Tomb Fairies

**Cthogua** · July 19th, 2005, 02:10 AM

Probably 2 or 3 hours worth of work on this one, still in progress...perhaps excessivly Beksinski influenced, but oh well.

Comments and crits very much appriciated

James Ball

**Ibishi** · July 19th, 2005, 02:39 AM

Very abstract but i like teh colours. 7/10

**JERI** · July 19th, 2005, 03:45 AM

It looks cool, but I have no idea what it is.

**BlueMech** · July 19th, 2005, 04:06 AM

I don't see any faeries, it also looks out of focus. Mybe sharpen it up and make it more clear as to what it is.

**Cthogua** · July 19th, 2005, 09:36 AM

Well the little dots of light at the top are supposed to be the fairies, like little pixies, undead tinkerbells...I guess I could do something to suggest "fairy" a little more. As far as the blurriness, its a WIP, I wanted to get some feedback on it before I took it too far to want to change anything. I was hoping to suggest some sort of long dead thing, entombed or perhaps cocooned in bones and skin, being visited by some lighter beings.

Looking at it now (after a nights sleep) I'm going to change the bottom left hand side cosiderably to reinforce the figure I have hiding in there.

Thanks for the crits

James Ball

**madster** · July 19th, 2005, 10:29 AM

Blurry as hell. You'll spend three times as long trying to sharpen up your concept, than if you had simply done preliminary sketches and worked out the fussiness before painting...oh, well, keeps you off the streets (although you could have painted at least one more picture in the time you'll spend "fixing" the unplanned elements.)
Why do you need so much "feedback" in order to design this thing? Feedback is supposed to point out technical flaws, not design the piece for you. What, your imagination is so stunted, that you can come up with a basic idea, but then have to get "design opinion by committee" as to how on earth to draw what you've imagined and detail it? It's YOUR drawing, YOU are supposed to KNOW what you're doing. We're just here to tell you where you're not succeeding, not tell you what to draw, and how it's supposed to look...who needs you for anything more than manual labor under those conditions???

* The head anatomy is terribly off, in that the cranium falls off just past the bridge of the nose...Poor preliminary layout/sketching, if any at all.
* Fuzzy glow dots = little fairies...Uh-huh...Here I thought they were just fuzzy kleig lights...
* The "depth" you've created with the little gradient "tubes" to represent teeth, veins (?), and every other texture you can't imagine how to create, look very hurridly rendered, with no real thought as to their purpose or underlying support. Combined with the horrid anatomy of what one could loosely assume to be her spinal column, it loses any practical association to the viewer's eye, as it is a covering on the lower portions, but simply poor depth rendering around the "skull," with holes in her head that match the ones in anybody considering this as a decent concept. It's not even a decent rough comp...

You've spent 2-3 hours merrily painting and shading, and trying to make something out of it...Put a fork in it, and call it "done," appreciate the practice exercise you got out of it, and go start again. If you want to explore this "concept" further, do it right, and sketch out your concept, and then do a detailed layout, instead of posting some blurry, half-assed mess that somewhat looks like something. Stop expecting forum opinions to help imagine it into something halfway believable...It's NOT that interesting, it's NOT that well comped out, and it's NOT why the rest of us are here, to help you figure out what you want to draw...
2/10 for composition, 1/10 for execution.

Before you spend a lot of time "exposing" the figure "hidden" in the bottom LH corner (and BOY, is he WELL hidden!!!), put more time into your MAIN subject, and figure out what the hell it's supposed to be. Don't change horses in mid-stream...Well, actually, this horse is dead in the water. You should get off him now, and go find a fresh one...

Also, can you link to any of the Beksinski pieces that you found SO inspirational to you in creating this? I've yet to see any of his work so fuzzy, or poorly composed in terms of general anatomy and layout. What piece(s) formed the motivation for this effort?
~M

**Cthogua** · July 19th, 2005, 11:40 AM

Well I assumed since this was a Work in Progress section it would be ok to post something that was not fully rendered/finished/whatever it wasn't that you thought it should be. Sorry its not up to spec

I don't really remember asking anyone to "imagine" it for me though

You got me on the direction thing though. It really just started as doodle and just kept going...so I guess the design phase was too long and allowed for too many ideas to only be partially realized before something else cropped up. If I continue with the concept I probably will just start another piece thought, as you're right "tightening" up the details would take as long as doing another painting.

