Fire Mage WIP

[Gragg]

Already spent about 5 hours on this, still have to clean it up and add color. Just wanted some opinions on how its coming together so far....

[JOvictory]

the values are pretty good, but i feel like this has a total lack of hard edges.

[Gragg]

Thanks! I'll have to add some more hard edges when I clean it up! Notice anything else?

[roozard]

Look at the hands, would you hold strings with such width like that? Either make the strings thicker or put some grip-thing (don't know the word right now) on it or consider drawing a different hands pose. If you want put something with around that width in your hand and 'feel' what the most comfortable position it would have in your hands.

[Gragg]

Ok, I think I'll make some thicker handles on the whips, good eye!

[arenhaus]

The form has numerous inconsistencies. Have you made a structural breakdown of the figure? Have you picked a clear direction for the light? Where is the falling shadow?

[Gragg]

arenhaus- The main light is going to come from the bottom, and since I havent pushed that yet I cant realy place my shadows. Im assuming you see issues with prospective and anatomy since you ask if I've broke down the structure of the figure, may I ask you to tell me what exactly you notice wrong so I can try to fix it? I have broken down the figure as best as my ability. Thanks!

[Slothboy3000]

Thumbnails, man! You could have sorted out the lighting, forms and composition etc before going into the rendering.

What reference did you use for this?

[Giacomo]

...may I ask you to tell me what exactly you notice wrong so I can try to fix it? I have broken down the figure as best as my ability. Thanks!

As so often happens, the issue here isn't that anything's "wrong" and needs to be "fixed"--it's that you did the entire thing out of your head--and as a result, the pose, anatomy, hair and lighting are all about 20% off. There's no easy solution, except to say "use reference photos next time."

[arenhaus]

arenhaus- The main light is going to come from the bottom, and since I havent pushed that yet I cant realy place my shadows. Im assuming you see issues with prospective and anatomy since you ask if I've broke down the structure of the figure, may I ask you to tell me what exactly you notice wrong so I can try to fix it? I have broken down the figure as best as my ability. Thanks!

This:

it's that you did the entire thing out of your head--and as a result, the pose, anatomy, hair and lighting are all about 20% off.

You need to work more - a lot more - on the structure and lighting before you paint. You've already painted a lot of detail in - and now you are saying you haven't gotten around to place the shadows; but you should have worked out the lighting BEFORE you began painting.

As it is, you have a mess of various made-up lighting in this picture, some parts lit diffusely, some from below, some from above, some from the front, and if you add a shadow it'll only confuse things more. That is on top of very wobbly, contrived structure. It's not really going to work unless you start over and pay more attention to structure, anatomy, perspective and lighting.

[Velocity Kendall]

int he very short term, maybe do as people with dodgy figures do and cover them with clothes and shit. wont solve any deep problems (i dont know anatomy either and Giacomo is right everythings a bit off i think, specially in the neck and tits and head) but see wht you think..

[Gragg]

Thanks for all of the replies! Yes I know I'm supposed to use reference for everything, but I dont, lol. I learn a lot more the hard way. Its way to easy to make an awesome painting using reference, when I'm done with this I'll be able to say its completely out of my head, and I think its damn good for someone on my skill level. Here where I'm at so far!

[Giacomo]

Its way to easy to make an awesome painting using reference, when I'm done with this I'll be able to say its completely out of my head, and I think its damn good for someone on my skill level.

Um...I've just been checking out your DeviantArt page in reference to the above-quoted remark. Are those slavish pencil copies of the Megan Fox and Arnold Schwarzenegger photos supposed to be "awesome paintings?" Please advise so the rest of us can know how to proceed.

[Gragg]

Giacomo- Ouch... Sorry for putting it like that. I know Im not capable of doing anything "awesome'' compared all of the amazing artists out there (including yourself, I have a lot of respect for you and I love your critiques), what I should have said is that when I use a reference I feel that when Im done I dont feel like it came from ME...because all Ive done is copy from something. I just like trying to paint from total imagination. I'm just a young dumb begginer artist. I don't want to sound desrespectful. I know reference is the best way to learn, and I do use it, but when I paint like this I just try to use what I've learned and see what I can do out of my head. It might sound stupid but its what I do for some reason. Thanks for always taking the time to critique my stuff!

[Giacomo]

Sorry, I didn't mean to be such a dick.

But the point is to take what you need from the photo (or the model, or whatever) and make it do what YOU want. If you feel like you're just mechanically copying it, you're not understanding the process as deeply as you could. It's true that some great artists (all the Old Masters, Jack Kirby, Burne Hogarth, etc.) had an almost superhuman ability to visualize the human body--but you're not there yet. For most artists working in a realistic style, it's about careful observation and analysis of the forms.

[Gragg]

It's fine, your prabably sick of dealing with assholes on here. And yea I see what your saying.....I get wat too impatient and I try to think I can come up with something awesome just out of my head, when really I need to take my time and do it right....I just want to be a professional artist so bad and it seems like its taking forever to get good enough, its so frustrating.

[Giacomo]

....I just want to be a professional artist so bad and it seems like its taking forever to get good enough, its so frustrating.

If you want to be a professional artist (or at least one working in a realistic style) you need to draw from observation until the process of drawing becomes absolutely second nature. Work from photos (or from movie stills) and from life. Make copies of comics and master drawings. Expressing yourself through drawing needs to approach the naturalness of speech or writing. Based on the work on your DeviantArt page, you need to be putting in a LOT more mileage to get your observational focus up to a professional level. (Students in full-time art schools are working eight to ten hours a day to develop these skills...how much time are you spending daily?)

