Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

    Critique and comment. I think I'm finished.

    Hello. So I think I'm finish this painting. I posted a very rough version of this painting before, so I can get some help on the water.

    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...r-tea-I-guess)

    Thanks to the comments I received, I think I figured it all out. So with that said, feel free to critique and comment this painting. Though if someone can spot something horribly wrong, I may fix it.

    Even though the painting is a bit risqué, I think the overall idea is pretty cute. I did my best to vary the textures of each object, and I'm pretty impress with how I manage to paint the cookie, leaf, and sugar cubes. Can't help but feel that they might stand out a bit because they are pretty detailed. But, the color palette I used for the tea and cup, should hopefully keep the focus on the pixie girl.

    Name:  tea_bathing20_finished_Aug10 small pic for concept art forum.jpg
Views: 2264
Size:  109.6 KB
    Last edited by Mr. Midnight; August 10th, 2018 at 11:28 AM.


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    1,620
    Thanks
    59
    Thanked 548 Times in 475 Posts
    You know you can just add to the existing thread, right? It would remove the need to go around editing things to say 'look here for this' and 'look there for that'.

    As it is - the first thing that throws me off is the cup perspective to the saucer to the table. They are not the same, and in fact the cup looks squished by the handle.

    Next I don't get the peach pit? turkey? rock? What ever is near the top arm.

    Lighting - where is it coming from? What is it? It is not consistent.

    The drawers, bra, etc look way..way too large for that character.

    Why is the leaf and cubes the same blah tan,washed out, coloring?

    Perhaps add somethign to the background - this is overly boring.

    The face is nice.
    My commentary is a gift to you.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,767
    Thanks
    290
    Thanked 522 Times in 435 Posts
    Hands and feets are too tiny, to study lighting watch these: https://youtu.be/V3WmrWUEIJo and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dqG...6&index=6&t=0s then do still life using one light source, you can also lay down clothing and study same way as you do with objects always use reference

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Ah I see. Oh dear. I don't know why I didn't see these mistakes.

    To answer all of your points...

    -I did not know I could edit my first thread. It makes sense, and I should have probably figured out how to do it first, before starting a new thread. But, if you were suggesting to add on to the thread - (like starting a new reply) - I think my thought process at the time was; if I did that, nobody would of see the post because it was a couple of days old. And, there are always new post being brought in by other artist. Thus, it might have drown out my post in the sea of other posts. I didn't want that because I really wanted to get feed back on this painting, as I was exited to share it. Upon sharing this post, I did not sleep for 27 hours. So my judgment was horribly poor at the moment. Sorry about that.

    -I had trouble painting the perspective of the saucer and the cup. I didn't put any thought into the table. I more or less used it to try to frame the girl. I wasn't thinking of perspective for that. I can try to go back and fix it though.

    -It's actually a tea bag. I used the tea bag, that I was drinking from, as reference. It had this weird shape because the tea morphed it into something strange. I was hoping that the string and the logo connected to it, would make it clear. But I guess not.

    -Lighting is suppose to be coming from the top left. Or...If you want to know what I wanted the direction of the lighting to go, just look at the sugar cube's shadow. But looking at that, and looking at the shadow from the plate..and that really doesn't make sense, does it? But your probably also talking about the lighting that is on the cup, or the girl. Regardless, I guess the lighting is not clear cause I'm pretty bad with lighting. I know how to give lighting to simple objects. But once you add in more complicated shapes into the mix - and a lot of them, things get really hectic for me I guess. I thought it looked good. But I guess I was wrong. No idea how to fix this unfortunately. Except for the shadows, I guess.

    - I can shrink the clothing, I guess.

    -The leaf and sugar cubes reference I was using didn't have much color. The Sugar cubes were just brown sugar cubes and the leaf was just brown. So...I don't know what to do to make them more visually interesting. Maybe I could add some green or more red to the leaf?

    -I didn't know what to do with background. I didn't think it would of been important because the main focus was on the girl. And I also took inspiration from self portrait paintings, where there was no background. These self portraits, usually have different textures or color to make the character to stand out more. Considering the perspective this painting is in, I have no idea what to add to the background still. It was such a hard angle to work with. I was thinking of this board with a window, but it threw off my composition. Maybe if I try again, I could come up with another idea.

    -Considering that this is your only compliment...I'll take it...lol...

    Welp...I guess I'm still not done. Sometimes I wonder what's the point in me trying to paint something more complicated, when every time I do, I fail at it. Lighting, especially, has always been a thorn on my side. I should probably take classes on it. Being a self taught artist, there is only so much I can figure out on my own and without the aid of others.

    Thanks for your help. I'll go see what I can fix with this painting.
    Last edited by Mr. Midnight; August 10th, 2018 at 09:50 PM.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    I thought about that too...But I actually really like the hands and feet being tiny. Would it be wrong to keep it like that? I wasn't striving for realistic proportions or anatomy.

    Thanks for the videos. I already watch them before. But, I'll happily watch them again. I already practice still life using one light source too - it's part of my study routine. That said, I guess it's pretty obvious that I still have more studying and practice to do, before I can get good eh? It's hard to judge how good my practices are, because I have no one to judge them but my self...But, when ever I try to apply my studies into something original, I end up failing I guess. I wonder how much more practice it will take, for it to all click. I've been considering getting classes on lighting lately from Schoolism or CGMA, but I'm pretty poor at the moment. So I sort of have to rely on self studies for now.







  7. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    862
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 322 Times in 278 Posts
    Hi Mr. Midnight. Overall, I really like this illustration. I think the character design is really cute and I personally don't mind the proportions of her hands and feet. I also love the mood you're indicating. I've attempted a paint over with some suggestions. I hope you don't mind. While I think you could probably play with the value structure a bit more and perhaps tame the steam a little, my critique mainly has to do with the tea rendering and the colors.

