This is the 2nd aurelia i've seen altered, (Mine would make 3rd), I still don't understand why everyone else is fading to black.
You've got sunlight (and bright sunlight at that) coming in from the gateway, and I'd assume the ground is something like cobblestone/white paved, so wouldn't you use lighter colors getting brighter towards the lightsource?
Here's mine for reference of what i'm talking about.
Firstly, it's not fading to black. The scan of the card makes it look a bit darker than it is in real life, but even so- it's purplish-gray, with it blending a bit more orange on the left side.
Secondly, borderless cards don't allow for much of a clear idea of what's going on underneath the text box. I imagined Aurelia to be hovering in a great courtyard, and the light source from under the archway not to be sunlight, but a fire, on account of the little flecks of embers floating in the air around her. Also, the sun going down wouldn't wash out *both* sides of the archway, but rather put it in silhouette, so the light source couldn't possibly be the sun, but multiple fires in a courtyard-turned-battlefield. Continuing with that idea, it didn't make sense to me to wash out the stones around her to such an extent.
Thirdly, artistic license. I like my purplish-gray, thank you. You obviously like your white streak along the bottom. There are plenty of artists here who elect to fade to black on any given card, and that's fine, too. How about we drop the matter now and keep the condescending comments to a minimum from now on?
Well, personally, I think that fadding to black looks just better when the artist hasn't polished his/her skills enough to make pretty details in the foreground. The down half of the card demmands more detailed work than the upper one. Since the vast majority of the community is new ppl giving a try on the altering thing, it is normal to see many pieces fading to black.
I've always said this, and I'll keep doing so: Don't be afraid of screwing it up by trying to "unveil" the foreground. I think it is the more challenging part of the card to work with. Of course, if you just like to fade it to obscureness, it's up to you.
How about we drop the matter now and keep the condescending comments to a minimum from now on?
1) The general point is valid in my opinion. BlackBull's suggestion of revealing the foreground is something to think about. Personally I fade to black at the bottom if it is a quick commission ($10-15) or a bulk bunch of alters for consistency, but given the time I would like to complete more scenes. Painting in what isn't there is certainly challenging and time-consuming, but for a nice piece of work it is worth it. Galspanic's work on an Isperia, Supreme Judge comes to mind; it would be so easy to fade to black there, but his work in completing the scene is what made it memorable.
2) I didn't see any condescending comments, just some average criticism. Take it as an opportunity for discussion. Too often we just see post after post of pictures and a bunch of pats on the back.
Pretty awesome
The only thing that bothers me is that the reflected Gollum is behind the name box while the reflected is in front of it. Also, few ripples would probably make this 150% more badass. Great work nonetheless.
Well, personally, I think that fadding to black looks just better when the artist hasn't polished his/her skills enough to make pretty details in the foreground. The down half of the card demmands more detailed work than the upper one. Since the vast majority of the community is new ppl giving a try on the altering thing, it is normal to see many pieces fading to black.
I've always said this, and I'll keep doing so: Don't be afraid of screwing it up by trying to "unveil" the foreground. I think it is the more challenging part of the card to work with. Of course, if you just like to fade it to obscureness, it's up to you.
Usually, when I'm altering cards to myself, I fade to black most of the times for these reasons:
1. Foreground details are not applicable to every art. Some art just tend to not want anything in front of it. 2. Foreground detailing takes way too much time for what it adds to the art. As it has been noted, demands more work to be accomplished. This is also a nod to the next item: 3. Adding details/light colouring to the bottom part of the card detracts your eye from the art. So, if the main purpouse of your alter is to make the original art more attractive, adding detail to the bottom is accomplishing just the opposite. Sometimes the detailing is so fine it doesn't even get your attention and it becomes just noise. Noise that you had to put a lot of time into.
Those points are mostly my own views on the subject, but that's probably because my alters are a bit more "practical" then "artistic". If you are to take these points for granted, yeah, sometimes (or most of the times) you will just spend more time for less value. You might as well just fade this card to black and use the extra time to alter that other card you have laying around. But yeah, it's mostly a card-by-card choice and it depends on the alterer's style.
