[WIP] Trioculi

[qunit]

those 3 eyed creatures are really well made... they have alot od character built on them.... you can almost hear them call in a deep dolphin-like call..
the birds really add to the largness if those creatures.
i think it would be great if you shade the eyes alittle bit.... and use some more colors and shapes in the backround...
overfall its a great scene with great creatures

[TrevoriuS]

With the current perspective it also looks like the monsters are already 'above' the running people, which definately adds to the atmosphere. Of course you should make corrections to the perspective, but you may also try an impressionistic effect.

[ndchristie]

color-code the lines from a specific point ONLY with that color and so on.

I thought I did this?  ANd for the record there's a grand total of 2 vanishing points, with one subordinate point showing slope.  I don't think that's too many at all, considering a proper assessment could have used five or six, with subdivisions and such to judge scale.  I think it's really dumbed down personally if you read my original description (which says everything that the second one says, only faster).

The exact smae perspective point can be used to describe the human figures on the front if you so desire, there's no need to overcomplicate.

Actually no they can't.  Well, they can, but because the people are not aligned with that vanishing point, this would actually take more steps, more lines, and more confusion.  this would have created a thousand lines going to the same place which would i think have been far more confusing.  Better just to have them start their own process with only a few lines so that you can see how broken it is (new horizon would need to be underground, etc).

Perspective is a consideration of depth and priority, clarity is important when you try to explain something to someone. It's not just seeing it, it's being able to communicate it

I might have come in from the start with an explanation of my process if this was a piece about learning perspective, but it's not, it's a piece about monsters.  Personally i felt that it was much more sensible to say just to say "this is what's here, here's what you can do" than be like hey arachne let me take you on a magic carpet ride through perspective theory and then maybe talk about the answer .  TBH i think you're the only person who would care about the process  .  Most people don't want to hear about it, it's easy enough to just see the results.  If i didn't think that rosse's work was wrong i wouldn't even have made/posted the diagrams.  The step by step i gave isn't even a proper step by step, and there's no reason to assume that someone knows the processes, so to explain it to people who aren't accustomed would take pages of text.

Sorry for the off-topic, arachne.

[Turbo]

I understood ndchristie's perspective breakdown just fine, and agree with the points made. Before his edit, i didn't realise the two dudes were supposed to be on the same plane (i thought the furthest one was actually lower, behind a dune, and the closest one on top of the same dune).
Although, assuming from the perspective indicated by the shape of the closest monster's body where it hits the water, it shows the horizon to be at the height helm showed (crossing the vertical half-point of the picture), where the observer would be above the scene, maybe standing on top of a hill. Contrary to helm's edit, i think the closeness indicated between the monster and the running folk shows a more immediate sense of dread, instead of not showing how much little ground is left between them by changing the perspective point (the original's composition reminds me more of a painting; helm's reminds me more of a movie).

Assuming the perspective stays the same: if these beasts are so massive, they're relatively close to the beach (or lakeshore?). The water there isn't too deep, so, they're not much larger underneath the water, which detracts from their potential huegeness. If you want to change this, change the shape of the monster/water intersection to show further distance, or change the shore to show something other than sand (maybe rocks, which could imply further depths to the waters near them).

Anyways, looking great, and great potential. I like the vertical format you used for your latest pieces canvas.

[Ben2theEdge]

Regardless of technical details, Helm's edit with the lower vantage point serves the drama of the scene much better. Viewing the monster from above makes it feel small, viewing it from below makes it feel huge and puts us at the same level as the fleeing characters, making us more sympathetic towards them.

[edit] I think Helm already made most of these points but I second.

[Arachne]

You guys are awesome! Thanks a lot.



Here's what I have so far. Not quite sure how to combine the light reflected in the water with the mist.

The other guy is supposed to be lower than the closest one and behind the mound there. Maybe it's more apparent now.

[ndchristie]

The other guy is supposed to be lower than the closest one and behind the mound there. Maybe it's more apparent now.

my main point was that he cannot be lower than the other guy until you fix the shoreline, which the way you have it clearly suggests that it is inches from the front man and not more than a few inches lower than his feet - this area must be changed/obscured for the mound to work, because water is going to imply a plane and right now that plane is too high.  it's not the object that's the problem, it's the space in which it resides .

as far as the glow goes, what is fog other than water in air?  the lights should color the fog a bit where they have a path to reflect it.

[Helm]

Yes generally avoid crispness in fogbound environs. It will be a nice challenge for a medium that is so precise as pixel art and an artist that is so meticulous as you. Let some vagueness flow.

The way to get that mound to work is to separate it from the 'back' mound where the boat is placed. Make 3 distinctive planes: sea, early beach, top (darker or lighter ) mound where the girl is placed on, and which obscures half the other sailor.

oh btw to nathan: it was very difficult for me to read your reply to me without thinking you were talking in some sort of ironic fashion. I realized it was because you italic'ed the font to I guess, delegate that you were being off-topic. You have in the past used font coloring and whatever else to achieve this also. Italics isn't a good choice because it's closely associated on the internet with you know, being facetious and whatnot. I suggest just putting an OT tag on the top of the post, nobody complaints if the discussion is even marginally pertinent to the main thread anyway - as it were in our case.

[ndchristie]

oh btw to nathan

woops!  I'm not much of an internet-guy (this is my only forum, pixeljoint my only gallery, partisan my only blog...) - wasn't aware of an italics-sarcasm connection.  noted!

[Arachne]

Alright, first I removed the mound so I could more easily place that guy correctly. I hope I did. Then brightened the mound and darkened the rest. Hopefully not too subtle. This time I had a bit of trouble with the waves and making the sand look wet. Faded the closest creature out a bit more and started cleaning up. I don't think I'll mind obscuring the rest as much once I've spent a few more hours AAing that stuff.

as far as the glow goes, what is fog other than water in air?  the lights should color the fog a bit where they have a path to reflect it.

True, it's all water, but a cloud of miniscule droplets reflects light differently from a solid body of water.