A Beautiful Lie.

[Eliwood]

V.1


V.2


I really like the outcome, although i think they could be a little darker. Please c&c. Also, c&c my "Newest" tag in my signature, that's also new, but i found i liked this tag more. Also, i'll be adding text soon, but i need ideas for what kind of style i could use, i use the same old boring text all the time. Need something different.

[M.o.N]

The person's cutout or render fades into the background a bit,and that's good.

The background is really nice in v.1

V.1 is the better than v.2.

[Eliwood]

Originally Posted by M.o.N

The background is really nice in v.1

V.1 is the better than v.2.

Yeah, i thought so too. Although, i think if i made v.2 a little bit darker it'd be better Xp

[SoraKHLuver]

i agree, v1 has a better background color IMO!!!

although the right side of the pictures seem 'dull' as in not much of what u did on the left side!!!

[Eliwood]

Originally Posted by SoraKHLuver

i agree, v1 has a better background color IMO!!!

although the right side of the pictures seem 'dull' as in not much of what u did on the left side!!!

I did actually put some effects there, but i disliked them, so i erased them xD;

[Veritas_Aequitas]

Stock is really low quality. The clipping mask seems somewhat random because there are no other really solid structures in the tag besides the stock and that clipping mask. Colors are bland and don't complement the stock very well. Overall, the tag needs a lot of work. Add some more solid effects that will give a better feeling of depth. Everything is kind of smudgy and cloudy with nothing substantial to set against it to make any form of depth.. Start picking more HQ stocks, too.

[Eliwood]

Originally Posted by Veritas_Aequitas

Stock is really low quality. The clipping mask seems somewhat random because there are no other really solid structures in the tag besides the stock and that clipping mask. Colors are bland and don't complement the stock very well. Overall, the tag needs a lot of work. Add some more solid effects that will give a better feeling of depth. Everything is kind of smudgy and cloudy with nothing substantial to set against it to make any form of depth.. Start picking more HQ stocks, too.

Thanks for the help. Although i disagree on some points.
I actually didn't want to overload the tag with too many effects to keep it simple. The stock is the centre of attention and is the focus, which i wanted to maintain. As you said, the colours are quite bland, which i find in alot of my tags, it's an issue i'm working on. But not getting very far with, unfortunately. Also, i don't see what you mean about the quality of the stock. I think it's fine. The only reason i can think is that the size was like 6000x5000 and i had to lower the size.

[Veritas_Aequitas]

I'm not saying clutter it. I'm saying that you should add more solid effects in the future. You have nothing to contrast the cloudy smudge effect that you seem to be so fond of. Think for a second. Is it easier to tell depth in the fog or in a city filled with very solid objects? A mixture of the two is often even better though. The stock is grainy and looks overall LQ. Decreasing the size shouldn't lower quality. In fact, it should make the quality better.

Look for Sparkle's basics tut. It'll help you a lot with colors and depth.

[Eliwood]

Lol, i am very fond of the cloudy effect, just experimenting atm. Anyway, i think the depth is in all the right places, i.e, the stock. The focal point. I agree though, i need to experiment with more solid figures in the future. Even though i don't particularly like them. But i'm still stumped on the problem of the stock's quality. I'll take a look at SM's colour tut. Thanks alot for you advice, i'll bare it in mind.

[Veritas_Aequitas]

Depth isn't supposed to be in only one spot. Depth should be throughout the tag. The focal point is supposed to be in focus. It's like a photo. Your subject is focused and everything is else is in varying levels of darkness, lightness, blurring, and sharpening. That's how depth should be. You have a stock that sticks out as a foreground and a pretty flat background. Clouds can be solid and have depth, but I don't think you've quite reached that understanding of smudging yet to pull off a good cloud effect. No offense to your skill is meant since you are getting better.

[Eliwood]

To be honest, i haven't ever used much smudging effects until very recently. So maybe i do need to work on it. And i think we're agreed that i am indeed improving, but i have a lot of room to excel, along with this particular tag. But i would like to go to a point in your last comment where you said "Depth isn't supposed to be in only one spot. Depth should be throughout the tag." I thought art had no boundaries or rules.

Anyway, thanks alot for the help and advice, i'll certainly look into it.
Any more c&c?

[Veritas_Aequitas]

Everything has rules. Artists are just usually known for breaking them more than others. When you break the rules, you have to make sure that it still looks good though. Good enough to justify breaking them.

[Eliwood]

I'd like to see these set of rules. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, not everyone thinks the same thing looks good. I don't particularly like Piccaso, although he's one of the most famous artists in the world.

Also, can people comment on my "Newest" tag in my signature, tell me when you like, dislike and what i can do to improve it. Also, is it better or worse than my current?

Edit: Current is a tad darker now, which i like.

[Veritas_Aequitas]

Look up artistic theory. It's the basics of arts. Those are the rules. The color theory dictates what colors go together. You're following one of the rules by establishing a focal point. Writing is another art form, but you have to abide by the rules of grammar and rhetoric for it to really sound good. Music is the same way. For it to really sound good, you have to follow keys and scales. You may break these rules, but you better have a damn good reason for breaking them. The rules of art agree with the statement that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder," but they also state that there are universal truths. Certain things look good. Certain things attract people's attention. If you follow the rules, the theories, you'll almost always make something that people like.

I've been doing graphics for several years now. Trust me. I know quite a bit about what I'm talking about. I went through the same phases of questioning only to find that art does have rules. I even taught a few of the people on here a few things. If I didn't know what I was talking about, I would've shut up by now and conceded the point.

[Eliwood]

I think you're talking about academic art, which is governed by rules on composition, drawing, colours etc. Not all art movements are like this. For example, Impressionism. They used light sources as their main source of colour. Different art movements, different colour combinations. Therefore, no rules. You say "There are universal truths. Certain things look good. Certain things attract people's attention. If you follow the rules, the theories, you'll almost always make something that people like." That is commercial, which art should certainly not be.

In the colour wheel, the "Rules" say that the opposite colours go nicely with eachother. Now disagree all you like, but green and red are disgusting together.

Also, i don't particularly want to get into music or writing, as they have absolutely nothing to do with my tag.

I, also know what i'm talking about. I've done all kinds of arts for several years
and question myself all the time. But these are my views and they aren't going to change, i'm sorry, but you just can't "help" me.

ANYWAY can people please c&c my tag? We seem to have scared everybody off lol xD