My first attempt at illustration: redux

Obviously still a work in progress, but i expanded my original ( http://forums.poxnora.desertowlgames.com/index.php?threads/my-first-attempt-at-illustration.17174/ ) into a panoramic.

Any suggestions on technique or content are welcome.

So I was thinking the sketched in figure could be a mirefolk.

 

those fish look absolutely devastated; did their grandmother just die?


also i like it. sort of wondering if the metal bit of the gobbo's weapon thing is too neat, but aside from that it looks FAIRLY SOLID YEAH

 

Even you're oldest version of this can't possibly be you're *first* attempt. At least not ever... I mean, if thats your first actual attempt you're going to be requested for comisions by every notable game developer by the time you retire (assuming you're not like, 60 or something.)

TBH I don't think this pic needs any other actual figures in it- it's visual balance is already pretty good. I feel like adding any figures larger then the smaller fish in there would just clutter it. Though could, of course, always expand the picture like you did the first time.
You'll have to stop adding things eventually though... and I think this is a good spot to do that and just add in more detail to what's already there.

(Noite, I'm not really a great artist myself, though I can do a notable bit better then stick figures, however I have taken a few art classes over the years. So you know my experience).

 

Also, I figure I'll mention I really like the art style you have here. I've never really seen art with this exact, say, texture before. Reminds me most of the art from the book "Where The Wild Things Are" (in art style, not actual subject matter).

 

When I say first attempt I mean it is the first digital art i've made but it has been reworked over many many months (see earlier versions on my original thread).

edit: also thanks for the feedback, I was thinking the same myself - maybe add another small background goblin in the background to create a better sense of distance.

edit: I should also say that I have a masters degree in (contemporary) painting.

 

Ah okay, that makes more sense XD. Good job in any case, good luck!

 

a goblin in the background stuck on his own trap would work


i think you can add a glimpse of curious mirefolk on the side there, too, but that up2u

 

There's a lot of greatness goin on in that pic that you should be proud of. One thing I've never been a fan of is fades or blurred objects in a picture. Outside of a major zoom in on a bug on a flower, for example, it just doesn't work for me.

I think I mentioned last time that the weapon, net and hands are awkward. He's got crosses arms making action by either hand seem less achievable and believable.

In my own research I found that net and spear references were only found on gladiator depictions but that the spear remained a two handed weapon with hands on top (unless throwing) and the net being operated with the back hand. A sweep of the spear, for example, could be a slight for a net attack.

Anyway, I look at your guy and it seems if he tries to use either weapon it will get tangled in the natural action of the other weapon and arm.

I do, however, love your color scale. And the environment definitely feels murky and isolated from the surface.

 

I'm thinking a mirefolk pointing at the goblin and telling the fish to go eat it.

Not sure about imps. Maybe, but i don't have much time these days.

I agree with you, and it's awkward because it was originally meant to be a bag of fish rather than a net - i made a bad descision to do the easier net option , I think i will change it back eventually.

 

@Baskitkase The zoom/out of focus thing is something i'm still trying to get my head around.

It's not something that is ever done in traditional painting, and I suppose is a response to photography having to focus on a particular depth.

On one hand, it seems like a lazy route in that you only need to go detailed on certain points and can pretty much sketch in the background.

On the other hand, as well as bein how cameras work, it is actually how our eyes work (only one plane/area being in focus) and it also does a good job of creating depth - which is something I think I'm lacking in this picture.

I guess I'll just experiment and see what works for me. I think if i was doing this commercially it would become a necessity to have somethings out of focus, but since this is for my own satisfaction I'll probably try to mix it up.

 

the gladiatorial net/spear was, i believe, based on a form of fishing. it fits in that sense.

 

I can see that, I'm more bothered by the impracticalities of throwing a net while underwater.

 

Actually, @Dagda , the Retiarius is the only fighter type that carried a net, and he didn't have a spear, perse, but a trident. Gladiator types were created as ways of beating other gladiator types. Think of Pox Nora and how certain things counter other things.

As the gladiators started getting heavier and heavier armor and weapons, the Retiarius became more popular as the ornate armor of the gladiators and their helms made great catch points for a net. The trident had thin, dagger-like blades made to get through eye slits and armor joints. Theyd get tangled and tire with the net and make for easy pickings, the net also caused sight blocking for the triden strikes. Depending on how tired or small the opponent was, the nets could also disarm.

The Retiarius was a harrass type build. He'd often get paired with a heavier assault type in duos. They either had no armor or just a shoulderplate, loin cloth and a leather belt or tunic.

Well I noted that too, and then I also noted your weighted ends, which brings it back into the realm of believability (new words, yay).

 

You could add Cthulhu; he lives in water, so it would be thematic.

PS Well, he probably won't fit into the picture. So maybe, Baby Cthulhu.

PPS It would explain the look in the eyes.

 

looking even more forward to that book now

 

like this a lot