need a critic :)

[johnny24]

i have done this without ref, i dont have any problem with references just to exercise my mind.

[Artimatum]

For a painting which was created without references it's not bad, especially the clouds.

[Ravatta]

Agreed! It does look good.
A couple of things tho: it's really, really green. This can be caused by the lack of references. If you look at a photo of a mountain closely, you can see that it's not just green grass, green trees, gray rocks. There's a whole spectrum of colours in there. It depends on the type of mountain of course (logically enough snowy ones will have a lot more white in there, while ones with lots of trees logically are very green) but there's also browns, yellows, and lots and lots of shades of green of different saturations that mix with every other colour.
I think working on this would make the picture pop a lot more.

[self-epidemic]

Were the clouds actually painted? I can't see the correlation between that and the rocks, they're two different standards. Also why is it so bright green, why are there no patches of shadow and light, it looks flat and unrealistic, it makes very little sense and then the clouds look like a photo. Not even in a complimentary way, as in you've googled clouds, went hm thats okay, its a bright stock image and pasted it on.

Its lacking a lot of dynamics. Making this piece boring and flat.

[self-epidemic]

You didn't paint the sky:
http://www.we-r-here.com/cad/tutoria...images/sky.jpg

[Artimatum]

OP,please explain why your using a photograph of clouds in the place of a drawing,its hardly exercising your mind.

[johnny24]

OP,please explain why your using a photograph of clouds in the place of a drawing,its hardly exercising your mind.

because it was to late and i was about to sleep so to take a shortcut and i use a photo, there are nothing wrong with use a photo... i think.

[johnny24]

Were the clouds actually painted? I can't see the correlation between that and the rocks, they're two different standards. Also why is it so bright green, why are there no patches of shadow and light, it looks flat and unrealistic, it makes very little sense and then the clouds look like a photo. Not even in a complimentary way, as in you've googled clouds, went hm thats okay, its a bright stock image and pasted it on.

Its lacking a lot of dynamics. Making this piece boring and flat.

i never said i painted the sky... because it was to late and we all need to sleep so i take a shortcut, thanks for your crit i will try to improve it .

[johnny24]

Agreed! It does look good.
A couple of things tho: it's really, really green. This can be caused by the lack of references. If you look at a photo of a mountain closely, you can see that it's not just green grass, green trees, gray rocks. There's a whole spectrum of colours in there. It depends on the type of mountain of course (logically enough snowy ones will have a lot more white in there, while ones with lots of trees logically are very green) but there's also browns, yellows, and lots and lots of shades of green of different saturations that mix with every other colour.
I think working on this would make the picture pop a lot more.

thanks i will follow your advice! and use more shades of green, yellow and so on

[self-epidemic]

because it was to late and i was about to sleep so to take a shortcut and i use a photo, there are nothing wrong with use a photo... i think.

Well its not exactly getting any practise. Stop being lazy. Either draw when you aren't tired, don't finish the picture till you've looked at it afterwards or just stop using images. Its annoying. While you may have never said you didn't use a picture, you never said you did. How are we supposed to help if you aren't going to clarify?

[johnny24]

Well its not exactly getting any practise. Stop being lazy. Either draw when you aren't tired, don't finish the picture till you've looked at it afterwards or just stop using images. Its annoying. While you may have never said you didn't use a picture, you never said you did. How are we supposed to help if you aren't going to clarify?

it was 4 am and i just want to see it with a sky... and go sleep lol. but yeh i agree with you... i will paint the sky.

[sone_one]

look at reference material of real mountains... the dont work like that. one way to get a starting point on them is used in video games for generic landscape generation...different levels (like sand > trees > grass > rock> snow) blending into one another, mixed with, its always rock where slopes are beyond 30° (or whatever depending on the materials). right now its spikes covered in something like green fur. everything is so evenly distributed aswell, nature is not like that.

[Eldinga]

Yes, DO paint the sky. Or at least mention that you used a photo in the background.

Anyways, the entire image strikes me as much too crisp. That's ok for the center of the image where sun hits the mountain, since that will be the focus of the pic. But the areas to the side, that lie in the shadows, are definitely too sharp and it hogs the attention. I'd do a quick paint over and use a slightly softer brush for the cause.

[johnny24]

Attachment 1631320

look at reference material of real mountains... the dont work like that. one way to get a starting point on them is used in video games for generic landscape generation...different levels (like sand > trees > grass > rock> snow) blending into one another, mixed with, its always rock where slopes are beyond 30° (or whatever depending on the materials). right now its spikes covered in something like green fur. everything is so evenly distributed aswell, nature is not like that.

i took your advice and from what i understood i think its something like this from diferent altitudes we have diferent materials, low altitudes we have tree because the oxygen then comes grass and so on... i remake the painting and come with this hope you can critic .

[sone_one]

much better on the lower levels... good work. now for the peaks... depending on material and climate rocks are shaped differently... looks at the alps, the andes, grand canyon, australia, newsealand, rocky mountains... pick up a car and go 4h north to the national park penada-geres, or some more hours more to the picos de europa in northern spain (been to both and its fantastic ). look at the real thing and analyze why it is like that. just ask questions, the answers are right out there.

[johnny24]

much better on the lower levels... good work. now for the peaks... depending on material and climate rocks are shaped differently... looks at the alps, the andes, grand canyon, australia, newsealand, rocky mountains... pick up a car and go 4h north to the national park penada-geres, or some more hours more to the picos de europa in northern spain (been to both and its fantastic ). look at the real thing and analyze why it is like that. just ask questions, the answers are right out there.

thanks for your help... i will work this painting with your tips in mind.