UIR: the new hawkman by cyberphoenix

[chatback]

Comments for UIR: the new hawkman by cyberphoenix (http://www.comics2film.com/DCG/DispArt.php3?f_id=19960)

[B]

Hawkman: The S&M version. Sorry, couldn't resist... It's a perfectly good design, though it'd probably suit an evil Hawkman a bit better (like in the switch theme day image by kev_incal from a while back) than a non-evil one. Pretty good pic too, though there's some obvious blurriness, most obviously the torso, and the lighting and contrast of the various body parts are completely mismatched. And the background is utterly generic. Still, I'd say one of your better pics... you've improved noticeably since you debuted here.

[cyberphoenix]

:x genric?!what do you mean by "genric"?!and as far as the"mismatched body parts"go---there are none!all limbs are of the original model!except for the helmet of coarse which i took off an action figure.and wow---almost 65%of ure comment was actual compiment?the last part about how much i've improved,it's almost like a backhanded compliment.unless of coarse that was your personal best.out of all my pics on here---not one actual good thing has been said.what is it with you people?!what does it actually take to impress or please you guys?or are you all just such the professionals at this that it is totally impossible?if i sound a little upset over this i am.now--i know i am by far no means a pro at photomanipulations.but no one else here is either.if they were they would be rich by doing so.i think that this should be remembered when being so critical in criticquing.stop trying to look so hard for flaws and such.put the white glove away and sit back and enjoy the mind and imagination of the artist.

[B]

*sigh* Oh, great.

I apologize if you feel I'm insulting you or your work; that's not at all my intention. I try to give a balance of praise and criticism when commenting on an image. If you feel my criticism here has been too heavy-handed, then again, I apologize. I do tend to be overly blunt in my UIRs. I don't sugarcoat. If I see flaws in a piece of art I'm critiquing, I tend to point them out in the hope that knowledge of where they may have made mistakes will help the artist improve in the future. I think most people who give UIRs are trying to offer constructive criticism, even if we don't always succeed. And personally, I think the honesty of the UIRs is an asset for the site and for the artists; I know I wouldn't be half the artist I am if it weren't for the numerous people who've torn apart my work in UIRs.

What does it take to please us? I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, all it takes is a willingness to improve. And I do think you've improved since your first post here. That's not a backhanded compliment, it's simply a compliment, period. There's definite improvement between your first image and this latest one, and I think it's important for me to acknowledge that in UIRing your work. And I realize you're not a pro... and believe it or not, I don't critique your work as strongly as I would that of those artists here who are (or may as well be) pros, like android or QuantumFX.

So again, I apologize if any of my comments have come across as attacks. I will endeavour to be more positive when UIRing your work in the future.

As for your specific questions: I said the background is generic because it's a typical starfield that doesn't particularly have anything to do with Hawkman and that doesn't particularly enhance the image, at least in my opinion. As far as the mismatched body parts go, I was referring to the fact that the image's lighting and contrast (difference in lighting between the shadows and the bright areas) are very different between the helmet, wings and body (and I think also between the skin and clothing). I point this out because, first, a good background immeasurably improves an image and, second, making sure that the lighting of the different parts of an image matches makes the image fit together better and look more natural.

[WonderWomanGoddess]

cyberphoenix, the "R" in UIR stands for review. These are reviews of artwork, and whether on these boards or in the pros, you gotta be able to take the criticism with the praise. You can't get one without the other, like an oreo without the cream. What B said about learning and growing from criticism, is exactly right, and I agree with his UIR as well (even though I'm terrible about using starfields for backgrounds) I've learned so much from the helpful tips, as I think of them, from UIR's.

Now, on to my review: I will tell you what someone on here once told me that has been one of the keys to improving my art- you can't do better than to get a great base image. I know it's hard, and time consuming, but a clearer base image really pays off. Even now, I have trouble matching image quality among peices when I am frankenstiening (putting in pieces from other pictures, like the helmet, etc). So I can't give advice on that because I still struggle with it!

One thing that stood out to me about this image was the use of lightning. I dunno, the way that it seems to be coming from, almost as if he were standing on a cloud firing ligtning bolts, that's cool looking, and I wish I could do it.

