HOME | DD
skybolt β Tree House
Published: 2006-11-07 22:21:12 +0000 UTC; Views: 29467; Favourites: 827; Downloads: 525
Redirect to original
Description
3rd in the series (to Subzero/Afterburn).........4th coming soonThis was a piece I started a few weeks back, but I wasn't happy with it, so chucked it in a folder with all my other unfinshed work. But today I had another go, and made some major changes. Pretty happy with it now. Shame the compression loses all the detail.
Canvas Prints of this, and more wil be avaliable VERY soon. So watch this space for more details.
Hope you like?
Matt
Related content
Comments: 110
This is really great. Β What kind of tutorials should I look for to start learning how to create this style digital art? I am using GIMP.
π: 0 β©: 0
ΡΠ°Π½ΡΠ°ΡΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈ ΠΊΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠ²ΠΎ!
ΡΠΏΠ°ΡΠΈΠ±ΠΎ!
π: 0 β©: 0
Wonderful work. The colors are amazing, very warming and the details are incredible well done. Very calm piece!
π: 0 β©: 0
Awesome, really reminds me of somthing i've been writing about recently. Nice work.
π: 0 β©: 0
Wow, i really love the lightning in here.. good job dude.. this piece of art is awesome
π: 0 β©: 0
Hi, I'm kind of new at this but I have to say this is a serious piece of work! I love the prehistoric/futuristic feel. How do I get a poster?
π: 0 β©: 0
i allways love tree houses and this one is just superb
π: 0 β©: 0
oh ma gawd..... although i'm not too big on the ship to be honest this picture is teh shit.... i absolutely love the idea of living in and on trees. this turned out quite awesome!
π: 0 β©: 0
Still one of my favorites of yours. When are you going to get off that fantasy rap you've been on lately and get back to your inspired sci-fi?
π: 0 β©: 0
What a wonderful view! It looks so majestic.
π: 0 β©: 0
First I'd like to say I find this piece of artwork absolutely beautiful. However, I think there are some areas which could be improved. As a few others have said before, I also think this scene could benefit if there was not so much darkness on the left side. Also I would of like to see the amount of detail put in to the tree village in the foreground as in the background one. I know the idea is for second village is to be behind fog/atmosphere, but I think to much detail is not present. The second thing I noticed is on the plane I can see sketch lines, It bothers me to see dark lines around a plane that should be being illuminated in the scene. I'm very please with the tree and lighting in the dawn/dusk background. Here you did an excellent job with creating an almost surreal moment.
My expertise is in photography, therefore lack the ability to critique any technical aspects on this type of artwork. Thought, once again I want to say; overall itβs an amazing piece of work. I've noticed this type of work becoming more prevalent on DA. This is absolutely excellent; I find artwork outside my genera usually more fascinating anyway.
Keep up the great work.
-Kezz
*2envision - Your art through our eyes
π: 0 β©: 0
I apologize if any of my comments below are repeats of any of the other comments you've recieved - to keep from being biased I only have read your deviation comments and viewed the image. (Though I'm curious what the rest of the 2Envision crew said, so I'll read that after).
I'll start off with my critiques:
Atmosphere.
The atmospheric perspective is beautiful, but I feel like just a few minor value adjustments in the closer trees might give it more depth - if you look at trees farther back, you will notice they are similar in value to the highlights of the midground trees, which is perfect, but the shadows - which are so deep and beautiful in the foreground - are lacking in the midground tree. (the one that the plane overlaps). Bringing in just a few more darks (similar to the foliage below the big tree) would add more depth there - not too much is necessary, I think. It's a subtle nitpicky thing, really.
Clouds.
I would love to see the clouds detailed farther - the rest of the image might be rough, but there are always details in each element which make the quick, beautiful gestural lines come together. By bringing in a few more details in the clouds, especially the pink ones above the plane (since that is a major focal point)... you will bring in the same element of sketchy vs. detail that is present in the other areas. IE - the clouds right below the major tree, above the hot air balloons - those are beautifully done.
