The_Jeppoz

No... But the idea is good :twisted:

Rough lines and pointless subject but could be a good start for next stuff.

There's so much ignorance about Christian history... Jesus wasn't killed for any Roman empire will, but for the radical Judes that were afraid of the rising power/fellowship of Jesus, and the reflected consequences on their own religion/power. The Romans, being in control of those lands, simply were the political structure that accomplished the process started from the Judes and finished by the people (the same ppl that had in Jesus their Idol, and here comes the meaning of the sig imo) that voted him to death a couple days after worshipping him in the public streets. Stated the above, the sig is well done and has its own meaning (if i got it right of course). I don't think it's anyhow offensive, even if i must recognize Azvy looked more like an elephant in a glass-shop in the managing of this thread.

Isn't it like the 4th sig from Xman in a week ? Mass production takes to lower quality imo. And originality lives somewhere else. That's the 20th Ranger with the same face, same equipment and same body position i've seen coming from his sigs. That's, how to say, embarassingly boring now. Plus the detail is going down (and quickly too) compared to his last works before this rush, when he actualy had some time to work with.I guess that's what costumer want however So pleeeeeasssse, ask him something more interesting and let him breath, you boys :roll: . Poor, yet richer, mrX :wink:

http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?t=71

It's called "abstract", which is basically what you want it to be. Abstract doesn't imply random. That piece is way 2 random to my eyes. You can't get anything off it. You don't have a focal point or something to catch your eyes somehow. Plus the brushing is pretty rough. However it's a first piece so as a start it's not bad. Keep it up

It's very late here so i'll be brief. 1-If it was that hot to heat the hammer so much to burn his hands under the gloves then probably he couldn't even stand by the sword himself. Plus if you know any way to make an hammer that's not subject to heating, tell me (even if i'm pretty sure that kind of hammer won't overheat since hammering is different from direct, long contact) and i'll be glad to fix it. 2- You can't tell how close to the fire those strings are. Actualy you can see the furnace colors in the darkness, not the flames, that are buried deeper inside the furnace. However that detail is basicaly estetic. 3- The neck is allright. Smithers are supposed to be muscular, and i personaly go for the "squared body" build, that is short neck. Plus the position of the head tends to cover the neck, not to expose it...exactely the opposit you'r saying. 4- That's plain wrong. Actualy the briks directly by the furnace should have been seen as BLACK due to the high contrast with the flaming light emitter. Moreover that part of the wall isn't and can't be directly lightened by the furnace, but only by the reflections generated from that light source. It's more like an ambiental or global weak lightsource, and i added the fact that the brigh light spot makes the things closer to it look darker. Of course i didn't want a pitch black bg so i went for an intermediate solution. 5-this is probably the only good point in the above post. not 100% happy of that glove myself, still not disappointed either. 6- Hair and beard aren't purple, they'r dark brown and as you should have already understood so far there's a orange/red lightsource (actualy there's 2 of them). This means everything is shaded according to a red light. This means black and dark brown move slightly towards reds and so on. This effect has been reduced compared to a RL furnace cause i didn't want the sig to be all black in the dark spaces and all in orange tones in the highlighted ones. Still i wanted the dual, colored light sources to effect the screen. I'm however glad you gave such in-depth suggestions. I took some time checking all the above points and that might have helped a lot fixing some mayor flaws. Thanks.

and that should be... :oops: ?

Yes, both are very old 2. Now his style has slightly changed to something more worked on and refined. Upon one of the locked threads of this page you can see 4 of his latest works.

Mr.X man.

You were given 1 warning already and you had 3 of your threads closed. This might be a free world and whatever, but on these boards we are guests and when we register we accept to follow the Forum rules. Rules say you can't post about drugs. Your sig is obviously referring to that. The result ? Thread closed. You keep posting ? You'r gettins so banned...

Yes, the face directly comes from a pic i was sent. About the Bg i'm aware this one is somehow poor compare to others i made but i wanted to keep the sig as quite as possible in order to focus the eye on the main character and the armor details. Answering the others this sig took probably something like 12+ hours but i'm very busy these days so i had to split it in many many sessions, this probably making the work last more than usual. It's going for something around 2 mils.

Darkness is a vital factor for this sig and its lightsources (lights and shadows took a long while to be done, expecialy those related to the red/orange atmosphere effects). Anything was planned to be dark,in a flaming,hot atmosphere.In the first concept it was supposed to be even darker but then i went for this choice.

Very interesting and very nice, of course. Keep it up :D

The sword is in prespective and is in an early step of its manufacturing so it's supposed to be somehow rough.

Made for a smither....took longer than usual :? Hope you like it. Thx

Looks more like the camera is half sunken in the water, since the only visible water effects are on the topmost area, by the shore. Imo you should take away the "rainy" effect from the dark waters and add something like a shark popping out the darkness....could be cool imo...very cool..

very nice :) Only flaws imo are the excessive water swirling (?) that should be caused by a strong backwards movement from the animal while it looks a bit static and probably walking in the opposite direction; and the trees ,the naked ones, that look a bit odd to me.

