pretty good stuff ewooz. nice clean linework with a nice coloring up in photoshop. the design doesn't exactly drive me wild, though--the flat, broad back of his head plus the eyes make me think of a zerg hydralisk, but the rest of the body is fairly humanoid. he's got three toes in an interesting arrangement, but very normal human-structure hands? how does he use the chain-mace thingy? why does he have a chain mace, or loincloth? not that of course i need to be able to tell all of that from just a concept... but in some ways, i should. things should all fit together. while this concept is decent enough on a technical/execution level, the monster design itself could use further development, to tie it's differing parts into one cohesive identity.
Gauss thanks a lot for your feedback, you are the concept-king here onboard and your thoughts are always to be taken seriously. I didn't think too much about what I was doing when I drew this monster, I just decided I wanted to draw something non-human and ended up with this. But I had some thoughts about the chain-mace. The idea is that when he attacks he swings it by the chain, throwing the mace at the opponent. The loin-cloth is placed there purely for commercial reasons. I have burnt my fingers presenting a portfolio with monsters that had penises and such, and it was not well received by the firm looking at it. It was a long time ago, but things like that is an important lesson. I guess I wanted the creature to have some intelligence therefore the human arms, loincloth and so on...
But I promise you that I will start thinking more design-wise in my next piece, I want to move on doing a new concept. But don't get me wrong Gauss; your words have been enlightening for me.
Gauss: I would also like to add that your work has become really impressive lately, I am looking at the concept tag tread and your stuff is really good. I remember your stuff from way back when I was frequenting the old boards, and you have really developed a lot since then.
Weiser> I didn't get that, perhaps it is my ignorance when it comes to Beavis and Butthead, not my favorite show I guess.
Ok, I've been struggling with the colors a bit so here's an update:
thanks for the kind words, ewooz. it's difficult to gauge one's own progress, heartening to hear reports of it from fellow artists. i like the new color-up, there's some very nice detail going on with the skin and highlights, really brings out the chain nicely as well.
briefly, on the subject of the loincloth: there are other options than doing a loincloth and drawing a penis. it's a fairly well established convention to draw monsters sans generative organs entirely, and for good reason--who is to say that along with their other physiological differences to us, that the way in which they reproduce isn't wholly different as well? the Orks in WH40k reproduce asexually, through spores or some such, which is why there are no females. and despite CheapAlert's insistence on a deluded sense of "realism", there's nothing to support that gargoyles or any other fanciful entity doesn't reproduce in some esoteric manner as well. i'll get back to the loincloth issue specifically in a bit.
as what i posted about was on the subject of the concept itself... the monster, for what it is, is very well presented here. but to move up a step in your game i think it's going to be a question of integrating those kind of conceptual thought processes into your work.
to wit: everything means something. the shape of his head, the bend of his legs, the spikey hairs on his back. the loincloth. they're all saying something about how this creature evolved over however long he's taken to evolve, how it lives now, what period it's in.
or did it not have a chance to evolve--is he some sort of genetic mutant, grown in a lab? the loincloth and mace carry very strong period associations with them, and if you do not wish to conjure those associations you should not use them, or modify them in a suitable manner. a compromise between not using a loincloth and drawing a smooth crotch is to just draw a darkened area of hair--suggestive, but not actually showing genitalia.
with the mace and the loincloth, you've got a clear past-history kind of vibe going. amd it's assuming that the monster itself is aware some sort of societal/practical need to cover it's genitals, which is verging on silly.
or is it silly? is this beast actually rather intelligent, and part of a quasi-"primitive" race of like beings? in which case, the loincloth could change to something a little more developed, and the monster itself could begin to have markings on it... tattoos, piercings, a trinket or armband. all of what you detail visually has (or could have) deeper implications, so choose what you suggest wisely.
though you've thought about the purpose of the mace somewhat, have you thought about the shape? when i say the word mace, i guarantee what most people immediately visualize in their head is exactly what you've drawn: a ball with spikes radiating out of it. and the chain attached to it is also pretty much the most universal design for a chain.
this is what is called symbolic visual language--like when people draw that silly hieroglyphic-like eye symbol instead of an eye. eyes don't look like that; but that's what we think of when we go to draw them. good concepts move beyond the symbolic language of things (monster = sharp teeth, glowing eyes, sharp claws etc.) and relate to our expectations in a more interesting fashion.
thinking of it this way: in some ways, every time a person looks at your art and sees what they expect to see, their brains just turn off. they're not seeing your art because they see the symbol and they don't see past that. though you don't want to alienate your audience by completely removing familiar reference points (which is why most monsters, even the very creative ones, tend to resemble terrestrial biology in some fashion), subverting and playing with expectations is key to interesting concept art.