2) I didn't see any condescending comments, just some average criticism. Take it as an opportunity for discussion. Too often we just see post after post of pictures and a bunch of pats on the back.
Hear, hear. There was nothing condescending about that post.
Well, personally, I think that fadding to black looks just better when the artist hasn't polished his/her skills enough to make pretty details in the foreground.
It has far less to do with skill and far more to do with composition. Most cards don't lend themselves to foreground extensions, and it looks more clean and natural to fade the card to black instead of forcing in foreground art that ultimately looks out of place. A lot of times, less is more. A simple clean extension looks far better than a forced complex extension in most cases, and that has nothing to do with altering skill.
On the fade to black thing, not sure if someone mention it but most of the times the vantage point is too low in the original artwork.In other words, if you want to paint what is supposed to be there, you'll probably end up painting the ground using extreme perspective which it doesn't look that nice some times.Not sure if I'm clear, I guess those familiar with sketching/painting know what I'm talking about.
Painting without fading to black works better with artwork with floating angels because there is at least something under them instead of just ground.And I think fading to black or to any color seems cooler anyway :cool:.
It has far less to do with skill and far more to do with composition. Most cards don't lend themselves to foreground extensions, and it looks more clean and natural to fade the card to black instead of forcing in foreground art that ultimately looks out of place. A lot of times, less is more. A simple clean extension looks far better than a forced complex extension in most cases, and that has nothing to do with altering skill.
Agreed. On a borderless card, the focus should be on the top half of the card. There's a lot to be said for the style of the background, as well. Galspanic's Isperia was gorgeous, and how he continued the perspective perfectly was amazing. The original art was intricate throughout. With Aurelia, The arches behind her aren't anywhere near as complex- they're kind of blocked in, which makes sense with the lighting and focus on the character.
It has far less to do with skill and far more to do with composition. Most cards don't lend themselves to foreground extensions, and it looks more clean and natural to fade the card to black instead of forcing in foreground art that ultimately looks out of place. A lot of times, less is more. A simple clean extension looks far better than a forced complex extension in most cases, and that has nothing to do with altering skill.
While I agree that there are many examples of cards that would probably look pretty flowing with a fading to black, I think there's always room for extending the scenario to the foreground, making the extension more interesting an appealing to the curious eye. It's just about taking the time to figure out what would add to the image instead of detracting to it. And while referencing about the skills, I meant as a general take, wich means statistics. New alterists are majority in comparison with the "senior" ones and, among the new alterists, the vast majority of them just fades to black (and also tends to extend instead of customizing.) It's just that: Numbers (not a personal and dictatorial statement, nor even a vague perception.)
My point is that I get this feeling from the altering community in general that's much better to fade to black because: It saves time, it reduces the chances of "screwing it up" the piece, it demmands less dedication regarding design, and also many people has this (and this is just my personal interpretation) weird feeling that covering what's going on next to the viewer's position feels more proper (this feeling probably comes from the summatory of many of the aforementioned facts, deppending on ech artist's case.) Galspanic's Isperia is a great example of what I'm trying to explain here. As another user said, it would have been so easy to just fade to black there, and also it would have felt very flowing, but hitting the nail on the head about how to extend the scenario feels just better for my personal taste and also for what art itself seems to have been conceived for: To show something else. To stimulate our senses, to help us to unveil what's there and cannot be seen. Not to just cover the possibilities with a shovelful of nothingness and turn our senses out. Of course, there are many pieces that are conceived to end into darkness at some point of their surface, but I'm pretty sure that, if you check the original artworks behind the cards, you'll notice there's something that's going on there at the foregrounds and that want to be shown to all of us.
Please, take this as my personal perception of this matter. I'm not expecting to change anybody's mind regarding this. Just giving you my opinion, wich happens to be relateively subjective as seems to be art itself as a concept.
EDIT: Also, remember that extending a card's art doesn't exactly mean to respect the original background and pallete. It also allows you to incorporate new elements, or even tweak the original ones to get what you want from your work.
If anyone has some tips on doing portraits on cards, I'd appreciate it. I painted with oil before but with acrylic and considering the smaller size, its a lot harder.
