic in your view, specially when dealing with more stylized styles.
A small description of what you're aiming at might generate more relevant suggestions.
Once again, great pic, and hope you'll post more.
Whee! Very nice. :)
The diffusing of the light from the surface, and the effect created, adds a lot to the background.
As for the characters colours making it stand out, I think MashPotato is right in her choice of contrasting hues between subject and background. It's pleasing to the eye and creates a nice sense of depth.
I agree the colour choices are good.
QuoteAs for the characters colours making it stand out, I think MashPotato is right in her choice of contrasting hues between subject and background. It's pleasing to the eye and creates a nice sense of depth.
Guess I could've been clearer when making that example.
Providing that Mash wants the character to blend in with the background, as in, create the illusion that the mermaid is actually in that enviroment, the colours, especially the shadow ones are too pure red. But again, this is providing that she wants to achieve this effect, which isn't clear. The current scheme is attractive in a stylized way as is.
Colours are relative. If doing a red enviroment, green colours will usually be just grey, which are percieved as green because of the red surrounding.
So my example wasn't aimed at the colour choice, as in, red subject, purple background, but the actual colours.
Thanks for all the kind words, everyone ^_^. I'll address some of the stuff brought up in order:
Outlines: Ivy, I hope you're not insulted by this question, but are you sure you're using the paintbrush, and not the airbrush, for the outline? If it's the latter, this may be why the outlines are fuzzy. Otherwise, I'm not sure why the lines would be fuzzy, unless you're working at an extremely low resolution, but that's probably not the case :-\
I've only just started painting in the outlines myself; previously, I always inked everything before I scanned. In this one, the only brush I used for the entire picture was the default paintbrush, with the flow turned down, and the wacom pressure set to opacity. After blocking in the base colours (using the paintbrush at maximum opacity), I add general shading using the paintbrush settings I previously mentioned. After that, I paint in the outlines, then started to clean up the shading.
Before, I kept trying to do the outlines last, and became frustrated. I really think you need to put them in as you go along. However, I'm still really new at this and I'm learning as I experiment ^_^
I do sometimes use the pen tool, but only for very clean, simple pictures like this one:
(http://crabshack.bythegoddess.com/misc/SlimeCouple.jpg)
(btw, this is the picture that inspired the idea for my game ;D).
I don't really know that much about the pen, though, so I'm not sure what its full capabilities are ^_^
Lines: Darth Mandarb, I'm not sure I understand... do you mean that the stripes aren't following the curve of the tail properly? If so, you could very well be right ^_^. I'll make a few edits.
Colours: You caught me, Loominous ^_^. I was concerned about that too, as the background is so purplish, her tail (and other stuff) should be getting more purple as it goes backward, etc. I didn't do that for 2 reasons (one is a good one, the other isn't ^_^):
1) I like the contrast between the reds and blues. I'm a fan of saturated colours, and making things *pop*. In my opinion, it suited the picture to have a clean break break between the character and background, making it more lively ^_^
2) I didn't really know how to do it. To be honest, for the longest time I never drew backgrounds for characters because I wasn't good at them... this is actually one of the first pictures I've painted that has a semi-complicated background. Learning how to integrate the character and background into a whole is something I really need to work at.
In this instance, I like how the character really stands out from the background, but I know that what Loominous stated is true, and is something I need to improve on ^_^
Thanks for the comments, everyone ^_^
You're left handed, aren't you?
Here's a version which integrates the character more, while still making it stand out quite much, and maintaining saturated colours:
(I don't prefer it over your version, it's another take on it with things that you might want to incorperate)
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/mp_m.jpg)
The biggest change is probably the colours. The parts of the character not hit by the sunlight are now coloured cyanish,Ã, like the rest of the enviroment. It's far from realistic, but incorperates part of reality which can help the image.
Another thing with the colours is more colour variation in the background. They're still all bluish, but with enough amount of other colours to make them appear different, which tends to provide richness, and interest.
