as usual with topics about quality this is turning into arguing semantics and personal taste and clarification needed for posts in order for addressing perceived hazy issues so as to intimately dislike a person's viewpoint more righteously
it's good we all have our own kind of investments here eh what would a discussion be without that fun stuff
Wunderpurps said:
He's confused because he is comparing characters that are supposed to be unnamed archtypes on a PnP cover and supposed to show off the coolness of being a warrior mage lizard elf to individual characters like jack the ripper or emma of the green gables.
perhaps one of my unsaid points is that a character which looks named and yet hasn't been for the viewer is far better than one that looks like it has been drawn purely as a safe stereotypical example template
Firstly unless you're going for something a lot more academic like a ethnological dictionary written by a british man in the 1890s it is a bit of a fallacy to say any example npc or character should be drawn generically because that's somehow better.
In a non-formal setting quirks and personality variances between a hundred members of the same guild should become very apparent. Even if each is isolated in a scene, the difference remains. Remember, we are talking about character design here, not uniform or armor design of an organisation.
Same here, in an action scene. Why shouldn't these designed as fully realised individuals? Wouldn't that deepen interest in the class for prospectives? Isn't the notion that you should give the loosest and blandest template possible running counter to the objective of 'cool' design?
in the context of this discussion all four characters here don't have names anyway, and would giving them all placards and honorifics shift the field there?
along the lines I think it's interesting you consider my examples named characters compared to the d&d cover. I can photoshop out 'chokeshin' on the second if you like, it makes little difference to the piece in terms of it being better as a 'cool' portrait. Stating a case is well served with strong counter-examples(not anti-examples, mind) so perhaps my deliberate choices became another entirely opposing camp with different ideals for you.
And yes I do try to ascertain the context and intent of a piece. With all the above in mind the costume detailing and intimate proximity do little to tell me that I am supposed to see and judge this as two faceless no-namers. Unfortunately the delivery ends up making it all interest-diffusing and sterile.
You can say that with an extreme judgment like that I have missed the point of the piece entirely because those who actually do will like it but that's really just your call I'm afraid just like this is mine.
with that said my overall intent was to show how an interesting character portrait versus non interesting ones so perhaps this whole 'why do you hate action shots' thing has meandered a bit too far off the scope of the thread
in the interest of full disclosure I'll probably be very pleased with an image of scantily clad dragonborn men or females laying against a sloping peak and curling their supplicating arms around a heroic wizard or witch king, so timeless and classy that stuff is
probably not as a portrait though unless as satire of a previously established character
also I've long given up the idea of disliking someone for liking something I don't so if the problem lies there for you be at peace. condescending? be sure to tell me
All the blah blah blah about how bad DnD art is can probably be replaced with "fuck, I am not using my brian, am I?" or maybe "I am confused and angered by things which are exaggerated or stylized in any way." with a side of "I don't understand that it's much more important to hit the notes even too loudly than to miss them completely, especially for the type of pieces I like to rage about where the character himself is not the real focus, and where it can be very difficult to be subtle such as an action scene.".
Going to have to disagree with your slight strawmanning assumptions about my thinking processes and how flawed the road they led me down was bro
in fact I do love d&d art and have p. much all the monstrous manuals and have never taken issue with the artwork inside them (will this turn the discussion into something similar to oh the rpgs you like back then are as good as the rpgs now in fact they are the same hypocrisy hypocrisy what you say cannot be trusted), but not the conveyances here as regarding character design
hitting the notes loudly? disciples 1 and 2 art is hitting the notes loudly. this comes off more as elevator music.
the rest I probably addressed in some convergent fashion above.
Luigi said:
Dude, Imma let you finish and all since you are one of the last members her who is not a complete brian surgeon.
BUT WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU COMPARING HERE?!
what a sweet thing for you to say man don't hit on me I'm just another guy rpg gamer
and I'm quite aware of the genre or setting differences there, the idea was to show 'having character' versus not having it
the following images should help
your other misgivings I probably answered or help cement in that mess above
so bros here are some pictures of characters that I think constitute as looking interesting or delivering well in various fashions and degrees of sophistication that I won't go into because what is this a damn thesis let me say things are unequivocally shit or good in fine codex tradition you fuck
these should give you a better picture and refine any further questions
if you dislike what I'm saying these should give you more ammo
quite a bit of these are not specifically game or setting related and can well be captioned with descriptives like 'a fantasian being pauses for reflection'
I think they are all p. nice really and you should look at them even if you don't care about the shit said so far
there might be some tits
http://i.imgur.com/UaqSb.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/NutwP.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/4qlZh.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/89tc2.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/4XQL2.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/RIoJ0.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/q5k30.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/lvVvR.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/vjn6k.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ZysvZ.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/DqJE7.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/M5i38.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ySiED.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/E6Wt1.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/7phEL.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ZIcZg.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/0R6gw.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/oanHP.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/eSidX.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/2FCFG.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/RomXV.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/K99Bn.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/qg23Q.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/KgUmA.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/uKZuS.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/tNVd5.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/FMaDA.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/is3jH.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/68dQo.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/leiLo.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/3Cp1d.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/hXcRn.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/MmM7D.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/mAat5.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/GQKyj.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/WZKY8.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/h3LcD.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/6DtNf.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/EMMlq.jpg
'generic action pose/scene' contenders I approve of
next up is debating what is generic
http://i.imgur.com/SLNGX.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/eomD8.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/uTrYl.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/MIr0T.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/53pRc.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ToYH5.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/wiasL.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/tNVd5.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/CH4Nq.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Y6P0O.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/iGwEF.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/aAGyv.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/tWIp0.jpg
ok your turn