My raves:
Light.
Having just begun to study atmosphere and environments myself, I can really appreciate how beautifully your light works here. The sunset glow touching all the little details really makes this sparkle.
Color.
It was bold to go with such a warm color scheme here, without many hints of cold tones to balance this out. I love the colors, but I feel perhaps even a few dark purples in the shadows would bring the beauty of this scheme even further.
Perspective.
I'm not quite sure if it's perfect, but boy does it work anyhow. Visually, to the eye, this has so much depth and a feeling of space, that with the few adjustments I mentioned with the midground trees, it would appear flawless.
Details and Concept.
Ahh, the balloons, the tree house, everything is so beautifully done, and so interesting to look at, that I have found myself viewing this piece for a few days just to write my comment for you. I enjoy all the little surprises every time I look at it, and really think the details are what really make this stand out.
Composition.
You beautifully composed the elements here, the eye flows naturally, stopping at the focal points along the way, and really holds the attention. This is by far one of the strongest things about your piece.
Over and out.
Overall, beautifully done, it was a pleasure to be introduced to your work this way, and I look forward to checking out your new stuff in the future!
Cheers,
Gracie
π: 0 β©: 0
Sorry for being late, I didn't have time for DA last few days. I hope you found all those great comments above helpfull; You should really let us know about it so we can improve too
In any regards, as I was the one who chose the image, I will resume stating mainly the most important flaws and how to improve them:
The first thing that comes out to a keen eye is the perspective. The airplane simply throws away your perspective. Words are useless, just draw a perspective grid over it and see it for yourself
Also, did you intend to go for a 1 point or 2 points persp? Right now there's a mixture in there plus a sky that goes towards panoramic angle. While this issue is fortunately covered by midground graphics, you should be aware of it
I do not agree with your blur, which simulates motion rather than focalizing. And if movement was the intended effect then that's not the right type of blur to use. I can't go into details here before you tell me exactly what you intended to do.
Third issue - while I understand you want to focus on the big tree, this doesn't mean that the sourounding area loses contrast or saturation, the vegetation around it should have almost the same values, but just lesser detail
Last but not least, there is whole set of wrong highlights or shadows; Big tree almost doesn't have any highlight in it's corona considering it is placed in the middleground; airplane has too sharp transitions between highlights and normal tone and it's also lit in wrong areas. Background is too hazy and too unrealistic. Trees dont mix with the horizon so fast, and there's no element to justify it. Such a thick haze can only be seen over volcanoes 
π: 0 β©: 0
I'm not sure what I can say about this piece because it looks as if its just completely straight out of your imagination, and as for subject matter I see nothing wrong - the baloons, huts, trees, aircraft, etc. all work in my opinion.
I would love to see more detail in the tree simply because it looks so interesting over there! I feel like I am missing something and if I could just get a better look I would be able to get closer to this world you have created. I see cranes and what appears to be some sort of machinery - do they make the balloons? I want to see into that world!
I really think you pulled off the background well, the faded out trees etc. all very well done. The aircraft doesn't quite seem to fit in like the rest of the image but that may be because of the strong lines it has around its edges? It still looks fine the way it is though.
A lot of people don't like critique, but you had courage in being the first person to allow this group to crit your work - I hope you got some good insight from comments!
*2envision Your art through our eyes
π: 0 β©: 0
As the last one said I've not fully read the other critique so forgive me if I do repeat anything.
I find this piece overall very very beautiful but I also have some small issues with it.
First of the good and beautiful parts.
I really like the gradient from the dark forest on the left to the bright light on the right.
It gives a feeling of a forest edge, an last outpost of the forest.
I also like the trees in the background, although I find it odd that it's only leaning trees in the background as the two trees in the foreground are both totally straight.
To the "bad" parts...