There's also water colour variation, again taken from reality, where the water closer to the surface gets an almost green hue, and the depths one closer to purple.
Another difference is the lightbeams, which I added to create a bit of imbalance, and diagonals. In the original, the lightest part is just above her, and creates a bit boring symmetry. They also cause some smaller lightspots, which creates interest.
I added some leaves, or whatever they're called, on the closest plant, to make it overlap the subject, which creates some depths n also makes the character "sit" more in the picture.
A dropshadow just beneath her adds to this. Also added some more bouncelight to the tail section.
I also made the background objects fade out more, mostly to give the feeling that the world continues, and doesn't stop just after those rocks, just that we can't see it, but also to create the illusion of dense atmosphere (particles), and depth.
That's about it.
A tip: When doing colours/lighting, it can help greatly to work additatively, rather than subractively, that is, by adding light, rather than adding shadow.
You'd start out without the main lightsource, direct sunlight. If outside, you'd tint the whole subject with the colour of the sky, which is the lightsource. In this case you make it whatever colour the water is at the position. You can add the bouncelight caused by this lightsouce at this point, though it's a fairly small amount, or do it after the next stage.
Lastly you add the main lightsource, which then tints the subjects once again, in case of the sun, anything from red to white, depending on the time of day, in the case of artificial light, any colour. You also add the bounce light/colour, which will be mostly visable in the parts not directly lit, due to the relative strength. Bouncelight will pick up any colour it's reflected off, and tint the next surface it hits.
Edit: Also edited the bubbles, and just made them bright at the position where they're hit by the sun, and around it, where it would reflect the enviroment, but transparent otherwise.
Though nice, the background has now become too busy.
The contrast between character and background is lost, as the eye can't settle properly, particulary in the lower half of the picture. Bringing part of the background foward, to partially obstruct the tail, is also a mistake, IMHO.
The focus of the picture, I presume, is the character. As such, the background is simply there to provide visual context. Which would make MashPotato's original choice of a simple single tone backdrop, allowing the character to remain the primary focus, the better one.
Again, just MHO. :)
It's probably a matter of personal taste, but I do prefer background integration and interaction of light; it makes things more dynamic... (but I just happen have this thing about reflected light and colours).Ã, Of course, it depends where you want to go with the piece - from a design point of view, MashPotato's is fine. But Loominous' post is still useful in learning about light and colour.
Btw, good design on the mermaid MashPotato! I like your stylisation of the figure a lot.
Wow O_O
Thank you so much, Loominous. The paintover itself, as well as the explanation of what you did (and most of all, why), is extremely helpful. I will definitely be using your advice for my next painting. It was just the kind of thing I needed ^_^
If you don't mind, I have a couple of questions:
1) when you say to colour additively, do you mean add from the middle tone, or the shadow tone? I usually block everything in a medium tone, then add shadow and highlights on top of that; however, this is mostly a carryover from when I used to cel-shade everything, when every colour consisted of a dark-medium-light.
2) I'm a little confused about what you mean about tinting the figure before adding the main lightsource. If one tints the figure the colour of the sky, wouldn't most things be blue? If I have a figure that is wearing red (or some other warm colour), how would this work?
Once again, thank you for your help. I truly appreciate it ^_^
Akamuyo: nope, I'm totally right-handed ^_^
LimpingFish: I think a character can remain the primary focus of a picture while still being part of its environment; however, I'm glad you like my version, thank you ^_^
Fizzii: Thanks! I agree with you that integration between background and character makes things more dynamic. It's something I need to work toward ^_^
Damn, that is a very good painting. Reminds me of Disney artwork a bit. Hell, you could work for an animation studio like disney if you wanted.
QuoteIf one tints the figure the colour of the sky, wouldn't most things be blue?Ã, If I have a figure that is wearing red (or some other warm colour), how would this work?