    Name:  mr, midnight.jpg
Views: 1430
Size:  60.3 KB

    1. I feel the way you've rendered the tea counteracts the calm mood I believe you're trying to achieve. That liquid looks very active like there's wind affecting the surface or perhaps she has just finished splashing around. I think if you calmed it down a bit it would serve your mood better.

    2.Judging from this piece alone, it looks like you might be afraid of using distinct local colors in this sort of rendering situation? Her hair and tea, the teacup, and the biscuit all seem to have their own distinct local colors. Her hair and the tea are pink, the teacup is white, and the biscuit is a tan color. Her skin, her clothes, the sugar cubes, the leaf, the table cloth, and the background all appear to be the same local color- perhaps a light peach. If you want to keep the hues mostly as is, I would at least try to make the table cloth and the sugar cubes appear more "white" to match the teacup, and also shift the hues of all of the shadows similar to the way you've shifted the hues for the shadows on her skin, clothes, and parts of the teacup- towards purple. I also think her skin needs to be a tad more saturated and the shading of her skin warmed up a bit so she doesn't look too sallow against the warmth of the tea.

    Anyway, those are my suggestions. Again, it's a fun piece with a nice mood. Even if you don't tweak this piece any further, hopefully you've had some fun and learned a lot. Best of luck.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Grumpysaur For This Useful Post:

    Nsw

  9. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post

    1. I feel the way you've rendered the tea counteracts the calm mood I believe you're trying to achieve. That liquid looks very active like there's wind affecting the surface or perhaps she has just finished splashing around. I think if you calmed it down a bit it would serve your mood better.

    2.Judging from this piece alone, it looks like you might be afraid of using distinct local colors in this sort of rendering situation? Her hair and tea, the teacup, and the biscuit all seem to have their own distinct local colors. Her hair and the tea are pink, the teacup is white, and the biscuit is a tan color. Her skin, her clothes, the sugar cubes, the leaf, the table cloth, and the background all appear to be the same local color- perhaps a light peach. If you want to keep the hues mostly as is, I would at least try to make the table cloth and the sugar cubes appear more "white" to match the teacup, and also shift the hues of all of the shadows similar to the way you've shifted the hues for the shadows on her skin, clothes, and parts of the teacup- towards purple. I also think her skin needs to be a tad more saturated and the shading of her skin warmed up a bit so she doesn't look too sallow against the warmth of the tea.

    Thank you so much
    Grumpysaur! The paint over really helps me see what you're talking about.

    About your first point for the tea, I can totally understand what you mean. I was under the impression that more water caustics, felt more convincing to tell that something was water. And I suppose it does, if the water it's self is moving around. But when the water is calm, it shouldn't have caustics. I didn't think about that.

    About your second point. I am confused about it; "You might be afraid of using distinct local colors". Are you saying that I should of varied my colors for each object in the painting? Or are you saying that I should keep the colors the same?
    Like...should the the girl, tea, clothing, leaf, and cookie have roughly the same reddish purple color - and variations of that reddish purple color? And the cup, plate, sugar cubes, and table cloth should have that whitish - bluish color and variations of those colors?
    Judging by your paint over's color, which seems to be reddish -purple...I think your trying to tell me that I should do my best to make the colors roughly in the same hue and color. Am I right?

    The first thing I'm going to fix about this painting, is the perspective of the plate and tea cup. And then I'll move onto what you suggested.

  10. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    862
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 322 Times in 278 Posts
    So when I said that you might be afraid of using local colors, it's because I've seen a lot of artists, when they are first starting to render out their own scenes in more realistic lighting scenarios, they tend to do similar things with their color palette, where almost everything is basically the same light neutral local color with maybe a couple of different local colors thrown in. They just don't know yet how light and atmosphere will affect their local colors and the result is that most of their objects look like they are made of the same material. I thought you might have this problem because you chose to make the light sides of the sugar cubes which are typically white, follow a different logic than what you've set up for a white cup. Without seeing more of your work it's hard to tell if you have this tendency, because a limited palette like this is utilized for stylistic purposes sometimes. I was saying to you specifically: be aware that you might have this problem. But I approached my paint-over giving you the benefit of the doubt that you did it for stylistic purposes.

    That being said I chose to do my paintover by distinguishing your white objects from your tan objects on their light sides, and having the shadow sides of all your objects be more influenced by a red/purple atmosphere. I think we could have gone the other route and distinguished between the white objects and tan objects on both their light sides as well as on their shadow sides. I just took a view point and went with it. It just depends on what your going for.

    My biggest beef was that your shadows seem to be all over the place in hue anyway and the dominant shadow color you chose for most of the scene felt muddy in contrast to the warm pinks and purples. You've chosen warm neutrals on your lighter areas for most of the scene, but your shadow sides range from warm neutrals to cool neutrals to more saturated reds and purples. It doesn't seem to be based off of local color, it seems object specific. Each object seems to be shaded by it's own set of rules, even when it looks like you are saying they are the same local color. The girl's skin is shaded with fairly saturated purples, her clothes with fairly saturated reds and purples. Perhaps to show subsurface scattering? Or to establish them as focal points? The sugar, leaf, table cloth and background shadows while they go a tiny bit toward red hue, stay pretty close to their light side hues. The teacup and saucer's shadows have warm neutrals, cool neutrals, and fairly saturated purples depending on the area.

