/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6623417
Good job, anon.

I disagree with >>6623086 >>6623106 and you showed that >>6623081 is correct.

This artist didn't have anything interesting to say, all characters are rounded, chunky, stable.
Your change in design of the balrog thing helps by adding an unusual design, which creates new shapes.

Another thing the picture lacks is depth. Not even the basic, good ol' "foreground, middle ground and background" system was used, everyone looks sort of in the middle. The artist is good at rendering, not so much at drawing in perspective and decided to play safe.

Here I made the summoner bigger (foreground), added some perspective to the chick knight (just deformed a corner of a selection box, he lost the original shape but even that helps with this uninteresting picture.

Then I manually changed the shape of the archer, making his job more relevant to the composition because WHY WOULDN'T YOU USE THE LORE TO ENRICH THE DRAWING?

The skeleton bird would also greatly benefit from looking less solid and more elemental, with some organic splashes of matter to make it interesting instead of a Scooby-doo sliding ghost.

Keep adding these changes, thinking about interesting shapes more than efficient shapes and you can do something interesting.