[WIP] Pixel signature - Help constructing pose needed!

[tehwexxl0rz]

You really are picking apart what I said
I meant force of the arrow... and of course the arrow has force and of course the force would be transfered... but it isn't enough to send the guy flying back. It would most likely just knock his head back an inch or so(the same amount of distance of the hand firing the crossbow would recoil) and then he'd fall whichever way fits the scenario. I wasn't trying to get into some huge debate about this as I'm no physics major, just explaining that while the pose is better, it's just like Hollywood... over dramatized for viewing pleasure.

Ah-HAH, well that's very different!

Yes, he'd be knocked back with basically the same force as the recoil (a liiittle less because of air drag).

Although the distance would most likely be greater, dependent on the acceleration, because the mass absorbing the force—the guy's head—is presumably less than the mass opposing the force on the other end (ie: the mass of the crossbow, arm, and the shoulder.) It's the same principle as saaaay... a man getting shot with a cannonball. The cannon and the man absorb the same force (ignoring air drag), but the guy probably travels a lot farther.

Sorry! I don't mean to be obnoxious, I'm just really into physics, haha. Anyway, conceptually you got it, Dusty. Thanks for clarifying.

[ndchristie]

You really are picking apart what I said
I meant force of the arrow... and of course the arrow has force and of course the force would be transfered... but it isn't enough to send the guy flying back. It would most likely just knock his head back an inch or so(the same amount of distance of the hand firing the crossbow would recoil) and then he'd fall whichever way fits the scenario. I wasn't trying to get into some huge debate about this as I'm no physics major, just explaining that while the pose is better, it's just like Hollywood... over dramatized for viewing pleasure.

Ah-HAH, well that's very different!

Yes, he'd be knocked back with basically the same force as the recoil (a liiittle less because of air drag).

Although the distance would most likely be greater, dependent on the acceleration, because the mass absorbing the force—the guy's head—is presumably less than the mass opposing the force on the other end (ie: the mass of the crossbow, arm, and the shoulder.) It's the same principle as saaaay... a man getting shot with a cannonball. The cannon and the man absorb the same force (ignoring air drag), but the guy probably travels a lot farther.

Sorry! I don't mean to be obnoxious, I'm just really into physics, haha. Anyway, conceptually you got it, Dusty. Thanks for clarifying.

you can't compare the recoil on a crossbow to the impact, they are completely different forces acting on completely different objects.  the bow action is created by release of tension to start, which is a totally new ball of wax, as the parts which brace the machine are already by default holding in place the maximum amount of force that can be generated - it's all downhill from the draw weight.  Because of this bracing, most bow weapons move forwards when fired, not back, and only with a fraction of the force as most of the actions within the mechanism balance each other out.  It's not unrelated to the force of the arrow in flight, but it's different.

there's no way to know the draw weight or bolt weight on this nonsensical machine he's firing, so there's no way to tell the force of the bolt.  However, we can assume that the bolt has enough force behind it to penetrate the skull, which is enough to knock anybody's head back.

[tehwexxl0rz]

you can't compare the recoil on a crossbow to the impact, they are completely different forces acting on completely different objects.  the bow action is created by release of tension to start, which is a totally new ball of wax, as the parts which brace the machine are already by default holding in place the maximum amount of force that can be generated - it's all downhill from the draw weight.  Because of this bracing, most bow weapons move forwards when fired, not back, and only with a fraction of the force as most of the actions within the mechanism balance each other out.  It's not unrelated to the force of the arrow in flight, but it's different.

there's no way to know the draw weight or bolt weight on this nonsensical machine he's firing, so there's no way to tell the force of the bolt.  However, we can assume that the bolt has enough force behind it to penetrate the skull, which is enough to knock anybody's head back.

"you can't compare the recoil on a crossbow to the impact, they are completely different forces acting on completely different objects.
.....
It's not unrelated to the force of the arrow in flight, but it's different"

Contradictory much? Those mechanisms you listed that mostly nullify the recoil account for the mass I mentioned exerting the oppositional force. The thrust of the bolt that they are opposing is the SAME force—ignoring air drag—that the target's head is absorbing. That is how they are related.
Also, we do NOT assume that the force of the bolt's impact is enough to penetrate that skull; we know that as a given of the situation. The assumption is the knockback, which we base on our approximation of the head's mass, it's fixation to it's initial position, and the bolt's velocity.
Also, let it be known that when the bolt is airborne, the only forces acting upon it are downward (gravity) and backward (air drag). The idea that something needs a lingering force to continue carrying it along in a certain direction is archaic and defunct.

Also, let's get back on topic shall we? Sorry, `Rob.

