Couple comments/suggestions. You might be going for a more stylized look, so take this with a pinch of salt.
Surface decoration looks fresh and uniform - given this is a chunk of rubble, maybe you want to lighten up on the stencil/texture or age it so that it looks more like part of the surface instead of stamped on. Same with the paint - fresh blood is red, tends to be affected by gravity, dried blood has less pigment to it, dries to a muddy brown. yeah, I've seen enough of my own to know that - no woodworking project is complete without some hemoglobin somewheres.
Looks like some texel smearing happening in the upper right corner, along the broken edge.
The broken edges on the vertical piece seem sliced to me, could be an artifact of a low-poly model.
Rebar looks more like rope to me than rebar - maybe because the color is so uniform?
Lighting seems too even on the two surfaces. They have different orientations, so it would be logical there be some difference in color/chroma/value.
I think you're currently worrying too much about time with the 2D stuff. Honestly, I think the idea of speedpaints (which I guess is basically what this whole spitpainting thing is about? 30 minutes to paint a given topic?) is waaaaay too popular among artists learning to paint digitally.
Speed is about optimization, taking what you know and then finding more efficient ways to do it. In painting, this often involves knowing what key elements something relies on for a good read or proper portrayal. But if you haven't actually done something proper - haven't seen something through with a level of quality or accuracy that you want to have, trying to do what you don't know quickly is only going to interfere with progress (at least, in my experience).
I would recommend experimenting a bit more with different painting techniques - not worrying about time, just looking to learn. Locking a layer's pixels, more work with hard brushes, working in grayscale for value studies prior to color, etc. I can see you using some custom brushes, but it seems pretty experimental and it's missing intent. That's something else I see a lot, people snag some custom brushes and are quick to sling them around for "texture" - but why? For what purpose? To portray what? Clouds may seem soft, but that doesn't mean you need a soft feathery brush to paint them. Trees may be feathery looking when you think about them, lots of leaves and all that - but are they really, when present in a 2D image? Or do they have just as much definition and hard edges as anything else? Can it depend?
Take some time to analyze. One thing I've done a LOT of over the past several years is take paintings I love, throw them in photoshop and try to see them in as many different ways as possible. Grayscale them, open up the contrast adjustment option and if you have a "legacy" option, check that and crank contrast up to 100% - resulting in pure black, pure white. Just to see how it reads. What shapes are still present; what ones are not? Throw a "cutout" filter on them, play with the options - this simplifies all the shapes, makes them more angular and chops down the amount of colors available. How can you still tell what things are? What are the key elements that retain shape? Do these elements remain consistent if you do the same things to images with very different styles or feelings? If not how do they differ? You will discover all sorts of things about what exactly is portrayed in the image, how, and why.
You could spend hours learning from just one great painting, without putting pencil to paper! But you may find your work and knowledge improves much more drastically than if you'd spent the same amount of time simply making speedpaints for the sake of it.
It's been a long time since I've added a new portfolio piece! Literally 3 years. I've learned sooo so much between then and now. Here's a little something to break the time gap.
This is my first shot at using Substance Designer on my own. After watching a few days of tutorials and experimenting, I decided to jump into it and have some fun.
This camera lens is 100 percent created within Substance Designer. Marmoset Toolbag 3 was then used to render. The 3D factor was created with a height map and tessellation.
A design and rendition of a hotel room occupied for a business trip.
- All models were created in 3DS Max. - Cloth layouts used Marvelous Designer and 3DS Max's cloth simulator. - Textures created in Substance Painter and Substance Designer. - Rendered using V-ray.
Replies
Surface decoration looks fresh and uniform - given this is a chunk of rubble, maybe you want to lighten up on the stencil/texture or age it so that it looks more like part of the surface instead of stamped on. Same with the paint - fresh blood is red, tends to be affected by gravity, dried blood has less pigment to it, dries to a muddy brown. yeah, I've seen enough of my own to know that - no woodworking project is complete without some hemoglobin somewheres.
Looks like some texel smearing happening in the upper right corner, along the broken edge.
The broken edges on the vertical piece seem sliced to me, could be an artifact of a low-poly model.
Rebar looks more like rope to me than rebar - maybe because the color is so uniform?
Lighting seems too even on the two surfaces. They have different orientations, so it would be logical there be some difference in color/chroma/value.
My .02, worth price charged.
-28 minutes
-31 minutes
-30 minutes
The Hunted Man[spitpaint]
-30 minutes
Demon Dog[spitpaint]
Speed is about optimization, taking what you know and then finding more efficient ways to do it. In painting, this often involves knowing what key elements something relies on for a good read or proper portrayal. But if you haven't actually done something proper - haven't seen something through with a level of quality or accuracy that you want to have, trying to do what you don't know quickly is only going to interfere with progress (at least, in my experience).
I would recommend experimenting a bit more with different painting techniques - not worrying about time, just looking to learn. Locking a layer's pixels, more work with hard brushes, working in grayscale for value studies prior to color, etc. I can see you using some custom brushes, but it seems pretty experimental and it's missing intent. That's something else I see a lot, people snag some custom brushes and are quick to sling them around for "texture" - but why? For what purpose? To portray what? Clouds may seem soft, but that doesn't mean you need a soft feathery brush to paint them. Trees may be feathery looking when you think about them, lots of leaves and all that - but are they really, when present in a 2D image? Or do they have just as much definition and hard edges as anything else? Can it depend?
Take some time to analyze. One thing I've done a LOT of over the past several years is take paintings I love, throw them in photoshop and try to see them in as many different ways as possible. Grayscale them, open up the contrast adjustment option and if you have a "legacy" option, check that and crank contrast up to 100% - resulting in pure black, pure white. Just to see how it reads. What shapes are still present; what ones are not? Throw a "cutout" filter on them, play with the options - this simplifies all the shapes, makes them more angular and chops down the amount of colors available. How can you still tell what things are? What are the key elements that retain shape? Do these elements remain consistent if you do the same things to images with very different styles or feelings? If not how do they differ? You will discover all sorts of things about what exactly is portrayed in the image, how, and why.
You could spend hours learning from just one great painting, without putting pencil to paper! But you may find your work and knowledge improves much more drastically than if you'd spent the same amount of time simply making speedpaints for the sake of it.
I love the details on that.
- Modeled in 3ds Max / rendered in Mental Ray / final edit in Photoshop
https://ajerb.artstation.com/portfolio/marble_a
Rolleiflex 2.8B Type 2
This classic camera was a good practice for hard surface modeling.https://ajerb.artstation.com/
Camera Lens : Substance Designer
It's been a long time since I've added a new portfolio piece! Literally 3 years. I've learned sooo so much between then and now. Here's a little something to break the time gap.This is my first shot at using Substance Designer on my own. After watching a few days of tutorials and experimenting, I decided to jump into it and have some fun.
This camera lens is 100 percent created within Substance Designer. Marmoset Toolbag 3 was then used to render. The 3D factor was created with a height map and tessellation.
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/585kmg
Colt SAA .45 Revolver
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/k4KoNK
Business Trip
A design and rendition of a hotel room occupied for a business trip.- All models were created in 3DS Max.
- Cloth layouts used Marvelous Designer and 3DS Max's cloth simulator.
- Textures created in Substance Painter and Substance Designer.
- Rendered using V-ray.
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/oO1nrW
Tufted Chaise
This furniture piece was referenced from Overstock and used for a nice practice session on modeling and rendering fabric tufts.- Modeling and UVs done in 3ds Max.
- Textures done in Substance Painter and Substance Designer.
- Rendered with V-Ray.
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/v1r0Ed