And when making an image don't forget about the helpful thread in the DCG Gab Gallery on the boards- Artist needs help. You can get some great tips and advice on there. Just remember, there are no 'good' or 'bad' artists on this site, good or bad or all the in betweens fall to the picture itself, not personally on the artist. We don't make personal attacks, we just want to help. Every artist here, from the most skilled to the least is one thing: capable of improving.

[cyberphoenix]

:oops: okay---forgive me.i'm just not used to the fine tooth comb when it comes to my images.but i do see your point.the lighting is a bit off.maybe even alot.i would gladly give anyone here my permission to try and revamp my pic to try and give me an idea of what i may have missed.maybe even beg for it.and B---dont hold back--tell me what i can do to make my images better.because with my next image,i want to hear a good comment without a "but"in it----lol.i know that will be hard to achieve even with my next image---but later on down the road---who knows?gee--it's good to have goals--lol.and your right---it is hard to find a good base image to work with.the model maybe perfect.even the pose.but the clairity may suck and ruin the whole thing.
but i do have one thing i need help with.i have a habit of trying to blend the image into the background(so it looks like it's a part of it)by blurring the edges.i guess thats not a good idea.can you tell me how i can make an image look like it is a part or belongs in the background?

[Shaylinn]

i do have one thing i need help with.i have a habit of trying to blend the image into the background(so it looks like it's a part of it)by blurring the edges.i guess thats not a good idea.can you tell me how i can make an image look like it is a part or belongs in the background?

Heyla Cyberphoenix, I don't know if I could do the reworking on your piece but maybe I can help a bit with the edge issue. I usually blur the edges of my people just a tiny bit to help them blend as well I would say you just went a bit too far. I usually only go a pixel or two feathered edge that I then invert the selection and erase/delete those few pixels. Its very subtle but does help. With you pic it looks more like you blurred 10-20 pixels. Hope this helps.

Shay

[B]

Glad we're cool, cyberphoenix. I can't promise a good comment without a but on your next pic, but then, no one gets good comments without buts from me. :lol:

As for your question, there's a couple things you can do make a foreground character or object look like it belongs in a background.

First, you have to smooth and/or soften the edges (so your instinct to blur them is a good one). When making selections, be sure you have anti-aliasing turned on, which automatically creates smooth edges. I dunno what software you use, but in Photoshop, there's a box in the options bar (the bar immediately below the menu, which has different options for each tool) labeled "Anti-alias" that you can check when you're using things like the lasso tool. Any good photo editor has an antialiasing option though.

If the new addition still looks wrong even when it's antialiased, you can also feather your selections, which automatically creates a soft edge. Your selections get feathered by a specific number of pixels, which you choose. The higher the number, the blurrier the edge. In PS, there's an option for that in the options bar when you're using a selection tool, and you can also feather a selection you've already made by going to select >> feather in the menu. Again, any good photo editor should have the option to feather a selection.

[And at this point I'll point you to Shay's post, which is also a perfectly good way of feathering.]

Second, and more difficult, to really make the character/object you add look like it belongs in the image, you have to try and make it's overall look match that of the background. What I mean is, try to match things like brightness (if the background's dark, something you add in shouldn't be really bright, and vice versa), contrast (if the background has sharp differences between shadows and highlights, you don't want to have something you add in look "faded"), and lighting (try to figure out where the background is lit from by looking at the way shadows in it fall, and try to replicate that lighting on your character). Trying to get that stuff looking right is usually good enough for most pics.

You can also make the character and background interact. The most obvious and most necessary way to do that is by making sure it's casting a shadow on the background. Also, if you have visible light sources in the background, they need to affect the way your character/object is lit, ie, if there's a bright blue light to the right of the character, then they need to have a blueish tinge to their right side. If you manip a character with shiny or metallic parts, you can also add some reflections from the environment.

I know that's a lot of things to look out for, but generally, if something's really obviously out-of-place, it's pretty obvious. If something's too bright, or too blurry, or not casting a shadow, you should generally be able to tell easily enough. If you there's anything you're unsure of in a particular piece, feel free to email or PM me (and hey, virtually everyone here is happy to help out another artist if you ask them politely and don't just randomly send them massive attachments out of the blue). And if you do happen to make a mistake then hey, that's what we're here for. :)

Hope that helps.