Preserved Topic: WIP (Page 1 of 1)

<edit> Sorry I accidentally overwrote the original</edit>

Comments and crits if you please. Working on the background, no need to go there.





[This message has been edited by docilebob (edited 03-21-2003).]

I'm not sure if I'm correct on this but the part where the legs meet near the groin shouldn't be that spread out, and the groin area itself looks a bit short lengthwise, making it a little longer would make it anotomically correct, no? All and all, it's very nice bob. I have a tablet and I can't paint like that yet, so... Nice .

Very nice bob. I'd say out of anything that needs to be improved, the proportions need some work. Take for instance her head - it's as large as one of her breasts. Also take into mind that her arms spread out = her height (so as she's standing now, her arms should be about 3/4 her height). Also, she has no ass As previously mentioned, he hips need some lengthening done to them.

Aside from the minor anatomical issues, it's looking fantastic. Keep it up, and please, post your progress

Hmm, I didn't quite word it that way but, yes... She has no ass

Something else I noticed... What is the arrow tip resting on? Her hand? The fletchings would cut the shit out of her fingers if fired that way. Even a recurve bow would have some sort of resting point for the arrows carved in or out of the wood, well at least that bow looks like it's wood .

edit: I'm observing this painting closely now. The two fingers that are recoiled back, that aren't grabbing the string of the bow, they look like nubs. Show some parts of those fingers bending back. And the other two fingers that are holding the string of the bow, aren't flexed enough to actually grip the bow. If that were moving I'd say right at the beginning she would shoot the arrow and then cut the shit out of her fingers. I think showing some more grip there would be a little more realistic.

[This message has been edited by InSiDeR (edited 02-17-2003).]

been a while since i drew a bow, but her body position looks odd..
back in a moment.. follow some of the links here and you will see the shooters only turn their heads.. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=archery+images

While we're at it, the bowstring is usually drawn with three fingers, one above the knock and two below it... but I suppose that's getting kind of picky.

I took a look and came to the same conclusion as Insider. Groin area needs lengthning, and maybe legs a little slimmer.

one other point, given two people of the same height (one male, one female),
the woman will have longer legs than the man.

Yes, it desperately needs an overall overhaul of proportion.

The individual details are mostly just fine...but many of them don't quite mesh together.

Best advice I can give at the moment is to simply do a little more studying of overall anatomy, and possibly find images of a similar pose (or even better - get someone to pose for you!).

My only gripe on a specific area at the moment would be her left hand - the one holding the bow. It just doesn't seem like she's really holding it...it would take a great deal of strength and pressure to hold a drawn bow like that, and she seems to be passively propping it up.

Good work all in all, just needs a lot of tweaking.

=)

I must be dense, but

synax : You mean she has big breasts, or her head is too small ? Her arms measure very close to her height. You mean one is longer that the other ? Or they look too long now ?

velvet rose : Yea, I noticed that. May have to do a breast reduction, so she can face forward.

Suho : picky, picky, picky..

DL : I used the * Ideal proportion * image from Figure drawing For All it`s Worth ( Loomis ) for proportions. It`s pretty close. Can you be more specific? I see what you mean about the hand. I`ll work on it.

Thanks all for the input. It may not be soon, but I`ll be back with this...later..

Hmm, I just noticed another major technicality with the bow...

She's right handed, the arrow is on the wrong side of the bow. .

^ yep, that's right

Ok, some specifics on the proportions -

Some general rules of thumb

1) handsize = about big enough to cover face - her left hand might, but her right hand is smaller

2) size of foot = size of forearm - nowhere close on that one

3) height of pelvic bone = height of head - the distance from the bottom of crotch to the top of her hips seems unusually short....she'd walk pretty funny

Other things -

4) her breasts, while not unrealistically large, are....rather large. not a problem really, just an observation

5) Her right arm - the angles are a bit off. It seems that her bicep goes straight back and then her forearm comes straight forward over it...which is a nearly impossible position, it would angle out from the body more. If it *were* to go straight back, the arm would need to be longer as well.

and finally - the back of her head could use a little more bulk.

=)

Hope that all makes sense...

Yea, that makes alot more sense. Thanks, that`s what I was looking for.

this page links to a 6 images of female shooters http://www.columbia.edu/cu/archery/women/photo/00-01/bigapplefita/images/

this series looks at young shooters:
http://www.internet-connect.com/archery/images/shooters/aim_shoot.jpg
http://www.internet-connect.com/archery/images/shooters/danny_6-09-2001.jpg
http://www.internet-connect.com/archery/images/shooters/danny_6-09-2001_aim.jpg
http://www.internet-connect.com/archery/images/shooters/danny_6-09-2001_groupaim.jpg
http://www.internet-connect.com/archery/images/shooters/shooter_01.jpg

[edit - fix links

[This message has been edited by velvetrose (edited 02-19-2003).]

DL-44: 2) size of foot = size of forearm - nowhere close on that one???

Your serious..... heh I must be way off proportion, I got 23cm feet. But im 5'8.......... heh
yay....kids shoes

Swavey, hold your foot up to your forearm--you might be surprised.

Of course, you might also be deformed...

Swavey - I'm confused as to how the relationship between your foot size and your height contradicts my statement about a human foot size being generally equivalent to the length of their forearm

Off hand (not having a measuring stick handy) 23 cm does not sound exceedingly small for a person of 5'8" (although why you would measure one in centineters and on ein inches confuses me even more ).



[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 02-25-2003).]

It must be an Albertan thing I swear these people have the smallest feet.


However anatomy is always an anomaly here. If you head into the rural areas or the political centres, you'll mostly find that people's sphincters are roughly the same size as the circumference of their heads.


~cough~

Curvy Wervy.

