Well, I can see now your intentions, however it still remains strange to me your ways of doing things. I can see how you do not wish to copy exactly and do put your own spin on the art.
I do not see how placing muscles incorrectly and adding new muscles will do anything at all. Exaggerating them is one thing (and a part of style, just look at comic books), but misplacing them and adding new ones comes across not as intentional, but rather (as I initially assumed) due to a lack of understanding. I think it is a safe assumption that if something is wrong like this that it is unintentional, as it is something a person who does not know better does.
This can be sort of be compared to Shakespeare who intentionally mispelled words for effect and rhyme. If you were to see someone make many spelling errors it is a safer assumption that they are not the best speller. Sure, they may intentionally be doing it, but the chances they are is so slim it is hardly worth noting.
I guess we just think differently, for I will always see added muscles like this as wrong and something that was unintended due to ignorance (which is, by the way, different than stupidity). You see it as adding to the fantasy. I personally don't see any of this as just someone's "style".
I guess this was a bit of a misunderstanding, and I apologize if I have offended anybody.
PS: About the bit on placing compliments around the "BS" as you call it (which obviously I take some offense at)--I really do enjoy your work, I do not just say things like that. You have excellent rendering skills that make for a beautiful picture. I simply put the compliments on either end as sometimes I can come off as harsh or rude or whatever, and some people need some nice things said about their work. Almost all I said was on things to be improved, as I feel that one should focus on weak points rather than just glorify their strong ones, which does nothing to help improve and would just come off as sucking up anyways. I wrote about what I felt could be improved rather than what I thought was great because I thought you would appreciate it more (I know I would rather have someone tell me what is wrong with a picture and what could be improved than "it looks great!!11!").
EDIT: Forgot to mention that I have to disagree with your point of it not being a human and thus not needing to follow human anatomy. I think all humanoids follow pretty much the same anatomy, for instance an elf might have different ears and maybe different proportions, but otherwise is the same. A centaur still has regular human anatomy on its upper body, and regular horse anatomy for the rest of it. Nothing changes just because it doesn't exist.
While I see the point you are making, I feel that this is not the case in this particular drawing. Having studied human anatomy, I can clearly see that it is a lack of knowledge/understanding of the muscles, not having them misplaced on purpose. As I mentioned earlier, the body is not actually showing any signs of decomposing, your only argument for this is that its face is decomposing. The legs prove a good example of where it is not an "intended imperfection", the muscles drawn there simply don't exist. It clearly is not a case of all the muscles being put in the wrong spots as a way of representing the decomposition of the body, rather it is all the muscles being put in the wrong spots because the artist did not know any better. If it were intended as you say, it would look nothing like it does now.
I agree with you on the fact that the face is distorted and is represented purely as "artistic interpretation" as you call it. If you notice, not once did I mention anything about the face. I commented on the body of this zombie, which is clearly NOT decomposing. There is not rotting flesh, or missing muscles or exposed muscle/bone. There are no signs of decomposation beyond the face. And so I pointed out anatomical problems with the body. Had there been visible decomposition going on with the body, I would not have commented, but as it is one can assume that the anatomy would remain the same as if it were alive.
Wow, I don't see why everyone has to jump on me for giving some constructive critisism. I saw an area in which it could be improved, so that in the future TTTF will be a better artist.
It is a pointless argument to say that it is a zombie, so it needs not have proper anatomy. It is not decomposing or stitched together, the only thing that is different is the face. The rest of the body should have regular anatomy. even if it was stitched together I would expect it to have proper anatomy, as stitching would just reattach a lost bady part, not change the insertions of muscles.
If no one appreciates the time I have taken to help out a fellow artist, then in the future I won't bother with giving critiques. I saw a serious artist with potential, and gave my two cents on their artwork. It does not mean that everybody else should argue that it is not necessary when it clearly is.
