c&c plz







millenium wrote:They look exactly on the same dimension.
Faiien wrote:thx for your opinionmillenium wrote:They look exactly on the same dimension.
question:if the bg and the girl look like there on the same dimension wouldnt that mean they blend?










millenium wrote:you still haven't grasped the basic concepts of how a sig can look good.
Icealya wrote:5.6/10
I didnt say you had to love it, i like the honest opinions but comments above just make me go...what?.rek wrote:If we didnt crit you properly you'd be making the same things over and over agian thinking evryone loves what you do.
very nice the colors go well with the render
I like this, but it just seems ... weird. But it's still pretty good.
its pretty sweet man, for some reason i dont like the girl on it though.. but nice work
drop the text and it will be much better. other than that looks nice.


BrokenSaint wrote:What do you mean by realism tag?
Faiien wrote:btw i posted this in gamerenders and got totally different commnentsvery nice the colors go well with the renderI like this, but it just seems ... weird. But it's still pretty good.its pretty sweet man, for some reason i dont like the girl on it though.. but nice workdrop the text and it will be much better. other than that looks nice.
which totally sends me mixed signals
Faiien wrote:be glad someone comments on your sigs even if their negative comments.
take what you can get and improve your sigs based on that. If you feel they are wrong then thank them for the comment, ignore them, and move on, no need to advance it any further than that. I would be so nauseated if people here tried to make everything too "acceptable to the common artist" in a sense.
Faiien wrote:HOLLAstir wrote:I've been a member of numerous gfx sites and still am. Honestly the critique you got from me would be the same if not worse on other forums. Ofcourse, there will always be someone who loves your style and others who don't care for it. It is art afterall. I've been doing gfx for many years, so although many don't see my opinions to be "professional" I do know what i'm talking about. On a personal note, I think you should join up gfx sites, you should hear other experienced artist's views on your work. I'll try to be more clear with my criticism in the future.
+1
if you think the comments on here are harsh...lol
Millenium wrote:No hun ^^ It means they're FLAT looking (just like my chest, wtf who said that??!?)
BLENDED would mean they look naturally um...interracting with each other I guess?
Hostage wrote:BrokenSaint wrote:What do you mean by realism tag?
I think it's like making a sig without the use of c4ds brushes etc. Mostly just taking images from different stocks and making it into one image, right?


cin wrote:well if it makes you feel good when you get only good criticism like "looks nice",
"Pretty good", "Pretty sweet" etc... then why keep posting your sigs here asking
for our comment? if that other forum of yours is so great, then why even listen to
what we have to say here?
cin wrote:man i hate whiners.
you ask for criticism, you get criticism.
i'm not after criticism thats why you never see me make NSR topics.
ok heres where the path divereged, i told them i didnt like their sigs and pointed out flaws i didnt say anything elsecin wrote:edit: if i remember correctly, you got the exact same comment by other users not
too long ago. stuff like you need to cut them some slack because you weren't even
capable of giving good, positive comments. back then you thought that was the right
thing to do; no sweet talk, just tell them what you don't like about the pieces.
so why is it different now that people comment you?
actually hurt, that felt more like an insult than a critique on the actual sig itself. I hope i clarified myself.millenium wrote:you still haven't grasped the basic concepts of how a sig can look good.
Faiien wrote:cin wrote:man i hate whiners.
you ask for criticism, you get criticism.
i'm not after criticism thats why you never see me make NSR topics.
if your whining that you hate whiners then what are you? lol
Faiien wrote:actually hurt, that felt more like an insult than a critique on the actual sig itself. I hope i clarified myself.millenium wrote:you still haven't grasped the basic concepts of how a sig can look good.
Photomanipulation tags mainly rely on good blending, great color, and excellent stock. If you fail at finding either one of these your final product will not turn out so well. Its more difficult than the usual sig because blending is a b!tch and the stocks have to be placed in the correct order or else things look completely wrong. + it relies more on placement&color rather on effects.
Sorta like a movie. There are some movies out there that look b@d@ss due to their special effects and cgi while others barely have any of those special effects but rely more on the acting and storyline.


waisha wrote:cin is not the one being hypocritical here, honey.
so plz stop callin me 
Millenium wrote:You had bad blending, good color on the tree(i had bad blending but good color on the tree...ok...) and bad color blending(isnt that what you just said?). Thus I said you don't know how the sig should look if its supposed to look good(what?).If you knew these points why didn't you work on it? =\(i didnt...which is why i posted it here...)