Results 1 to 13 of 53
September 30th, 2008 #1
IDW #80: Near future Commercial Airliner
Topic: Near Future Commercial Airliner
Background: Something a bit more serious and real world than normal this time. This doesn't mean this is a narrow topic, it just means there are certain boundaries to this topic.
Commercial Airliners can be anything from 'small' aircrafts that only serve on the short distances (between cities) or the very large ones (intercontinental flights). The main idea behind these crafts is that they transport large amounts of people in a relative small amount of time over a long distance.
Near future means that using a hyperdrive or traveling between the stars are not included in this topic. Think about airliners for the next 20 to 50 years.
However, even with these boundaries there are vast areas you can explore within this topic; try googling for the Boeing 787 for example, or search for several (fairly old actually) airplane designs by Luigi Colani. Think about the Spaceship One. Also, airports are changing too (think of the shift from mainland to an artificial island just off shore). Maybe the large airliners should become waterplanes again, like they used to be long ago.
1. Design and draw a near future Commercial Airliner!
2. That's it... now draw!
Deadline: Saturday, October 11
Hide this ad by registering as a memberOctober 2nd, 2008 #2
October 2nd, 2008 #3
October 3rd, 2008 #4
tried some 3D model stuff for overpainting and stuff.Problem?
me thought about something like this:
I remembered waterworld, pole melting and stuff in combination with fewer gasoline, so i got this concept.is this in or out of the rules?
Last edited by fughi from yuggoth; October 4th, 2008 at 10:45 AM.
October 3rd, 2008 #5
The Following User Says Thank You to Legato For This Useful Post:
October 4th, 2008 #6
overpainting isn't actually drawing it though. The model should be used as a reference, not a shortcut. I brought it up with Yoitisi for the Asteroid Miner. I felt that these contests should be an exercise of manual drawing skills and conceptual development, not an individual's proficiency with modeling programs.
fughi from yuggoth|| I think the design is, agreeing with Legato, a bit 1980s starship instead of near future aircraft, due to the angle transition and flat planes...I believe you can push the forms farther to become more dynamic.
The Following User Says Thank You to f1guremeout For This Useful Post:
October 4th, 2008 #7
Legato: Good to see you in here again Hope you'll get around to finishing something!
Arttorney: Do eeeeet! I might even update the old mentor thread someday soon...
Fughi from Yuggoth: A groun-effect plane is totally within the boundaries of this topic. In fact, I kinda hoped someone would pick that one up for this round I agree with the others though, it doesn't look all that aerodynamic at the moment. Make sure that if you're going to do a paintover you get rid of all the sharp corners and the blunt front end. If you look at concepts from Boeing for example, they're all very fluid and almost organic shapes.
f1guremeout: I partly agree with you on the paint-overs of 3d models. Just adding some texture and some dust and stuff to a 3d model in Photoshop or Painter doesn't really fit into this contest. However, I don't want to get rid of them altogether. Having a basic 3d model to help out with perspective and rough shapes is a very powerful tool to quickly develop multiple concepts on the same 'platform'. With a 3d model, you don't have to be so much concerned with the actual drawing of the concept but can now spend all your focus on the design of the concept. However, many people only use if for the first part and forget about that last part I'll monitor it a bit more closely in the future.
The Following User Says Thank You to yoitisi For This Useful Post:
October 4th, 2008 #8
ooooo, I'm going to have fun with this.
October 4th, 2008 #9You can work now and play later, or play now and work later.
October 4th, 2008 #10
if i get time i may go with the solar panel idea- i figure gas is going wayside pretty near in the future, ya know?
No. No. Uh uh. No way. Ain't happening.
alright, gimme a sec.
October 4th, 2008 #11
• Kenny •
"The greatest obstacle to discovery isn't ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge."
October 4th, 2008 #12
Although I dont manage to get some done that often on this forum, i watch it almost daily. I have to agree with KMH. I dont use 3d myself, but to each his own, as long as the bottom line is the depiction of what the intent was, I believe in "use every tool in the box" theory. some will use 3d none, some almost soley. what ever gets the concept across the best for you.
Sogbad is another that comes to mind.
Yoitsi, I dont believe you have been remiss in your managment of this issue in any way. my opinon.
I only live for today, but I'm one day behind.
October 5th, 2008 #13
As Yoitsi said, many do, "with a 3d model, you don't have to be so much concerned with the actual drawing of the concept but can now spend all your focus on the design of the concept. However, many people only use if for the first part and forget about that last part."
That's both troubling and upsetting to me, i'm just expressing my feeling about the whole process here; to see so much talent and for it to seem so narrow to me is surprising. On the other hand, I never said 3-D was bad or detrimental to the design process, It seems a bit narrow-sighted and myopic to me to solely represent the development of a concept, from start to finish, in a 3-D program. To say that otherwise would be prolonging the tradition of skecth to render to model is has-been, is just dismissive to the whole concept of art. That process is STILL being used, and as long as the human concieves concept, one must always create some analog interpretation. That never goes away. Even in the automotive field, designers must still exhibit tremendous artistic skill and precision to intpretative drawing. You can't create the 3-D model from nothing. Too much time devoted to the end step than the focus of getting to that step is, for some, becoming overused.
As a center of reference, take a look at Paul Richards and read what he says about the whole process in his blog and call me a ranting heretic... pld: