I am not sure whether this office building is modern or a bit futuristic with the tubular walkways between the buildings. Somewhat simple in design and shape, yet after a while, it caused my eyes to blur the image (must be the colors (or lack of colors)).
While this is the finished product, I can always break it down backwards into the various building stages (and show the hidden fourth small building).
Any constructive criticism appreciated once again.
Thanks in advance.
More practice...
Moderator: Graphics Moderators
More practice...
- Attachments
-
- Optical Illusion Building
- Optical Illusion Building.png (869 Bytes) Viewed 2197 times
I like that quite a bit. Looks nice. Ain't it a bit white tho? Bit... um... "clean"?
Anyhoo, looks good - fair play.
Dave
Anyhoo, looks good - fair play.
Dave
Official TT-Dave Fan Club
Dave's Screenshot Thread! - Albion: A fictional Britain
Flickr
Why be a song when you can be a symphony? r is a...
Dave's Screenshot Thread! - Albion: A fictional Britain
Flickr
Why be a song when you can be a symphony? r is a...
Thank you both for the replies.
The buildings are actually shaded. That seems to be one problem using an off-white color in the light and a shade of gray in the shadows - it blurs together too much. One aspect I have noticed looking at other graphics is there has been no absolute definition of how dark the shade should be. Some graphics have very pronounced shading while others have a light touch. Perhaps someone could offer an answer - using the three point color scheme per pixel, should the shade be 25% or 50% or 75% darker that the primary color? That is, if pure white is *thinks* 255, 255, 255, then shade should be around 127, 127, 127 to get ~50% ratio? Or should the designer use what he or she is most comfortable to keep the graphic relatively pretty?
The buildings are actually shaded. That seems to be one problem using an off-white color in the light and a shade of gray in the shadows - it blurs together too much. One aspect I have noticed looking at other graphics is there has been no absolute definition of how dark the shade should be. Some graphics have very pronounced shading while others have a light touch. Perhaps someone could offer an answer - using the three point color scheme per pixel, should the shade be 25% or 50% or 75% darker that the primary color? That is, if pure white is *thinks* 255, 255, 255, then shade should be around 127, 127, 127 to get ~50% ratio? Or should the designer use what he or she is most comfortable to keep the graphic relatively pretty?
Well i myself try to go for the lightest shades i can without making the object look to bright, though there are some objects where i use more drastic shading measures.
On vehicles its harder to see wich side is the "dark side" since their smaller, but buildings are many times bigger than any road or train can be on a square the colour diffrences are easily spotted, so the colour between the "light", and "dark" sides could differ 1 or 3 shades(that also leaves you nice options inbetween to use for extra shading like dirt marks and stuff) depending on the colour, on colours like white i'd suggest going for 2 shades diffrence between "light", and "dark".
On vehicles its harder to see wich side is the "dark side" since their smaller, but buildings are many times bigger than any road or train can be on a square the colour diffrences are easily spotted, so the colour between the "light", and "dark" sides could differ 1 or 3 shades(that also leaves you nice options inbetween to use for extra shading like dirt marks and stuff) depending on the colour, on colours like white i'd suggest going for 2 shades diffrence between "light", and "dark".
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot], Bing [Bot] and 21 guests