I didn't have internet last night, but here is day 8 - day 7 will be posted as soon as I get internet again....this took about 2.5 hours...
edit: okay so I lied, the two different blacks was unintentional...here is a re-vamped version, just changed the color/position of the cupid...thing...and the red is intentional! I mean it this time...
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Day 8
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Hey man, I miss Christina too. The cityscape is more solid black than the Cupid. Intentional?
ReplyDeleteGot a text from Paul earlier.
ReplyDelete"Thanks for the comment... and yes it was intentional!! Dickweed."
Whatever, dude. Also noticed the red behind the "halo" has a pretty aggressive fade from there. Do you see it? Was THAT intentional? 'Cause that's also distracting.
The blue line points right from the love birds to Cupid's penis... or vice versa. Intentional?
ReplyDeleteAnd please explain your red coloring. I can see that you wanted to emphasize the halo, but why didn't you extend the dark bleed farther, and more gradually, to the left?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteparadoxical. I wouldn't worry too much about making images so that everything you do is intentional — unless you’re a true genius. I think a lot of art and design allows for serendipity and intention comes after the fact. But, you probably know me well enough, by now, to know that’s important to understand why and how images are impactful. To be able to articulate that, to us, is very helpful. I actually appreciate the first rendition, but, one thing I find particularly distracting is that the right side of the circle (halo) touches the skyscraper (Empire State Building 1930s). What do you think?
ReplyDeleteParadoxical and serendipitous, of course - we shouldn't fall on formulas or standards for our work. I don't know your process of putting a graphic together, Paul, but there is still a notion of editing/touching up after the initial elements are set "in place." We could talk about composition alone for weeks, but color and concept etc. too.
ReplyDeleteAlvin: good point about editing, etc., as long as you don't edit the life out of the artwork (which takes experience). I call it 'pushing the design' and many never seem do any revisions — even after critiques. By the way, I tend to think of designing ‘by formula’ and having standards to be two different things. In design, standards have import and mean, among other things, being very attentive to values such as production details, quality and craft (including spelling and a general respectfulness for all elements in the composition). With my previous comment I was speaking to both you and Paul. Does Paul check his comments?
ReplyDeleteI do check the comments, but haven't had steady internet until about 2 hours ago!
ReplyDeleteI did notice the unnerving proximity of the sun/halo shape and the tip of the Empire State Building silhouette, however I noticed it after I posted, sometime I will go back and change it. Nice job figuring out what building it is by the way, I wasn't sure if people would recognize the New York skyline.
Lately I have been trying to be more purposeful in my design, however there is a limit to my skill with that as you have all noticed! I do agree with the differences between standards and 'formula.' But I don't think Alvin, you are saying that we shouldn't have standards for are work...You're just saying that we shouldn't work our designs on an assembly line.
On second glance I do prefer the placement of Cupid in the first design, I will go back and fine tune this design sometime in the near future. I also am thinking that the skyline needs some texture, it feels too dark too me, almost ominous...compared with the rest of the piece. Thank you for your comments -