View Poll Results: Vote for your favourite entry in this round of IDW
- 52. You may not vote on this poll
Results 1 to 30 of 39
December 23rd, 2007 #1
IDW #53: Main Battle Tank - Voting
IDW #53 Topic: Main Battle Tank
Deadline for voting: Sunday, December 30
No voting for your own entries! I repeat, no voting for your own entries
Give critiques and comments, we're all here to learn from each other!
Original thread: IDW #53: Main Battle Tank
Last edited by yoitisi; December 23rd, 2007 at 08:51 AM.
Hide this ad by registering as a memberDecember 23rd, 2007 #2
Artist: Mr. Natural
While it's proportions hearken back to the battlefields of Europe during World War II, the M3-C4 Petraeus(deployed for the first time in Kurdistan in the summer of 2012) is the first and most dominant Counter-Insurgency (COIN) tank ever built. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrated that the M1 Abrams, practically unstoppable in conventional warfare, was simply too large and heavy to operate freely in modern urban combat. Likewise, it's main weapon system often caused unacceptable collateral damage. Most importantly, the threat of enemy tanks is today deemed minor, and a wide spectrum of weapons from both infantry and airpower are sufficient to deal with them.
Eschewing the heavy steel and depleted uranium armor plates used in previous generations of tanks, the Petraeus utilizes thick poly-ceramic panels sheathed in ultra-high density carbide steel. Additionally, the need for an external gunner has been eliminated, and the Browning .50 caliber cannon and 20mm grenade launcher are remote operated from the safety of the crew cabin. The short-barrel 88mm main cannon can rotate freely in most two lane streets, and was designed with maximum precision (not destruction) in mind. With a total of sixteen radar, video, and thermal scanners, the M3-C4 is perhaps the "smartest" tank ever built. Scanning a large section of the battlespace, it is supremely difficult to sneak up on this vehicle.
Artist: fughi from yuggoth
Artist: jorge f. muñoz
I tried to make it durable and easy to move around, I opted for spheric wheels to avoid the sticky bombs and attacks on the caterpillar, the machine gun has a small cockpit for sniper protection, to handle this tank is necessary 3 people, one for the machine gun, one for the main cannon and one for the driving part, it has cameras around the hull for easy maneuvering and to keep an eye in stealth attacks.
The wheels turn on magnetic fields, so no need for axis.
Brief: The Lynx is designed to fight in the strife-filled world nearing the end of the 21st century, where the world has yet to shake off the shackles of nationalism, and ghosts of the Cold War still haunt.
Scheduled to enter service with the Bundeswehr in 2091, Krauss-Maffei's latest MBT, 'Lynx', will usher in a new era of tank-warfare with its hitherto unmatched firepower, operational range and size. The Rheinmetall L88 600 mm smoothbore gun with 35 N2 rounds, Lynx's primary armament, outclasses naval guns and is capable of neutralising fortifications with ease. Two 120 mm Rheinmetall L55 smoothbore gun, with 180 rounds, helps the Lynx engage small, fast-moving targets that are not worth expending the L88's ammunition. Anti-personnel and anti-aircraft defence comes in the form of twin 22 mm AAMG6.
Sensor/camera domes provide all-round and all-weather vision, and they are coupled with an exceptional target-acquisition software package. The Lynx can operate with a skeleton crew of five, with eleven (three gunners, three loaders, one commander, one driver, one engineer, two machine-gunners) being the optimal number. Its armoured transport module can provide a safe haven for an entire platoon along with their equipment and supplies. Sheets of carbon-composites shield the tank's occupants from AT rounds above 350mm and render the tank impervious to rounds from a gun below the calibre.
The most revolutionary aspect of the Lynx is its quadrupedal propulsion system. Previously relegated to the domain of fiction, advancement in technology over the last half-century has allowed for the four-legged walking tank design to be realised. No river, no crater, no building can halt the Lynx's advance, and tanks of previous generations are mercilessly crushed underfoot. When speed is required, the Lynx can be reconfigured to employ its treads. A K48 nuclear reactor coupled with a Rubis electric engine allows for a top speed of 78 km/h (in tread mode) or 56km/h (in quadrupedal mode), and an essentially unlimited operational range.
The principle design philosophy behind the Lynx is 'complete domination over the battefield'. The heightened viewing field aids in making tactical decisions and keeps the crew safe from conventional small-arms fire. It also provides an alternative answer to the MOUT problem with the Rheinmetall 600 mm: why fight in cramped urban environments when you can level the playing field?
Ultimate Havok TP-90
Main Battle Tank of the Northern Zemir colony.
- Armed with Double plasma generators (smaller tanks have one)
- Cooling nanofluid is sprayed when firing
- Camera on the end of the barrel provides up to 400% zoom view for long range sharpshooting
- Aerodynamic design and powerful engine provides top speed of 120 Km/h
- Mine thrower at rear of the tank can be used either to set a small mine field or throw them for pursuing enemies while escaping.
- All these qualities adding to some of i didn't think of make it the ultimate main battle tank.
Artist: Jim Hatama
I think nowdays tanks(as a stand alone universal battle unit) needs
1. Size an weight (for transportation purposes, fuel consumption, low profile on battlefield
2. Less crew members and their safety
3. Solid defenses agains RPGs an stuff
4. Speed ,active armor, and good standart armor
5. Stealth (heat detection, Electro magnetic detection, visual detection)
So this one I tried to paint has(sci-fi):
1. Holllow charge active armor (Like ukranian)
2. three active defenses (Round ones to cover wide area of possible attacks, they fire small metal fragments(in cassetes) to destroy incoming shells an also can be used against enemy infantry.
3. 2 sections - one for engine and one for pilot and other stuff (sirvival wise)
4. Its one piloted or unmanned at all, full auto). Because of more free space turret has more armor, better cannon, its smaller, it has auto reload system.
5. big thing on its back it is a Electro-heat decoy. It creatse Eclectro magnetic and heat activity in 20-30 meters away from tank to fool high accuracy rockets an stuff like that)
The GA5 Tank, is a revolution in design and technology. Based around the original prototype of the D1 that was first used in this great war. After 38 years of basicly stale mate, The new GA5 already shows promise. Built for only 2 men needed, one driver and one systems operator, the GA5 is practicly self suficient. 1 inch thick hull, totaly sealed from all known toxic vapours. Armed with a 105mm howitza D class gun, 2x .50-caliber M2 machine guns mounted either side. Plus with the 4 lava missiles and the new and improved GPS and thermal scensors, we are at last seeing an end to this great and terrible war.
Anyone wanting to participate in this glorious historical event should now go to your nearest volunteering post, before its to late
1. main cannon fires sub caliber discarding sabot rounds
2. secondary cannon (mid) normal ordinance
3. tertiary cannon (upper) 40mm AP rounds
4. remote upper turret for anti personnel work
5. mortar launched recon/spotter/firing solution drone rack
6. fold down munition pods (rocket/TOW/hellfire)
7. rear turret contains minigun for use against light vehicles and personnel
The SPHINX is a three treaded main battle tank designed for speedy bursts on clear straights and a large footprint allowing it to dash across frozen lakes that otherwise would be inaccessible to conventional heavy armor. another distinct advantage that this tank offers is its forward and rear turrets, which are located on their respective ends. this allows for peaking around corners with the best tool for the job while keeping a large part of the tank behind cover.
the crew of 4 all reside within the main turret, however the driver's position could technically be considered within the actual frame, however all aspects of control, are done via remote cameras, as there is no physical 'window'.
the bulk of the sphinx's length consists of its main track and its drive system and power plant, while the two 'front' outriggers provide steering and support for the massive main turret. while the main torque and horsepower is supplied to the main track, the outrigger tracks can function at the same speed as the main tracks, and are thus not dragged around. their main drawback is sheer power, but if required they could provide primary locomotion to a limited degree.
the armor of the sphinx is a mix of three unique systems with a few more additional counter measures. the static armor consists of rolled tungsten plating, while the proactive intercepting armor skirting detects oncoming projectiles, analyzes their mass and approximate damage and physically separate from the tank in order to meet the oncoming projectile head on. furthermore, key sections are covered in a crushed ceramic suspended in shear thickening fluid (STF). counter measures include standard ECM, chaff and smoke dispensers as well as a diffused heat source, and EMP shielding.
due to the tank's usually excess of power, the sphinx will often be seen pulling out injured comrades, or pulling in extra support to the field.