It has far less to do with skill and far more to do with composition. Most cards don't lend themselves to foreground extensions, and it looks more clean and natural to fade the card to black instead of forcing in foreground art that ultimately looks out of place. A lot of times, less is more. A simple clean extension looks far better than a forced complex extension in most cases, and that has nothing to do with altering skill.
^This
More alterations.
My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic is owned by Hasbro.
Fantastic Academy. There's a really neat delicate quality to your work with the mix of small/fine line work and all of the color that flushes it out. This and the earlier Sylvan library really are great pieces.
Are you working all in Acrylic/paint or are you doing line work with a fine technical pen too?
damia property of me
Spark Trooper (giveaway card):
Check out videos of me altering: YouTube
Firstly, it's not fading to black. The scan of the card makes it look a bit darker than it is in real life, but even so- it's purplish-gray, with it blending a bit more orange on the left side.
Secondly, borderless cards don't allow for much of a clear idea of what's going on underneath the text box. I imagined Aurelia to be hovering in a great courtyard, and the light source from under the archway not to be sunlight, but a fire, on account of the little flecks of embers floating in the air around her. Also, the sun going down wouldn't wash out *both* sides of the archway, but rather put it in silhouette, so the light source couldn't possibly be the sun, but multiple fires in a courtyard-turned-battlefield. Continuing with that idea, it didn't make sense to me to wash out the stones around her to such an extent.
Thirdly, artistic license. I like my purplish-gray, thank you. You obviously like your white streak along the bottom. There are plenty of artists here who elect to fade to black on any given card, and that's fine, too. How about we drop the matter now and keep the condescending comments to a minimum from now on?
Rogue Bard Media - My gallery and info on commissions can now be found right here!
For Sale - Pre-painted cards available for sale
My DeviantArt - All my other art
~*~*~*PIMP MY DECK!*~*~*~
Probably because it looks a lot better.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
I've always said this, and I'll keep doing so: Don't be afraid of screwing it up by trying to "unveil" the foreground. I think it is the more challenging part of the card to work with. Of course, if you just like to fade it to obscureness, it's up to you.
reference pic is from this site:
http://jmichaelrios.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/gollum.jpg
ALTERED CARDS
http://s671.beta.photobucket.com/user/poxy14/library/
commission status: FULL
1) The general point is valid in my opinion. BlackBull's suggestion of revealing the foreground is something to think about. Personally I fade to black at the bottom if it is a quick commission ($10-15) or a bulk bunch of alters for consistency, but given the time I would like to complete more scenes. Painting in what isn't there is certainly challenging and time-consuming, but for a nice piece of work it is worth it. Galspanic's work on an Isperia, Supreme Judge comes to mind; it would be so easy to fade to black there, but his work in completing the scene is what made it memorable.
2) I didn't see any condescending comments, just some average criticism. Take it as an opportunity for discussion. Too often we just see post after post of pictures and a bunch of pats on the back.
Check out my Blog: CommanderAlters
Visit me on Facebook
See my available alters Here
Sale: Magic Collection and Heroclix
Pretty awesome
The only thing that bothers me is that the reflected Gollum is behind the name box while the reflected is in front of it. Also, few ripples would probably make this 150% more badass. Great work nonetheless.
Usually, when I'm altering cards to myself, I fade to black most of the times for these reasons:
1. Foreground details are not applicable to every art. Some art just tend to not want anything in front of it.
2. Foreground detailing takes way too much time for what it adds to the art. As it has been noted, demands more work to be accomplished. This is also a nod to the next item:
3. Adding details/light colouring to the bottom part of the card detracts your eye from the art. So, if the main purpouse of your alter is to make the original art more attractive, adding detail to the bottom is accomplishing just the opposite. Sometimes the detailing is so fine it doesn't even get your attention and it becomes just noise. Noise that you had to put a lot of time into.
Those points are mostly my own views on the subject, but that's probably because my alters are a bit more "practical" then "artistic". If you are to take these points for granted, yeah, sometimes (or most of the times) you will just spend more time for less value. You might as well just fade this card to black and use the extra time to alter that other card you have laying around. But yeah, it's mostly a card-by-card choice and it depends on the alterer's style.