As far as Beksinski for inspiration
this was along the lines of what I was thinking

**madster** · July 19th, 2005, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by Cthogua

Well I assumed since this was a Work in Progress section it would be ok to post something that was not fully rendered/finished/whatever it wasn't that you thought it should be. Sorry its not up to spec

I don't really remember asking anyone to "imagine" it for me though...

...its a WIP, I wanted to get some feedback on it before I took it too far to want to change anything.

As undefined, undesigned, and blurry as this is, any feedback is going to be "imagining" it for you...

Originally Posted by Cthogua

You got me on the direction thing though. It really just started as doodle and just kept going...so I guess the design phase was too long and allowed for too many ideas to only be partially realized before "something else cropped up.

Sorry, WRONG. There was NO design phase to this. Doodling, doodling, and then trying to flesh out a doodle, instead of making a new "rough," using the overworked doodle as a comp is NOT design. It's trying to make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

Originally Posted by Cthogua

If I continue with the concept I probably will just start another piece thought, as you're right "tightening" up the details would take as long as doing another painting.

Well, at least you've gained something from this...

"As far as Beksinski for inspiration," although the images you've linked are very powerful, They look nothing like what you've doodled, and your "doodley" work process also resembles nothing about Beksinski.
Here is a bit more about Beksinski, his style, and his work processes.

Beksinski has always executed his paintings and drawings in either of two manners, which he respectively calls 'Baroque' and 'Gothic'. The first is dominated by representation, the second by form.

If you are going to name an artist as your inspiration, it would serve you better to try to understand a bit more about your inspiration. This piece shows no good representaion nor form. Unlike yourself, Beksinski will not "doodle" until he gets it right. His hardboard will remain blank for long periods until the form is right in his mind...

~M

**Cthogua** · July 19th, 2005, 12:57 PM

Well thanks for the link on Beksinski, I have a book of his work, but there's very little info in it about him other than a small bio, and no info on how he worked. Most of the other info I was ever able to find on him was always in Polish. I'll give it a read this afternoon...and I'll be more careful when citing artist's as "influences" in the future.

Yes, my piece is an overworked doodle, and is quite fuzzy however saying that any feedback on it would basically be "imagining it for me" isn't really constructive at all. If you really believe that how can you ever take any criticism at all for fear that someone else is imagining your piece for you?

James Ball

**Delta 1** · July 19th, 2005, 03:08 PM

Damn madster I dont know who just dumped you or frikin died but you are being lame. True this is was just a fuzzy thing-but it can be considered abstract-I had fun trying to find something in it. It looked like an underwater bairial thing-like in lord of the rings. So try to be more productive in your "crits" all you are doign is putting people down.

**Luthien Rogue** · July 19th, 2005, 03:41 PM

::Heals Cthogua's voraciously inflicted wounds::

I could tell what the first one was before you described it, however, had I not seen the titles, I wouldn't have known they were faeries; they look like little fireflies, to be honest. It -is- rather blurry, and it'd be nice to see the shapes more defined. I love the colours. The anatomy's really off and it doesn't look like it was simply caused by stylizing. Overall, I like the piece, but some refs should have been used.

**look** · July 19th, 2005, 03:54 PM

I'm pretty clueless as to what it is, but I'll hold my opinion till I see a more finished version.

As to the Beksinski images, even though they aren't overly detailed everywhere, there's a focus. The artist put detail only on the places where he want the viewer to pay attention to, this way it prevents viewer from getting distracted. I think you should try the same technique. Instead of having detail on bones and slimy things everywhere (or are those spider webs?), try only leave the ones in the place that has most lighting, and let the rest blend in with the darkness and surroundings. It gives more mysterious mood and help to show the focus better.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the updates.