In addition to the target's arms being drawn further back, I agree with Kcilc that there should be no bolt IN the crossbow. Also the lighting seems inconsistent to me on the target.... his face is lit from the front, but his cape is lit from the back.

[Dusty]

Well I wouldn't say this is really off-topic... no more than discussing anatomy and posture and center of balance. We're merely discussing the best way to determine a pose for the given situation. I will admit though that it may have become a bit too detailed and less helpful.

I don't think the dithering here is working. It just stands out and makes it look really, really rough. The values between the shades is so drastic that the dithering causes them to clash instead of blend. Also, it seems you have no concept of folds and how to construct them and I would practice on that. Particularly on the right guy's sleeve.

[tehwexxl0rz]

The less-helpful part was really to what I was referring.

I agree that the dithering gives everything a really rough texture, but maybe that's what you're going for? Some dithering is fine, but I think it would look nicer if you toned it down a bit. And yeah, the target's sleeve is a mess. I assumed it was very, very WIP.

[sharprm]

Don't assume the assasin and wizard have the same pose. Stand with one foot well behind the other. Slap yourself hard on the head. Head goes back abit but you don't fall. Now stand with your feet together. Slap yourself hard on the head. Did you feel like you were going to fall back?

Adarias - your crossbow going forward is surprising, are you sure? I'd say that because the mass of limbs move forward on release, then the entire system needs to move back, so COM is conserved, even without a bolt being fired.
 
'Rob- I would suggest drawing line art only until you are satisfied with the poses. I think you should definiately work on the helmet, it looks
mishapen. The wizard's hat seems too small. I'd remove blood from mouth - would there be enough time between him being in this semi-falling over position and blood to gush out his mouth? Also, was that helmet optional? Something seems weird to me about a guy with a helmet using a crossbow, wouldn't it be hard to see? Kclic's edit is pretty good, I'd suggest studying that. Why is the necklace going up, is there wind or something?

[ndchristie]

Adarias - your crossbow going forward is surprising, are you sure? I'd say that because the mass of limbs move forward on release, then the entire system needs to move back, so COM is conserved, even without a bolt being fired.

yup, because you don't stop pushing against the strain for a moment after the strain is gone.  try it yourself with a long thin dowel and some string.

[sharprm]

Adarias - your crossbow going forward is surprising, are you sure? I'd say that because the mass of limbs move forward on release, then the entire system needs to move back, so COM is conserved, even without a bolt being fired.

yup, because you don't stop pushing against the strain for a moment after the strain is gone.  try it yourself with a long thin dowel and some string.

Double sure? What you are describing is valid point for a bow and definately one I'll remember if a draw a bow animation. However, we are discussing a crossbow. As you know, this is a mechanical device where the string is held in its pulled back position by some sort of a locking mechanism. There isn't the same external force acting on the bow as when a human fires a bow. So I still dont believe it'll go forward. The only way to test this is putting a crossbow on a cart and seeing if it rolls back or forward after firing. Alternatively, a bow set up like this would represent what goes on in a crossbow.

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e199/sharprm/crossbow.jpg

I couldn't be stuffed setting up such an experiment, doubt any else would bother, so we'll never know. Looking at crossbow videos on youtube, it looks like there isn't much recoil (forward or back) so its not that important to the picture.

[ndchristie]

Adarias - your crossbow going forward is surprising, are you sure? I'd say that because the mass of limbs move forward on release, then the entire system needs to move back, so COM is conserved, even without a bolt being fired.

yup, because you don't stop pushing against the strain for a moment after the strain is gone.  try it yourself with a long thin dowel and some string.

Double sure? What you are describing is valid point for a bow and definately one I'll remember if a draw a bow animation. However, we are discussing a crossbow. As you know, this is a mechanical device where the string is held in its pulled back position by some sort of a locking mechanism. There isn't the same external force acting on the bow as when a human fires a bow. So I still dont believe it'll go forward. The only way to test this is putting a crossbow on a cart and seeing if it rolls back or forward after firing. Alternatively, a bow set up like this would represent what goes on in a crossbow.

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e199/sharprm/crossbow.jpg

I couldn't be stuffed setting up such an experiment, doubt any else would bother, so we'll never know. Looking at crossbow videos on youtube, it looks like there isn't much recoil (forward or back) so its not that important to the picture.

Ah, i somehow forgot that the crossbow is not drawn by hand (and therefor not pushed against by the arm) - silly me - so yes, because the force is applied to the arm only during the shot, you would feel it push backwards as it fired and - if you were not well braced - experience recoil.  my apologies.

[sharprm]

Adarias - no probs, it was fun thinking about it.

Rob - maybe you might want to draw a rough face for the assassin, then draw a helmet over it. I think there should be just as much head above the eyeline as below, so right now the 'visor' part is too high or the top of helmet is too low.