Although I like the red warm colors in the tree (fires?) it irritates me that they sometimes overshines the daylight, which naturally is much brighter. But if the red colors are from the daylight then the flying ship should also have some red highlights, as it feels now the tree house and the ship seems to be different pictures as the light isn't consequent.
If there should be any red glow from fires there should be some (maybe only) from the treehouse more in the dark than the one the light have reached...
It's a nice piece but IMO but the parts is a little to "detached"(the ship feels like one picture, the treehouses in the straight trees one and the crooked trees in the background one) to give an overall good impression.
And please realize that because the "bad" part is longer it doesn't mean that it's overall bad. More like it's very good but with a few flaws.
:2envision: - your art through our eyes
π: 0 β©: 0
Hi Skybolt,
I've avoided reading the prior comments, so forgive me if I repeat.
- The balance between light and dark in the image is interesting. You've set up a light + sharp vs dark + blurrily welcoming opposition. Perhaps the light (as it often does) represents the light of reason and science? And the dark, a kind of barbarity?
I think that's probably reading too much into it, but the set up forces an observer to try to establish some kind of order in the picture's imbalance. Without a purpose, the image just lacks equilibrium.
To my eye this difference in presentation (the busy left-hand side against the stark right) creates problems with depth perspective, too. The craft seems articulated according to a different aesthetic, which increases the contrast, yes, but causes a distracting clash in the picture's make-up. The ship has the kind of perspective one might see in something a lot more cartoony than this seems, and because of that is rather obstructive.
The tree, too, seems to have a few problems with depth. The sudden illumination of this populated, artifact-ridden treehouse with its various balloons and constructions strikes very much as contrived. The blurred, soft-focus surroundings are too suddenly obscured from view in an effort to make this tree-ship opposition the centre of attention. Too much artifice, imo.
Another minor detail: the tree-shadow directly below the ship is at an exceedinly drastic angle, and looks a little odd to me.
Hope this helps some. Very nice work.
*2envision
π: 0 β©: 0
Well what can I say? It's a beautiful work with the most attention to colour and light I've seen in a long time. Great stuff with producing a solid realm of depth, and a consistent one at that.
I knew technically brilliant works like this would come up often. But...but...but.......
From a gallerist in the contemporary arts, I find this piece lacks content, lacks strength as a contemporary work, and it lacks - what some call, meat and potatoes. There is no backbone behind the elaborate structures and vivid imagination, because even though it's an extremely creative piece, there is no motive exactly, as to why this work would ever come into fruition. And that my friend, is where most art lacks.
This is not to say all art needs the content I am eluding to, but that groundbreaking art should, and art that wants a more memorable effect in the long run.
It's a fantastic work and it's a lovely take on a science-fictional space and land, but it's an image I seem to have seen often, and it bores me.
π: 0 β©: 2
What an interesting statement. After reading this I thought back on my own art, and why I created it. I realized it's not been to bring some concept forward, or make any point. Its' because I wanted to see into some other world that didn't exist, or sometimes just to test my skill. Does that make me a bad artist? I'm not sure. Maybe selfish. I'm painting something I want to see, and not think of influencing thought in others. Perhaps you become truly great when you've grown enough to focus on a new concept first, and the skill and desire to see into a new world second.
π: 0 β©: 0
I think all art does need the content your saying, I think every artist strives for it. Well, let me re-phrase. Every artist who is serious about art strives for it. I think there are just a very few with the gifts enough to make that happen.
Like you say though, the art can be good and pleasing without, but if it as that "something" it can be great and moving.
Like you I feel this is a good piece but not something that will keep me coming back for another look.
π: 0 β©: 0
I like very much how you created depth of field while painting the trees. The details in the foreground are very exquisite. 
Otherwise, I love the color theme you chose; it's very warm and inviting! Once again I commend you on your skill in creating depth, this is a very nice piece!
π: 0 β©: 0
You are getting many critique from 2envision, but this isn't one of them lol. I'm not much of a visual artist myself, but I do judge them critically. I'll give a go..
