Eric Chadwick
Fabi_G
Wow, thank you very much for the feedback, and to everyone who responded to the thread, I'm new here. Yes, there's something wrong with the gold armor... thanks. Here's a render of the sword, it's pretty simple, but I'm glad it turned out at least somewhat originalFabi_G said:Looks very cool overall
Looking closer, I think there are a few points that could be improved on:
Skull - Got to agree this is the most glaring weakness, looking caught in-between different ideas. Given the overall amount of work put in, wouldn't skimp on such a central element. Perhaps do some paint-overs to explore different options (let me know if you want some :P )
Wings - while looking detailed, the way the direction of feathers is suddenly changes from one row to the next feels weird and makes it look somewhat artificial. If the goal was realistic looking wings, I would take notes from real world references.
Golden armor shading broken? - Compared to the dark variant, the shading on the golden variant looks off, the edges look much less defined. Some issue with the normal map, handedness or how it's sampled?
Closeup of Sword? Since you mention specifically this was your original concept, it would be cool if you showed this in more detail.
More defined alpha on cloth border? I think currently the scarf blends together with the underlying layer.
Keep it up

AndrewRosyaev
Eric Chadwick
Eric Chadwick
DustyShinigami said:I tried adding some noise to it before by including shapes/bumps within the main shapes, but then they became over-emphasized. Or was that the main shapes...? Maybe now I should go and re-add those shapes/noise now that the main shapes are softer and less emphasised...?
Hmm, I was trying to condense an abstract concept into a more concrete and practical advice, but am realizing that it was probably too reductive. The point I was attempting to make about the area marked up in red was that those secondary forms you added weren’t very “descriptive”. They don’t communicate any useful information about what is actually going on with the form and thus just makes that area difficult to “parse”.
That is what I meant about looking vague and lacking in
clarity. It’s not necessarily about more versus less detail, but that any detail that is there should help describe something. I thought you had the
right idea when you refined the scapula: you took it from a nondescript shape
and molded it into something with form and function…but then you got rid of it
in later iterations
?
I hope that makes (at least a little bit) of sense and clears up some confusion. And now that you’ve gotten a few pointers on how to approach secondary forms; I think you are at a good point to start doing a pass on the entire figure and then make a self-assessment to see how close or far you are to your goal with this study (which, by the way, is not meant to be a 1-to-1 translation?). I think that could help you (and people critiquing) see it in the greater context, rather than critiquing just a small part in isolation only to end up spinning your wheels too much.
pxgeek






RaphaelFabris