Congratulations on saving it. Where I live, there is a Wild Bird Centre where people who find injured or sick birds bring them and they have veteranarians (sp?) to take care of them until they can be released into the wild. Some can never be released for various reasons (such as being albino and an easy target, or just havign an injury that cannot fully heal) so they stay in spacious cages similar to their natural habitat. People can visit the Centre and make donations as it is completely non-profit. I would try to find out if there is a place like this where you live.
As for identifying it, it is a very simple matter. A female house sparrow will be a rather plain tan colour all over, with a lighter stripe over its eye, like an eyebrow. A Pine siskin would be smaller (the size of a goldfinch) and would be incredibly streaky, with some wingbars. A tree sparrow would be very gray all over (plain, not streaky, and is all gray on its stomach with a dot in the middle), with some reddish parts on its back and head (it would also have a gray stripe abouve its eyebrow). There are some other species it could be as well, such as a song sparrow, which is reddish and very streaky with a spot on the breast. If you can post some pictures, I would be happy to identify it for you. Good luck!
I think it is called artistic interpretation, or not having a degree in Medicine.
It does not take a degree in medicine to have a basic understanding of the human body. I am merely a 15 year old kid. It is important to know anatomy if one wishes to persue an art career, and I am simply pointing out some errors which were visible to me. I can guarantee that almost all (if not all) MTG artists have studied anatomy and been to life-drawing classes. This is because in order to achieve a higher level of realism and improve the overall art quality anatomy is vital. A beautifully rendered painting can be completely ruined if the foundations of it are off, things like proportions, anatomy, perspective etc. It is not "artistic interpretation", it is a lack of the understanding of the muscles.
TTTF: I love your work. Just thought I would pop in and say a good job to you. However, on the last mat, I feel that a better sense of anatomy would improve it greatly. The arms really bug me, the way the muscles twist like that. Starting with its right arm (our left) one can see how the tricep is drawn to twist medially downwards, when it should descend toward the the lateral epicondyle of the humerus. The two supinators (brachioradialis and extensor carpi radialis longus) attach far too low on the arm, they should start to descend down from the bottom third of the humerus. The other arm (our right, its left) has a similar problems. The ulna furrow should point towards the lateral part of the wrist, as opposed to following the direction of the radius. The wrist looks strange as well, bulging oddly; only the ulna would stick out that much, while the radius and other bones would not protrude, and would be covered in a ramp of tendons.
The legs look also anatomically off, it looks as though you invented many muscles there, while on the top of the leg only three muscles would be visible-- vastus medialis, vastus lateralis and rectus femoris. The leg in shadow appears to be much too small and the upper leg would certainly be longer.
All in all a fantastic piece of art, but it could still be improved.
Sorry for missing the last update :/. Usually I comment on you stuff so here goes:
I am with the evil-dolphins-picture liking group. The reason for this is probably because the other picture seems just too empty. There is nothing going on really, and no story or anything to be taken form it. The background isn't defined at all, which leaves the viewer wondering what a man with a big hole in his chest is doing or how he came to be like that. When I first saw it my initial thought was that he was falling.
The first picture with the creatures in it is much stronger, and at least I can now guess why the man has this giant hole in him. Unfortunately, the picture still does not read very well, and I am still wondering what is happening. Due to the fact that you called the monsters evil dolphins, I am guessing this takes place underwater, however to me it looks more like kicked up dust. And if he were underwater why is there no billowing blood leaking from his chest? There are some other things I think could be cleared up more, such as what that stone-like thing his head is resting on.
As for things of a more technical standpoint, I think the rendering is very good (although a better defined lightsource help), and I think the choice in colours adds to the gloomy mysterious mood of it. Perhaps it is a bit too dark, but that may just be me. The character's anatomy needs some work, his neck is a little weird to me (the sternomastoid should be thicker and descend to the clavicle), his torso looks a little bit short, and the foreshortening on his leg and arm seem off. His upper leg should be considerably shorter as it is coming towards us and is foreshortened (right now it actually looks longer than the other leg).
