Affiliates |
|
Latest topics | » Deepest regards to the Sneaky CommunityFri Apr 10, 2020 11:27 pm by sabian49 » damn sneaky, RiP. It was funSat Oct 11, 2014 1:25 am by Sylen7Nato» Just Another Blonde Joke xD FUNNY AS FAWKMon Mar 03, 2014 5:37 pm by Rossy Redness » Hey it's Skinny107Tue Dec 03, 2013 8:24 pm by o5Gz » ps3 hacking!Mon Jun 10, 2013 9:42 pm by Sylen7Nato» PSP ISO ListMon Jun 10, 2013 9:28 pm by Sylen7Nato» tiger renderFri May 10, 2013 3:11 pm by mk7 » SWORN. Sun Dec 09, 2012 6:25 am by EverEffects» homefront redeem codeFri Nov 30, 2012 1:32 am by EverEffects» Calling SwornTue Nov 20, 2012 4:34 pm by EverEffects» Thought Id Stop By And Say HiThu Nov 15, 2012 3:40 am by HappySnacks69 » An Introduction Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:33 am by Ace700 |
Statistics | We have 4719 registered users The newest registered user is CraftPR
Our users have posted a total of 13086 messages in 2891 subjects
|
Who is online? | In total there are 11 users online :: 0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 11 Guests
None
Most users ever online was 328 on Sun Jul 04, 2021 8:20 am
|
|
| Battle Nightmare v Cheesy | |
|
Better tag? | Sig 1 | | 44% | [ 4 ] | Sig 2 | | 56% | [ 5 ] |
| Total Votes : 9 | | |
| Author | Message |
---|
Nightmare Finest
Posts : 309 1337ness : 9 Join date : 2010-11-25 Age : 26 Location : California
| Subject: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:28 am | |
| Sig 1) Sig 2) Comment why which is better or vote dont count |
| | | +Elegance Super 1337
Posts : 638 1337ness : 34 Join date : 2010-09-17 Age : 28 Location : Houston
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:32 am | |
| I go with tag 2 but the text is horrible. Tag 1 has better text. Tag 2 has better depth and and blending |
| | | EverEffects
Administrator
Posts : 805 1337ness : 25 Join date : 2010-10-31 Age : 31 Location : Oklahoma CIty
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:55 am | |
| I say they both have shitty text, but I vote tag 2 based on blending. |
| | | DaBigBoss Super Moderator
Posts : 424 1337ness : 6 Join date : 2010-09-17 Age : 28
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:03 am | |
| tag 2 based on blen ding and depgth and like u cris said they both had bad text |
| | | KnightMaire Vip
Posts : 229 1337ness : 20 Join date : 2011-01-29 Age : 30 Location : Massachusetts
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:10 am | |
| Sig 2 is ugly as F***. There. |
| | | SwoRNLeaDejZ
Administrator
Posts : 2120 1337ness : 140 Join date : 2010-09-17 Age : 38 Location : Massachusetts
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:16 am | |
| I'm not really feelin either tag, but #1 GMV |
| | | kHaoZ Vip
Posts : 472 1337ness : 29 Join date : 2010-11-11 Age : 32 Location : Cali
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:01 am | |
| - KnightMaire wrote:
- Sig 2 is ugly as F***. There.
That really wasn't necessary. Sig 2 had better depth and blending. Both tags looked like they were rushed. I voted sig 2. |
| | | KnightMaire Vip
Posts : 229 1337ness : 20 Join date : 2011-01-29 Age : 30 Location : Massachusetts
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:04 am | |
| - NoHate wrote:
- KnightMaire wrote:
- Sig 2 is ugly as F***. There.
That really wasn't necessary. Sig 2 had better depth and blending. Both tags looked like they were rushed. I voted sig 2. My real reason: I walk into a store, see two album covers (sig 1 and sig 2). I'd rather shit in public than buy an album cover with the second one on it. No one would be like ' OH, that has nice blending, i think that's the one im gunna buy". --YES, i know these aren't going into stores (duh) -- but be realistic. If any of these people go into the GFx field, they aren't going to be making things like this. Therefore i just voted on looks. |
| | | kHaoZ Vip
Posts : 472 1337ness : 29 Join date : 2010-11-11 Age : 32 Location : Cali
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:13 am | |
| - KnightMaire wrote:
My real reason: I walk into a store, see two album covers (sig 1 and sig 2). I'd rather shit in public than buy an album cover with the second one on it. No one would be like ' OH, that has nice blending, i think that's the one im gunna buy".
--YES, i know these aren't going into stores (duh) -- but be realistic. If any of these people go into the GFx field, they aren't going to be making things like this.
