Challenges of the week give artists the opportunity to create new and fantastic art based on a weekly theme set by the challenge moderators. They are also a great place to develop core skills.
Being featured on ConceptArt.org can get your artwork viewed by millions of artists a month including big industry leaders.
|Color and Light||1.1||Do Assignment|
|Color and Light||1.2||Do Assignment||1.3 | 1.4|
|Illusion of Space and Atmosphere||1||Do Assignment|
|Personal Art||1.1||Do Assignment|
Hey everyone, first post here. I'm looking for some feedback on my work. I'm a self taught photoshop junkie. This hobby has evolved into a strange beast since I started experimenting with stacking old stereographs and seeing how they look when they're animated. If you don't know, the type of stereograph I'm referring to are the ones taken back in the day with 2 different angled lenses. These were placed into a viewer and were an early 3-d 'tool'. It's kind of a lengthy process, just ask if you want me to elaborate. Anyway, what started with this:
Eventually evolved with color and movement, into this:
Just wondering what you all think. I've taken a little break from animating due to what is probably arthritis in my hands, and I've been thinking about taking this hobby back up. I just don't know if it would be all that beneficial, or ever really go anywhere. Would love some opinions, critique, etc. I'm not looking to change these so much, I see a lot of potential for improvement, but will likely take what I learn and apply it to any future work... if I get back into doing it. Thanks
That's pretty neat! The only thing that looks a bit weird is how the turning animation looks really jerky.
Yeah, the background is almost always jerky. It's pretty distracting, but there's not a really easy way to get around it. There are a few reasons.
The cameras that took these photos had varying angles on the lenses. If it was a really drastic angle, it means the background moves a lot more. Busy backgrounds also are distracting from the focal point. Sometimes busy or shaky backgrounds can be toned down a bit by adding more frames between the two images, but a lot of detail is lost, and it often makes it look less 3d. I usually ask my husband to help me choose how many frames to use, the difference is pretty drastic just adding a couple extra frames.
One of the hardest parts of these are choosing an image with a background that won't be so... nauseating. But I think I was getting better at that... I've probably memorized about 90% of the Library of Congress stereo card collection lol
these are really interesting, seen something similar before, dont remember on what site...
i do prefer the ballerina one, looks so magical and the background is not distracting or hurting my eyes after a while.
but love the depth that comes with these, cool stuff!
Thanks for the comments. I will keep an eye out for some simpler backgrounds.
I agree with most of the comments here. The ballerina is the best imo because it is subtle. the others are too jarring. i almost feel like the turning doesn't need to be there on the two turbine dudes. the beans dropping from the guys hand or the blinking in the profile could be enough. Really cool though, well done.
Wow fascinating. They really get a good illusion of depth. I've experimented with trying to make stereoscopic drawings and taking photos before, but usually just side by side images to view cross-eyed. Don't think I've seen them displayed like this before. It's really interesting.
I think I'm against the trend a bit, the ballerina might be the smoother, but I don't like her as much, because I don't really feel the 3d-ness of her like the others. I wonder if it's because there's not much shadow to define her dress, or if the camera offset was more subtle. Might even be the way they're blended more softly.
I like the stronger depth in the girl in the dress, and the man's face most. The little movements are rather charming too.
The background flicking on the man kneeling is a bit too jarring to me in that one though.
maybe one way to get around the moving backgrounds would be to cut the figures out of each frame, then make a composite "fuller" background with the pieces you have left, and animate the "left-right" movement of the background separately? so its smoother?
i hope i explained that right.
i really like the ballerina and the turban guy.
i noticed that on the turban animation, by covering the parts of the screen that move a lot and limiting the view area to just the parts of his face that move, it retains the interesting parts without the distracting jerkiness.
so maybe another solution would be to crop some of the animations?
i think this has lots of potential.
ive seen similar things on tumblr blogs, though most of them aren't done with stereographs, im sure some are
great work! look forward to seeing some more
Thanks for the response, aks.
I totally get what you're saying... these are kind of confusing to discuss, hopefully I can be as clear. I've tried what you've suggested in the first paragraph, but I have a problem blending in the main subject in the image with the background when I try it. I did have pretty good luck with just a stationary background, taking the two and filling them out to look like one. But, the edges of the subject... ie the profile of the face on the wheat guy, are challenging to blend. It seems to depend on the focal points and the background, I look forward to experimenting some more with this idea.
I think you're right, the background could be helped greatly by being more generous with the crop tool. And I am going to experiment more with smoother transitions and making a more stationary background. I've actually gotten some complaints when I have the slower transitions (ie balerina), as some people don't think it's '3d enough'. But I think another good option is giving two views of the same image, a slower transition as well as a faster. It's really just a matter of adding or removing frames, as long as there's no additional animations (ie falling wheat grains).
I'm raring to get to work on these, but recently have had some major problems with arthritis in my hands (imagine that hmmmmm ) Hopefully the meds kick in soon and I can post back with some different drafts. Thanks again!!
Neat experiment. Regarding the picture of the lady with the leaves blowing around her...what if you you left her top half stationary, and cross-faded the skirt stills to soften the stutter? Perhaps it would look like her dress was blowing in the wind?
You mean like add more frames to the bottom?
Not saying it will work, but might be interesting to try.
Anyway, I like what you are doing. Keep experimenting! You never know where it will lead...
I like your other animations as well, such as these; http://clicksypics.com/category/if-i...le-animations/
when on the computer (or drawing or whatever) soft gentle hand stretches are super important
i use a mac program called "AntiRSI" which, every 15 minutes or so, pops up a "micro break" window, which lasts 15 seconds, so you can relax and stretch. it only comes up if it detects youve been using the computer for (keyboard and mouse input) continuously for a certain period of time. then every hour it offers up 8minute work breaks too. really handy
http://tech.inhelsinki.nl/antirsi/ this is what i use
otherwise google "anti rsi software"
Okay, I'll give that a try Fritz. And also yours, aks. I have rheumatoid arthritis, it's an autoimmune disease. Taking frequent breaks and stretching really does help a lot, it breaks up the fluids that accumulate in the joints with RA. A reminder program is a fantastic idea.
My biggest problem right now is actually just that - not being able to sit down for a long time to work on them. I've always been disorganized, keeping the frames and layers in my head, which was fine when I could work on them for long periods. Now I'm trying to get more organized and label each layer, keep sets in folders, etc. I need a system...