    So in short I was basically saying: if you want your objects to appear white, use the logic you've established for your teacup, which as of now has a warm white light side, and variations of neutral hues to more saturated purples on the shadow sides.
    Last edited by Grumpysaur; August 11th, 2018 at 03:39 PM. Reason: typos

  11. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post
    So when I said that you might be afraid of using local colors, it's because I've seen a lot of artists, when they are first starting to render out their own scenes in more realistic lighting scenarios, they tend to do similar things with their color palette, where almost everything is basically the same light neutral local color with maybe a couple of different local colors thrown in. They just don't know yet how light and atmosphere will affect their local colors and the result is that most of their objects look like they are made of the same material. I thought you might have this problem because you chose to make the light sides of the sugar cubes which are typically white, follow a different logic than what you've set up for a white cup. Without seeing more of your work it's hard to tell if you have this tendency, because a limited palette like this is utilized for stylistic purposes sometimes. I was saying to you specifically: be aware that you might have this problem. But I approached my paint-over giving you the benefit of the doubt that you did it for stylistic purposes.

    When I choose my color pallet, I first paint in the background color. In this case, the background I choose is brownish with a bit of red. So, I try to choose my color palette based around that. With the girl's hair, and the tea being saturated version of that red color. The tea was meant to be blue - not white, but I de-saturated the blue so it didn't conflict with the overall color palette. Or I guess, what I'm trying to say is, I didn't want the tea cup and the objects around the tea cup to steal the show. I wanted the girl to be the main focal point. It's why I washed out the colors of the clothing, leaf, and sugar cubes - and I tried to do the same with the cookie. So, you are correct when you say, that I limit my color palette. And maybe I did it for the stylistic purposes? But, I'm not too sure. It just makes more sense to limit the color plate for me, instead of adding a ton of variation.

    That said, after seeing you paint over. I feel like I totally messed up on the colors. Washing out the colors on some of the objects was probably a bad idea.

    But also..I notice that you made the top of the sugar cubes brighter...I would be hesitant to do something like this, because I am afraid that the values of the painting, would be stolen from the bright sugar cubes. And, they seem to be the brightest part of the painting, especially if I squint my eyes. So, then, would it be possible to keep the cubes white, without making them too bright and saturated? Or, am I over thinking this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post
    My biggest beef was that your shadows seem to be all over the place in hue anyway and the dominant shadow color you chose for most of the scene felt muddy in contrast to the warm pinks and purples. You've chosen warm neutrals on your lighter areas for most of the scene, but your shadow sides range from warm neutrals to cool neutrals to more saturated reds and purples. It doesn't seem to be based off of local color, it seems object specific. Each object seems to be shaded by it's own set of rules, even when it looks like you are saying they are the same local color. The girl's skin is shaded with fairly saturated purples, her clothes with fairly saturated reds and purples. Perhaps to show subsurface scattering? Or to establish them as focal points? The sugar, leaf, table cloth and background shadows while they go a tiny bit toward red hue, stay pretty close to their light side hues. The teacup and saucer's shadows have warm neutrals, cool neutrals, and fairly saturated purples depending on the area.

    So in short I was basically saying: if you want your objects to appear white, use the logic you've established for your teacup, which as of now has a warm white light side, and variations of neutral hues to more saturated purples on the shadow sides.

    So...I think I understand...If I look at my painting...The tea cup and plate, have the color purple for their shadows, but also have a green color shadow at the front. I have no idea why I gave it 2 different color shadows. The cookie has it's own brownish reddish color for shadows. The clothing, have pinkish and reddish shadow. The sugar cubes have a brownish shadow. And the leaf, also has a Brownish shadow. The girl, has a purple shadow.

    So just to clarify...Purple means "cool". Reddish -yellowish (the lighting color I have for the girl and clothing) is "warm". I am going off of color theory. I must I forgotten when painting this pic, but from my understanding, shadows get cooler colors, and light gets warmer colors. Right?

    Also...What you're saying is... if I want to keep the shadows for the tea cup purple, then I should give all of the objects and the girl, a purple shadow too, right?

    As well...I still don't quite understand what you mean by "local color". Do you mean color, absent of light and shadow? When ever I first start off a painting, I choose a middle color. Then I add shadow and light to that middle color - when I'm rendering it out. Is this the wrong way of painting? Or am what I am referring to wrong, and if so is it possible to give me an example of that?
    To make it clear on how I paint stuff, I use Jazza's tutorial as reference...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Evj8baC5-0

    If you like, I can show some of my recent art work? I'm wondering if I've been screwing up this color thing up the whole time.



  12. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    862
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 322 Times in 278 Posts
    When I choose my color pallet, I first paint in the background color. In this case, the background I choose is brownish with a bit of red. So, I try to choose my color palette based around that. With the girl's hair, and the tea being saturated version of that red color. The tea was meant to be blue - not white, but I de-saturated the blue so it didn't conflict with the overall color palette. Or I guess, what I'm trying to say is, I didn't want the tea cup and the objects around the tea cup to steal the show. I wanted the girl to be the main focal point. It's why I washed out the colors of the clothing, leaf, and sugar cubes - and I tried to do the same with the cookie. So, you are correct when you say, that I limit my color palette. And maybe I did it for the stylistic purposes? But, I'm not too sure. It just makes more sense to limit the color plate for me, instead of adding a ton of variation.

    That said, after seeing you paint over. I feel like I totally messed up on the colors. Washing out the colors on some of the objects was probably a bad idea.

    But also..I notice that you made the top of the sugar cubes brighter...I would be hesitant to do something like this, because I am afraid that the values of the painting, would be stolen from the bright sugar cubes. And, they seem to be the brightest part of the painting, especially if I squint my eyes. So, then, would it be possible to keep the cubes white, without making them too bright and saturated? Or, am I over thinking this?