Well for daytime, the sun is slightly yellow, so things can basically appear their 'normal' colours. :)
If the predominant environment is blue however (for instance, closer to night time, or underwater), things would take on a bluish hue. For instance, red would become more purple (blue+red). At least, that's how I reason how it works. Basically need to consider the environment, light source, and from there colour is relative. Loominous' light is somewhat close to white, so the red still stands out, but in the more shadowed regions, things become more blue.
I would like to see a few more hues added to the background. Other than that, very nice. It... bubbles style.
Hope this will explain it to an extent:
The aim will be to lit this grey ball:
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/col_light_tut_p0,5.jpg)
This approach is a bit hardcore, and I doubt many use it fully, I certainly don't, but it will hopefully explain it enough so you can skip some steps and work as fast as you do now.
Since it's done by hand, it's not as accurate as photos or 3D, but should suffice.
(I) You'd start out with pure black, since we havn't introduced any light,
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/col_light_tut_p0,5.jpg)(yep, same image as above)
(II) This is the lightsource. It will always be brighter than the subject it hits, unless that object is recieving additional light from something else.
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/col_light_tut_p1.jpg)
Now we'll lit up the surfaces, by adding light to the parts that would be hit, in this case all, but with less light hitting the lower part of the ball, and beneath, since those areas are exposed to less or none skysections.
(III) We've now added light to all the surfaces. The area below the ball has been least affected, and the top the most, since it's hit by light particles from most angles.
The blue is exhaggerated to emphasize the colour variation, but since the lightsource is blue, everything it hits should be affected.
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/col_light_tut_p1,5.jpg)
(IV) Bouncelight added, which is mostly visable in the darkest parts, since the small extra light is a relatively small addition to the already bright parts, but relatively big in the low light surfaces.
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/col_light_tut_p1,7.jpg)
(V) We'll now prepare to add the main lightsource, also referred to as keylight.
In the case of a directional lightsource, such as the sun, we'll have a "light equator", that is, a line going around the ball seperating the parts that will be hit by the light.
The brightness inside this area will depend on the ball's material and the lightsource. In case of a smooth surface like this ball, it will be roughly the same over the whole area, with a small brightness reduction towards the equator.
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/col_light_tut_p2.jpg)
We also need to consider the ground surface, which will recieve the same light. Since the surface is flat, and the sun is far away, the area will be lit even. If the lightsource would've been close, areas closer to it would recieve more light.
The ball is the only thing obstructing the light from the surface, and this will leave an area without direct sunlight, the dropshadow, which is the absence of light, so we won't be adding it, it'll appear due to lack of addition of light from the main lightsource.
Based on the angle of the lightsource you either calculate the shadow shape by some method, there are fairly easy ways, or just approximate.
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/col_light_tut_p3.jpg)
(VI) We've now added direct light. It's quite yellowy, and the temperature will depend on the time of day, or just what you think looks best.
At this point, the areas not hit directly have been left untouched, but they need to be affected by light bouncing off the ground, and the ball.
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/col_light_tut_p4.jpg)
(VII) The bouncelight is now added. A rule of thumb is that the value, as in brightness level, of the bouncelight should never, or rarely, be higher than the lowest value of the surfaces directly hit, that is, the values of the bouncelight, the lower left of the ball, should be lower than the values on the right side of the ball.
This is because light scatters as it hits something, so direct light means that that light "package" will hit the surface more intact than if it was to bounce first, off the ground for instance, which would scatter it.
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/col_light_tut_p5.jpg)
One thing to note with castshadows, is that they get blurrier the further the way they are from the object causing them. This is because light bounces off air particles, so their path isn't straight. This means that you actually have a multitude of castshadows, all with a slightly different angle, caused by the individual light particles. Since the total particle amount is huge, there won't be distinctive seperate castshadows, like you see in stadiums, with four seperate castshadows around the players, and will together just form a blur between their areas.