The first thing I noticed, other than color, was the contrast in subjects. A tree based living quaters, hot air balloons, and then a futuristic flying vehicle. That makes me wonder a few things.. makes me think about the history of the painting, the time set. It's rare that a painting brings such thought to me, but this pulled it off. You did a great job there.
Now looking at it for its visualistic proporties. I like the detail in the main tree. The others are a bit too blurry in my opinion. I know you don't want to detract the viewers eyes from your subjects, but in my opinion, the trees are too big to be soo blurry. They would be more tuned at the sizes they are. It's mainly the two on either side of the subject tree. If you could present a little more detail in the tree on the right, it would make up for this unbalanced feel. The left tree feels a little more detail oriented.
Another thing I liked about this was the lighting. I am feeling a sunset over sunrise, mainly since the ship is returning to the tree, as if the day is finished. I like the bit of darkness in the bottom corner. It makes the tree feel more homely, as if the ship is leaving the darkness. I do feel that the balance in the contrast between brights and darks
is a bit off. Maybe on the lower right dark patch you could extend it a little more the the left to offer better balance? From a zoomed out point of view that's the main aspect I see in lighting balance. One more thing I would do is darken that bright spot to the left of that lower right dark patch because it could be misleading as the sun, or what ever source of light this mysterious place goes by. The sun seems like it is coming from the back side area of the ship.
Well, I enjoyed viewing this. As I said, I'm not much of a visual artist, but I do hope my comments and suggestions have helped you with your piece. Thanks for providing!
Take care,
Chris
π: 0 β©: 0
I saw the link from the news article and thought I would put in my 2Β’. My issue with your painting is the lack of a focal point. Is it the tree? The ship? The balloon? That is what I think the weakness of your effort is. Now that being said you do have lots going for you in this. I love the composition and the colors. I also like the dichotomy between the natural and the man-made. The tension created by your use of light and shadow is also worth mentioning. It's obvious you put a large amount of effort in to your artwork, and hopefully this will help you in the future. Keep up the good work and you deserve kudos for putting yourself out there like you did.
π: 0 β©: 0
Sweet! Reminds me of my childhood a lot
The colors compliment each other nicely. I also like how it looks carelessly drawn, even though there's still a lot of detail and the amount of work you did really shows.
π: 0 β©: 0
At the risk of giving a 'wrong answer', I kinda have to disagree with some of the comments you've gotten on this. It seems like a lot of people are suggesting more detail in the trees, and although I would agree that if you were going for a photographic or super realistic style that would be true, I see nothing wrong with the trees in this picture, though. It was pointed out that this piece shares a feel with a lot of Roger Dean's work, and I 100% agree. One of Dean's strengths, IMO, is his ability to use shape, color, and shading rather than focusing in on details (though he, like you, is obviously able to do the details, they are also in this piece). Not being an artist, I'm not sure technically what the possibilities are, but I don't think you could keep the feeling in this if you added much detail in the trees? To me, the lack of detail gives an early morning dream-like quality. Possibly because I am viewing this as an early morning scene, I also see enough indication of activity in things like the smoke, what seems to be firelight, etc that the lack of visible people is not bothersome to me. I have to say/agree with other comments, though, you do inspire me to write. XD I can see several possible stories going on here, as well as just snapshot feelings, which is something I really admire in a visual artist, the ability to create possibilities. Thanks for showing a great piece, and for participating in the 2envision project (that's how I found this, looking at their site). -Sunny
π: 0 β©: 1
I think many (including me) have been suggesting more details, and a just in general tighter sort of look on the main tree, simply because it seems to be his focal point. everything, the subdued background, the indicated trees to the right, as well as the aircraft make the eye wander to the populated tree. Resulting in the eye expecting to see a detailed and in-focus object/subject/area. But since his lines there are rather loose, it feels a bit like he didn't pay enough attention there. And I think I disagree...while fires and all might be nice, without a figure or moving vehicle of some sort it still looks deserted. Like everyone just ran away, or is hiding. And except for the far balloon there don't seem to be many objects which are actually in use. Even the big balloon seems to just stay there for the moment. And that's just quite a contrast to the otherwise populated look of the tree. Our human eye always expects some action and movement in a populated looking area