    There are many ways your color palette could have played out. I think choosing a limited palette is just fine and I also feel you are asking yourself great questions as is pertains to color, value, and focal points. My suggestion in the future however, would be to do several very rough color studies for your painting before you commit.

    I can see your thought process on why you colored the sugar cube area the way you did, but the result was distracting to me. You've introduced the biscuit, which is visually heavy because of it's color and saturation in the scene and puts a lot of contrast to the area, the teacup/girl area is also visually dominant because of it's color and subject. To me that makes the scene unbalanced. Instead of having the sugar cube area less of a focus, it stands out because it's so different. If you had treated the biscuit more like the sugar cubes, leaf and clothes, it might feel more balanced and keep the focus on the girl. Or, if you had made the leaf the same color as the biscuit, it could have also balanced the different elements out. As is, my eye just kind of bounces back and forth between the sugar cubes and the teacup/girl/biscuit area, instead of flowing throughout before resting on the girl.

    That's the reason why I chose to make the sugar cube area more contrasted in my paintover, to balance out the biscuit and keep the focus on the girl. You can down play them more if you feel it's best, I would just keep an eye on the visual weight of the biscuit. Now the top of the sugar cubes, that was actually probably an error. I see now that you've made the side of the cup the brightest area, and the top plane darker. So the side plane of the cube should probably be the lightest part.

    Name:  mr midnight5.jpg
Views: 1245
Size:  57.4 KB


    So just to clarify...Purple means "cool". Reddish -yellowish (the lighting color I have for the girl and clothing) is "warm".


    In this specific case, yes purple is cooler and red/yellowish is warmer

    I am going off of color theory. I must I forgotten when painting this pic, but from my understanding, shadows get cooler colors, and light gets warmer colors. Right?


    It all depends on the environment, the light source, color/material of objects, and personal style and preference. There's not just one set of rules to follow. In one painting you could have cooler light and warmer shadows, in another painting it could be the opposite.

    Also...What you're saying is... if I want to keep the shadows for the tea cup purple, then I should give all of the objects and the girl, a purple shadow too, right?


    I'm saying that's one solution to keep the painting from looking too muddy. This is perhaps due to personal preference and maybe monitor difference- you might feel it's not muddy at all. To each their own. Here's another paintover keeping more to your original color palette where I try to balance between the elements to keep the focus on the girl.

    Name:  mr midnight 3-1.jpg
Views: 1247
Size:  57.6 KB

    As well...I still don't quite understand what you mean by "local color". Do you mean color, absent of light and shadow?


    Yes, that's what I mean.

    When ever I first start off a painting, I choose a middle color. Then I add shadow and light to that middle color - when I'm rendering it out. Is this the wrong way of painting? Or am what I am referring to wrong, and if so is it possible to give me an example of that?
    To make it clear on how I paint stuff, I use Jazza's tutorial as reference...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Evj8baC5-0
    I also tend to choose a middle color and then add light and shadow. Jazza's color choices however, have never been my personal taste.

    If you like, I can show some of my recent art work? I'm wondering if I've been screwing up this color thing up the whole time.
    I would love to see more of your work, I'd recommend starting a sketchbook or another thread. I wouldn't say you are screwing up, but just that there's a lot to learn. There's a lot of ways you can go with color. You'll learn and pick up things as you go. You'll be fine. I'm not exactly an expert on color either, but hopefully I've given you some useful suggestions without screwing you up too much.
    Last edited by Grumpysaur; August 12th, 2018 at 02:53 PM. Reason: typos as always

  13. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post


    My suggestion in the future however, would be to do several very rough color studies for your painting before you commit.


    Good Idea. That's something else I keep forgetting to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post

    I can see your thought process on why you colored the sugar cube area the way you did, but the result was distracting to me. You've introduced the biscuit, which is visually heavy because of it's color and saturation in the scene and puts a lot of contrast to the area, the teacup/girl area is also visually dominant because of it's color and subject. To me that makes the scene unbalanced. Instead of having the sugar cube area less of a focus, it stands out because it's so different. If you had treated the biscuit more like the sugar cubes, leaf and clothes, it might feel more balanced and keep the focus on the girl. Or, if you had made the leaf the same color as the biscuit, it could have also balanced the different elements out. As is, my eye just kind of bounces back and forth between the sugar cubes and the teacup/girl/biscuit area, instead of flowing throughout before resting on the girl.


    I see. That makes sense. I think I have difficulty with adding the same level of saturation, and contrast to different objects in a painting. It's gonna be tricky, but I think I can try to go with your first suggestion, by treating the objects like the biscuit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post

    That's the reason why I chose to make the sugar cube area more contrasted in my paintover, to balance out the biscuit and keep the focus on the girl. You can down play them more if you feel it's best, I would just keep an eye on the visual weight of the biscuit. Now the top of the sugar cubes, that was actually probably an error. I see now that you've made the side of the cup the brightest area, and the top plane darker. So the side plane of the cube should probably be the lightest part.


    The lighting is still something I'm iffy on. The light, to me, looks like it should be from the top left...but the lighting is kinda setting like a sun. It's strange, cause when I look at my real life reference; the Light is above the tea cup and plate, but the edges (or the tips) of the rims, have strong highlights. And the tea cups side, is pretty bright and has some highlights. Like...my cup and plate, curves at the end of their rims. Which maybe why, I might be having difficulty with the lighting. So...I think it makes sense to have the brightest area of the cubes, to be on the top. But, I don't think it needs to be that bright. Maybe I'm wrong. I'll show you a small pic of what I think the light is doing.
    Name:  boxy.jpg
Views: 1167
Size:  40.6 KB

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post

    It all depends on the environment, the light source, color/material of objects, and personal style and preference. There's not just one set of rules to follow. In one painting you could have cooler light and warmer shadows, in another painting it could be the opposite.
    I'm saying that's one solution to keep the painting from looking too muddy. This is perhaps due to personal preference and maybe monitor difference- you might feel it's not muddy at all. To each their own.