MBT - Command Vehicle
The MBT-Command vehicle is designed to lead land based military assaults. With its wide base stance and single point drive, its most useful on wide open landscapes, exceptional in deserts, snow and ice. The main artillery cannon is 360 rotation with vertical abilities and tilt giving the unit an extremely quick and radically wide range. The cockpit is two seated and is equipped with main artillery rounds, (shell storage and loading aft), large rail machine guns in case of close proximity, and self reloading missile rounds.
Secondary weapons on tank include dual , full rotation 50 cal machine guns and a few cruise missils. This is a 5man crew machine. Engine are dual CAT-C15, With Allison transmissions.
Last edited by yoitisi; December 23rd, 2007 at 08:01 AM.
December 23rd, 2007 #3
The MBT R-34 was designed for extreme maneuvaribility at high-speed on the battlefield. In 2224, Omega Seed Corporation developed a well advanced hovering technology to equip prototypes of the S-25 with. Ever since, the R-34 was functionig as a main battle tank on difficult terrain.
The N1 -Marazi is the main battle tank to the X-ALT Armies. It forms the first line of attack ploughing its way through infantry and walls of armoured vehicles. Apart from its nuclear fire power, the Marazi´s main feature is the I.D.T (Immune Defoliant Trichloroethane) gases and smoke screen it forcefully ditributes through enemy battalions. Effects of the I.D.T gas include numbness, hallucinations and after 20 minutes cardiac arrest.
The tank also contains a bunker which can hold one battalion of soldiers. Once enemy lines have been breached , the ramp is lowered. The N1 - Marazi remains the pride of the X - ALT millitary who continuously strive to break new grounds in the science of chemical warfare.
HAMT-Heavy Assault Main Tank
The HAMT was designed to bring fierce and fast firing power to the front line of battlefields. HAMT is the first designed tank to be outfitted with newly developed dual rail gun cannons and also is installed with state of the art missile launchers and missile reflectors. The HAMT main cannon (also called the chain cannon) is in itself a force to be reckoned with.
MBT - AR.101
2616 AD: The MBT - AR.101 was brought out of retirement on the Nubon system. With Nubo Prime's heavy world environment, hovercraft technology was ineffective. Thus, the AR.101 was the only combat ready and capable tank the Unified Corporation could field in the Nuboian uprising.
On the red plains of the Martian battle fields cover is limited so design tends towards mobility and fire-power. This MBT of the Olympian 9th hussars is typical of the period.
Last edited by yoitisi; December 23rd, 2007 at 08:10 AM.
December 23rd, 2007 #4
Okay, time for some comments and notes on this round:
First of all, I was rather pleased with the quality overall this round. Despite the fact that not all entries were completely finished, some entries made it to poll because of this.
oDaYWaLKeRo: Yours was one of those that at first I wasn't going to include in the poll, because it is rather sketchy still. Then again, the main shape is there and the design is clear. Shame you didn't put up some sort of description. Next time you'll have to work your entry out a little more with color and everything to make it to poll though.
Mr. Natural: Same story here, it is still sketchy. Again, shape and design were clear so I took it to poll this time. I expect a more finished entry next time though.
Fughi from Yuggoth: Contrary to what I said in the main thread, I took yours to poll. One reason was because I think you did something with my comment, but the main reason was because I think it is an improvement from what I've seen of you before and I think it should be rewarded for that, even though you used a 3d as base.
Jorge f. Muñoz: As a first time poster in this thread, I gave you the benefit of the doubt and included you in the poll. Next time, spend some more time on your entry and apply some color.
Schunnin: I almost included you in the poll, but then I read the text under your picture saying it was only the 3d model so I decided against it. No time to apply texture is no excuse
EElevation: On the edge of quality, mainly because you should've spend a little more time on it probably. Again, benefit of the doubt for a first entry in IDW
Form2function: At first, I only saw a black blob in the center of the image. After looking a bit more closely I decided it was the monitor I am working with at the moment, so I included it in the poll. Still, I think you can do better, so I hope next time you'll take a little more time for it
Nutkin: I gave you my reasons for not including yours in the poll via PM.
Phew, took me quite some time to get it all up. If I forgot anything or made a mistake, let me know. I might react somewhat slow away for a couple of days so I won't check in here frequently.
Last edited by yoitisi; December 23rd, 2007 at 08:34 AM.
December 23rd, 2007 #5
It's definitely not my finest hour on this one, mainly because I kept going back and forth on whether I would be submitting at all due to time-constraints and last minute travel plans. I pushed it in the final hour just to get it done, but it still needs more love.
Everyone else... Crit's coming once I've had my coffee.
December 23rd, 2007 #6
Ok, having recieved yoitisi's permission, i'm going to post my entry here. I missed the poll but in an effort to gain some value from this exercise, I would like to get some feedback for what i did.
nutkin's moster bag of feedback is on the way for all!
Last edited by nutkin; December 23rd, 2007 at 09:05 AM.
December 23rd, 2007 #7
Because i cant vote for myself.. my next choice would be Hideyoshi.. and then Legato...
Hideyoshis tank just looks so cool and futuristic..
Legato seems to have worked hard on his picture..
I rendered my very first idea that i had when i opened the topic back then.. worked on the 3D sketch model for 2 days and rendered for one day in photoshop. Heres some more angles of my tank btw: http://dekus.deviantart.com/art/My-t...ncept-72618254
The Following User Says Thank You to Dekus For This Useful Post:
December 23rd, 2007 #8
For me it came down to Huhwhat, Hideyoshi, D-Holme and IcyM. While I like nutkin, dragonspit and Trashy's entries, they don't say "MAIN" battle tank. They are too light and sleek. Trashy's is cool, but looks kind of like a tennis shoe. Doesn't have the heavy duty feel.
Jim Hatama and Legato, you both could have worked on the rendering more, or finish the piece more, which otherwise are good designs (JH's is a little too standard I guess).
I think Hideyoshi did a terriffic job with the presentation, the silhouette duo-tone displays on the right are great.
D-Holme taht sure is a heavy duty tank, I just wish you had shown more than just a profile. It wouldn't be fair to give you my vote, because the others had to deal with perspective
IcyM do you play Magic the Gathering by any chance? Because your name reminds me of the Icy Manipulator card Yours and Hideyoshi's are my two favourites here. Slightly slightly I have to give the edge to Hideyoshi. Cool piece though!
my homepage: http://www.trickstertoys.com
December 23rd, 2007 #9
My Vote going to Hideyoshi
a lot of really good post with some pretty wide open ideas for something that would seem almsost common place. the kind of design concepts I love to look at personally. nice job all.
the addded Coyote. the main portion of this write up is main battle tank. Your entry is way to small for that and even says so in your description. some additional detail would be good.
Hideyoshi: got my vote as usual the design, description and presentation are dead on. it looks like a main functional tack, somewhere in the future but still recognizable for what it is. nice job.
Rain: this was an interesting post. couldnt really grasp it because of its size and how different the idea was. Well thought out and nice presentation.
EElevation: I liked the design. It could use some harder lines. what I didnt understand was how it moved around. Missing at least some description was detremental for you.
Trashy: nice clean design, decently rendered, just not anything new, not bad, just not good enough to get past the Hidemiester.
IcyM: I really like this one to. Adding textures would have pushed this just a bit more. but it was well done.
F2F: another one I liked a lot for its design. even though the stealth factor required that loss of detail, the loss of the little detail just took away from the "tank" look. the side profiles help clarify that alot and makes sense, but when just looking at it, it just looks, like it should have more detail. I think I might have picked this second.
D-Holme: aaha mr. steampunk himself. huge monolith. this also was a good design andwell represented. as usual you steampunk rendition reads well. I woul dlike to seen this tightend up as far as the drawing part goes. but all in all it was a good entry.
Mr Natural: a solid design and nicely detailed. I believe for a final post, color is a must. even then, the design is pretty common place so I doubt you would have gotten past a few other, but then again, this is all about learning and if I cared who won, I would never post myself, lol.
fughi: not bad, but pretty light. if its 3d a more dynamic perspective might have helped.
jorge: Looks interesting, but not much more than a scketch.
huhwhat: I liked this one from the start. I think some more details would have helped push it. the textures look good. to soft in some areas.
Dekus: Nice perspective, all those sketches were cool looking and was good to see your design concept process. the finish, looks almost to clean but the gun is just a really cool design. another one that I consider for my vote.
Jim Hatama: I really like the way you painted this. the size compared to the guy is just so off. It couldnt be that small. or that guy, couldnt be that big. the design itself didnt seem all that new, but the way you presented made it just way cool looking.
Grenogs: this was thinking out of the box. The texturing was cool and painting decent. I like the idea about the elongated war giving reasonability to the design.
