Just a bit of fun to try and learn how to use paths in PS
Just a bit of fun to try and learn how to use paths in PS
Last edited by AndrewLey; May 14th, 2005 at 09:22 PM.
is that a guy on the inside in the rear of the top, or is this a suit?
No. No. Uh uh. No way. Ain't happening.
alright, gimme a sec.
well he said mech so I think that's a guy in the back part! man that looks pretty awesome. Are there arms on the side that were cut off in profile view or not?
N & B
Very well rendered - I'd say you had p-shop down pretty well
well, i really like the way you rendered it. you got the tone graduations and reflections done really well. (technically and easthetically). and you managed to not give it that waaayyy too soft airbrush look.
but then i scroll down and see the guys legs and he's standing like he's holding his ass cheeks together and - i really hate these kind of comments but felt it was pretty strong - the design seems like it is going to tip over and fall down. tiny feet! i understand its a side view but still...
just some thoughts, still good rendering.
abediah - the driver sits in a reclined position at he back.
one2hit - cheers - yes I left the arms off this rendering - they fit into those housings on the side.
johnfields - Thankyou
tensai - Thanks man - I imagined the back cockpit area being lighter than the front, which contains the large engine. Also the heels are located at the center of gravity so it shouldn't fall over
I would have to agree with Tensai on this one. I think you have a wonderful rendering, it really looks absolutely professional. But in terms of the mechanics, it is a little weak. The legs you have on this thing are pretty much human legs, from the looks of it. Human legs evolved to fit a humanoid body structure, where what you have is actually closer to a bird in my mind.
Go take a look a how a birds leg is put together, the knee joint actually bends the opposite way a human's does, and their feet are disproportionatly large to support the more or less horizontal body structure. A mech design that reflects this pretty well would have to be the AT-STs from Star Wars, where the two legs bend "backwards", and are on a seperate support structure away from the main chassis, and the 'feet' are pretty long and flat, creating a more stable support for the cockpit area.
I think that making a few changes in the engineering aspect would not only make it more believable, but would make it a significantly more dynamic rendering, because right now when I look at it, I feel like a light breeze would topple it.
sorry for the overly verbose post, and keep up the good work man.
ok, this piece, its goods and its bads, keeps me thinking. often in industrial design and especially in entertainment design there is this (un-)written rule or tendency to make the design look visually logical. i do not automatically agree with this though. while its often usefull to design things in that way, the real world is full of objects, buildings, clothes that do sort of the opposite - like buildings with mad cantilevering extensions etc. - designed to create a sort of visual tension rather than logic. in real life these things are believable because, well, they are real. andrew points out the back part is lighter etc. and it could be perfectly true. it just doesnt 'read' that way. i keep thinking though, if in this case the visual tension illusion is taken too far - making it an impossible design; or if it is mechanically all possible but i just dont like the design.
personally i still think the rendering is good, and the design really not. it might just be a personal preference, but im still curious what the both of you think of this.
trust you dont mind discussing your work like this.
Originally Posted by Moccomouse
Last edited by tensai; May 16th, 2005 at 06:04 AM. Reason: spelling
Moccomouse - yes certainly a reverse knee setup would be more stable but I really wanted the "7" shape in the design. I think it looks sexier
Tensai - Actually you make very interesting points - I definatly don't mind While I tried to render this is a professional way I never really expected it would work in real life. Perhaps in a movie or a game where the audience has different expectations.
Perhaps the rendering style is working against me?
Think of all those crazy anime mech designs out there. There is no way they could work but they look cool.
Also this is concept art, not product design. I think concept artists should try and push past pre-concieved ideas of what does and doesn't work in reality.
Still the design is always stronger when you believe in it...
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaghhhhhhhhh - I'm torn on this one
andrew - i dont think your rendering style is necessarily working against you. i understand its a 'fantasy' concept, and i AM thinking of all those anime mechs out there (i see m here everyday..) even in those fantasy project there is an internal fantasy logic though. i actually think most of those mechs do work according to the laws of gravity for example (they often have giant foot /support designs). that s what i ment with :
entertainment design there is this (un-)written rule or tendency to make the design look visually logical..
yes, but im talking about visual logic, first and second 'reads'. the impressions of a design. shapes telling what the product is/does (real or fantasy). or doing the opposite (pretending to be something else and or creating visual tension).Also this is concept art, not product design. I think concept artists should try and push past pre-concieved ideas of what does and doesn't work in reality.
again, like i said - i definitely dont think we always have to be visually logic (or logical according to your own fantasy).
im trying to find out if i object to your design because it doesnt follow these rules or if i just 'dont like it'.
conceptart.org talks a lot about illustration, a little bit less about concept design. just curious what others think.
whats funny is , every time i look at it im more convinced the legs are wrong haha. sorry man.
Last edited by tensai; May 16th, 2005 at 06:37 AM. Reason: spelling
Well, I think it's elegant in it's design and a nice bold departure from the ususal fair. And the rendering is exceptional. But I have to admit that my first thought was that it looked very unstable. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't work. It would be neat to see it with arms in place in an action shot
Grave Sight Graphics: The Art of Eric Lofgren.
elofgren@ telus.net (to use e-mail address please remove space between the '@' and 'telus')
My Art Blog
My Online Portfolio (Updated Jan. 30/ 2011)
~NiNjA~^~mOuNtAiN~^~PoDcAsT~(Working illustrators talking illustration)
Eric Lofgren's licensible rpg art resource
Art Director for New Gods of Raanon
Originally Posted by Eric Lofgren
yeah - thats what i mean basically. i also think that braking the rules, when done succesfully, often results in fresh ideas and designs...
mahh, enough of this.
lets see some more work!
or better - a wip or tut on how you rendered it so nicely.
i think its bad ass but the feet are too small looking, it seem like it would need thick, wide rubber traction on the feet in order to balance and actually function as a robot, oh and the ostrich knee set up would be cool with some hydraulics and what not! its still magnificant regardless ;] let me know if BMW actually makes one hahahaaa it looks like it would be fun to drive
yea, and a tutorial on the path work u did would be nice!! spread the wealth and it will come back to u ten fold
Last edited by stalsby; May 17th, 2005 at 01:41 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)