Unable To Edit...

[GeoBen]

so I am posting a revision in a new thread. fixed a cuppla really annoying flaws.

though, no one seems much interested.

[Intbel]

so I am posting a revision in a new thread. fixed a cuppla really annoying flaws.
though, no one seems much interested.

The bird bothers me somehow. (Not sure exactly how)
The backgound image is great.

[parahandy]

Maybe they are spellbound by your posting Geoben. Friday/Saturday a bad time for posting new stuff I have found, everyone is away to the pub or somewhere.
Cos you get no comments doesn't mean your work goes unappreciated. Keep them coming .

....Norman

[GeoBen]

The bird bothers me somehow.

don't really know what to say to that, Raymond. Thanks, though, for stopping by.

norman... yer a good man... thanks.

geo.

[kwasiada]

Agree with above.
Background image stunning, but it & the bird don't marry.
Birds unique perspective seems to work against it and its background.
It has a weird beauty.
I bet that don't help!

Peace

[GeoBen]

no, kwasiada, 'weird beauty' is fine, very, in fact. ... thanks. while it is true that i have a bad habit of attempting to 'marry' (good word) images of dramatically contrasting types, here it was essential to the image. of course, if it doesn't work, it doesn't work. thanks for commenting. serious critique is why I put it here.

i have to remind myself that this board is Xara's board and that the participants, especially the moderators are interested in the tool much more than the works the tool is used to produce. I was fortunate in receiving some very useful critiques on other boards more concerned with aesthetics, one of which may have answered the question of what is bothering Raymond.

I FORGOT THE FEET!

was hurrying to get it done and go out and do something even more useless than drawing because i have to make some money (what moron came up with THAT rule?) and i forgot the feet.

i am gonna go away now.

geo.

[masque]

no, kwasiada, 'weird beauty' is fine, very, in fact. ... thanks.

i have to remind myself that this board is Xara's boardand that the participants and especially the moderators are interested in the tool much more than the works the tool is used to produce. I was fortunate in receiving some very useful critiques on other boards more concerned with aesthetics, one of which may have answered the question of what is bothering Raymond.

geo.

I think the Xtreme forum is more to do with the program rather than work produced, its always been my understanding that this forum is primarily for the work. I don’t think the colour of the birds works against the background as well as it could, to me its just too vibrant. I must admit I didn’t notice the absence of feet, though the one wing being much larger than the other bothered me. I don’t think that perspective accounts for the size difference.
I agree with others that the backgound is very good and is let down a little by the bird.
Derek

[Soquili]

Hi Geo,

I think the bird's left wing (viewer's right) is too large and the body is a little too long. A stylized image can have exaggerated proportions however the wing is larger than the bird itself. The elongated body may be more acceptable to a viewer if you resize that wing.

I like the textures you used, it gives the bird good contrast with the background.


The Xtreme/Xtreme Pro forum is for discussion of the program and techical questions. The Xara Gallery is for posting work you want to show and receive comments and/or critique.

Moderators do not always have time to view and comment on members work here in the Gallery. We have our full time jobs and families in addition to moderating the forums.

[EnigmaMachine]

If you don't mind Geo, I'd like to make a couple observations about your bird image as well. I certainly can't speak for anyone else but I for one, being more the old fashion Normal Rockwell kinda guy, vs the impressionist artistic type find the birds proportions to be somewhat off kilter. i.e. the shadowing on the birds wings give the impression that they are as deep as they are wide which is a pretty dramatic stretch. Almost taking on a parachute look. It seems to me that if the shading gave the impression that the birds wing thickness was more on the order of 15-20% of the wings width it would be a better look and feel. Another issue (for me anyway) is the underside of the wings being a soft white color when most birds possess more vivid colors everywhere and you have presented that on the rest of the bird. And I agree that the background is terrific. Anyway, that's my two cents. These are my observations not a critique.
Chuck

[GeoBen]

not only do I not mind, EM, i very much appreciate the time and the consideration you took here. (and I, too, am a fan of Norman Rockwell)

Yes, the left (bird's perspective) wing IS exagerated, not only because it is nearer the viewer than the left and sweeping forward to propel its changing direction. Primitive forms would use such exaggerations to suggest motion. generally speaking, the rest is proportional (measured. from several samples. with a compass).

but, as I say, if it doesn't work, it doesn't work.

thank you all for giving your views. many opinions will go toward making revision decisions much easier.

geo.