[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

View post   
File: 361 KB, 864x1065, nasdasd34545ed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1789528 No.1789528 [Reply] [Original]

would you agree that this is a nice example of how you can complete ruin an image by overworking the fk out of it? or do you think the bottom one looks 'finished' and the top one empty and in lack of a narrative or a 'subject' ?

without any context or explanation, in a purely instinctive way... which image would you find more appealing?

>> No.1789531

the only reason the second one looks like shit isnt because its overrendered, its because the rendering is shit.

>> No.1789533

>>1789531
agree with this

>> No.1789535

I like the second one more, but the composition is horrid. That chain tangent, at the very least, needs to go

>> No.1789536

>>1789528
What the fuck you are still working on that shit?

>> No.1789538

>>1789531

overworked =/= overrendered

>> No.1789545

I like the second one more, but the cat and that door knocker thing make it look really off.

>> No.1789571
File: 157 KB, 1022x1256, blownhighlights.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1789571

A lot of artists ruin perfectly good art by blowing the highlights. It makes no sense to me.

>> No.1789574

Second is way better. First one shows that the artist has no idea of what he's doing. It already starts where the focus is on the fucking ground where's just nothing. The shadows don't have a any color casted into them and just look like they're shaded with black-which only beginners do. Also the shape of the casted shadows is wrong. Why is that door knocker raining yellow dots and fog? Doesn't make sense.

The second might not be perfect, but it's miles better than the first.

>> No.1789586

>>1789528

well fuck. huge amount of disparity on the issue at hand. that aint good.

what now d/ic/ks ??

>> No.1789590

>>1789571
i think it has a lot to do with the length of your session. if you do the large majority of the ending process in one huge session, it's likely that your eyes are too accustomed to the piece. you find it boring, and to make it "stand out" you add unecessary shit.
and in hindsight you notice that you went way outta line.

>> No.1789596

>>1789586
not really. in the end it's a quation of skill, no?

it's like saying
>that figure study looked a lot better when it was just a bunch of scribbles!
the real issue is just that the artist lacks the skill to finish it properly.
rushing it is definitely also an issue

>> No.1789609

>>1789536

w-what? nooo i would ... never ... fuk

maybe it's compulsive

>> No.1789628

>>1789609
who are you? i remember someone doing something with a cat on a porch but that was months ago

>> No.1789654

now that i think about it i do have alot of trouble finishing stuff without overworking it. that's not good. also lack patience. maybe gotta take more breaks to look at the same image with refreshed eyes, but without a huge pause (which kinda takes you out of the 'flow' - really harmful imo) of several days or weeks...

>>1789628

just some guy. was it the image in the op? i don't remember posting this pic in a longass time. but cats sitting on porches are probably not that rare in the stylization thread. never go there tho.

>> No.1789665

>>1789528
composition m8.

second image is obviously supposed to be better but the problems with the composition are made significantly worse.

>> No.1789672
File: 15 KB, 113x100, 65862.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1789672

>>1789571
>mfw my niece asked what the difference between the two last frames