Legato: Not having anything to do with the track design. i like your design the most. It made sense, it was realistic in the near future and very mobile and big enough to be a main tank. I thought your painting, soften up the line work and with the darks, hid, way to much. however trying to do this in snow, when you stated backgrounds are a weak point for you, would be an undertaking you didnt steer away from. kudos points for that, and how you did the lighting. I think if you sharpened up linework, so that your sketched details would should up, this would have been dynamic. a good showing none the less.
a response to D4lunch in review: you stated my post didnt have main battle tank? its acronymed in the title. as a 5man crew, with two in the turret cockpit. I dont see how you can see this as a light unit, or, do mean the armor? which I chose not to explain.
I only live for today, but I'm one day behind.
December 23rd, 2007 #10
Dragonspit Thank you very much.. at least someone even mentioned my name... i appreciate what you say...
December 23rd, 2007 #11Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
voted for hideyoshi, kick ass tank!
Dragonspit- thanks for doing that crit, you are the man!
dekus- I liked your tank , and I respect the effort you put in to it, going all out with the models and everything, good job man!
my dev art page...check check it out
December 23rd, 2007 #12
Haven't quite had my coffee yet, but here goes anyway.
First off, amazing turnout compared to the last round. What the heck is it about tanks folks love so much...Or maybe some of ya'll are just sick of staring at your medusa, eh? Whatever the reason, keep coming back!
The quality definitely jumped up to what it should be on a regular basis, which makes for good learning, stiff competition, and some difficult voting in the end. Here's my patented f2f crit™ for each of the entries:
oDaYWaLKeRo: What happened? Your first sketches were looking promising, and the revised sketch definitely had detail in it... I think even some simple marker passes like you did for your rough sketches would have helped it. Whatever the case, it's still very much a sketch so I can crit it much either way.
Mr. Natural: Loved the background on this one, as I told you in the discussion topic thread. I thought you had said you had yet to finish up a render for it, but as with many these days time was short. I do love the turret on it definitely and it's a solid design. Shame you didn't take it all the way, but if you do please share it with us.
fughi from yuggoth: A nice concept and some nice touches on it as well, such as the wolf logo. Technically, for me it feels a bit too light on it feet for an MBT. But that's just my opinion. On the design side, I would definitely suggest loosening up your lines and painting style. You have a wonderfully detailed design, but the sharpness and thinness of the lines make the tank look like a toy (meaning unrealistic and plastic) and the presentation like a coloring book. Work on it and I'm sure you'll improve. Shadows are a good place to start.
jorge f. muñoz: If you can manage to get a job as a concept or industrial designer for ACME, you my friend are set for life. The design itself has some more thought put into it than one sees at a glance, but I'm afraid the sketchy lines and comic style and/or proportions make it hard to take it seriously. Which isn't necessarily a problem keep in mind, if you can push that angle harder. I think if your piece was fully painted it would stand its ground much better. I'm looking forward to see what you come up with on the upcoming round of toys though, as something tells me it'll be unique. Hope you find the time.
huhwhat: Amazing render, great palette, good design... In that order. Yours and Legatos are my two favorites of the lot. And oddly enough you have a similar painting style as well (which I envy). As with a few other designs though, it comes close to departing from an MBT. And it's mainly the legs that do that for me. However, you gave such a convincing argument for the legs in your description that I can't hold it against your design. And the description itself deserves applause. My only qualm is utterly subjective and its on the name. The Lynx is one of my favorite felines of all time, but I just don't see it in your design. I can see the antennas as references perhaps, but the whole thing is utterly insectoid. Something more in those lines would have fit the design better I think. Of course, what's in a name...
Dekus: A definite improvement from the last round. You've obviously spent a lot of time over this design, so I'm not surprised. I see you also pulled out those ghost wolf brushes again, heh. All in all I think the design is good. The render is clean, but it feels a little stark. My feeling is that you might have spent too much time trying to model it in 3D and not as much time working on the painting and presentation. It feels a bit too much like a straight model render. You also pulled one of my personal pet peeves, which is headlights in an already lit environment. Don't know how it bugs me all that much, but it never fails to do so. Feels like someone forgot to turn of the lights when parking and is going to come back to a dead battery. In any case... Great job and a very marked improvement. Keep it up.
Jim Hatama: Yours is a very emotional and moody piece and I absolutely love your palette, more so than any other from this round. The green/brass patina on the tank is stunning. I wish you could have finished the whole thing a bit more, but the figures don't bug me all that much due to the artistic style you have. What does bug me is the same thing I commented on before, the size. I'm not even sure if a man could fit inside it as is. Definitely not in the turret at least. All that was needed was to make the people smaller, but what can we do. It's still a top-notch piece.
Grenogs: I have to say it.... Put the glowing brush down and step away slowly. You're lethal with that thing. All jokes aside though, you definitely used it appropriately here. It's still a bit too neon and detracts from the tank, but what helps it is the red of the cannon that draws your eye back to it a bit. And at least it definitely looks like gas this time as opposed to radioactive plasma. The painting itself is great and I think I like it best from what I've seen from you thus far. The cannon reminds me of nutkin's sniper rifle for some reason and I think I've had that in the back of my head since I saw it. No point there, just thought I'd share it. I'm still not convinced that it can really run a straight line, but you did one thing that helps and that's making the rollers bigger (slower) on the long part and smaller (faster) on the round part. If that was intentional to make it work technically, good thinking. There are stronger entries this round, but what I like about yours is the character and uniqueness the design has. Which most of your work seems to always have. Don't ever lose that!
Legato: Don't think I need to say much, since we've discuss it at length. I think it's good that you're pushing new techniques and into new territories and damned be the consequences. Seeing the final, I really like the contrast and lighting on it. The harshness and length of the shadows does a great job of indicating the appropriate time of day for the scene and amount of light and it all fits together perfectly. Still don't think you needed to blur the roof and it's actually a touch more distracting for me personally than any depth issues it might have had before, but it's bearable. The reason yours will get my vote over huhwhat (after I get some sleep and take one last look at them all), is that you brought all the components of the other pieces together into one. You kept to the brief while still thinking outside the box, you painted the tank itself beautifully and in detail but didn't skimp on the background, and you gave the whole thing a cohesive feel. What's missing? The presentation board (ie. border, text, etc.). I have a feeling you worked so long on the render that you completely forgot about it.
Dragonspit: Well thought-out design concept and a pretty good presentation of it. What I like is the design itself and the fact you still pulled depth out of it while using more of a marker style. What could be better? First off, your choice of colors and contrast. Try opening it up in photoshop, desaturating it, and you'll see the whole thing is just about the same value (squint if you don't see it). What that does is make it look extremely flat and extremely hard to read (visually). I can tell you tried to offset it with the red against the green, but color itself is rarely enough. The other thing is minor, but I would have preferred to have the tank in a closed position on the upper left corner instead of a second view of the turret, just so I can get a sense of what it looks like closed (assuming that's what it does). Try working on the contrast and values for the next one and I'm sure it'll be much better. And welcome back.
---crit and general comments for Yoitisi's second post of entries (and yes, you too nutkin) will follow tonight after I get some sleep, as I'm practically falling asleep at the keyboard---
The Following User Says Thank You to form2function For This Useful Post:
December 23rd, 2007 #13
Dragonspit: thankx for the review. Yea I decided to try do something whacky Wish I had had more time to tighten things up.
Anyways I voted for Huhwhat. I really like this design..especially imagining the tank animated. Breaking out of the ´classical ´tank silouhette and making it work, good job. For me it was actually a close between EElevation and Huhwhat.
Wish I had time to write more in depth reviews but gotta dash:
Merry Christmas everyone!
December 23rd, 2007 #14
This took forever to write up… easily more than an hour… your not getting any paragraphs, and no proof read so deal with it, and if you can understand what I was trying to say well enough to correct me, consider my write up, grammar and spelling a success! - as always I’d appreciate if you read up at least on my self critique
oDaYWaLKeRo - very sketchy, and as stated earlier a side view doesn’t help too much - even when your just doing thumb nails. As far as design goes, the track’s wheels are oblong, and would roll like eggs, also the barrel looks rather improvised but all in all its a good standard tank design, with some nice angles on the tracks.