so how about this monster specifically? first of all, i'd avoid some of the more token elements of the genre, and the overt likenesses to previously established properties. the head makes me think of a hydralisk too much, and doesn't relate to the body very well. so either the body should relate more or the head, one or the other. the extra join in the leg is also fairly well farmed out--again, let's have a reason for including these kinds of things, instead of just adding it because a lot of monsters/alien designs have those style of legs. i've already mentioned how the toe and finger styles are inconsistent... i think the chain-mace (a "morning star," as it was known in medieval armories) is nice, but it should have as much attitude as the monster wielding it.
let's just play with an assumption for a second, and then change the design logically from there: say that the monster has extremely tough skin, especially on the pads of his hands. not sensitive at all, which is a disadvantage, but let's say that the advantage is that he can wield this really cruel chain-mace of his quite effectively. how would the chain-mace change in light of this conceptual difference? well, what if the mace itself had no proper 'handle' and in fact was, say... a vaguely ice cream cone-shaped mace (horrible irregular spiking all over it) that the monster had no trouble holding onto? further pressing his advantage of tough skin/high pain threshold so that the weapon he uses couldn't be, say, taken and used against him, or that long chain grabbed a hold of very easily, let's modify the chain to have spikes along each link as well. then we could go on to think about how that extra tough skin might change his fighting style and general phsyiology in a general way, but i think you get the idea.
simply by supposing an interesting feature of this monster's being, we've managed to revise the chain-mace design into something a little different, a little more exciting. the more you can ask yourself these kind of questions and constantly justifying the design to yourself as you work (why does it have crazy back legs? the form it evolved from originally walked on all fours, etc.), the more that kind of thought will show in your designs and the better they'll be. hope this helps some, sorry if i'm too long winded about it
Gauss just gave a great mini-essay on character development and believability, folks. Listen to the man. This is what a lot of people overlook when drawing "cool monsters and robots"... they don't have any sense of background, or any believability of character.
You should type this up in more detail/formatting and make a sticky, Gauss, IMHO it's something everyone should pay more attention to (myself included!).
ewooz: It's a good drawing and I like the colours, but as Gauss has stated so well, there are many things about it that just don't make sense. I can appreciate the skill that's gone into it, and yes it looks "cool", but when you dig a little deeper you end up just being confused by what it's depicting, which is not really what you want to do with a concept artwork.
Awesome post gauss, already fowarded this to many friends hehe.
Hmm design has always been a wiley beast in my eyes, good to get people opinions on it.
Thanks a lot or your effort Gauss, I really appreciate it.
Yes this is really in-depth stuff Gauss. And as Mop said it should be typed up as an essay or tutorial on creature conceptualization. I enjoyed reading that. And I will start asking myself questions about the stuff I'm making. It is important and I guess you're right about the fact that you want to trigger the brainwork on the viewer. It is important if you want to make interesting designs.
However often it is not the concept artist who comes up with a description of a monster but rather the world builders, game designers or level designers. And the artist then gets a quite detail description of what to draw and just follows the description he gets handed over. So your writing will also be important for more than the general concept artist. Of course the artist drawing the stuff still needs to think about what he is doing in an "academic" fashion in the rendering process.
Thanks again Gauss, and keep up your elaborations and your art, you're getting indispensable.
Mop>thanks for the feedback, I'll take it into account. So thanks for your words both kind and evaluating.
The Pimping and Previews are hard cash if you turn the critique into a lesson learned.
[ QUOTE ]
I have burnt my fingers presenting a portfolio with monsters that had penises and such, and it was not well received by the firm looking at it.
Replies
But I promise you that I will start thinking more design-wise in my next piece, I want to move on doing a new concept. But don't get me wrong Gauss; your words have been enlightening for me.
Gauss: I would also like to add that your work has become really impressive lately, I am looking at the concept tag tread and your stuff is really good. I remember your stuff from way back when I was frequenting the old boards, and you have really developed a lot since then.
Weiser> I didn't get that, perhaps it is my ignorance when it comes to Beavis and Butthead, not my favorite show I guess.
Ok, I've been struggling with the colors a bit so here's an update:
briefly, on the subject of the loincloth: there are other options than doing a loincloth and drawing a penis. it's a fairly well established convention to draw monsters sans generative organs entirely, and for good reason--who is to say that along with their other physiological differences to us, that the way in which they reproduce isn't wholly different as well? the Orks in WH40k reproduce asexually, through spores or some such, which is why there are no females. and despite CheapAlert's insistence on a deluded sense of "realism", there's nothing to support that gargoyles or any other fanciful entity doesn't reproduce in some esoteric manner as well. i'll get back to the loincloth issue specifically in a bit.
as what i posted about was on the subject of the concept itself... the monster, for what it is, is very well presented here. but to move up a step in your game i think it's going to be a question of integrating those kind of conceptual thought processes into your work.
to wit: everything means something. the shape of his head, the bend of his legs, the spikey hairs on his back. the loincloth. they're all saying something about how this creature evolved over however long he's taken to evolve, how it lives now, what period it's in.