Well the quality is pretty poor even for a first try, but i can see some nice elements in this sig such as the shading attempt at the hill and a bit of texturing. Too bad i think you didn't give it the right amount of time. Main flaws are the bad anathomy, the trembling outlines, the sun rays, the bow shape and the rat position. Keep it up tho...it's just a first :)

Seems like someone's getting a bit big of an ego. Just be cause you gave what you call "real" CC doesn't mean they have to take it. It's a simple choice, true it may be "correct" but it's all on a matter of liking by the artist or buyer. It's not a matter of ego my dear, it's just a matter of how and why we ask/use CCs. If you read the first page posts then yuo should have known none of those posts were real CCs (i hope you know what CC means), but merely i like this, it's funny, it's bright...bla bla bla. That's not CC imo. However i spent my time leaving a CC based on tech suggestions and it's so good to see that the sig maker next post is about trees being magical ones. I think CCs can help if you face them and maybe reply, explain your choices or something like that. If you can stand them of course... PS: If you don't know me don't go around saying i have an ego or something like that. You'd better not. Yes I know what CC is I'm not some random blabbering Neandertal. Though, I'm just pointing out that just because you gave CC doesn't mean she'll take it or that it's universally correct that's all. I do agree my ego comment was a bit over the top but no offense but people glorify you as a god type of pixels, and yes you are very dam good, but sometimes I think it's more of a wagon kissing contest towards you. I know you don't bring it upon yourself but sometimes it's more so annoying then anything else. I'm not that dumb to think that my CCs have to be taken all times or that they'r like "godly speech". The point is that i did put some effort in that CC and not cause i love to bla bla bla over other ppl work, but mainly cause i like to give my opinion/help to others. I think i have enough experience to leave CCs in pixel stuff and i'd like those to be at least considered or, better, discussed. I personaly don't like when some1 posts his/her stuff to get other ppl opinions and then avoids to consider the cons coming from the CCs (or saying ppl to go away from the thread). That's mainly all to say about it. About the rest of your post i can't be responsable for what ppl says about me. I simply try to get fun and satisfaction from my pixel works and to be helpful/kind on the boards. If this brings me some fans...well all i can do is being happy. :D

Seems like someone's getting a bit big of an ego. Just be cause you gave what you call "real" CC doesn't mean they have to take it. It's a simple choice, true it may be "correct" but it's all on a matter of liking by the artist or buyer. It's not a matter of ego my dear, it's just a matter of how and why we ask/use CCs. If you read the first page posts then yuo should have known none of those posts were real CCs (i hope you know what CC means), but merely i like this, it's funny, it's bright...bla bla bla. That's not CC imo. However i spent my time leaving a CC based on tech suggestions and it's so good to see that the sig maker next post is about trees being magical ones. I think CCs can help if you face them and maybe reply, explain your choices or something like that. If you can stand them of course... PS: If you don't know me don't go around saying i have an ego or something like that. You'd better not.

no...

*coff coff* Nice to see how ppl tends to ignore the real CCs ... :lol:

I don't have the time to check TTTIA's and Nad's posts but they both usualy talk wisely so i'm sure i don't have to reply to anything coming from them. About the guy that hides himself behind a fake account...what to say ? Nothing that hasn't been said or is plain obvious by his actings. About various arts i only have to say that's way harder to make a decent looking pixel sig rather than a decent looking abstract. This doesn't mean that one is easier than the other, just that the learning curves are different. That said, we'll always have junk pixels aswell as junk abstracts and good pixels together with good abstracts (and in order to be good both need the right amount of time in this case).

Nice work, but there's some major flaws that you should realy fix in my opinion. First of all the three verticaly slicing the sig in the middle is the most annoying thing my eyes have recently seen. It somehow cuts the screen in 2 different zones and those, being filled in different ways (the left side being 50% empty while the right one is basicaly crowded), generate a clash that i personaly don't like. As pointed out above the left side is way 2 empty, expecialy in the horizon that's somehow hidden by a grass field...now we all know that's pretty impossible. Due to the choice of slicing the sig in 2 halves with the trees, taking away from us any idea of how the bg develops, you find your castle on the same distance level of the girl and the bees...This means that either the castle is a miniature or the others are giants. Graphicaly speaking i find the sig pretty nice, with a fresh cartoony look. The main problems are related to the outlines that are 2 bright while they should be in a abviously darker version of the inner color so that there's a bit of contrast and that the shapes are better defined. The guy outfit is a bit...mmm..."happy" :wink: if you get what i mean. Overall the sig is nice but needs some more work if you realy want it to be worth the 1-2 mils you'r getting paid for.