Mr. Natural - I said before, your tank has a really really striking turret design, and your pencil render aids to that - but with how fast you pooped this out, I would have liked to see some further development! Although it has no impact on my judgement, watch out for the wheels, the one in the middle is a little bent out of shape, but I really don’t even know why im nitpicking something so stupid! All in all a great take on a short stocky tank!
fughi from juggoth - not much to say here really. I think you need to reconsider a few design decisions and really look at the tank in regards to how it functions to better avoid some of the problems you have in this one. For instance, wouldn’t the thing structural legs be a crippling weakness? Also, beyond picking a better angle to show off the turret and how it works, there isn’t a single curved line on this - even the radar is made of straight lines, and I really think you need to step a bit away from that. The presentation with the neon green really really hurts this submission.
jorge f. Muñoz - weather you intended it or not, this looks like a cartoon tanks, maybe as seen on school house rock but don’t take it the wrong way! If I can fault you on anything it would be the perspective you took, not the render or stylistic route you used. Not only are side views pretty balls when it comes to showing stuff off, but it looks like your back wheels are space out pretty far, with no other indication that the rear is wider than the front!
Huhwhat - enjoyed your back story, and it looks for for a speedy render with some nice textures for the armor, and really only the dust is distracting as it seems to have a hard edge when it should be more feathered, overall nothing too bad! I’ve always enjoyed walking tanks like this where the tracks are also feet, but I think you need to be careful design wise showing that those joints could indeed hold up such a massive structure without being weak points, in addition, I think adding more freedom of movement to the smaller cannons would aid in their goal of being tank killers - perhaps attaching smaller tank-sized turrets to the ‘knee’ of each of the legs, also with the crop view you chose it doesn’t allow the viewer to see the track’s “feet” to me at least would be interesting! Final note, there’s a few parts that might be a smidgen out of perspective, but what hurts it more is the lack of straight lines for the legs (as hideyoshi has called me on)
Dekus - rendering wise there’s really nothing to report, with a good solid paint-over and some nice grit, so I won’t dwell on it too long, because the only thing I can knock are a few of the design elements you have chosen. A few things that rub me the wrong way is the end of the barrel. With the perspective you have chosen its hard to tell if that ridge is the center and there are two outer chambers, or if its asymmetrical. Having seen the render I know its two separate chambers, but a casual viewer would not and they might mistake it for being an error in perspective. Second, the guard railing around the turret almost make the tank look like a toy - or rather, it fights against the other design aspect of the piece and really damages the scale I think you are going for than again, there really isn’t any other indications of scale, but for that guard railing to be useful the person would have to be pretty big. Finally, with the barrel being such a large part of the design and it subsequently being a rail gun, It would have been nice to see an indication of the support structure needed to fire such a cannon. The united states navy has a ship on the drawing boards that has a rail gun, which is designed to fire a tungsten rod hundreds of miles, and to fill the capacitors that make this possible it has to divert all of its energy for propulsion into them - we’re talking about a nuclear reactor. With how small the turret is, I think you might have added a large armored - but interesting structure to the back and give it some indication of its purpose (storing huge amounts of energy) (see jim hatama’s tank)
Jim Hatama - its a real shame that you either didn’t have time to pick up on some of our critique or weren't able to get back to your piece in regards to adjusting its scale, because quite frankly it had my vote if you had just shrunk down the people significantly. This is the style im trying to develop so I might currently be biased to it, but even disregarding that you have such a strong and unique design while still making it familiar. With how long the treads are it might have been nice to make them split (even though I have said I dislike the stereotypical 4 track tanks) --- seriously man, all you had to do was take out the “over sized people” layer X_X!
Grenogs - I defiantly see where your inspiration came from on here, so I’ll try not to talk too much about the practicality of a side mounted forward facing gun because I respect the design elements you were respecting. However, I can say that as it is right now it just seems far too small. Between needing room for 2 engines, crew and munitions for that shotgun of a cannon to work - which is odd, because out of all the pieces here yours expressed scale better than all I can think of with the soldier, his shadow and the barbed wire - its unfortunate that it was taking it the wrong way! As for the rendering, since a large part of the design consists of tracks, I think this could have benefitted from a dive into some reference images and additional detail. You have the basics (wheels and tread) but they are put together with no indication of how they work (no interlocking joints, no suspension, no teeth, etc)
MYSELF - as noted a dozen times, I am trying to render my submissions with a full background and composition, not because I feel I have God’s gift of being awesome in the field, but because I desperately need help, and the way I propose digging myself out of this ditch is by forcing myself to do them for these challenges. Trust me, I would LOVE to drop down a 30% grey, and go to town, as invention is what I love more than anything else, but that won’t cut it for the job market I am shooting for. I am quite proud of the tank’s design, and wish I didn’t have to mangle it up with everything else, including my first attempt at rendering snow and trees, bit it is what it is and I can guarantee you I am at least a smidgen better at it now than I was a week ago. Also, as noted I have no idea what everybody’s gamma is doing to this piece, as I can see all the shadowed detail really well (it was something I didn’t want to lose with the shadows) but I could see how if your monitor was off not seeing anything in the shadow would hurt the design. Here is a link of the stand alone tank with no environment and limited cast shadows and lighting http://legato895.deviantart.com/art/...ender-72361801 its sometimes hard navigating the critique field with everybody having their own styles trying to say what they think, but the bigger base I have the better, so I’d appreciate any critique you have to give me - seriously, as long as its constructive, tear me down!
Dragonspit - the render is really simple, so all I can really say is keep on working on it, try more for value and shadow, right now its really flat. In terms of the design, a few areas look out of perspective, or stretched out (for instance the right rear support arm for the track is too visible, and you have two exhaust pipes that I think you lost perspective on and are rendered at the completely wrong angle) in terms of functionality this has a few things going for it, mainly the hideaway cannon which looks like the anti naval batteries of the same design, but the rest of the tank is weaker. The three treads are a good start, however they simply do not appear to be able to hold up the bulk of the tank and are spread too thin in addition to being too thin with almost no ground clearance. Also the window on top isn’t too inspiring for safety - the silver lining of this is the un-armored turret render you have above - If you would have made a full tank, rendered like that with a larger image size I think allot of this current version’s troubles would be behind you! Also where are the cruise missiles and what is the scale? Judging from the 50 cal this is really really small
Hideyoshi - im usually a complete sucker for your work, but I think you were a little rushed on this one in particular design wise. As always your presentation is top notch, and you stylistic mix between line work and fully applied textures shines as always, so I’ll abandon nit picking those and say what I feel about the design! Ever since the hover apc round from a half a year ago or more, I have always had a bias against hover tanks - mainly because I see them floating around like a drunk hockey puck with very limited abilities to go up hills. To alleviate this, I try providing and demonstrating as many vectored thrust ports as I can, to allow micro adjustments in any direction needed. So while your tank looks like it could go into badass fast mode on a straight away, its hard to see how this were to turn, juke dodge and fire all while zipping around. Im splitting hairs here, and taking what is a design of fantasy into the real realm, but thats what I would consider my strong point and thus I value that opinion of mine over say “your lighting is wrong”! - quick random nitpick, the missile launcher is either angled, or out of perspective correct?
:::rain::: - love how when we all went into varying states of length, you made yours wide - a tank design I hadn’t even considered. However while your render is decent (your lines are better imo so im glad you included both) I think you slightly lost perspective on the topic of “main battle tank” and instead traveled down the road of “mobile fortress” this problem would have been mitigated slightly had you included conventional turrets of some kind, to at least bring back its tank like nature, however as far as I can see, its a giant mobile bunker with biological weapon tanks, and for me thats not enough to get the second 50% of the grade
Eelevation - with the thumbs you had posted, you actually had in my opinion set the bar higher for yourself than what you turned into your final, but regardless of that, this is what you submitted so this is what I’ll ramble about! To me this is kind of a mixed bag both in terms of rendering and design with about half of it catching my eye the right way and half the opposite. The right half of the tank’s render is vibrant, detailed and and nice, even with no cast shadows on the structure itself, but the left half is as if you were only 33% done instead of the right half’s 66% - this odd transition carries itself to the design elements, with a strong turret design and at least a serviceable core, but than it adds legs that can’t walk with no clear sign of how it would move, it looks more like a stationary gun, and the small elements of scale, while doing their job excellently, only confuse what is happening in my opinion.
Trashy - I rather like this rendering, in an almost abstract way, but on the opposite side of the coin, if this is not what you were going for (and quite frankly I think industrial designs of the week should be about the design with good perspective work and angles) than I think you have some work to do in that regard. Design elements seem cramped, with the treads looking to be a static design element with no ability to move as they go into the frame itself. It looks like you have a small gun on the side, but it seems tacked on and while I love the angled weapon systems on the back of the turret I think its a little too hard to tell what kind of weapons they are - great suggestion of background however!