π: 0 β©: 1
this, i think, is why my artist friends don't ask me to comment on their stuff.. XD I tend to not understand the finer points of visual art. I definitely agree that the tree is the focal point, and, yeah, i can see that having more leaf detail and such on the main tree would tighten the look. i'm mostly fond of the big tree to the right of the main trunk, the way it blurs and is kinda undefined? and the trunk of the main tree itself seems to have a good amount of detail, so i was kinda thinking that the blur/ lack of details in the foliage was sort of like when, for example, someone does a human figure, fouses on the top part, then lets the piece sort of blur, then fade off... if that makes any sense? maybe that isn't so desireable in something like this, though? and, i do see your point about the action and movement for sure, I guess I was seeing it a s implied, so wasn't noticing it so much. when I think about it in terms of written stuff, which is where i'm better at seeing stuff like this, i guess it's maybe like a piece of prose where it may be more satisfying to the audience to have more solid descriptors, or in this case, to have an actual visual that there are people. i think that the story i was telling mayself about it really effected the way I viewed it because in my mind i was fillingnin that there was very little activity and all of it happening inside.
(thanks, btw, for helping me understand the critique on this, I'm hoping that I'll learn more, especially in visual art, by following this project around like a puppy dog. XD )
π: 0 β©: 1
That's perfectly fine, I understand that people do have different views on things, and I'm glad if I was able to explain you my position
I actually do understand what you mean, and I quite like this way of going sketchy in a piece, as you described it. But I think that this is more used in portraits, for once. Also, I think that you should differ between roughing something out, and actually creating depth of field, as I think ~skybolt did, here. Just think of photography. If you take a photo, you will have a certain distance from the photographer where the photo has its sharpes and most focused point. Everything in front of it and behind of it will look unsharp. And you will want this point to be your focus. You will want your story there, your subject of the painting. And your detail. There is no point in having the detail somewhere else, where you don't need it, and where it will only distract. That's why I think the main tree needs to be tightened up (sharpest point, remember?) and more detailed. And then you also have to pay attention to physical realism. I mean, that points with the same distance from the camera/eye/viewer also are equally sharp. Which is why I recommend him to also define the trees to the far right a bit more, which seem to be at roughly the same distance as the main tree. There he sort of did what you were describing. Going sketchy, indicating, hinting. That's artistic freedom, I just think it was a tad too much of that. You always do a painting or artwork in a certain style, and I think he was going for a rather realistic look here.
π: 0 β©: 0
Hey Matt, this is truly a wonderful picture. The very first thing that caught my eye about it are those gorgeous colours, they really help creating a deep mood, emphasizing the time of sunset that you picked for this piece.
The setting also gets a special touch through the combination of low-tech and high-tech objects/architecture. It gives the viewer both something to relate to and something to explore. It's something that you find in many films, too, and you successfully made use of this style.
As others before me I am really curious about the story behind this piece. The aircraft makes me wonder what its intention is, a good or bad one? To me it seems as if it is an intruder of some kind, since it looks quite different from the tree houses and the vehicles closeby.
However, I am really wondering what your focus point is. Is it the aircraft, which, isolated against this rather subdued background stands out a lot, or is it the colony on the tree, which is the image's area with the most detail. Here I am having an issue with this piece, I would really love to see that being tightened up. The piece as a whole, the aircraft could need a somewhat less sketchy look, too. But especially the main tree needs to be tightened up, needs to get a few hard edges and even more details. It also needs more population, I think. Albeit you have those balloons there, it does look kinda dead. Perhaps a few pointy highlights would help with that. You could also show off more of the architecture, adding more rope bridges and such. I like how you have a few indicated huts on the left tree, but there could be more. It feels a bit as if this tree is the only populated one.