This will be most noticeable with large lightsources, like the sky or a lightbox, since then we have a great spread of light directions, and the result will be soft shadows beneath objects, since pretty much all other castshadow areas will be neutralized by some part of the sky.
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/col_light_tut_p6.jpg)
Hope this makes it a bit clearer. Just ask if something is still confusing.
Edit: Updated some of the images
Marcus, you never seize to amaze me.
Thank you
:)
Thank you indeed ;D
You've been extremely helpful once again, and I have saved that post for future reference ^_^
I have a similar question as before, however. Fuzzii helped clairify things a bit (thanks, Fuzzii ^_^), but I think I'm still a little confused about reds and other warm colours. As an example to make sure I'm understanding this process correctly, if I wanted this ball to appear to be red in this environment (with exaggerated lighting), at no point would there be a pure red, but only purple and oranges?
Thanks once again, I appreciate the time and effort you have put into this. It has helped me a lot (and others too, I'm sure)! ^_^
[lgm]: Thanks. It's funny you mention animation, I actually tried to get into animation school when I graduated highschool (4 years ago), and didn't get in ^_^.
It's amazing the time you find for these kind of things, when you're really supposed to be doing something else.
It's often said that there are no pure colours in nature, and what usually differentiates novice work from more mature is the usage of them.
In a white room, with a whitish lamp, your ball would be close to pure red, but like you said, in a situation with coloured ambient light, like the sky, and a yellowish keylight (main light, ie the sun), you'd be dealing with orange reds, and reds towards purple with low saturation. Or some other colour, depending on the type of ambient light.
You can still maintain a warm and saturated style if using this, take CMI for instance. What it does is provide colour contrast, which is usually found attractive, and unity, which will make it feel more believeable, even though the world may be really odd, and thereby increase the immersion.
Glad you found it helpful, and I'm looking forward to your next piece (with or without the implementation of these things).
Nik: Thanks for the encouraging comment.
-
A tip: Photoshop provides plenty of ways to blend colours, so that you don't have the guess the right colour by picking from the chart, or redraw areas if you just want to change the colours. It's usually safest to have seperate layers when doing it, and merge them when satisfied.
Probably the easiest, and safest way is making a new layer and setting the blending mode to 'Color':
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/blendingmodes.jpg)
In the example image, the bottom layer is a red ball, and the layer above has been set to 'Color'. This means that anything you draw in there will only affect the colour value of the layers below, and the brightness values will remain intact.
You can set it to many things, such as luminosity, to just change the values (colours won't be affected), saturation, hue etc.
Small note: When you merge a colour layer with another, the effect will only be applied to that layer, none other. So for instance, let's say you have two layer, a subject layer, and a background layer, and only want to change the colours of the subject layer. In this case, you don't have to worry about the colour data spilling over on the background, since when you merge the colour and subject layer, the colour data will lost on everything but the merged layer, ie, the subject layer.
Anothe way of changing a certain part of an image, is by changing the 'brush mode':
(http://marcus.krupa.se/AGS/brushmodes.gif)
(just select the brush tool, then change the mode. Don't forget to change it back to 'Normal' when you want to continue painting as usual)
This enables you to draw directly onto an image, without additional layers, but only affects one part of it, such as the colours, saturation etc. This is quicker, but less flexible, since with a seperate layer you're always able to erase parts, and so on.
Edit: Added a note
Thanks for the explanation ^_^.
The tip you gave about the colour blending was helpful too. I've been using Photoshop for a while now, but I always seem to use the same, simple tools and so haven't been using Photoshop up to its capability. For example, to change the hues I would lasso the areas, then change them by adjusting the hue/saturation. The method you describe would allow me to have more control, and wouldn't result in choppy edges... overall, a better choice ^_^
I have a quick sketch right now that I was planning on colouring simply, but I think I'm going to try and implement what I have learned here instead. Thank you ^_^