IcyM - great render, great scale, great turret design and cannons! Now that I got the perfect stuff out of the way I can start on what I would change --- first of all, I looks like you adhered to your block model perfectly, and the reason I think this is based on one is because allot fo the angles you used are angles that are used in 3d modeling out of laziness. While this doesn’t hurt the turret, it appears as if you have almost completely neglected the tracks in every way as for rendering and tightening up. The point of a block model is really give you main forms (for example my tank was 6 cubes) but either when you drew this you chose to mimic a simple render for the tracks, or you chose to copy the model all they way to the grave! The plow angle on the front is also a slightly distracting design element that I think would have been better realized or even beneficial had the tracks extend all the way up to the front, but as is, it distributes the forms weight around in a way that I don’t like too well. Last and probably least, I am having a slight difficulty seeing how the turret can turn - right now it seems like it would hit the rear engine compartment, or like it is solid with the (even though it has a slight shadow)
Form2function - you know what I think of this and have to say better than I can write out here, but knowing that you literally started and finished this in the last few hours I know things were not ideal by any means. As for the gamma, on my screen I have great definition, and it doesn’t look black at all, almost dark grey like “lead” from the crayon menu, so im not sure which of our monitors are messed up /o\
D-Holme - after a seemingly never ending hour of writing up these critique im almost out of steam - but not quite! All I can really say is that I really wish you had chosen a perspective angle, as this has so much potential based on the top down, its almost all ruined when you flatten it down to the side. Design wise, watch out for ground clearance, especially with that lower pod and ladder! Love the asymmetrical layout it has, but again all advantages that you could have had in terms of uniqueness are ruined when you flatten it down to the side like this
The rendering is flat, with no light source or cast shadows… so I guess what im saying is everything could have been remedied by a different pose, as I know you can do lighting and shadows - I assume you were just rushed!
Curses… one more!!!
Nutkin - *grumble grumble grumble* !!! Just when I thought I was done
First off, I would say even if you had fully rendered it, this should have made pull due to how off it is from the topic, but since you had the determination to put this up, I will critique this without taking into regard the topic!
For what it is, you do the job well of conveying a small, fast, light weight scout or skirmisher - this looks like a pack animal even without your description, so im glad you included it anyway. The render is basic, but conveys its simple shape fairly well.
Design wise I would have liked to seen a more compact barrel, possibly running inside the top of the body with a loading or recoil mechanism sticking out from the back a bit, or the opposite, a full turret. Right now I think you need to devote the design to something that aims by moving its legs, or something that could scurry around in circles with the top turret constantly adjusting, firing and recoil being compensated for using its feet.
Also, as a side note, the additional guns don’t really add much in my opinion. They don’t seem to have that great of a firing angle, and the two on the top are just kinda… there… and are pretty confusing
December 23rd, 2007 #15Registered User
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
December 23rd, 2007 #16
December 24th, 2007 #17
form2function Thanks for the comment! yeah.. its always like that.. i want to make a quick 3D sketch and end up putting details and correcting the polygons for 2-4 days.. xD But its fun.. and in the end you can get any angle of your design and put it into any environment you want..
lol.. i understand what you mean about the headlights.. I just wanted for people to understand that they are headlights and not some little machine guns..
Legato Thank you for the comment as well!
Hmm... i guess i should have added a human sitting on the turret behind the railing, chilling out.. Yeah.. many people have commented on the hugeness of the cannon.. but i still went on modeling it according to the side view.. I had hard time choosing a good angle and perspective for people to understand the whole design... i guess i should have had attached a front view to the main picture.. And i feel that youre completely right about the adding some place to store all the plasma/energy..
Its funny how i felt that i have made The ultimate, most beautiful design of a Main Battle Tank and i had such high expectations.. and now i got 0 from 24 votes .. but its totally ok... i couldnt care less about if i win or lose.. anytihngs good to me.. and the critique and the experience i got is i guess the most important..
Thank you all and merry Christmas and a happy new year to everybody!
December 24th, 2007 #18
thanks for the feedback guys, much appritiated, though i did feel a little out of my depth in this one, due to lack of mechanical knowledge.
Voted for d-holme, for a couple of reasons, 1. if i was on the battle field, and that thing was backing me, i'd be pretty confident, 2. Since we're designing more towards a movie or game market, or basicly fantasy-sci-fi here, and not having to deal with the real practicalities of a fully realistic working manufactured design, then i believe theres room to play, and it may not have been intentional but i think d-holme pushed that by adding the fun element into it, which personaly i think is worth a vote, especially in an industry that seems to gear towards realism at the moment. Though, i would defentaly have liked to have seen a perspective view on this.
now some crits, i wont go into practicality of design, its not realy my area, so ill try and say something on the visual side, ill keep it short and sweet:
0daywalker0 needs colour
mr natural again, needs colour
fughi from interesting perspective, but some shadow on your design would realy make a difference
jorge f again, colour would realy sell this image
huhwhat what can i say
dekus maybe some texture on the ground would be nice
jim this has potential, at the moment it looks like its heading more toward fine art and less design
me omg! where do i start, lol
legato maybe experimenting with a focus blur will help, to create that depth of field look you want,
dragonspit change the tones to your background, at the moment its very close to your tank, making you tank get lost a little
hideyoshi hmmmmmm........i cant think of anything yet, but i will find something
rain maybe sharpen up the edges to your tank, to keep that same consistency as the rest of your design
eelevation soften the edges in the background and and sharpen up the foreground to give your image more impact
trashy some perspective issues
icym the front wheel jumps out, sorry
form2 on an ordinary surface this may work, but on snow, due to the flurry effect that snow gives off from wind pressure that your tank creates, then another angle would sell this better, probably a much lower h-line would suite it more
d-holme give some perspective
nutkin dont put your far legs with so much depth, give them more tone so they still look like part of the actual tank
Last edited by grenogs; December 24th, 2007 at 07:58 AM.
December 24th, 2007 #19
Crit Round Part Deux
Ok, here goes for the rest of the entries. Starting with our house favorite...
Hideyoshi: The design itself I think is good and still keeps a lot of the MBT feel in a futuristic setting. On the artistic side, you kept to your traditional rendering style which I do like. However, I do think that you rushed this one a bit. You've set the bar high for yourself with your body of work and I was expecting a piece that would blow us all away. The result, while an excellent design, doesn't do that much for me. I think a bit more love and attention would have pushed it all the way. Having said that, time is short for everyone during the holidays so it's understandable. Since I have to vote for the given piece and not what I know you're capable of, this one feels a little too "phoned in" for me. Then again, I'm guilty of the same so who am I to talk.
rain: First off, killer presentation. I've said it before and I'll keep saying it each time, but for me the presentation is as important as the concept. There are concepts that sell themselves, but those are far and few in-between. So in that regard, my hat's off to you. The schematic views help your piece greatly as well, as they often do for any piece. Some might consider the other little accents a waste of time, but I personally feel they're very important. Moving on to the concept itself, I think you kinda lost track of the brief. As Legato said, this feels way too much like a mobile fortress and nothing like what an MBT should be. Especially the part about it housing an entire battalion, which pretty much cements it as a transport unit. The thing is that no matter how strange or alien the technology or world gets, when a client says they want a given object you have to work at keeping the same design principles that give that object its function. They might say they want a car. Now you could make a car that's made of jelly, travels at the speed of light, and can fold the time/space wrinkle to house 30 occupants. But if it doesn't still feel and function like a car, you're screwed. So. That's that on that. The painting itself is well done and I like the lighting on it quite a bit. I'm not crazy about the width, but that's entirely subjective on my part. Good work either way!
EElevation: Not bad at all. I'm a little weary of crab/insect robots and designs, but that's just me. Technically it pretty much works. What I like most about it is the maintenance guys working on the leg. For me that probably made it ten times as appealing of a presentation as it would have been without it. Where I think you need work is your painting technique. Try to ween yourself off the smudge tool, because it's one of those things that looks very cool at first but to anyone with experience it looks like the work of an amateur. Not in a good way. And it's very easy to get hooked on it, to the point where your pieces look like amorphous blobs. Instead, practice blending by using the transparency settings of your brush and varying the color. That way you'll keep all that great definition that I can see in parts of it and I'm guessing you had in others that got too smudged. Keep at it!
Trashy: Technique-wise I think it's a very good piece. A bit sparse, but I don't really mind it that much. However on the design end... Those missile turret thingies are rolling all over the place. Not sure what happened because you kept a pretty good perspective for the rest of it, but you hit the turret and somehow it all went horribly wrong. And again, I have to point out that lit headlights in a bright environment rarely work. It does make for a good surrealist piece though!