    I personally don't think it looks muddy. But I do think that one objects shadow needs to be consistent. So...if the tea cup, which has this greenish blue as a local color, has a purple shadow through out. It makes sense to me. But, if it has purple and green shadows at the same time, it doesn't make sense to me. I'm still not sure if it would be ok to have different shadows for each object, or that I should keep the same purplish shadow throughout every object...Because...To me it make sense to have a purple shadow with a blueish green cup. But it doesn't make sense to me to have a purple shadow, for a orange, yellow cookie. So...it make sense to me to have different color shadows for each object... But.............. then, I am instantly reminded, that I usually change the overall color of the entire painting. To like, make it all fit. By that I mean, if an object is green, in a reddish painting, I'll change the hues of that green to make it look like it fits in that paintings atmosphere (assuming that I don't want the green object to standout)... So...,...(this is really hard to get my thoughts down by the way lol....I feel like I am having an intense epiphany...)...I think your right! Or at least, it make sense to me, considering my painting habits. I just didn't realize it till now...I'm gonna do it your way, and see how it works.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post
    I also tend to choose a middle color and then add light and shadow. Jazza's color choices however, have never been my personal taste.


    Too be honest, I'm not a fan of Jazza's art. But he makes good, easy-to-follow, tutorials on the fundamentals. So, I like him for that lol...

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post
    I would love to see more of your work, I'd recommend starting a sketchbook or another thread. I wouldn't say you are screwing up, but just that there's a lot to learn. There's a lot of ways you can go with color. You'll learn and pick up things as you go. You'll be fine. I'm not exactly an expert on color either, but hopefully I've given you some useful suggestions without screwing you up too much.


    I think you definitely gave me a lot of useful suggestions. And the paint overs you linked were super helpful too. I really appreciate all the help you given me so far!
    I don't feel comfortable making a sketchbook on different thread yet. So, I'll just link my Deviant Art Page. And if you like, you can let me know what you think on this thread.
    https://www.deviantart.com/masquerade-art-party

  14. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    862
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 322 Times in 278 Posts
    Hey have you seen this video? I think it's really cool and helps with color theory a bit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwLQ0cDb4cE&t=17s

    As for the lighting? That's something I still have to map out with effort or reference. I guess I was visualizing your lighting set up something like this:

    Name:  tea.png
Views: 1149
Size:  96.5 KB

    I will check out your DA when I get a bit of time! Thanks for the link.

  15. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    862
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 322 Times in 278 Posts
    Ok, I'm noticing some patterns in your work.

    1. You use the same basic palette between all of your pieces. You love purple and pink. You really play with the saturation levels of these hues, but overall your color palette tends to be muted.
    2. There are some exceptions, but if we were to put the majority of the elements that make up your paintings into a neutral lighting situation, they would all be low saturated, mid to light toned objects.
    3. You tend to use low saturated highlights and mid tones.
    4. You use a range of saturated purples for your contact/occlusion shadows on your main and secondary focal points.
    5. You use cool, low saturated greens. When they are on a focal point, you use warm saturated occlusion shadows. When they are on non focal points, the occlusion shadows have low saturation.
    6. Second focal point items tend to be similar in hue and value as the skin color of your characters. In the teacup piece, you've made the sugar cubes similar to the skin tone of your character. In some other pieces, you've made the pumpkins similar to the skin tone of your characters. If we were to put those pumpkins in a neutral lighting situation, some would be pale peach pumpkins, and some would be white pumpkins.

    I'm not going to pass judgement on these things, because you may be trying to achieve certain stylistic goals that are not trying to be naturalistic, but I'm pointing them out so you can decide if it's what you want to be doing. Peter Mohrbacher and Loish might be two artists for you to study color-wise, as they also play with occlusion shadows in similar ways.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Grumpysaur For This Useful Post:


  17. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post
    Ok, I'm noticing some patterns in your work.

    1. You use the same basic palette between all of your pieces. You love purple and pink. You really play with the saturation levels of these hues, but overall your color palette tends to be muted.
    2. There are some exceptions, but if we were to put the majority of the elements that make up your paintings into a neutral lighting situation, they would all be low saturated, mid to light toned objects.
    3. You tend to use low saturated highlights and mid tones.
    4. You use a range of saturated purples for your contact/occlusion shadows on your main and secondary focal points.
    5. You use cool, low saturated greens. When they are on a focal point, you use warm saturated occlusion shadows. When they are on non focal points, the occlusion shadows have low saturation.
    6. Second focal point items tend to be similar in hue and value as the skin color of your characters. In the teacup piece, you've made the sugar cubes similar to the skin tone of your character. In some other pieces, you've made the pumpkins similar to the skin tone of your characters. If we were to put those pumpkins in a neutral lighting situation, some would be pale peach pumpkins, and some would be white pumpkins.

    I'm not going to pass judgement on these things, because you may be trying to achieve certain stylistic goals that are not trying to be naturalistic, but I'm pointing them out so you can decide if it's what you want to be doing. Peter Mohrbacher and Loish might be two artists for you to study color-wise, as they also play with occlusion shadows in similar ways.
    Cool. Thank you for you looking and critiquing it. I've also notice that I follow a similar pattern too. I think the reason for most of my choices when it comes to color, is because I follow a "analogous" color scheme. And for what ever reason, I feel the most comfortable with purples and pinks. In the one painting, with the witch and the sword, I tried to get away from that. But then I ended up changing the hues to a pinkish color which closely matches my usual color palette. I tried to do something different with the tea cup girl, but as I am repainting it, it is following my usual color palette too. I can't seam to break it away from it.

