Jopie211

V2 is a lot better IMO.

Reading first posts is cool. You should try it too.

I'll give it a shot.

Agreed. :P Once again, absolutely great work, I love how you really managed to blow some life into a RuneScape character. Can't fault it, great job. =D>

Looks pretty good. Only thing I'd suggest, blur the parts that are further away a bit, to give it more depth. And the text isn't great, although it doesn't really bother me. Good job. :thumbup:

Looks rather nice, especially V1 (contrast between cold and warm colours works well there). You might want to fix some of the red splotches that seem to be floating around randomly, but other than that it's a nice manip.

Well Julius said it was only a 3 min picture (a good one though ;-)), so he probably didn't think it was necessary. I'd say that looks fine, the blending is really good. Just keep doing sigs in this style, and they will be great.

^ Agreed. I really like it too, the colours work really well. Also, nice Iwarping. :D

Certainly some good improvement over time, the latest signature looks quite good, but you could indeed improve on anatomy a bit. No C/C other than that really, since it's hard to make out details with this horrible jpeg quality (obviously not blaming you for that, though).

I love it (for obvious reasons). The cartoony style works well too, and the concept is great. Only things I'd change are the left side of the border (looks like a small part was accidentally chopped off), and maybe clean up the linework on their flippers a bit. But I just love it, could I have it please? :pray: Will use on here and credit. P.S.: :-w

The logo looks great, I love the texturing. The other painting is quite nice too, but it's a bit messy, and I'd definitely get rid of the black lines.

Not quite... (Although I don't really mind them, but I do hate trading cards.) Anyway, I suppose it would be quite fun to see all of them made in different styles (drawn, pixeled, photomanipulated).

Nice piece, I like it. The colours are good and I like the splatteriness near the middle. OT: I kind of agree with Mastersigmaker, but the reason I personally watermark/put names on my stuff is not only because I'm afraid of losing money or recognition over it, but more because I just don't want to give rippers (for whom I have no respect) the opportunity to get praise from others for what isn't their work. I'm not saying that I want lots of praise, I just don't want them to get any for someone else's work. I hope that made sense... can't really explain it well.

The version without the wings looks a lot better IMO. It's a decent signature, a bit too much empty black space, but I suppose it works here. The text is a problem though, it really doesn't fit, is hard to read and quite distracting too. I wouldn't really know what to do with it instead, but as it is now it just doesn't seem to work. Not my all-time favourite from you, but it's decent.

It certainly doesn't look bad, but I think this style of sigs just doesn't really work with this render. Since the background colours are quite light and the squares are significantly darker, they are a bit distracting in my opinion. Other than that it's a good signature, but with this style you have to be careful when deciding what renders to use.

^ I'm pretty sure that's what he meant.

Well I think you've got your answer to the interest question in the title now, I doubt a lot of people will be entering this contest on this forum. Maybe somewhere else people will like it, but it just doesn't work here. I don't see why you're being so overly defensive about this, you asked a question and received a honest answer. If you still want to organize this, then by all means, go ahead and do so, but just don't expect most people to like it.

^ That's great. I don't really know how to help you with this, but I think Mastersigmaker pretty much covered it anyway.

^ Well obviously he didn't mean the dictionary meaning, he meant that the examples can hardly be considered photomanipulation by The Gallery's standards. :roll:

10/10. :geek: Don't ask, I like that smiley.

Well I remember you. :P The sig is pretty nice, but the border nor the text look great IMO. For the border, I'd just go with a one pixel black stroke around it, would look pretty good I think. But overall, nice signature.

It looks really squeezed, and the colour is strange. It isn't supposed to look like it's made of cheese. :roll:

Lol at the last hide tag and line. Hawt gallery. I think I've given C/C and most of these before, so I'll just post some more when you update this with new designs. Still loving the first avvy though. ;)

Like said before it needs blending, and the colour scheme isn't really interesting. Quality seems bad too. I don't know, I just don't like it. :/

It's definitely not great, but at least you shaded some parts which is quite rare for a first attempt. The colours definitely need chancing though, they're way too bright for a night scene (did you know that you can edit the default colours in MS Paint by double-clicking them?). Other than that, some parts need a lot more detail/better shading, like the grass. You can't just make a green blob, shade it roughly and expect it to look realistic. Same problem with the tree and moon really, they both look really sloppy. But it's some start, just look at some pixel tutorials (can be found here on TIF) and keep practising.