To me one of the most interesting things about this piece are the creatures. They each look slightly different from one another, which bothers me, but they are pretty cool looking. I would like to see a full one of them. Speaking of the creatures, why is the closest one upside-down? Nothing really wrong with it, but it seems odd.
Okay, well that sound kind of harsh, but in reality I think this is one of your best yet, and look forward to more updates.
I really like the last batch. There are some anatomy problems, but they aren't too apparent (small things like in the first picture the radius should cross over the ulna, not under). I think the first two pictures are the stronger of the bunch. The frog-like creature is interesting, but its legs are strange and it takes away (look at some reference photoes of frogs and it will make it look much more natural and better). The last guy is rendered well and in a cool style, but is hard to read. I would reposition him, as right now it is cluttered and confusing (you want to avoid having silhouettes which you cannot tell what is what). Keep up the good work!
EDIT: I forgot to ask, why is there faint typed writing over all your pictures? Are you doing these on the back of scrap paper? If so, I would recommend buying a sketchbook to keep all your drawings in.
Like a magic trick or something? I think you should be a bit more specific. Anyways, the biggest wow thing I can do is solve a 5 x 5 Rubik's Cube. You can learn a regular Rubik's Cube online pretty easily--there are plenty of sites showing the various algorithms necessary.
An interesting start. I agree with you that perhaps you should show the front instead. Currently I absolutely love the colours, but there are a couple things I don't like so much. Mostly it is the wand-- one would think that a planeswalker would not need a wand to aid his magic powers. Right now I see a character more like Hagrid than a planeswalker. Also, the glowing light thing isn't reading well for me. Is it from the tip of the wand? Is it the eye of the bear? Why is it glowing? Doesn't make too much sense. Also, the pose looks almost as though he is attacking the bear (as opposed to summoning or controlling it), although part of this is the way the wand being pointed at the bear.
Voted Bad Luck. I felt he had the strongest piece in this contest. I particularly like the humour in it, and the way he used light simple colours; it reminds me of a watercolour wash.
I do not see how placing muscles incorrectly and adding new muscles will do anything at all. Exaggerating them is one thing (and a part of style, just look at comic books), but misplacing them and adding new ones comes across not as intentional, but rather (as I initially assumed) due to a lack of understanding. I think it is a safe assumption that if something is wrong like this that it is unintentional, as it is something a person who does not know better does.
This can be sort of be compared to Shakespeare who intentionally mispelled words for effect and rhyme. If you were to see someone make many spelling errors it is a safer assumption that they are not the best speller. Sure, they may intentionally be doing it, but the chances they are is so slim it is hardly worth noting.
I guess we just think differently, for I will always see added muscles like this as wrong and something that was unintended due to ignorance (which is, by the way, different than stupidity). You see it as adding to the fantasy. I personally don't see any of this as just someone's "style".
I guess this was a bit of a misunderstanding, and I apologize if I have offended anybody.
PS: About the bit on placing compliments around the "BS" as you call it (which obviously I take some offense at)--I really do enjoy your work, I do not just say things like that. You have excellent rendering skills that make for a beautiful picture. I simply put the compliments on either end as sometimes I can come off as harsh or rude or whatever, and some people need some nice things said about their work. Almost all I said was on things to be improved, as I feel that one should focus on weak points rather than just glorify their strong ones, which does nothing to help improve and would just come off as sucking up anyways. I wrote about what I felt could be improved rather than what I thought was great because I thought you would appreciate it more (I know I would rather have someone tell me what is wrong with a picture and what could be improved than "it looks great!!11!").
EDIT: Forgot to mention that I have to disagree with your point of it not being a human and thus not needing to follow human anatomy. I think all humanoids follow pretty much the same anatomy, for instance an elf might have different ears and maybe different proportions, but otherwise is the same. A centaur still has regular human anatomy on its upper body, and regular horse anatomy for the rest of it. Nothing changes just because it doesn't exist.
