Cave Tomb (Gah, another rejected background)

[Andail]

Not much to say. It's rather wide, so I linked it instead of publishing here in the thread.

http://www.nolore.com/illustrations/bcr10.png

It's scrollable!
15-20 hours, pen tablet, photoshop.
Note; The background is based on a sketch drawn by chapter11studios.

My homepage is also more or less functional, please drop by and write in my guestbook!!!
http://www.nolore.com

If you have comments about my homepage, I guess it could go here as well. I'm quite a beginner when it comes to webdesigning, so I won't be able to change that much

[DanClarke]

Thats awesome, i can really see the time youve put into it, and the transition in lighting is really nice. My only comment is that the top of the bell looks a bit 'pissed' if you get me? Just doesnt look quite right but that would be a minor fix. Apart from that i think its excellent.

[.]

Good bg i think

(Ok i try to make joke too)

Is that a scelet of a princess waiting for prince?

[Mozesh]

One word: excellent.
I can really see you've put alot of work in it.
Good job...

[Nacho]

But... why has it been rejected? I love it, and yeah, there's something weird at the top of the bell, but it can be easilly fixed... may I use it and say I am the one who painted it??? 

[Erwin_Br]

Awesome work - really inspiring! It also reminds me of Runaway.

Got it rejected for technical or artistic reasons, if I may boldly ask?

--Erwin

[Ubel]

Your backgrounds look nearly as good as mine...........:

Who am I kidding? I could never draw that well! Good job!

PS. Wow! :o

[José Luiz]

It's perfect!!!
I can't understand how a background with such high quality could be rejected!

[RyRayer]

Thanks, man. You reminded me old COMI times. I like your other backgrounds too.

[Snarky]

Just so there's no confusion, this drawing was actually done by Chapter 11 Studios (or, more precisely, by one of the background pencil artists). Andail colored it.

Like the last example you posted, Andail, I think it's very good, but not quite up to Chapter 11 standards. (Compare the work in this thread with the finished piece here.)

[Privateer Puddin']

Hmm, i'd say a different style (something really hard to emulate) rather than saying 'standards' which imo, sounds like you're putting it down..

also, i wouldn't say the piece posted today is perfect either but that's for another time i guess

[Snarky]

Well, I think the final version is better, for a variety of reasons that don't all have to do with style. (For instance it makes a lot more sense, since it shows a path going over the top of a hill, instead of a path heading over the edge of a cliff. It also does a better job of preserving the pencils, where Andail's version tended to "paint over" or smudge the edges. Just compare the outline of the rock in the lower left corner in the two versions.)

Not to put down Andail. His work is very good, but (in my opinion) Chapter 11's is better. Not perfect, perhaps, but better.

[Andail]

Snarky, I just published the piece here for people to see and give c&c for its own merits, I didn't ask to be compared with somebody else, especially not with a completely different picture, which has its own thread. I don't know what you're aiming for really.
I for one never claimed to be better than anybody else, and I don't care much for comparisons either.

PS: The reason I'm not showing the sketch that this is based on, is simply because the sketch is not mine, and I don't wanna go around spread out material belonging to chapter11studios, especially since their game isn't released yet.

[Snarky]

Andail, don't you think that if you post an image in the Critics Lounge, you should make it clear what part of the work is yours and what was done by someone else? Newbies who post paintovers without attribution have been thwapped in the past. Marking the image with a "(c)" in your own name comes very close to being dishonest, in my opinion.

You may not care for comparisons, but your thread title ("Gah, another rejected background") and responses like "I can't understand how a background with such high quality could be rejected!" positively invites them.

As for what I'm aiming for, the criticisms of your other color piece apply in part to this one, too. Your colors still intrude on the pencil outlines.

Edit: I'd like to make it clear that I don't think you're being deliberately dishonest, just that the way you present these backgrounds may be misleading.

[DanClarke]

Andail, don't you think that if you post an image in the Critics Lounge, you should make it clear what part of the work is yours and what was done by someone else? Newbies who post paintovers without attribution have been thwapped in the past. Marking the image with a "(c)" in your own name comes very close to being dishonest, in my opinion.

You may not care for comparisons, but your thread title ("Gah, another rejected background") and responses like "I can't understand how a background with such high quality could be rejected!" positively invites them.

As for what I'm aiming for, the criticisms of your other color piece apply in part to this one, too. Your colors still intrude on the pencil outlines.

Edit: I'd like to make it clear that I don't think you're being deliberately dishonest, just that the way you present these backgrounds may be misleading.

This is an interesting point.

I was always under the assumption that the BGs youve hosted for criticism were drawn by yourself. I think Snarky is right in that you should make a point of stating that the BGs aren't your own. Your website also suggests that the work is your own.

[Andail]

First of all, what I mainly objected to in Snarky's post was that he started comparing another background, which is another story althogether. It just seemed unnecessary negative.

And you two certainly exaggerate the copyrights/honesty issue; the pictures are mine, end of story. It's not like I've taken their sketches and just filled paint with the bucket-tool; the procedure still requires me to paint every last pixel by myself.
And I'm not gonna sell it, nor use it in a game, nor use it in some competition to win money, I'm just showing the picture for you, quite innocently, to share with you what I've been doing the past week.

But sure, I should have pointed out that the sketchwork was made by chapter11studio, and they deserve credit for it.
Can we move on now? Ok, Snarky?

[stuh505]

This background is just amazing.Ã,  It REALLY makes me want to play!!!Ã,  The geology is completely unrealistic, but hey, it looks cool.

EDIT: I checked out your website too.  Some nice stuff.  This one is definitely my favorite though.  BTW, the button to submit on your guestbook is 95% cropped off.

[Igor]

Great coloring Andail..
Love the homepage too!Ã, 

As for sketch and copyright.. i do think Snarky and Dan have a point here. It is nice to credit all the authors of the piece.. Sure, you did *a lot* of work by coloring it, no doubt about that.. however, the idea, composition (both very important) and general mood are the work of another author, so.. it's up to you if you'll credit him in your portfolio, but i know i would

[Snarky]

First of all, what I mainly objected to in Snarky's post was that he started comparing another background, which is another story althogether. It just seemed unnecessary negative.

I only dragged the other background into it as a response to the side-thread about why it was rejected. With my reply to Privateer Puddin' it all did turn more critical than I'd originally intended.

But sure, I should have pointed out that the sketchwork was made by chapter11studio, and they deserve credit for it.
Can we move on now? Ok, Snarky?

Sure. I've made the points I wanted to make. I really admire your coloring skills, and hope this thread will get back to offering constructive criticism.

[=The=Brat=]

  :o 8)
U rock! that bg almost goes up to Monkey island 3 standard
i reckon u could make the ultimate monkey island fan game if u tried(with a little help from Paco Vink the monkey island comic artist from http://www.worldofmi.com/features/comics/vink/ ). keep up the good work