    In regards to your 4th point....I think another reason, why I use pink and purple as occlusions shadows, is because my pencil work for my sketches are in purple or pink. So I use some of the pencil work and apply it to the shadows, and I think it looks cool. But then I saw the video you posted, by Marco Bucci, and I was like "Damn", I've been doing this thing wrong the whole time lol. But at the same time, I'm not sure if it's wrong? And I am wondering if it's because most of my color pallet is very pink and purple. Except when it comes to the Witch with the sword painting. The grass had this greenish hue - albeit desaturated - and If I were to use that color and mix it into the ambient light and shadows(I assume that's what it is called. I only watch the video once, but I plan to watch it more to understand it better), I think it would of worked fairly well.

    "6. Second focal point items tend to be similar in hue and value as the skin color of your characters. In the teacup piece, you've made the sugar cubes similar to the skin tone of your character. In some other pieces, you've made the pumpkins similar to the skin tone of your characters. If we were to put those pumpkins in a neutral lighting situation, some would be pale peach pumpkins, and some would be white pumpkins."

    I think the tones are similar because I like to use an analogous color scheme. I'm afraid that if I make objects different colors, they would stand out too much and it will take away from the focal point of the painting. Or they would just stand out too much. Like...Right now in my repaint of the Tea Cup Girl, the thing that stands out the most is the Tea Cup, because it is very blue. So, I tried adjusting it's hues to fit with the overall color palette, and I'm not sure if this is a bad idea or a good idea.

    So...Your critiques on my paintings, made me realize of why I don't know what I'm doing when it comes to color lol. I thought it was just lighting and value I always had trouble with, but I guess it's color too. A lot of the things you mention, I'm having trouble understanding, and I think it speaks volumes to how little I know. It pretty difficult to know how to move onto the next step of my lessons, when I'm not sure where to jump into. I've taken color theory in classes before, but they were pretty basic. I think I need a class or lessons, that jumps me from the basic lessons, and eases me into the more advance stuff.

    I've heard of Loish before, not Peter Mohrbacher. So, I can try do studies of their work to learn more from them. There is one artist however, I've always wanted to learn how to paint from, and that's Ross Tran- better known as Ross Draws. However, He's just totally beyond my level. Judging by Peter Mohrbacher, he seems beyond my level, too. I think I would have a easier time learning from Loish. But she has a tendency to change her style with each painting. Her work seems more varied then Ross Tran any ways...Either way, I have to wonder if it's better to learn the basics and advance stuff first, separately from what other artist have painted. I only say that because they have a solid grasp of the fundamentals. And even if I can replicate their paintings, I don't think I'll be able to understand why they paint the way they do, without proper knowledge of color, values, and lighting... Hmmm...

    I have one question about that pic you've linked. The one with the mug, cubes, and shadows. Was that from a computer program? If so, do you know what it is called? I think having a program like that would help a lot when it comes to keeping my lighting consistent.






  18. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    862
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 322 Times in 278 Posts
    Cool. Thank you for you looking and critiquing it. I've also notice that I follow a similar pattern too. I think the reason for most of my choices when it comes to color, is because I follow a "analogous" color scheme. And for what ever reason, I feel the most comfortable with purples and pinks. In the one painting, with the witch and the sword, I tried to get away from that. But then I ended up changing the hues to a pinkish color which closely matches my usual color palette. I tried to do something different with the tea cup girl, but as I am repainting it, it is following my usual color palette too. I can't seam to break it away from it.

    In regards to your 4th point....I think another reason, why I use pink and purple as occlusions shadows, is because my pencil work for my sketches are in purple or pink. So I use some of the pencil work and apply it to the shadows, and I think it looks cool. But then I saw the video you posted, by Marco Bucci, and I was like "Damn", I've been doing this thing wrong the whole time lol. But at the same time, I'm not sure if it's wrong? And I am wondering if it's because most of my color pallet is very pink and purple. Except when it comes to the Witch with the sword painting. The grass had this greenish hue - albeit desaturated - and If I were to use that color and mix it into the ambient light and shadows(I assume that's what it is called. I only watch the video once, but I plan to watch it more to understand it better), I think it would of worked fairly well.


    I think it's absolutely ok to work analogous, but I think you have room for improvement to work within these confines. I personally feel you aren't quite playing enough with value when it comes to second focal points. You seem to think if you give your second focal points a light value range they won't steal the show from your main focal point? I would challenge you to make a scene where all of you secondary items are in the dark range, with non of their values coming into the lighter range, and see if you can still make your main focal point stand out.

    As far as the grass on the witch/pumpkin piece, yes, I think it would have worked better if you had thought how that pink purple light would have affected the green. You probably thought that you would desaturate the grass and make it cooler so it wouldn't distract from your focal points. . . but I feel it does the opposite. You strayed too far from your analogous scheme and pushed the grass toward blue instead of pink/purple.

    I don't think you need to lose your purple shadows, I think it looks pretty cool too, but you just need to make it work with the piece as a whole.

    So...Your critiques on my paintings, made me realize of why I don't know what I'm doing when it comes to color lol. I thought it was just lighting and value I always had trouble with, but I guess it's color too. A lot of the things you mention, I'm having trouble understanding, and I think it speaks volumes to how little I know. It pretty difficult to know how to move onto the next step of my lessons, when I'm not sure where to jump into. I've taken color theory in classes before, but they were pretty basic. I think I need a class or lessons, that jumps me from the basic lessons, and eases me into the more advance stuff.
    I think you've learned certain things with color that you should be very proud of, and now you can learn a bit more and add more to your tool belt. Sometimes you have to play around with a certain set of guidelines for a while before you take on new knowledge. Sam Nielson's Fundamentals of Lighting might be a good course to take? You could do the subscription course and I think you'd learn a lot. If you want to stick with analogous, Wylie Beckert would be a good person to study for that.