Other than that those trees turned out really awesome. Especially the background ones work perfectly in there simplicity. They retained a clear shape, but with your excellent feeling for values and shades you managed to put them far off and help the eye focusing on the important areas.
If at all, I'd suggest to define the trees to the right a slight bit, because by their value and colour they seem to be at almost the same distance from the viewer as the main tree, but they are just roughly indicated. Of course you did that to guide the eye towards the left, but it struck me as slightly odd, since they aren't much farther away from the eye. Though, you could play with their shape to make the eye go leftwards. That would have the same effect as the blurriness.
I think it would be interesting if you tried to add some cool colours to this piece. Perhaps a few cyans and blues mixed into the shadows. Also, if you add many details in the shadows, you might want to put a thin black frame around your picture. With dA having this really bright background, shadow detail easily gets lost, because the image is bound to look dark against the dA grey.
One more thing that you might want to consider is to make some extreme forground elements. A few branches and leaves perhaps, or some more of this low-tech architecture. Just indicated, but it would add even more depth to the piece, and it could balance out your composition.
Anyway, despite all those critique points, I really admire this piece and the strong mood you created. It's creative, it's artistic and it shows that you're truly skilled. Just refine it some more, and you'll have a real eyecatcher here.
Looking forward to more works like this! Well done.
Daniel
*2envision - Your art through our eyes
π: 0 β©: 0
I feel it isn't my place to point things out in a piece I do not know the category/technique of, but I'll try my best!
Looking at some things in general just make me smile without realising it, and this is one good example. I love the warming welcome it delivers, and hot air balloons? That alone makes me super happy.
But back to business... probably the only thing I would understand is detail. While I absolutely LOVE the lit windows in the background to the left, the outlining you did for the aircraft would be great for the bottom part of the balloon and is that a crane toward the top right of the tree? But again, I might have no idea wtf I'm talking about.
Also, the foliage at the top and bottom - is it blurry 'cause it's much closer, as to the focus which is considerably further away?
Sorry if this seems pointless, but I guess I'm learning too
*2envision - Your art through our eyes.
π: 0 β©: 1
You comment about the blurry section shook loose my issue with it. Thanks for making it.
If the blurry sections are showing depth of field (foreground blurry, middle sharp, background blurry) the the plane couldn't be blurry since it is close to the eye.
Now, mind you, this is coming from a photographer who's limitations for interpretation are created by a camera lens and how it sees the world but having a multi layered creation like this (in terms of depth) doesn't make 'sense' in the lens/eye world.
Dave
π: 0 β©: 1
Lense wise not everything here might make sense, but in a painting you would often just indicate certain areas which are not too important, in order to guide the eye towards the focal point and the important details. Though, I agree, a few areas need to be more defined in order to be physically correctly shown. You can guide the eye just as well by the mere shape of a branch.
Daniel
π: 0 β©: 0
Looking at this image and then reading the comments have made me realize how much I take for granted that what I produce is what goes up on the screen. Welcome to the *2envision project. My name's Amelia and I'm involved in the lit community here on dA. Being a writer, images like this aren't exactly my critiquing strongpoint--for example I don't have the vocabulary and I don't necessarily know what to look for. The advantage to you of a thoughtful comment from a layperson (such as myself) is that you can find out exactly how the piece comes across to the average viewer. With that said, I'll dive into the piece.
My first look at the piece immediately drew my eyes to the lit architectural arches of the main tree. The eye easily travels from there out along the tether to the balloon, then down the hanging construct down to the lower levels of the tree house. Of course the wing from the plane and the sunrise/set draw the eye out along to the right as well. However, I felt the same anxiety about the plane mentioned by ~ARTWITHIN and the tension that `krissie mentioned in regards to the lack of population. More than one comment has mentioned how thereβs a story here begging to be told, and I think that is probably directly related to the viewerβs desire to see who lives here. Itβs hard to believe that at this time of day with a balloon at dock and a plane incoming (does it have hover capabilities? I want to know how it moves!) there wouldnβt be people somewhere running around and doingβ¦stuff.
