/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3513546
For sure - happy to help! It just really stuck out to me, and I'm really glad it didn't come across as too mean / critical - that's not my intent at all!

I think the issue might be a lack of taking the time and bothering to include & render out the inconsequential stuff - things like environmental detail and such. Like you mentioned - it's about pushing past that initial block in, and relying less on implied detail and more of literal details. I personally find there's a joy to be had in the detailing of a piece after blocking it in, and I know you experience it too because you render out somethings to completion. You bring up Jamie Jones - he's fantastic and uses a lot of implied detail, but if you look at his more finished work you'll see that he still renders things and includes more literal details.

For example, look at your cliff outpost drawing. You did a good job rendering out the subject matter, but the rest of the drawing relies on the vague and very loose strokes and sparse implied details that communicate to us that this is supposed to be desert cliff. The environment is just beginning to be detailed, as it is in so many of your other drawings. There's not much stuff on desert cliffs, but if you pull up some references, you'll see that they're populated with tons of rocks. It's the type of clutter that should be included to produce a more real and believable scene instead of a perfectly smooth ground and cliff face we have now. Again - we can tell you've drawn a cliff, but taking the time to include the small stuff makes a lot of difference. It creates texture and contrast by using varying levels of detail and shapes to bounce your eye around. Pic related is a real quick attempt to include some of this stuff.

Hope that helps!