That's the phrase of the day, says I.

Now, before I get the blank stare, try this on for size: The body is a synergistic formation of curves. We've been told about simple shapes to flesh out the depth and positioning of the human form, but somewhere along the line...we forgot the lines...or the curves.

Or rather...The Curve©.

The Curve© is a line that starts at the top of a figures head, bisects the eyes, the nose, the mouth.....and eventually winds up midway between the stance of two feet. A centerline for positioning a character. It can be rotated so that it defines the profile, and it shall change shape from our perspective for that. The Curve© defines the stance, height, positioning, relationship to surroundings, and dynamism of any character...human, bestial, or other (yeah...you know you marked "other" on some form once people.)

So why am I getting at it? Well, we could talk anatomy until the cattle arrive at the Rancho El Whopper-o...but that's not going to solve anything until the base is defined.

Bob...I like it. Yeah there are some anatomical divergences, but my advice there is to find a local nude woman and spend time staring at her.

Then stop touching that...and draw.

~cough~

BUT...the one thing I noticed first was the lack of The Curve© Defining your enterline is going to make life a lot easier. Right now she's stiff...not even human for how she isn't leaning or transferring any weight. She's got no arch to her back, no set of her feet, no sense of weight. Why? Yep...she needs a dynamic positioning. I say start sketching...rough, dirty little sketches. Just body positioning and perspective. Oval heads, centerline, stickmen, stick women...then flesh them out a bit. Your painting skills are increasing daily...no denying it...now get the roughing skills going and you're five by five.

I enjoy the skintone, the basic structure, the hint of lighting...all good things.

Now gimme gimme gimme.



Can't wait on an update to this one...gonna be great.

And, the arrow is on the wrong side .

I also think her pants are too skin tight. Shouldn't they be a little loose?

Yeah, no shit - you said that already.

And of course, the important thing - as DG points out - is that it needs that base for the proportions to spring from...which I alluded to rather vaguely in my earlier post (it's in there somewhere, I swear )



[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 02-25-2003).]

heh DL-44 sorry about the centemeter/inches thing.... last time I mesured how tall I was I lived in alberta Canada, and they use inches. And now I live in Japan so I measure in cm here..... heh sorry, i got messed up.

well i held my foot to my forearm.............. heh about three inches to small, lol..... I have extremely small feet. heh

once again... Yay kids shoes

Swavey: You didn't have your feet bound when you were a child, did you?

haha, not that I am aware of...............
although, I was born with clubed feet and had sergery on them real early.... I guess that could have had some effect....

haha anyways getting back on topic... DB hows the pic comin along?

Honestly..I haven`t touched it since I posted it. Been trying DarkGarden`s advice (gave up on finding a naked woman that doesn`t mind me staring at her) and I have discovered that I really suck with a pencil.

Hope to be back with an update..hehe..*soon*.

I seem to be short of painting time, and I paint really slow, but here we go...
Update

I can't believe you actually changed the fingers!

It does look better, especially in the area of her posterior. Unfortunately, I don't have a photographic memory, so I can't really get into much more detail than that...

From what I remember of your initial painting, she looks much improved, especially the crotch area. she's still very big breasted but maybe that's a guy thing

Anyway, I think she looks very good - nice painting

You may not have much time...but however much it is, seems well spent. The shadow works well. And there's something else that has changed too... is it her stance? She seems a little more comfortable with that bow than I remember from the first one. Good work man.

I'm not sure, but I think you switched the arrow sides, but it still looks a bit odd...

Oh, but of course, Master Suho. You can treat this one as a whole new piece, if you wish. ( I know it`s a shocker, but there are inmates do listen when advice is given ! )

Amerasu : Thanks, and yea, what can I say.. This is my first *full figure* painting. I got carried away.

NoJive : Thanks. Yes, her stance has changed. ( extra 2 points for memory.) I tried to apply what I understand about The Curve(tm).

Hmmm... Hello all,

I have been reading all the conversation and have many thoughts of my own... alas modesty and newbie status cause me to hold my tongue in check.

Welcome, Xpirex, to the funny farm.
Please feel free to speak your mind. Rest assured that we will when the situation is reversed.
That`s why we`re here.

I definitely think you've made some real strides in improving the image. Anatomically, you seem to be bang on, and all the proportions seem to be correct. Good job all around.

I guess the only comments I can make, then, would be along the lines of taking it one step further and adding that extra bit of action.

Notice that the top half of her body is in a very dynamic pose and you can just imagine the moment of stilled motion, however, her legs seem to be just there and don't really contribute to the action other than to hold the torso off the ground.

If you change her foot placement, such as having her back foot coming straight out towards you and her front foot slightly angled, so that most of her weight is on that rear leg, you'll get a nice dynamic figure. I'm not sure if I'm explaining this properly, so look here for a better explanation of what I'm talking about.

Then again, I'm sure you've put loads of work into it already so I offer this as merely the hint of a suggestion. As far as I'm concerned, it's looking pretty dandy right now.

I'd like to second silence's comments about foot placement and dynamics.
I'd like to see both feet slightly angled forward. (the back one less than the front)

First , I want to thank you for the input. You`ve helped me past a few things I stared at to long to see.
On the dynamic stance thing, from what I`ve gathered (not being an archer myself) the stance is anything but dynamic. It`s very static, balanced. In most of the photo references I`ve seen the center of gravity is centered between the feet , the feet turned slightly outward, and the leading shoulder is slightly cocked rearward, presumably to help keep the forearm out of the bowstring`s path. Seems to me any motion or *off balanceness* would adversely affect your aim.
I have tried moving her feet and it just looks wrong. Maybe I just don`t have it right, yet. I`ll play with it some more and see what happens.