STF mod creator, Modcrafters.com admin, CampaignCreations.org staff
The technical drawing isn't good at all. Lacks shadows, pencil quality, volumetry between many things that I will stop to mention because if I don't I'll start with one of my bastard analysis.
And unless that thing is flying while producing flames or something it MUST have a projected land shadow.
Second look, it does have a suggested pencil quality but my guess is that he didn't use different pencil graduations, I stand with that unless he says otherwise.
Dear Corbo:
Yes, shading is only hinted, nothing commited because I'm not confident in defining volume through shading.
I used a mechanical pencil, only varied my pressure. No use of different leads (HB, F, etc). I always found switching pencils to disturb flow and concentration, though that's simply because I never got myself used to the process. That, and softer lead always ends up on my hands. =oP
As for the "land shadow", technically the light source could be from behind the 'camera', and thus the shadow would be projected behind the figure. The horizon line is also fairly level with the view. In any case, I never defined the background beyond crude suggestion, nor is the direction of my light source defined.
So... you draw a sketch and the basic rules & concepts of design & drawing don't apply just because you drew an sketch?
Intent, my dear Corbo. My intent in this image was to show a creature design. Thus it qualifies as a sketch (
Definition: "a simply or hastily executed drawing or painting, esp. a preliminary one, giving the essential features without the details.") rather than a more detailed illustration. Granted, more detail, shadow, scenery, even color would certainly improve the quality of the image, but the lack of these things is superficial to the intent.
And with art, there are no
rules. Silly boy. =oP Merely guidelines to improve visual impact, depending on your goal and intent.
Dear Phobos:
Do you have Photoshop? You could desaturate the image to remove the blue. Anywho, pretty good, though the eye, nose, and mouth are simplified and thus come out flat, as opposed to the shading you did on the jacket to express the folds and volume. When an image is not consistent in its approach, the differences point out the flaws in one another.
Dear everyone:
My initial sketch was to express a creature design for a project of mine. Luckily, I knew people far more talented than myself in the field of drawing. As a team, we developed the design through many stages.
Size comparison to a human.
We dropped the exoskeletal concept in favor of flesh. Then we decided to remove the shoulder globes (brain casings) due to animation concerns on the four arms and globes being too much in one area.
Here you can see how the forearm splits and closes when swimming, revealing a fin.
A closeup of the gills behind the jawbone.
Here we were deciding on the orientation of the four arms to one another, either vertically or horizontally aligned. We reasoned the horizontal approach would limit arm movement in animation, so we went with the vertical alignment.
Gesture drawings for the six maestro types. Also some anatomy on the skull and neck cords.
Arm anatomy and how the fins extend.
Leg anatomy and how its fins extend.
Reaver anatomy, an appendage that extends out of the chest. In this sketch, it was referred to as the Scythe or "sythe".
In the end, this is what we came up with:
A generic Kerubim warrior with Reaver extended.
One of the six maestro classes.
A color comp for the Gravitonic Maestro.
Armor concept. We drew all maestros nude, so we could photocopy them and draw different armor concepts over each.
Different color comps for the Nephilim, a newborn Voa.
The whole cast assembled in a height comparison. (Note, each character is from a seperate image, so they do not all share the same view plane)
Anywho, that's a lot of pictures. Hope I don't break anyone on a slow connection.