As always, just my two cents.

[Gragg]

I spend about 5 hours a day, until I can get a job in the art industry unfortunately a have to work 60 hours a week to pay the bills. But my art gets ALL of my extra spare time, and I WILL be there one day....thanks for takin the time to talk with me Giacomo!

[Giacomo]

If you ARE spending five hours a day, you're working on the wrong stuff. Don't worry about rendering or "finish" for the moment. Sign up for a figure-drawing class immediately...on the days when you can't work from a live model, find a photo with people in it (movie stills work well for this) and spend 2-3 hours drawing from it, with a graphite pencil, on bond paper or bristol board. Do that every day for a month.

[Velocity Kendall]

Gragg totally understand where youre coming from bud, but what I will say is i noticed after doing studies of landscapes and cars and stuff, i can somehow create them out of my head a lot easier than i used to. like each study left some info in my brain, and was a lesson. so while it seems like copying, its actually recording...

[Gragg]

Giacomo- Ok I'll take your advice and do that!

Velocity Kendall- Makes sense, and that is a great way to put it...recording, I like that! Thanks!!

[Lulie]

Crit on the actual drawing:

The main thing that jumps out at me (even more than the light) is the proportions of the hip area. It strikes me as very 'straight down' -- hips aren't wide enough, or the torso is stretched too much, or she's bending her hips forward in a strange way or something. I haven't studied enough female anatomy to know exactly, but I think it's that her hip bone isn't wide enough and there isn't enough curve to her back. Whatever the culprit, it reminds me more of a man's anatomy.


Crit on the methodology:

If that's your girlfriend in your DA profile picture, you can do much better than studying from photos! For this picture, even. Supportive family and friends, too, can be makeshift models if there are no convenient figure drawing classes near you. It helps prevent the 'mindlessly copying a photo' phenomenon to draw from life. People move, so you have to look for particular features, instead of just copy values.

But if you want to draw from imagination, I'd guess an anatomy book might help more -- it's hard to position the body without understanding the underlying bones and masses, and learning them will help with remembering what each part looks like and how it fits together.

[Gragg]

Found a reference and cleaned it up a bit, hope it looks better!

[Lulie]

I liked the muscular look of before! It is more realistic, but it still has some of the problems I was trying to get at. You've made the hips starting at the leg wide, but you haven't made the hip bone (which is higher up) wide. I guess it's possible for women to look like this, but I guess I'm used to fantasy art having more idealised proportions. Maybe the problem is that the line you have starting just above the navel going down to her hip is straight, almost concave, instead of convex. Like this -- I doubt the anatomy is all right in this statue, but it has the 'bump' I'm trying to get at. And here is a figure with proportions and pose close to what you have, but it still goes convex at the hips. Does that make sense?

[Gragg]

I agree, I like more curves too...but I was trying to stick close to the reference photo to make sure I didnt mess it up too bad, lol.

[TNiznet]

Hi Gragg, I did a quick paint over which I believed to be a key problem. Your figure has a lot of male qualities, ranging from the placement of the bellybutton to the unbalanced upper torso in comparison to the legs. You can disagree with my beliefs but the human figure is comprised of a balancing act, if you picture your figure with its bare bones skeletal structure, you can visualize that the rib cage is far too large in comparison to the pelvis, especially when dealing with the female figure. It lacked some aspects of curvature as well as the proper placement of the bellybutton. The female's torso usually dibs at about a head distance a little above the bellybutton and then curves out from under the belly button in a graceful manner. There were some other minor issues but I figured this would be the key one in getting the feminine quality in your figure. I am strictly speaking from my experience thus far in learning and understanding the figure. Great job though, hope it helped somehow.

[Gragg]

TNiznet- Thanks for takin the time to do a paint over! You are exactly right....but I already fixed that problem last night by using a reference ^^^^

Thanks again though!!

[Lulie]

That reference you posted is cut off before the thighs. I would guess that they don't bulge out as much as you've drawn them. But also, the reference doesn't show the shoulders. You have a figure here who has quite broad shoulders for a woman, and I would be surprised if that reference you posted shared those broad shoulders.

It actually strikes me as quite young, as if it were a teenager's body rather than a woman. Women like that do indeed exist, but most of them will be more balanced (as TNiznet says) around the shoulders and thighs. It would be better to get a reference more suited to this drawing's body type.

But suppose you do use this reference. You still haven't addressed the convex/concave thing I mentioned, even though the ref has it (though subtly):



EDIT: The little arrows are meant to show where the line is being pushed. Green pushes out, red pushes in for the right and just going straight down for the left. Big arrows mean to point at the area I'm talking about.

EDIT 2: The point is, that's a bone under there pushing the hip out. You're supposed to see it, if subtly, indicated on the figure. It's noticeable even in thin/petite girls, like the reference you posted.

[vineris]

This is probably a good place to mention that you need to grab some reference of female faces. You have this realistic body all hammered out, and then you look up into the face of a Disney cartoon villain. It kinda gives a viewer the impression that you spend all your time staring at boobs.

Also, the pose of the thighs doesn't make a whole lot of sense balance-wise. She looks like she's unbalanced. Next time sketch the entire body, figure out how the feet are placed, and then crop at the thighs before you start rendering. It solves a lot of pose problems.

[Gragg]

vineris- you are correct about the face, but wrong about the body. Here is the full reference I used--obviously the body proportions and balance are correct, unless the female in the reference is deformed or something...lol

Lulie- same answer about the body^^^^

Thanks guys!!