Iβm particularly amused (and admittedly confused) by the sunrise/sunset debate. Which is it? Does it matter? I wish you would give the viewer (and I want to say audience here because I think this piece is downright theatrical) some clue about how to frame this shot.
Iβm eagerly awaiting your replies to these commentsβI hope the attention to your piece isnβt totally overwhelming. Thanks so much for being brave enough to subject yourself to our trial run! Hopefully you get as much out of this as we do.
π: 0 β©: 0
I really love the atmosphere of this piece! The colors are very warm and provide a sense of homeliness, if that is even a word. The brushes and textures you used attribute to the sci-fi, fantasy look that you wanted to create.
This piece makes people think if there are really any other intellegent life out there besides us.
The soft transparencies of the trees and the colors used in the background resembles a quiet, peaceful suburb that still has quite a bit of traffic due to people getting off of work.
We can use this piece to recognize what we familiarize with everyday, unconciously, of course, and this makes me love this piece even more. There are so many other viewpoints I can explain it from, but I think the ones I have provided will suffice.
Your skills are superb, and I hope to see more from you.
*2envision - your art through our eyes.
π: 0 β©: 0
I suppose I shall attempt to add something novel to the commentary provided this far.
I see this as quite well developed across the entire span, save the floating ship, which seems to lack the level of detail and heft that the rest of the image has. This throws off the asymmetrical balance of it a little, as does the seemingly less developed lower right corner mentioned by a previous commentator.
The image composition itself is very solid and well laid out, in a manner I see as similar to someone like Roger Dean (which is a compliment if you are ot familiar with the name, because most people under 35 aren't these days), which is to say there is a suggested narrative and it is open enough to be seen as a section of a bigger series of storytelling, or as a complete work of its own.
Technique wise, I don't think there is any doubt at all on your ability. Not just in the draughtsmanship, but in the understanding of proper theory of color, form, spatial relationships, etc (whether learned or self-practiced), are all very evident.
2envision - your art through our eyes.
π: 0 β©: 1
Roger Dean!!! That's it! I was trying to focus in on what this reminded me of. While this could never be considered a true dean construction, as you said, it can definitely be attributed to a dean influence. I truly love that guys work. Thanks for knocking the cob webs loose...
π: 0 β©: 1
I used to collect Roger Dean as a teen, including his trading card series. Very littl of his work still resonates with me much, but I still have a deep resepct for his technical skill, and I do enjoy his nature work (i.e. his rock structure paintings).
π: 0 β©: 0
The think that struck me most about this piece, other than its stunning beauty, in the way the sunset gives the piece an almost serene quality, like coming in from the fields after a hard days work. But at the same time, I get a sense that all is not right in the world either. The spacecraft seems to be a little out of place here, giving the scene an expectation that more is going on than we now, like the ship is carrying with it a portend of things to come.
From an artist perspective, I can really only give you a laymanβs assessment of this work, as I'm highly unskilled at drawing and/or painting.
To me the lighting in the sky, the sunset seems rather good, but the higher altitudes seem to be too blue for the sun being that low. Plus, I think that the angle of the light is too low for it to seen natural that may be the thing the others have mentioned. It appears that the light is actually emanating from below what would seem to be the natural horizon.
The detail on the ship and the trees in particular is absolutely stunning. The way you handle the reflections and shading is impressive. I like the horizontal line effect you used in the less detailed areas too.
I can't really add much more to what the others have said, but I must say, I am very impressed with your work. It reminds me of the art that used to be in the old Omni magazines.
Keep up the great work!
*2envision - art through our eyes
π: 0 β©: 1
After a second look, I'm waffling on the 'light being too low statement'
*2envision - your art through our eyes.
π: 0 β©: 0
| Next =>