Therefore i just voted on looks. Your logic about the album covers is flawed due to people buying because they like the artists music not on how good the designers they hire are. We aren't anywhere close to what we are voting on with that example you just gave. Im just saying you shouldn't be able to say, 'oh yeah that tag looks like shit so im not going to vote that one' without having any knowledge in the area. |
| | | KnightMaire Vip
Posts : 229 1337ness : 20 Join date : 2011-01-29 Age : 30 Location : Massachusetts
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:12 am | |
| - NoHate wrote:
- KnightMaire wrote:
My real reason: I walk into a store, see two album covers (sig 1 and sig 2). I'd rather shit in public than buy an album cover with the second one on it. No one would be like ' OH, that has nice blending, i think that's the one im gunna buy".
--YES, i know these aren't going into stores (duh) -- but be realistic. If any of these people go into the GFx field, they aren't going to be making things like this.
Therefore i just voted on looks. Your logic about the album covers is flawed due to people buying because they like the artists music not on how good the designers they hire are. We aren't anywhere close to what we are voting on with that example you just gave. Im just saying you shouldn't be able to say, 'oh yeah that tag looks like shit so im not going to vote that one' without having any knowledge in the area. Okay fine, not album cover. bad example. Art gallery. Same logic. no one isn't going to buy a poster just because the "blending is good". They will look at the picture as a whole |
| | | skinny107 Super Moderator
Posts : 361 1337ness : 10 Join date : 2010-09-25 Age : 27 Location : Inglewood, CA
| Subject: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:14 am | |
| to tell the truth i dont like nether one but if i had to choose i choose #2 |
| | | EverEffects
Administrator
Posts : 805 1337ness : 25 Join date : 2010-10-31 Age : 31 Location : Oklahoma CIty
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:14 pm | |
| - KnightMaire wrote:
- NoHate wrote:
- KnightMaire wrote:
My real reason: I walk into a store, see two album covers (sig 1 and sig 2). I'd rather shit in public than buy an album cover with the second one on it. No one would be like ' OH, that has nice blending, i think that's the one im gunna buy".
--YES, i know these aren't going into stores (duh) -- but be realistic. If any of these people go into the GFx field, they aren't going to be making things like this.
Therefore i just voted on looks. Your logic about the album covers is flawed due to people buying because they like the artists music not on how good the designers they hire are. We aren't anywhere close to what we are voting on with that example you just gave. Im just saying you shouldn't be able to say, 'oh yeah that tag looks like shit so im not going to vote that one' without having any knowledge in the area. Okay fine, not album cover. bad example. Art gallery. Same logic. no one isn't going to buy a poster just because the "blending is good". They will look at the picture as a whole My turn to try to make this make sense to you. As graphic artist working on these types of pictures, there is a list persay of things you need to incorperate into your tags to make it come out great. Flow, the movement of the picture. Keeping everything going in one direction keeps the eyes from wondering off. Based off of the focal you use, the flow will generally go off of the body movement or lighting on your focal. Depth, the illusion that the picture is pushing 3D. Generally burning and dodging areas will keep this appearance looking good. Sometimes giving is a Gaussian blur is a good way to add depth making it look like you're focusing in only on the focal and the BG will catch your eye less. Lighting, giving your picture a light source or using your light source will help your depth and flow out tremendously. Burning and dodging is a great way to make the light source more realistic. Effects, adding C4D's, fracticals, lens flares, etc.. Those are to keep your picture interesting and not be so boring. Its crucial where you place them or you will ruin your flow. Blending, making your picture look natural. You cannot have a brightly red focal but have a blueish tint to your background. Using photo filters, Gmaps, and other blending options you'll be able make it look more realistic. BUTT there is a possibility of over doing it. And tag number two is a example. Instead of making everything look natural, he just made the whole thing orange. Text, keep it simple and close to your focal until you learn some typography. In the end, both of these tags are not that great, but you really shouldn't talk down to them unless you can do better. |
| | | Guest Guest
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:16 pm | |
| - +vB.Chris wrote:
- KnightMaire wrote:
- NoHate wrote:
- KnightMaire wrote:
My real reason: I walk into a store, see two album covers (sig 1 and sig 2). I'd rather shit in public than buy an album cover with the second one on it. No one would be like ' OH, that has nice blending, i think that's the one im gunna buy".
--YES, i know these aren't going into stores (duh) -- but be realistic. If any of these people go into the GFx field, they aren't going to be making things like this.