IcyM: Clean lines, good details and a nice design. Overall one of the better entries I think. It definitely has a slightly stylized flat-cell animation or comic book feel (sorry, graphic novel ). Technique-wise I can't find anything wrong with it. Design-wise, it's.. Ok. It looks good, it just doesn't really move me. Then again, is an MBT supposed to enthrall one's aesthetic sensibilities or just shoot things? Depends who you ask I suppose. Still, I think if the presentation was at least a bit more powerful this could easily be one of the top entries this round.
D-Holme: Love the design. Love all the little accents. And I generally love all things steam in nature or feel. Plus I'm fond of orange, heh. The side view killed this one though, which is a shame because it had massive potential as a design. It feels like a colored schematic side view instead of a real render, which is essentially what it is I suppose. I can't ride you too hard on it because I often struggle to break out of the sideview myself. But it's something that's crucial and I know from your past work you can do it well.
nutkin: You definitely have a very unique and particular style all of your own, as we've seen the past few rounds. It's not necessarily the best approach to translating a concept, but it does have a very strong illustrative and carefree side to it. I think you just have to ask yourself what matters more to you, expressing the concept or expressing your style. The more unrealistic your style is, the more impact that choice has on how well your idea translates to others. I've often chosen the latter myself though, and it's a balance each of us has to find between our left and right brain. Moving on to the design itself... The concept is way off what the brief called for, but I do like it as a seperate piece outside of the poll. I also appreciate the thought you put into it, especially the way you applied the hunting of a pack to the technological side. You could probably take that even further if you spent more time on it, from a concept point and not necessarily a visual one. Do they need many guns when each has a specific function, and so forth. Overall though, I think there's some improvement in this over your past two presentations, so keep it up. Oh. And always remember to spellcheck your text.
Myself: I'll try to keep this short and avoid too many excuses. It took me a while to really get a feel for where the design was heading, but I think by the end of it I managed to get a pretty good grasp of it. At least in my head. Mainly I really wanted to delve into the stealth aspect of a tank as a functioning MBT, because I feel that's a strong direction towards where we might be headed. And the research I did seems to support that to an extent. Most of the tech is headed towards fully optical stealth, but that's something that's hard to translate as an effective design and also didn't really appeal to me. I went back and forth a few times between more radar-aimed angular designs and ones that were more in my personal curvilinear aesthetic and in the end the aesthetics won. Sort of. As Dragonspit commented, a stealth-sensitive design meant cutting down on a lot of the "bling" that often attracts votes. Glowing LEDs and such were out of the question, and the surface itself had to be fairly smooth for its purpose. Having said that, I definitely feel it needs at least a bit more detail. If not for aesthetic purposes, then purely technical ones. It took me way too long to get to the point where I could really delve into the details though and I'm afraid the product suffered for it. (Mental note: Never switch directions towards polar opposite designs, two days before a deadline.) Still, given the time I had, I do feel I managed to carry across enough of the concept in a reasonably good presentation form. And I actually managed to learn several new things (and some old ones) in the process, that I'm looking forward to applying in the future. One aside I'll share is that it's interesting for me to see how my designs lately all seem to gravitate towards a particular style. It's given me thoughts of pushing that further into a more unified direction with my future entries, fitting them as parts of a particular culture or world. Something that we've discussed as a topic possibility as well. Enough rambling though, as I'm likely the only one that will read this bit to begin with. But I think aloud already, so what's the harm in typing out loud eh?
That's it for everyone... Good work and see ya'll in the next round!
Last edited by form2function; December 24th, 2007 at 08:26 AM.
December 24th, 2007 #20Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Thanked 19 Times in 7 Posts
Thanks for reviews everyone) It`s my first post here so it was very helpful. I like the Idea of IDW so I`ll try post here regulary.
As for the tanks they were cool) I like best steampunk red one and a Chemical tank(It feels like author already has sci-fi world for it: buildings, story etc)
December 24th, 2007 #21
yoitisi: i propose we do some sort of monitor gamma calibration. maybe make it an image that is part of the topic banner so we can all set profiles. even if we don't use them we can still save them and toggle before submitting. as it stands, i feel that if your using standard pc gamma my image is way too dark, but default apple gamma is right on... so regardless of what we pick, there needs to be some way to unify everything imo
December 24th, 2007 #22
Actually, it wouldn't be hard to just agree on a particular color profile and simply convert in photoshop before submitting. Traditionally sRGB 2.1 is what's used for web sharing and quickly becoming the standard for anything that isn't going to the press. So that would be my suggestion.
And if anyone isn't sure on how to setup, proof, or convert their profiles I'm willing to make a detailed post about it. From there it's just a matter of people making sure their monitors are calibrated right, which every artist should do once in a while to make sure the colors that the computer is sending to the monitor are the same as the monitor is displaying. As a point of reference, print designers usually do so on a weekly basis. And while there are all sorts of hardware and software calibrators you can buy, there's plenty of free options and even just eyeballing it using the monitors built-in settings.
But this should all probably be discussed in the discussion thread.
December 24th, 2007 #23
nice sketch, strong profile shape. Good simplistic shading to show the forms.
Same here. The turret looks nice (good job on tackling a complex shape here) and it has good potential to be finished. Maybe the design is a bit too standard.
The right track (from viewer) is off perspective.
Isometric perspective, I am not such a fan of that to be honest. Very good for showing the form, though. Your line tool drawing looks like a CAD drawing, maybe use stronger accentuating lines here and there...
Interesting design, the armour tyre concept is fun. Another entry with potential for cleaning up and fleshing out.
Nice illustration, though too sloppy overall for ID. The design could be developed further because it’s rather stereotype. Perspective is a little wonky here and there and Legato was right when he mentioned the missing of strong and straight design lines.
I LOVE the description!
Personally, I don’t really like the idea of doing a painterly approach for ID, because it doesn’t show enough technical aspects of a design most of the time. Illustrations should usually be based on clear cut orthographic views that are established beforehand.
Cool stuff, much work put into it! Creating a 3D model is a very good method for creating a base. But you didn’t use that in your best advantage. The tank is simply missing details.
Drawing away on a 3D base render gives you maximum freedom in exploring little details, so you could have really pushed that aspect.
The turret is ace, so is the cannon. I also dig the front light shapes.
Difficult to make out, but those tank threads have some nice detail – that’s what I mean!
Also keep an eye on not destroying the correct perspectivity of your model once you render it! I see some little issues on the front hud area with the dark window openings.
Your presentation could also use some work like scale reference etc. Including the sideview in this sheet would be a good idea.
Though being another illustration, this shows a lot more form and detail in the design. The repetitive armour plating looks cool. I also like the sci-fi touch.
Someone mentioned scaling those guys down, I’d agree.
I would have cropped out the top and bottom area for final presentation if I hadn’t found the time to touch it up further. The sloppyness there kills some of the main subject’s visual impact.
Funny concept. I value the fact that you did some simple ortho views.
It needs a lot more exploration in terms of ID finesse and detailing.
It doesn’t give the impression of a MBT, but looks like a gun on wheels acting in a swarm formation.
Always creative and well-thought. Your ID skills are pretty advanced! Turret design is dope and I like its massive size! I have told you some of my thoughts earlier, so I won’t repeat them here. Seeing your finshed illustration now, I’d agree with Dekus on perspective issues. You could also have cropped out some of the top area for better framing. And ortho views could have rounded up your design. The lighting turned out pretty dark which doesn’t allow for best presentation I think. Also, the tank could use some color variation now that you decided to do a color render!
Good effort on the presentation! This could have worked a little better with a greyscale render with more contrast mabye. Your tank has a very retro sci-fi feel which is cool but it needs a little more development in terms of ID craftmanship. I like how you thought about a turret joint for good movability. Also, making sure that your perspective is solid always guarantees for a good impression in ID. I actually think, this is one of the key and basic elements that needs to be correct when it comes to ID.
nah, I don’t say much about it. Dekus asked about the rocket launcher. That’s indeed got an angled front. Orthos need work.
I think this is a very chaotic design and it could have benefited from a clearer or lighter rendering.
Very good job on the orthos. They do show a lot of the functionality (although unreadable at this size) and I can see that you put in a lot of thoughts.
Presentation is spot on.
Ah, I liked some of your other thumbs better. The top view has a good silhouette and I like the general crab concept. The 4-turret setup work well with the short barrels.
What strikes me in a slightly negative way is the wonkyness with perspective and rendering.
Well, this looks like a tank made of wood planks. It needs work on perspective. The ID aspect has a very pseudo-functional feeling and doesn’t allow for clear understanding of the forms. Looking up some reference for machines etc. helps making it look more believable.
The simplistic backdrop works fine!
This has a very nice retro touch as well! It’s got some cool shapes like the triple barrel. I am not very fond of those tracks though. They were a little carelessly done. Some more contrast for the render could have worked nicely. Some minor perspective issues.