    Which brings me to studying artists. So of course, work on fundamentals separately, but that doesn't mean you can't learn from more advanced artists as a supplement. Don't think of it as "I need to copy this piece and make it look perfect" Think of it as "I'm studying color right now. Ross Tran has this piece that I really admire and related to the color theory I'm learning. Let me see what he's doing in this piece with his color". My advice for studying artists, is that you can just break down what you want to learn from them. Even if you feel they are very advanced, you can just take one thing about their work that you want to study and analyze it. For color, you could take an artist you admire, put one of their pieces into photoshop or whatever and just see what happens with their saturation/hue/value on different objects or elements of their scene. Be very analytical. What percentage of value is their darkest darks? What kind of green are they using on their grass? Is it closer on the color wheel to their pinkish light source? or does it go more toward blue. Is it saturated? Is it desaturated? What about the color of the grass shadows. Does it shift in hue? What happens to the saturation level? Etc etc. You don't have to copy it at all if you don't want to. But it might be very helpful to paint your own very simple scene using the principles you noticed in your master study. Let me share how I sometimes I approach color studies, thought it's not the only way:

    Check out this study:
    Name:  Gotch color study.jpg
Views: 1026
Size:  448.2 KB

    I feel I didn't learn much at all from this study. Why? It was just about copying and my mind went in to autopilot.

    The following study I learned a lot from, because I had to think about it:

    Name:  Light-Study-2-Feb-2015.jpg
Views: 1024
Size:  79.1 KB

    The 3d program I used is Sketchup. It can be a real pain in the ass to use though. I usually just download objects in the 3d warehouse. Sometimes it helpful, but a lot of times I find it's easier to setup approximate objects in real life and take a picture of them. I recently tried to make a simple house in sketchup, but got so frustrated I took 10 minutes to make a simple cardboard model of it in real life and the lighting information I got from it was a lot better than the sketchup model. Just my 2 cents!

  19. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post
    I think it's absolutely ok to work analogous, but I think you have room for improvement to work within these confines. I personally feel you aren't quite playing enough with value when it comes to second focal points. You seem to think that, if you give your second focal points a light value range, they won't steal the show from your main focal point? I would challenge you to make a scene where all of you secondary items are in the dark range, with non of their values coming into the lighter range, and see if you can still make your main focal point stand out.
    As far as the grass on the witch/pumpkin piece, yes, I think it would have worked better if you had thought how that pink purple light would have affected the green. You probably thought that you would desaturate the grass and make it cooler so it wouldn't distract from your focal points. . . but I feel it does the opposite. You strayed too far from your analogous scheme and pushed the grass toward blue instead of pink/purple.
    I don't think you need to lose your purple shadows, I think it looks pretty cool too, but you just need to make it work with the piece as a whole.


    I think I understand. When it comes to values, I try to look at the scene from far away, and see if it's balanced or not. So I guess I'm usually afraid of those secondary objects screwing up the values and stealing the show. Oh. And I just remembered something. One important lesson that my professor taught me, is that objects closer to the viewer, are usually darker (Though, it's just a guideline and values can even appear darker in the back, while the front is lighter. This depends on the project). So when I look at that Bazooka Witch painting I did, I'm pretty sure I understood that lesson. Because the 2 pumpkins in the back, have a lighter value range. While the 2 at the front, have a darker one. I think this is called atmosphereic perspective - I could be wrong.

    Referring to the tea cup girl; I think I forgotten some of the lessons I've learned from my professor. But regardless, thanks to you're insight, I think I understand that the leaves and cubes were more distracting, because I tried to saturated their color and reduced their values.

    As for the Pumpkin Slayer Witch...I see...and I agree. In a analogous color scheme, it's ok to have colors to stray away from the analogous, as long as it's main focus serves the focal point, right? So, since the grass is taking away focus, the grass's color could of been used on the Witch her self, to add more focus to her. Looking at it now, I think I sort of already did that with the sword, it's sheath, the Witch's eyes, and the pumpkin's eye on her hat. It's not the same color. And, definitely not as much color as the grass. But, I suppose it accomplishes the same thing.
    In terms of the ambient lighting. I'm under the impression that light would of bounce off the grass's color, and hit the pumpkins and the Wtich. But, you're saying that, because the sky is purpleish-pink, the colors from the sky, would of mixed into the grass, and been more prominent. Is that correct? If so, then when would it be fine, and work in the focal points favor, if the grass is still that blueish color? That would have to depend on the sky's color (and I guess the overall color of the entire painting), right? Grass is always green, but the thing that changes it's color is through ambient lighting. If I look at the color wheel, the green would have to get through blue-green, then blue, then blue-violet, to get to violet. According to Marco Bucci, the only way to do that, is if the green grass was desaturated to a almost gray tone...
    These are not really questions, by the way...This is more or less me thinking out loud in a text base form. I'm just trying to make sure that I understand these lessons correctly. Sorry if it sounds like I don't know where I'm going with any of this lol...Either way. I do agree with you.

    "I
    don't think you need to lose your purple shadows, I think it looks pretty cool too, but you just need to make it work with the piece as a whole. "
    That's the tricky part. I think it would really have to depend on the overall color of the entire piece. In which case, I could experiment with more sketch colors depending on the color palette.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post

    I think you've learned certain things with color that you should be very proud of, and now you can learn a bit more and add more to your tool belt. Sometimes you have to play around with a certain set of guidelines for a while before you take on new knowledge. Sam Nielson's Fundamentals of Lighting might be a good course to take? You could do the subscription course and I think you'd learn a lot. If you want to stick with analogous, Wylie Beckert would be a good person to study for that.


