Dark Adept Portraits (Male W.I.P [10%] Female W.I.P[70%])

[Pic]

Well i think they're both looking great The nose dosn't really jump out at me at all, IMHO if you made it smaller it might mess with the other face proportions.

[Jetrel]

it looks pretty much a duplicate male nose.

You did a good job thinning the eyebrows and softening the jawline for the female

Just so you know, I did not edit the male image to make the female.

The female picture was drawn from scratch on a blank photoshop file. I didn't even use penciled line-art as a guide, I simply drew it 'cold' with my tablet. I'm actually kinda proud of this, because I've had many failures at doing that, before.

[JW]

it looks pretty much a duplicate male nose.

You did a good job thinning the eyebrows and softening the jawline for the female

Just so you know, I did not edit the male image to make the female.

The female picture was drawn from scratch on a blank photoshop file. I didn't even use penciled line-art as a guide, I simply drew it 'cold' with my tablet. I'm actually kinda proud of this, because I've had many failures at doing that, before.

Well dang, that's quite impressive.

Do you think my comment is invalid though?

[Jetrel]

Do you think my comment is invalid though?

Semi. Valid enough that I'll try an edit.

[pekka]

I prefer, personally, the painted style. I could offer some speculative reasons for that, but largely it's a matter of opinion. The lutes style is more procedural, and yields easier results for beginners - unfortunately, it absolutely requires good linework to equal lutes' own work in quality (and it needs to equal that to be worth having). Unfortunately, doing said "good linework" is something that very few people around here can do - I had to personally tweak Thrawn/Tatmf's portraits into shape to fit that level of cleanliness, and a certain je ne sais quoi in the shaping of the lines which might have something to do with fractal density (though I'm just grabbing at straws; I really don't know what that secret ingredient is - it might also be a series of conventional symbols used for things like cloth folds). In other words, it is easier to make the Lutes style, but not vastly easier.

I prefer the lutes style and I can speculate a bit. The portraits drawn in lutes style have minimum amount of individual features and the characters are very generic. Therefore that fits very well for numerous recruitable units.

Then there is the point that lutes style portraits are much quicker to produce well. Both styles need good linework, yes, but lutes style needs only a rather quick cellshading procedure after that. Texturizing a lutes portrait is much easier to do well. With painted style the result can be easily much more messy. The dark adepts and the new Kalenz portraits come firstly to my mind. I'm sorry to say but they are messy and I don't like it.

I'm not saying that Jormungandr's superior portraits should be compensated with new "lutesian" portraits, but we really have only one Jormungandr around here.

By these words my opinion is that we favour lutes style in every faction which doesn't have any portraits yet. That includes also the undead and the elves. In the other hand painted style fits perfectly for the main chracters. There would be desired contrast with the hero units and generic units.

[fmunoz]

I strongly agree with pekka...
That dark adept will be superb as portrait in the Dark Hordes (Maybe adding a little bit of red velvet here and there)
I have to plug my scanner and scan some images I drew trying to emulate Lutes style... mostly a bunch of mages (well .. a bunch of summoners)

[turin]

This going to be committed? Or was it decided against?

[Jetrel]

This going to be committed? Or was it decided against?

Decided against, for 1.2. If I commit these post-1.2, I'll probably do some major edits, so there aren't suitable for trunk, either.

Amongst other things, I need to rework the "fantasy painting" style I've been using - I need to improve my use of larger, more continuous brushstrokes.