Oh I really like that backdrop, very simplistic yet realistic. The tank should have been bigger though. It needs a lot more details, but the overall shape is very cool!
I like the whole German make-up and backstory. Very in depth and creative!
This is a little detail, but the cast shadow works very well showing the form along with the ortho views which are spot on.
You would have gotten my vote if it had more details. Right now, it just looks too bold and simple.
I think this looks like a kids book illustration and I don’t believe that fits with ID at all. The design has a very steampunk vibe (cool!) and shows some good functionality, but a mere sideview is not ideal for showing the form. At least you could have touched up the topview a little better for that sake. The asymmetrical turret setup works very well with this type of concept.
Believable design but execution wise, I’d really have liked to see a more rigid linework.
Seeing wonky freehand lines with ID doesn’t seem right to me all the time...
Like Legato pointed out already – it’s rather off topic. But the main weakness lies in the design and handling of details. It looks pseudo functional and needs a lot more attention when it comes to the technical aspect of your tank. Damn, I don’t want to sound too harsh, so I regard it as a WIP for the most part...
I am giving my vote to Dekus, because he really put in some hard work. Also, it just deserves at least one vote for now!
Though, Legato is an equal choice in that regard.
Good stuff all, great round!
Sorry, if some of my critique sounds a little to direct and harsh. I only want to help, pointing out issues how I see them in the most honest way. (gosh, I could still be a LOT more honest...)
Thx a lot for c&c so far!
December 24th, 2007 #24
i havent posted anything due to time issue (altough i have apretty far going illu') but i would like to comment on some pieces, i know i may sound like a fart getting proud in my real life exprience with mbt's and other armourd vheicles (typo..?) but i find it may be usefull info for you guys.
legato - your finished painting look very good, also the overall visual aspect of the design, but, regarding real life neccesaties, your design lack most - the tank is too long making it a fairly easy side target, its two front rails having such long middle rail making it absoulotley impossible to climb even a very shallow "staircaise" (by saying staricase i am refering to the nickname boulders and sharp elevations has for it), making it non usefull for any kind of any combat location. also mention that due to the fact that a single rail will then be in the charge of moving the tank it will casue the rail to have over weight and it'll instantly break. its boxy shape make it a perfect target for any hollow head missiles (hollow missile, when hit a curved surface tend to lose alot of its drilling power due to deflecting the initial direction of the arrowhead). i am really sorry for being such a hard fart dude, i really like your piece but those things just immediatley came to my mind after having so much time in so many diffrente armoured rail machines and some mentions here saying this could be the future of Mbts made me jump and point out some of the issues concering mbt's.
jim hatama - if the industry will be able to micromake all the parts in the size your tank is, this scale of tanks would immdiatley be the future tank, but the older moden design with the current scale isnt convincing, altough it looks good. one note - the most volournable point in a tank is the connection between the tube (the main big part) and the cockpit - you left yours quite open to side and direct missiles aiming because of the fact that there is an inward going surface on its side cockpit directing every missile below mid point of the cockpit directly in to the personell aread.
icym - i voted for ya.
crit would be note the front of the tank preceeding the rail, this way when the tank will go about a sharp curve, its front will touch the curve long before the rail, making it get stuck. the turret cant make 360 spin due to the higher back of the tank, infact, i dont see how its rotate at all.
edit - whats that yellow side light? is it the warior entrance door? if so, its also risky because it pushed the rail behind (usually the rail itself portect the warrior crew chamber) and another would be that fighters disembarking the tank would be open to 3 direction (side front and top)
mr. natural - well, very good plannig, would have voted you if you paint it
- its believable,you paid attention to the overall neccesasites, it can be a reall tank. one thing, look at the front orth, note how its hight make it easier for front anti attack and make it difficult for the tank to sneak ramp attack. (were you a soldier?).
i'd suggest lower the turret cockpit a bit.
all else - there are really good entries this round and beatifully designed! i will come back later to point out other technical things if youd like.
sorry again if i was to harsh.
Last edited by benkashmir; December 24th, 2007 at 01:02 PM.
December 24th, 2007 #25
ok folks, i will critique primarily from an industrial design point of view. as i'm not a rendering master, i'll stick to what i know
Nice sketching, although the wheels are not particularly round. there is a lot of movement in the form, but also a lot of weight to the individual components. there's a lot of complicated details too on the hulk, these would potentially catch rpg's etc. cool though.
good choice going for the shorter barrel for shorter range combat and turret rotation in the streets. also, i'm loving the armour that you speak about. i'm not so keen on the presentation layout. good design- shame it didn't get past the sketching stage.
fughi from yuggoth
let me know how you drew this, as i suspect you could do better with a pencil. this tank could have benefited from a bit of flowing sketching. so the design - the front legs are pretty are a pretty pointless feature in my opinion, imagine the weight of those tracks on the legs! the design as a whole has little integrity, everything looks bolted on, i can't decipher the function of many of the details. my favorite thing about your presentation is the mini-diagram - although i don't understand 'flexible leg technology' it gives a bit of insight into the feature. there weren't enough diagrams in this competition, so well done.
jorge f. muñoz
spherical wheels - goood. sniper protection - goood. perhaps you could have made the cameras a bit more integral? although i appreciate that that gives it a 'bolt-on' aestheric that makes it look cool. shame you didn't take it past the sketch phase
for me, the best image in the competition, awesome. I love the form and the alternate movement provided by the legs (i'm biased, ha). however, i feel the design falls down a bit with the main gun, surely the accurate range would be minimal given the length of the barrel, and as a 'battlefield dominator' this would make it vulnerable. also, i love the final comment - level the playing field. ha. as i said at the start, best image.
looks great! well done. good dynamic form, i really like the rendering style. well thought out and well executed. i'd quite like to know how the gun works/ what the projectile is (i didn't understand from the entry)
the design however, feels like you drew a tank, and then added some futuristic bits to the outside. i actually love it, but the solution doesn't appear to be designed, rather it has been engineered by some skilled scientist mercenaries in chernobyl. everything functions well, but it could have a lot more integrity if the basic form encompassed the features (rather than being fitted afterwards)
Right. i really don't know where and when this is set. gps, thermal sensors, world war one styling and material choices? i don't know. also, i suspect it has pretty terrible aiming adjustment and turning. good job for chucking some 2d views in there, and a scale reference person. ah, also, despite it being a similar shape to the barrel on my sniper rifle (idw 51) i think it would retain too much heat and be unnecessarily heavy.
Last edited by nutkin; December 24th, 2007 at 02:13 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to nutkin For This Useful Post:
December 24th, 2007 #26
Great entries, this was a tough vote.
Legato-Well, when it comes to your tank I think it is quit unique and well designed. The sense of sheer scale is there and it looks like a main tank for sure. I like the human figure on top of the tank; it really shows how big that tank truly is. Technically it looks like it might have a hard time moving though, I’m not too sure on the design of the tank tracks.
I saw in your comments your working really hard to do the environment with the designs. I think it’s a good idea. I’m am in no way a environment/background master but here’s my two cents on your piece and what you might maybe try in future rounds. Okay, with your current piece I just think maybe you were trying to do too many things here. There is a lot going on here; tree’s, houses, guy on rooftop, rocks, half a bridge it looks like, snow…this is really complicated actually…especially if your just starting out with environments. I think you might want to start with environments that are less strained with all these objects and break it down into simpler parts first. You mentioned Jim Hatama style and I want to bring up that background he did. Take a look at it closely, you can actually break it down into three simple parts. You got the foreground and the tank nicely placed on it, and a background with moody cloud cover/smoke, and lastly a little touch of rain for atmosphere. That’s all you really need to start out with affective backgrounds. Now doing a tank in a war torn alleyway with bullets flying overhead…yeah that can all come later. You want to study environments individually first before doing all that stuff. EOW will help you out there and browsing through good reference material always help. Anyway I hoped I made sense and didn’t ramble there and sound like a total nimrod. Good luck man and thanks for the comments.
Jim Hatama- you got a real solid render there…but you already heard this but…those guys really do need to be smaller. It throws the piece completely off…how do they fit in there? Seriously though, it’s soooooo close to being ace. If you bulk up the tank just a little more also you got one fine looking piece. I hope you finish this man. It’s like 85% complete, it wouldn’t take too long to tweak that.
Huhwhat- Yeah, I’m a real sucker for these walking tanks but in terms of making a main tank that looks…well…like a main tank you got it pretty good here. The thing looks freaking huge and I can’t tell you how important that little guy on that tank is. It elevates your piece to new heights. The piece could maybe use more rendering and smoothing, but it’s pretty much there. I don’t mind the painterly style too much, but I do agree with more straight lines in some areas. In terms of functioning, legs on tanks is pretty tricky. Most cases they look unstable but spider legs go pretty good with this.