It is a pointless argument to say that it is a zombie, so it needs not have proper anatomy. It is not decomposing or stitched together, the only thing that is different is the face. The rest of the body should have regular anatomy. even if it was stitched together I would expect it to have proper anatomy, as stitching would just reattach a lost bady part, not change the insertions of muscles.
If no one appreciates the time I have taken to help out a fellow artist, then in the future I won't bother with giving critiques. I saw a serious artist with potential, and gave my two cents on their artwork. It does not mean that everybody else should argue that it is not necessary when it clearly is.
As for identifying it, it is a very simple matter. A female house sparrow will be a rather plain tan colour all over, with a lighter stripe over its eye, like an eyebrow. A Pine siskin would be smaller (the size of a goldfinch) and would be incredibly streaky, with some wingbars. A tree sparrow would be very gray all over (plain, not streaky, and is all gray on its stomach with a dot in the middle), with some reddish parts on its back and head (it would also have a gray stripe abouve its eyebrow). There are some other species it could be as well, such as a song sparrow, which is reddish and very streaky with a spot on the breast. If you can post some pictures, I would be happy to identify it for you. Good luck!
It does not take a degree in medicine to have a basic understanding of the human body. I am merely a 15 year old kid. It is important to know anatomy if one wishes to persue an art career, and I am simply pointing out some errors which were visible to me. I can guarantee that almost all (if not all) MTG artists have studied anatomy and been to life-drawing classes. This is because in order to achieve a higher level of realism and improve the overall art quality anatomy is vital. A beautifully rendered painting can be completely ruined if the foundations of it are off, things like proportions, anatomy, perspective etc. It is not "artistic interpretation", it is a lack of the understanding of the muscles.
The legs look also anatomically off, it looks as though you invented many muscles there, while on the top of the leg only three muscles would be visible-- vastus medialis, vastus lateralis and rectus femoris. The leg in shadow appears to be much too small and the upper leg would certainly be longer.
All in all a fantastic piece of art, but it could still be improved.
I am with the evil-dolphins-picture liking group. The reason for this is probably because the other picture seems just too empty. There is nothing going on really, and no story or anything to be taken form it. The background isn't defined at all, which leaves the viewer wondering what a man with a big hole in his chest is doing or how he came to be like that. When I first saw it my initial thought was that he was falling.
The first picture with the creatures in it is much stronger, and at least I can now guess why the man has this giant hole in him. Unfortunately, the picture still does not read very well, and I am still wondering what is happening. Due to the fact that you called the monsters evil dolphins, I am guessing this takes place underwater, however to me it looks more like kicked up dust. And if he were underwater why is there no billowing blood leaking from his chest? There are some other things I think could be cleared up more, such as what that stone-like thing his head is resting on.
As for things of a more technical standpoint, I think the rendering is very good (although a better defined lightsource help), and I think the choice in colours adds to the gloomy mysterious mood of it. Perhaps it is a bit too dark, but that may just be me. The character's anatomy needs some work, his neck is a little weird to me (the sternomastoid should be thicker and descend to the clavicle), his torso looks a little bit short, and the foreshortening on his leg and arm seem off. His upper leg should be considerably shorter as it is coming towards us and is foreshortened (right now it actually looks longer than the other leg).
To me one of the most interesting things about this piece are the creatures. They each look slightly different from one another, which bothers me, but they are pretty cool looking. I would like to see a full one of them. Speaking of the creatures, why is the closest one upside-down? Nothing really wrong with it, but it seems odd.
Okay, well that sound kind of harsh, but in reality I think this is one of your best yet, and look forward to more updates.
http://www.makeupandmonsters.com/FAKE_Bigfoot_stories.htm
EDIT: I forgot to ask, why is there faint typed writing over all your pictures? Are you doing these on the back of scrap paper? If so, I would recommend buying a sketchbook to keep all your drawings in.
EDIT: Here it is http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=78739