RRR Like a Bosh!
WUB Sharuum Solar Flare
UBR Thraximundar Zombie Beatdown
Hear, hear. There was nothing condescending about that post.
RRR Buy some of my art! Prints! RRR
If you think an infraction was unjust, please post on that moderator's helpdesk, not here.
It has far less to do with skill and far more to do with composition. Most cards don't lend themselves to foreground extensions, and it looks more clean and natural to fade the card to black instead of forcing in foreground art that ultimately looks out of place. A lot of times, less is more. A simple clean extension looks far better than a forced complex extension in most cases, and that has nothing to do with altering skill.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
Painting without fading to black works better with artwork with floating angels because there is at least something under them instead of just ground.And I think fading to black or to any color seems cooler anyway :cool:.
CARDS FOR SALE HERE!.
My alterted cards Gallery.
My Alters Blog.
Agreed. On a borderless card, the focus should be on the top half of the card. There's a lot to be said for the style of the background, as well. Galspanic's Isperia was gorgeous, and how he continued the perspective perfectly was amazing. The original art was intricate throughout. With Aurelia, The arches behind her aren't anywhere near as complex- they're kind of blocked in, which makes sense with the lighting and focus on the character.
Rogue Bard Media - My gallery and info on commissions can now be found right here!
For Sale - Pre-painted cards available for sale
My DeviantArt - All my other art
~*~*~*PIMP MY DECK!*~*~*~
My point is that I get this feeling from the altering community in general that's much better to fade to black because: It saves time, it reduces the chances of "screwing it up" the piece, it demmands less dedication regarding design, and also many people has this (and this is just my personal interpretation) weird feeling that covering what's going on next to the viewer's position feels more proper (this feeling probably comes from the summatory of many of the aforementioned facts, deppending on ech artist's case.) Galspanic's Isperia is a great example of what I'm trying to explain here. As another user said, it would have been so easy to just fade to black there, and also it would have felt very flowing, but hitting the nail on the head about how to extend the scenario feels just better for my personal taste and also for what art itself seems to have been conceived for: To show something else. To stimulate our senses, to help us to unveil what's there and cannot be seen. Not to just cover the possibilities with a shovelful of nothingness and turn our senses out. Of course, there are many pieces that are conceived to end into darkness at some point of their surface, but I'm pretty sure that, if you check the original artworks behind the cards, you'll notice there's something that's going on there at the foregrounds and that want to be shown to all of us.
Please, take this as my personal perception of this matter. I'm not expecting to change anybody's mind regarding this. Just giving you my opinion, wich happens to be relateively subjective as seems to be art itself as a concept.
EDIT: Also, remember that extending a card's art doesn't exactly mean to respect the original background and pallete. It also allows you to incorporate new elements, or even tweak the original ones to get what you want from your work.
some stuff
If anyone has some tips on doing portraits on cards, I'd appreciate it. I painted with oil before but with acrylic and considering the smaller size, its a lot harder.
Cards for sale
^This
More alterations.
My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic is owned by Hasbro.
Altered Cards for Sale Facebook Dev-Art
EDH
GBSavra: A Perfect Circle
BMachina III: The Machines of Geth
RRR Like a Bosh!
WUB Sharuum Solar Flare
UBR Thraximundar Zombie Beatdown
Altered Cards for Sale Facebook Dev-Art
EDH
GBSavra: A Perfect Circle
BMachina III: The Machines of Geth
Wow, thats really awesome. great joob on the detail of her dress. i like the fishies too
Haves/Wants
Collection
Something new from me:
Altered Cards for Sale Facebook Dev-Art
EDH
GBSavra: A Perfect Circle
BMachina III: The Machines of Geth
Art Page
Alters for sale
Fantastic Academy. There's a really neat delicate quality to your work with the mix of small/fine line work and all of the color that flushes it out. This and the earlier Sylvan library really are great pieces.
Are you working all in Acrylic/paint or are you doing line work with a fine technical pen too?
Check out videos of me altering: YouTube