HOME | DD
Chromamancer — A New Dawn -Process-
Published: 2010-02-09 02:46:17 +0000 UTC; Views: 1805; Favourites: 33; Downloads: 86
Redirect to original
Description
Progress Reel, for Zeimyth.
I didn't make this as I was working. I just turned off layers and took screenshots, so the accuracy is a bit lower than my progress reel for Forest Depths.
Anyway, here is a rough overview of the process I used on this picture. The final result is here: [link]
1) Line art
It's line art. It didn't start as fully formed as this. I went back to this layer several times while working on the picture.
2) Grayscale Fills
This part is important, because it is the foundation for all the shading in the picture. I factored in atmospheric effects by making the foreground darker.
3) Gradients
I cheat.
The plants and things in the foreground were frustrating, so I decided to throw some gradients on, and use them as a base for the rest of the shading.
4) Actual Shading!
I did the shading here by sampling bright and dark shades from the gradients in the last step. Those looked fine, so these do, too. This step and the next one took up most of the time I spent working on the picture.
5) More shading, and markings.
A bit more lighting and some of the background low are included in this step.
6) Lighting
I balanced out the picture a bit. Some places seemed a bit too light, or a bit too dark, I though. So, I fixed those issues here, besides adding the lighting, that is.
7) Gradient Map
I had to give a gradient map a try, after the bit of advice from Cryslara, on my last picture. It basically maps colors to certain brightness levels.
If you haven't seen her art, check it out. She's awesome. And helpful, too.
8) Coloring
I did a bit of coloring myself here. I used a shade of green on the leaves of the tree, and added in those browns. Also, there is a bit of blue in the lower left corner I added in to balance the colors out a bit, and smooth out some of the edges that the brown introduced.
All colors I used in this step were sampled from different parts of the picture.
9) Finishing Touches
I modified the lighting and saturation a bit here. The upper lighting layer also throws off the relationship between color and brightness a bit, and I think the darker shadows help make the picture more dynamic, too.
Related content
Comments: 19
Thanks you!
My process has changed a bit since this one, but I'm using many of the same basic methods.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
uuuh great pic *w*
i love to watch walk-throughs 8D
mhh but what is the advantage of drawing first in greyscale? :3 ive nerver seen this before XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm glad you enjoy the walk-through.
I did the drawing first in greyscale, so I could focus on the lighting and contrast in various areas of the picture. Basically, it can make lighting in some areas much easier to manage. That's what I think, at least.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I love number 5, the extra shading and lighting part! There's so much lovely contrast working there that it becomes a nice black-and white piece of it's own
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thank you.
I thought of leaving it like that, but decided that I should probably add in a bit more lighting.
Maybe I over did it a bit...
I'm satisfied with how it turned out, but there are always things that I can improve on.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks for putting this together.
So I'm still trying to figure out some of the technique behind how you draw grayscale. How many layers would you use for this, at the grayscale level? Do you leave the lineart as a separate layer on top of everything, or is it too divided up into layers with the grayscale?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You're welcome.
Before merging layers together, I think I had around 30... That's because I would put flat colors down, then make a new layer for shading... then make a new layer for more shading.
I didn't need all 30 layers. I just kept adding more in case I didn't like how things were turning out, so I could go back if needed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Heh, that's a lot. O.O I wonder what my computer would do if I tried to make a picture with 30 layers...
At the most basic level, what were your different layers? I can tell that you had one for the tree leaves and one for the trunk, and then obviously one for the sky and one for the mountains and one for the character in the foreground...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I broke things up by distance. The tree and the character were actually on the same layer, along with some of the ground. There was a bit of ground on a closer layer, and some farther back...
If you look at the image where I did the solid gray fills, the different shades can basically show you what was on each layer. The line art for each of those areas was broken up onto separate layers, too.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hmm, okay. I'm guessing you broke it up further when you did more detailed grayscale work?
Is there any gray behind the lines? If so, how did you make sure that making the line layers invisible didn't result in a few patches of white throughout the picture? I always have that problem...
When you moved on to working with colors, was the whole picture flattened first?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The shading and detail layers are broken up a bit, but that was done out of convenience, or laziness, rather than necessity. If I change the settings on the shading layers, the shading that I've done my hand looks off, so logically those layers should be merged. I didn't really bother with that, though.
There is gray behind the lines, and there are some white spots, if I make the lines invisible. The lines themselves are a shade of gray, so they blend in fairly well.
I never flattened the picture, or merged many layers, in case I wanted to go back and change things. There wasn't a need to do anything like that to color the picture. Setting the blending mode of layer to "Color" is a very handy way to apply color to whatever is underneath the color layer.
It's like coloring in reverse. Rather than place colors underneath the line art, I shade then put my colors on top.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Maybe it's just a mouse thing, then. XD When I do a lot of drawing I need to keep things separated into a lot of layers because it's so hard to not draw over the lines. If I try harder to stay within the lines then the picture looks unnatural near borders.
Hmm, the white spots are covered up pretty well, then. XD I do kinda like how the lines are visible but without sticking out.
I tried doing a color layer in GIMP. It works just fine, although a gradient map won't work unless I flatten the entire image (otherwise it just does a gradient map on one flat color (namely the "color" layer) and it's just the same as using the fill tool with one color 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It sounds like there are a few differences between how Gimp and Photoshop Elements work, in that regard.
I use enough layers that I don't really need to worry about messing up my lines, because my lines are usually on a layer of their own. That way, I can draw above or below them.
As for the gradient maps... In Photoshop, those work on everything underneath the gradient map layer. Can you use "Copy merged" and paste to paste a merged layer underneath the gradient map?
If so, you would have to re-do that layer after you change things below that, but it may be a decent work-around for you.
The eyedropper grabs colors as if the image was all merged together. Maybe there are some preferences for that tool that you can change, to make it more intuitive.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, and it's kind of annoying... On the surface, and for most practical purposes, they work about the same. But Photoshop does most everything more efficiently, and there are some things about it that GIMP can't do at all. XD
I like to keep my lines separated... When asking about layers though, I meant for the actual drawing part and things like that. After laying down the base shades, when you started to do more detailed shading.
Yeah, I would have to do something like copying every layer into one flattened layer and applying the gradient on that. Annoying. >.<
I will look to see if there's a way to change how the eyedropper tool works in GIMP, but I rather doubt that there is. XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0