Mage Portraits

Post by **Zebulon** » September 15th, 2005, 1:30 pm

Cuyo Quiz wrote:Medieval fashion tip: it was considered attractive to have a large forehead, just as any preference, it wasn't common. It was so regarded this way that women actually came to cut some of their hair in the front, just to show some more forehead.

But yeah, i know, may be a bad example .

Yes, that is a bad example.

evil_green · Post by **evil_green** » September 15th, 2005, 1:42 pm

I think the male mage portrait is quite good and needn't be changed at all. I like the sense of potential and solemnity it conveys. Makes you really want to level him up and see what he can do.

The female mage looks good too, but there's such a contrast between the image unit's 'do and your portrait's that I don't feel it's reconcilable. Also the expression on her face is a bit too pleasant for a mage.

And what is this business about not being good at humans? These look good! I don't see any drop in value.

Website · Post by **Xan** » September 15th, 2005, 2:26 pm

There's nothing wrong with them.

Post by **turin** » September 15th, 2005, 9:19 pm

That's your opinion... IMO, though, 1. Jason Lutes' human portraits are superior to the ones J-man is proposing, and 2. I think a consistent style should be kept for each race, and these really clash with the other human portraits that Jason did.

J-man: I'm not trying to insult your work or anything. Your other portraits are great, I just don't think these are up to par...

Post by **Kestenvarn** » September 16th, 2005, 1:16 am

turin wrote:Well, the female mage has a very vacant, slightly happy expression that doesn't look very magelike, as well as having a strange hairline, which others have mentioned. The male mage on the whole is worse, I think because of the different color you chose for the skin.

I agree with turin... I'd say try drawing her from any angle other than straight forward; might make it seem more dynamic.

This pose isn't that great, either - but better than head on and cardboard-like.

varradami · Post by **varradami** » September 16th, 2005, 2:30 am

Kestenvarn wrote:This pose isn't that great, either - but better than head on and cardboard-like.

The portraits are ok, but I like your sketch best.

I think mages should look reasonably bad-ass.

scott · Post by **scott** » September 16th, 2005, 11:49 am

What ever happened to Jason Lutes?

Post by **Jormungandr** » September 16th, 2005, 2:37 pm

turin wrote:I think your skills are better suited to inhuman creatures, like mermen, nagas and saurians...

I would tend to agree with you, in that most of what I draw leans towards the monstrous rather than the human. But I'm trying to broaden my skills - these were actually the fourth or fifth drafts of the mage portraits, and believe me the others were worse.

Kestenvarn has also got me pretty well beat - that's quite nice.

Looks like it's back to the drawing board for me.

Post by **Dave** » September 16th, 2005, 10:45 pm

Jormungandr wrote:
turin wrote:I think your skills are better suited to inhuman creatures, like mermen, nagas and saurians...
I would tend to agree with you, in that most of what I draw leans towards the monstrous rather than the human. But I'm trying to broaden my skills - these were actually the fourth or fifth drafts of the mage portraits, and believe me the others were worse.

Kestenvarn has also got me pretty well beat - that's quite nice.

Looks like it's back to the drawing board for me.

Gee it is SO nice to see a contributor who has modesty to match his talent.

David

martenzo · Post by **martenzo** » September 17th, 2005, 6:00 am

I think that mages should look serious on their expressions, but not rugged like warriors. I agree that the female mage looks odd, possibly because of the angle. If I had to choose which one would go to the game, I'd take the male one.