Dekus- It was neat watching what you went through to get to the final illustration. It is a solid overall piece but just doesn’t strike me as a main battle tank. It’s still a great piece though. Hmmm…wish I could say something more intelligent about this one but I can’t. I think using the 3d models is a great method though, keep doing that.
Hideyoshi- your work is always a great eye candy to look at. You have a fantastic way of using colors and line work. I think you already know though this is a slight step down though from your other work. It does look rushed. I’m trying hard to imagine it in on the battlefield also. To me it just comes off as another standard hover tank with guns attached to it and missiles, it’s a damn fine looking hover tank…but that’s just it though. I just feel like I’ve already seen stuff like this before which is by no means a terrible thing. I just think you could of pushed the design part more and I know you can.
D-Holme- The colors are rad and it does scream main tank. In the “real world” a tank like this wouldn’t be made. This is a very fantasy illustrated tank as Hideyoshi said. If the real objective was to a make a tank for the “real world” then yeah this is an issue…however if not…I think it’s a unique tank and design…but unfinished. Right now it is sketchy and needs some cleaning. It still looks like a wip. Other then that I have to say I really like this one. It’s almost whimsical in a sort of way.
ME- Some parts work, other don’t and in the end it is a mixed bag. I rushed that turret and it does show in the perspective. It needs a lot more fine tuning is some parts.
Guys, thank you for all the critiques and comments. I swear these are the best comments I’ve ever gotten and it’s ten times better then in any critiques given at any school I’ve gone to or place. I love you guys
I’ll try to get to more of you later hopefully . In any case I hope you all have a great Christmas and stay safe.
Last edited by Trashy; December 24th, 2007 at 01:34 PM.
December 24th, 2007 #27
And now, giving back to the community. Sorry if I sound overly harsh and the points I made are invalid, since I'm inexperienced and also not used to critiquing. Also, I'm focusing only on the minor flaws. I'm basically nitpicking. If you made it to the poll, you've obviously reached a certain level of competence with your illustration.
oDaYWaLKeRo: A 3d perspective would have helped. So would some colour, or if you're going b&w, clean up and straighten those lines. There's also an unbalanced feel to the tank.
Mr. Natural: Again, colour it. If not, clean up the lines and do some b&w shading. More panel lines and detailing too. Tank is well thought out text-wise.
fughi from yuggoth: This sounds crazy, but the thumbnail looks better than the full-sized. I can't put a finger on it, but I would say it was the 'lifeless' lines that killed the design. That and the lack of shadows. And the weak support structure for the front tracks. (My personal logic would say that if the stilts are made of strong material, then the same material should be used on the tank's other parts, which means that the tank shouldn't be so bulky.) A black background to go with the green text - to provide contrast - would be nice, since I can barely separate background from text.
jorge f. muñoz: Needs 3d perspective and colours. OK, this bit is personal prejudice/bias, but your design reminds me of a Japanese rice cake on wheels. But I applaud you for using spherical wheels.
Dekus: Nice lighting/ Well designed, down to the little detail (camera on the end of the barrel). But it feels too smooth, even if it just rolled off the assembly line.
Jim Hatama: Great painting skills. Love the meticulous attention to detail on the reactive-armour-ish things. Would've been a stronger entry with smaller figures (or without them).
Grenogs: I think you're going for a retro/steampunk design here, but somewhat futuristic looking gun (looks laser) and missile pack clashes with the three ye olde exhaust pipes spewing black smoke.
Legato: Nice mood. Reminds me of Kai. And the design is strong too. But what hurts this is the background. Since you lavished so much attention on the tank, it would help if some of the background elements get the same amount of love too. The way you direct the viewer's eye - tree, buried house, tank, fuel tank/pod-thing - makes the fuel tank/pod-thing stand out as sore thumb with its lack of detail, even if it's supposed to be covered by snow. Also, I know I watch too much post-apocalyptic world stuff, but the white stuff: Nuclear ash or snow?
Dragonspit: Scorpion tank! This looks like one of those classic Battletech paintings. Not enough strong highlights and shadows. The scorpion tail/ tank neck looks kinda weak to be supporting a gun, especially when the gun doesn't look energy-based and has massive recoil. Glass on (cockpit??) of tank screams vulnerable.
Hideyoshi: Glowy, shiny, sleek-y + nice design lines and texture. Superb presentation. Which means I find it hard to nitpick.
:::rain::: Mobile fortress! But somehow it just doesn't remind me of a tank, and more of a troop transport, what with your emphasis on carrying a battalion of soldier and using chem/bio warfare to kill other battalions.
EElevation: Though it feels walker-ish and hovercraft-ish, your tank has a fresh feeling to it. Nitpick: The diagram on the upper left looks a bit half-assed, and the lighting seems a bit off.
Trashy: Feels flat. might be the overly dark rear end of the tank that disrupts the illusion of 3d. There's also a mishmash of curvy organic lines with straight lines. The missile launcher at the very back looks out of place - placement and lighting wise.
IcyM: Overall, it's great. Strong design lines, like Hideyoshi. What you lack is a well-crafted presentation. Also, the tank wheels are spaced a bit too far apart, especially for a tank designed to operate in a heavy world environment.
form2function: Outstanding presentation. You did a great job with the environment, mood/feel and also the sleek lines of a black stealth machine, but a wee bit more detail would be great. You gave real convincing reasons for making a stealth unit into a MBT.
D-Holme: Awesome design. A 3d perspective would help. Maybe it's because I'm influenced by modern tanks, but I think a MBT should have cannons at least half the length of the tank, especially when they engage in long range artillery duels, and even if the tank is a behemoth. Small guns = mobile fortress to me.
nutkin: First off, perspective looks a little off. Ultra-light, I feel, deviates from the theme of the IDW, which calls for 'main' battle tank, something that can stand toe-to-toe and trade slugs with its foes on the frontlines. I think you went for the sleek look, but it looks oversimplified to me. And it ended up looking more like a giraffe than a dog, and doesn't convey any sort of ability to outmanoeuvre other tanks.
It came down to Hideyoshi (rendering), EElevation (originality), IcyM (rendering) and form2function (mood + presentation) for me. My bias towards well-written descriptions tips the scales in f2f's favour.
My thanks go out to all those who C&C'ed me. A general response here to them.
Hard edge on the dust effect. You hit the nail on the head there. I can't believe I didn't catch myself on that one there.
Too soft. Lack of details. Yep, that's the problem of taking a painterly approach.
Lynx. I was going for the feline naming system (leopard, tiger) there, reasoning that the Lynx can climb trees, has short tail, is bigger than a household cat so... Who am I kidding, it's a bad naming choice.
Wonky perspective + Poor tank design. I agree that the triple-jointed legs look weak. It's more of a problem of my lack of skill in foreshortening, since I'm aiming for the legs to be thicker than the gun barrels. And the track's 'feet' is just two squarish things mounted on the sides of the far end of the track - crap design. Stereotypical and lacking design lines - yup. I'll try to do orthographic views on future IDWs. The two small cannons were supposed to be able to spin around, but that design got lost when I painted over it. Barrel length: bad foreshortening skill, bad, bad, bad.
Texture on the armour: it was a cop out. I had great difficulty drawing straight panel lines, so I abandoned the idea altogether.
December 24th, 2007 #28
thanks nutkin, and you are right, but i never designed this thinking towards a totaly realistic concept, and whether or not this could work in real life, because obviously it wouldn't. Take it for what it is, a purely fantasy design aimed towards a fantasy scenario or game concept design, realism shouldn't have to come into it or at least not your prime concern. Once you start thinking realism and total practicality the box gets a little harder to get out of. But as for the gun heating up, you maybe right, i have no knowledge about that, but i do know it wouldn't be the first time in history thats happend, it happened with the rifles in the zulu wars, the main reason why british troops were beat, and it still happens today in modern warfare.
huhwhat, actualy i would concidern it more retro/steampunk with a tiny bit of early 20th century future/cyperpunk if thats at all posible,
Last edited by grenogs; December 24th, 2007 at 02:38 PM.
December 24th, 2007 #29Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Oakland, CA
- Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks for the crits, everyone.
Yeah, I wish I could have spent more time on it as well, but X-Mas ate up more of my time than I thought it would.
I always forget how much talent CA has, so I'll defiantly come correct next time around.
December 24th, 2007 #30
Last edited by Legato; December 24th, 2007 at 03:47 PM.