or did it not have a chance to evolve--is he some sort of genetic mutant, grown in a lab? the loincloth and mace carry very strong period associations with them, and if you do not wish to conjure those associations you should not use them, or modify them in a suitable manner. a compromise between not using a loincloth and drawing a smooth crotch is to just draw a darkened area of hair--suggestive, but not actually showing genitalia.
with the mace and the loincloth, you've got a clear past-history kind of vibe going. amd it's assuming that the monster itself is aware some sort of societal/practical need to cover it's genitals, which is verging on silly.
or is it silly? is this beast actually rather intelligent, and part of a quasi-"primitive" race of like beings? in which case, the loincloth could change to something a little more developed, and the monster itself could begin to have markings on it... tattoos, piercings, a trinket or armband. all of what you detail visually has (or could have) deeper implications, so choose what you suggest wisely.
though you've thought about the purpose of the mace somewhat, have you thought about the shape? when i say the word mace, i guarantee what most people immediately visualize in their head is exactly what you've drawn: a ball with spikes radiating out of it. and the chain attached to it is also pretty much the most universal design for a chain.
this is what is called symbolic visual language--like when people draw that silly hieroglyphic-like eye symbol instead of an eye. eyes don't look like that; but that's what we think of when we go to draw them. good concepts move beyond the symbolic language of things (monster = sharp teeth, glowing eyes, sharp claws etc.) and relate to our expectations in a more interesting fashion.
thinking of it this way: in some ways, every time a person looks at your art and sees what they expect to see, their brains just turn off. they're not seeing your art because they see the symbol and they don't see past that. though you don't want to alienate your audience by completely removing familiar reference points (which is why most monsters, even the very creative ones, tend to resemble terrestrial biology in some fashion), subverting and playing with expectations is key to interesting concept art.
so how about this monster specifically? first of all, i'd avoid some of the more token elements of the genre, and the overt likenesses to previously established properties. the head makes me think of a hydralisk too much, and doesn't relate to the body very well. so either the body should relate more or the head, one or the other. the extra join in the leg is also fairly well farmed out--again, let's have a reason for including these kinds of things, instead of just adding it because a lot of monsters/alien designs have those style of legs. i've already mentioned how the toe and finger styles are inconsistent... i think the chain-mace (a "morning star," as it was known in medieval armories) is nice, but it should have as much attitude as the monster wielding it.
let's just play with an assumption for a second, and then change the design logically from there: say that the monster has extremely tough skin, especially on the pads of his hands. not sensitive at all, which is a disadvantage, but let's say that the advantage is that he can wield this really cruel chain-mace of his quite effectively. how would the chain-mace change in light of this conceptual difference? well, what if the mace itself had no proper 'handle' and in fact was, say... a vaguely ice cream cone-shaped mace (horrible irregular spiking all over it) that the monster had no trouble holding onto? further pressing his advantage of tough skin/high pain threshold so that the weapon he uses couldn't be, say, taken and used against him, or that long chain grabbed a hold of very easily, let's modify the chain to have spikes along each link as well. then we could go on to think about how that extra tough skin might change his fighting style and general phsyiology in a general way, but i think you get the idea.
simply by supposing an interesting feature of this monster's being, we've managed to revise the chain-mace design into something a little different, a little more exciting. the more you can ask yourself these kind of questions and constantly justifying the design to yourself as you work (why does it have crazy back legs? the form it evolved from originally walked on all fours, etc.), the more that kind of thought will show in your designs and the better they'll be. hope this helps some, sorry if i'm too long winded about it
You should type this up in more detail/formatting and make a sticky, Gauss, IMHO it's something everyone should pay more attention to (myself included!).
ewooz: It's a good drawing and I like the colours, but as Gauss has stated so well, there are many things about it that just don't make sense. I can appreciate the skill that's gone into it, and yes it looks "cool", but when you dig a little deeper you end up just being confused by what it's depicting, which is not really what you want to do with a concept artwork.
Keep it up!
Hmm design has always been a wiley beast in my eyes, good to get people opinions on it.
Yes this is really in-depth stuff Gauss. And as Mop said it should be typed up as an essay or tutorial on creature conceptualization. I enjoyed reading that. And I will start asking myself questions about the stuff I'm making. It is important and I guess you're right about the fact that you want to trigger the brainwork on the viewer. It is important if you want to make interesting designs.
However often it is not the concept artist who comes up with a description of a monster but rather the world builders, game designers or level designers. And the artist then gets a quite detail description of what to draw and just follows the description he gets handed over. So your writing will also be important for more than the general concept artist. Of course the artist drawing the stuff still needs to think about what he is doing in an "academic" fashion in the rendering process.
Thanks again Gauss, and keep up your elaborations and your art, you're getting indispensable.
Mop>thanks for the feedback, I'll take it into account. So thanks for your words both kind and evaluating.
The Pimping and Previews are hard cash if you turn the critique into a lesson learned.
Somewhere butthead is laughing at that title...
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah so did I
I have burnt my fingers presenting a portfolio with monsters that had penises and such, and it was not well received by the firm looking at it.
[/ QUOTE ]
woah did i miss something?