    Which brings me to studying artists. So of course, work on fundamentals separately, but that doesn't mean you can't learn from more advanced artists as a supplement. Don't think of it as "I need to copy this piece and make it look perfect" Think of it as "I'm studying color right now. Ross Tran has this piece that I really admire and related to the color theory I'm learning. Let me see what he's doing in this piece with his color". My advice for studying artists, is that you can just break down what you want to learn from them. Even if you feel they are very advanced, you can just take one thing about their work that you want to study and analyze it. For color, you could take an artist you admire, put one of their pieces into photoshop or whatever and just see what happens with their saturation/hue/value on different objects or elements of their scene. Be very analytical. What percentage of value is their darkest darks? What kind of green are they using on their grass? Is it closer on the color wheel to their pinkish light source? or does it go more toward blue. Is it saturated? Is it desaturated? What about the color of the grass shadows. Does it shift in hue? What happens to the saturation level? Etc etc. You don't have to copy it at all if you don't want to. But it might be very helpful to paint your own very simple scene using the principles you noticed in your master study.
    [/QUOTE]

    I see. And after reading all of that, I have to agree. I think I remember hearing my professor from CGMA saying something similar too. We had master studies in his class, as well. I'm often overwhelm with how much I need to study for art, that I think I put away the stuff I'm less interested in. Life responsibilities get in the way too, of course, which adds to the stress. I tend to want to jump into my own original work, without studying the work of others. I think the only thing I'm really consistent at, when it comes to studies, is life drawing and anatomy. I really like it. So everyday, I practice it for an hour or 2. I often leave color or values out of the equation because it's usually an afterthought to me, as I would rather keep my paintings simple. But every time I paint something, I struggle to keep it simple. It's a curse lol. Though, I still practice painting studies from life. Just not on the same devotion as I do with life drawing and anatomy. I suppose I should start making more of a habit to include studies from other artist in my everyday routine. Or rotate out life drawing in favor of color and master studies. Probably be a good idea. Extra practice would certainly make painting less frustrating sometimes lol.

    Also, thank you for the name drops. I'll be sure to check them out, and Nielson's course.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post
    The 3d program I used is Sketchup. It can be a real pain in the ass to use though. I usually just download objects in the 3d warehouse. Sometimes it helpful, but a lot of times I find it's easier to setup approximate objects in real life and take a picture of them. I recently tried to make a simple house in sketchup, but got so frustrated I took 10 minutes to make a simple cardboard model of it in real life and the lighting information I got from it was a lot better than the sketchup model. Just my 2 cents!


    Yeah, I totally agree. Real life reference is always the best reference. I was mostly hoping that the program would be easy to use.Sometimes I get lazy, or I just don't have the materialize to use as reference at hand. In which case, I'm then too lazy to go out and find those materials lol... This time around however, I used referenced for the tea cup girl painting. I didn't have a tiny pixie-girl around to be used as reference -it probably would of been awkward any ways - , so I used a small teddy bear, and dunked it in tea instead lol...It didn't really help, but I think I got the cast shadow on the floor just right Also, the teddy smells like green tea now (I've still have yet to remove him from the tea. It's been a couple of weeks now lol), so I can't complain.

    Speaking of the tea cup girl. I am officially done the painting. I am also officially spent, as I made a lot of changes based on your help, and the advice of others. I don't want to work on this painting any more. It physically hurts to look at it now lol. So mistakes or no, I'm done with this. Though, I'll still happily take criticism and critique.
    For the lighting, I took your suggestion and made the light come from the side instead of the top. I did my best, to adjust the lighting, colors, and values of everything. I Also tried to add Marcco Bucci lessons to it, as well. So hopefully it looks better. Your paint overs helped out a bunch, too. So again, thank you for that.
    Ta da! What do you think?

    Name:  side_by_side_small.jpg
Views: 932
Size:  93.1 KB

    Name:  tea_bathing24_leafrepaint_small_pic.jpg
Views: 932
Size:  106.5 KB

  20. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    862
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 322 Times in 278 Posts
    Hey, congrats on a finished piece! Though we busted your chops, I hope that you're still proud of your work. The character is so cute, and I think you've successfully conveyed the mood you were going for. Best of luck in future work.

  21. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpysaur View Post
    Hey, congrats on a finished piece! Though we busted your chops, I hope that you're still proud of your work. The character is so cute, and I think you've successfully conveyed the mood you were going for. Best of luck in future work.

    Thank you, Grumpysaur. I really appreciate it.
    Though... I still have a long way to go, until I feel like my art reaches a professional level of quality. But it's nice to know, that I can get help from random stranger on a website like this. It kinda helps alleviate that feeling of being overwhelm with my studies.

Similar Threads

  1. Comment and Critique Soldier (Need Help)
    By UntoldPromises in forum Art Critique Center
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 17th, 2015, 08:34 PM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: February 10th, 2013, 02:17 PM
  3. Robin: accept comment and critique
    By Shiprock in forum Art Critique Center
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 1st, 2009, 07:55 PM
  4. Backdrop almost finished please comment
    By zahorix in forum Art Critique Center
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: March 17th, 2009, 08:08 PM
  5. my prince of persia redone not finished plz comment.
    By eddie choi in forum Art Critique Center
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 3rd, 2008, 05:22 PM

Members who have read this thread: 65

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Designed by The Coldest Water, we build the coldest best water bottles, ice packs and best pillows.