Therefore i just voted on looks. Your logic about the album covers is flawed due to people buying because they like the artists music not on how good the designers they hire are. We aren't anywhere close to what we are voting on with that example you just gave. Im just saying you shouldn't be able to say, 'oh yeah that tag looks like shit so im not going to vote that one' without having any knowledge in the area. Okay fine, not album cover. bad example. Art gallery. Same logic. no one isn't going to buy a poster just because the "blending is good". They will look at the picture as a whole My turn to try to make this make sense to you.
As graphic artist working on these types of pictures, there is a list persay of things you need to incorperate into your tags to make it come out great.
Flow, the movement of the picture. Keeping everything going in one direction keeps the eyes from wondering off. Based off of the focal you use, the flow will generally go off of the body movement or lighting on your focal.
Depth, the illusion that the picture is pushing 3D. Generally burning and dodging areas will keep this appearance looking good. Sometimes giving is a Gaussian blur is a good way to add depth making it look like you're focusing in only on the focal and the BG will catch your eye less.
Lighting, giving your picture a light source or using your light source will help your depth and flow out tremendously. Burning and dodging is a great way to make the light source more realistic.
Effects, adding C4D's, fracticals, lens flares, etc.. Those are to keep your picture interesting and not be so boring. Its crucial where you place them or you will ruin your flow.
Blending, making your picture look natural. You cannot have a brightly red focal but have a blueish tint to your background. Using photo filters, Gmaps, and other blending options you'll be able make it look more realistic. BUTT there is a possibility of over doing it. And tag number two is a example. Instead of making everything look natural, he just made the whole thing orange.
Text, keep it simple and close to your focal until you learn some typography.
In the end, both of these tags are not that great, but you really shouldn't talk down to them unless you can do better. ok ok ok ok ok hold on EVERYONE before this argument gets worse, just calm down and let the votes decide. do CNC after the fact not during, and be nice to both sigs, they worked hard on them so give them that credit ps its inseption. a quote inside a quote inside a quote |
| | | SwoRNLeaDejZ
Administrator
Posts : 2120 1337ness : 140 Join date : 2010-09-17 Age : 38 Location : Massachusetts
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:46 pm | |
| OK, first of all, I agree with both arguements, and ill rant now to explain why.
When you put up a battle, and ask some of our 425 members to vote on an outcome, you have to be prepared for people who are not GFX inclined, or GFX members to vote on the battle. If you dont want people who arent in the GFX groups to vote, post these polls in the GFx VIP section. I agree with KnightMaire, because the casual SC user is going to vote based on looks, PERIOD. They arent going to break each tag down into the 5 holy categories of computer graphics, and CNC each piece. Not realistic, not going to happen, and as far as he was concerned, number 2 was inferior to number one.
That being said, i also agree with EE and NoHate. When you post a response to a battle, it is customary to vote, give a reason why, and click send. Downing one of the pieces, and calling it "shit" isnt really necessary. As a newcomer to the community, im certainly not going to hold that against someone. It's customary in the GFx community, to vote, and give a thumbs up to both entrants, as a nod of effort. To show them that you, although maybe you didnt vote for them, recognize the fact that they put the effort in to making the piece. Alot of these kids use these battles as a means to progress, so it isnt necessarily wise to downplay their effort, or crap all over them either.
I voted for Sig 1, because to me, sig 2 seemed very unrealistic, rushed, and chaotic. I didnt necessarily like sig 1 either, but i liked it more than #2, because i thought even though it is drastically undersharpened, and has absolutely no flow, it was more realistic looking than sig 2.
Cant we all just get along? |
| | | KnightMaire Vip
Posts : 229 1337ness : 20 Join date : 2011-01-29 Age : 30 Location : Massachusetts
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Thu Feb 10, 2011 8:08 pm | |
| i didn't say it was shit, i said it was ugly - there's a difference =] and plus -^ is my opinion personally i think requiring a comment for a vote is dumb in the first place so...... |
| | | --J2atecl-- Super Moderator
Posts : 345 1337ness : 19 Join date : 2011-01-23 Age : 29 Location : In Your Closest (No Seriously Check Your Closest Im Hiding There, Bring Me Some Chicken Wings Aswell)
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy Fri Feb 11, 2011 11:43 am | |
| okay i voted for sig1.
reason why sig1, it looks better overall, lightning was good and it looked liked the background/foreground fitted perfectly
sig2. i would have voted for sig 2 but its kinda ugly, but i can see there is a lot of effort put in the lighting & depth but if it looked better, i would have voted for it |
| | | Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: Battle Nightmare v Cheesy | |
| |
| | | | Battle Nightmare v Cheesy | |
|
Page 1 of 1 | |
| Permissions in this forum: | You cannot reply to topics in this forum
| |
| |
| |