m1kclark's art Reviews on Newgrounds

[Behind The Mask]

I'd like more information, please!
1) What program(s) did you use?
2) Is that character model from scratch?
3) Who designed that poster in the background?
4) Is this intended for a video game, or as a pure 3D-Art image?

mascerrado responds:

1) MAXON Cinema 4D
2) Yup!
3) Me
4) For my studio annual mag

[Sherlock]

The eyes are anatomically too small, and the eyebrows should be a little more sinister to give a real Sherlock effect.

tlishman responds:

Thanks! This is work in progress.

[Robo Render]

Lighting is definitely this image's weak point. First, it's too dark, and second, there are specular reflections with no apparent light source.

Meanwhile, I would give you more constructive criticism, except I can't see anything well enough to judge it. Sorry to be blunt, but the lighting is so poor that I cannot pick out what looks right and what looks wrong, because it *all* kind of looks wrong. It certainly has potential, particularly that robot, and I would LOVE to see & critique what you've done! Good luck!

SPace responds:

thanks for the response. yeah i was trying some stuff with the lighting and was realllllly unsuccessful. i haven't slept in a few days. so yeah, just blegh lighting, redoing it all. the scene is supposed to be on the darker side in the context of the animation. i'm not sure what you mean by the spec reflections? the bars of light on the wall/couch are from a window with the blinds down, which i'm currently redoing as a gobo to be more consistent. the assignment is due in a week so i have time to unfuck the lights. maybe i'll post a render of the robot by himself. i wish NG had a way to post turntables... will ask Tom...

[Between Together and Apart]

I'm not a fan of the mixed styles. The background looks almost like 3D art, very realistic style, perhaps with a painted feel to it. The character, meanwhile, is entirely anime style. Sure, the shadows have more depth than average, but it does not match the level of realistic detail in the background at all. Redo the background in the same style, though, and I'd give 4.5 stars.

FelixRJ responds:

Thanks for the input. I really appreciate it!

[Still Life]

Not a bad first go. Here are my comments:

Models: In general, the objects are well thought-out, but you need to bevel your edges. Super-precise edges look unrealistic unless you are working with something truly massive. Also, you need a slightly higher polygon count on the boot. The entire front reveals the polygons that constructed what should be a smooth surface.

Textures: the boot texture is really good, presumably from a photo. However, it is not well mapped to the boot's polygons. There's some stretching going on midway between the toe and the laces. Also, the logo at the top of the boot looks weird because you didn't use a "normals" map, a.k.a. bump map. The rough texture on the Nerf-rubber is a bit over the top. The laces, also, need some kind of texture, or at least a different base material, because they looks unrealistic.

Lighting: This is frankly your weakest point. You've got a spot light shining down, and you've got a "sun" style lamp shining toward the left. Both have shadows enabled. Either of these lights alone would be fine, but together they make for really strange shadows. Also, they are each too bright. See how the center of the image is over-bright? That's because you've put so much light on that point that even a yellow surface is reflecting as white, because you've supersaturated the color. So, one light would be better, whichever one you choose. Now that will make the image look stark and empty, so you could include some additional lights to illuminate the object better, but these look best if you disable shadows AND disable specular lighting. For a softer look, use area-lights instead of point-source lights, if Maya has them.

It's quite good as an amateur shot, and I hope that my comments were constructive so you have a better handle on what to do next. Keeping all these things in mind is hard, which is why God invented critics.

Arch-Angel responds:

Wow! thanks for the review! I honestly didn't think I was going to get any decent feedback. I really appreciate it. I knew there was something about it I didn't like, I couldn't put my finger on it. I agree with every point you made. Textureing and lighting were the hardest part for me I admit. UV Mapping is way more difficult than I would've thought. and it can really make or break a project. I really appreciate your advice, and I'll keep it in mind for the future.

[3D Flashlight]

Not really prioritized

I'd like to point out that, for a low-poly model, you sure wasted a lot of polygons on a hemi-spherical on/off button. You could have done a rectangular button, flush with the flashlight's surface, with indents at its edges, and that would have added 9-12 polygons instead of that 25+ polygon button.

Also, as the last reviewer pointed out, it doesn't look like a typical flashlight. It's clear you did a Google Image search and took the first reference you found, which by the way is an obscure LED flashlight brand. Meanwhile, when most people think "flashlight" they're thinking of a Mag-lite. The contour of the body goes from wide at the light, to narrow at the butt, with at least some part sloping between wide and narrow. Your model is a wide cylinder + a wider interface cylinder + a narrow cylinder. I swear, the classic Maglite look would be more appealing AND use fewer polygons.

I'd give 9/10 for effort, but I'm afraid I can only give 6/10 because of the lack of research into what the audience would expect to see.

Gamers-Gear responds:

Several good points, I forgot about doing proper research, and I will most def try and keep that in mind next time I model something.

For some reason I had the idea that the LED types where outdated but I suppose I was wrong.

Either how, thanks for the constructive critisism, I appreciate it over all things.

[Viking Village]

Awesome idea!

I love the idea of making the 3D base and then using filters to make it a painting. The best part about it is, you aren't restricted in the 3D environment to an exclusive style, since the painting later can modify it as needed. An excellent concept, some of your best stuff IMO.

samulis responds:

Thanks, this is honestly my favorite piece of art so far. The automatic painter takes the image and literally re-paints it using calculated brush-strokes, allowing for a result better than most filters, which merely re-arrange pixels... it's a great method, because you can take something that looks plain and simple in 3D and give it lots of character with the painter. What may look bad in a straight render can look amazing after this process... and if it doesn't get painted right, I can change some settings and get a whole different take.

[Florentine Library]

Hmmm

(This review applies to all three "Library" 3D pieces.)

First, a detail: this isn't "Pixel Art", it's "3D Art". This is important because NewGrounds has fans of 3D Art who *only* look at 3D Art submissions. Those people (your target audience) won't see your pics if they are mislabeled.

Okay, the image. All your textures are properly anti-aliased, but your geometries are not. The wooden pieces of the window, for example, look highly pixelated when they should be smooth. Also, you have a pretty low polygon count: there isn't a single round surface that isn't clearly made of flat polygons. Now, IF this is for a game environment, that's fine, but you need to tell us that. If it's to make high-quality 3D art, a la Pixar, then you need to increase the detail in your geometries.

There's also an inconsistency in your detail level overall. The textures are really highly detailed, specifically on the scratched marble columns. But the object itself looks very low detail: a single rectangle. Again, this is something I might expect in a game, but otherwise you should use a normal map to make those scratches stand out a bit. (And some modern games DO use normal maps for this purpose, even in real-time.)

Finally, the lighting. The light from the windows make some sense, although the color and brightness of the light from the windows doesn't match the color and light of what we see outside. If it's that dark and cloudy a day, then I would expect a dull, blue-tinted light instead of that bright white. Also, the lighting around the torch (on the right) again doesn't match the light source. It looks too white, when the torch should be giving off a soft-yellow glow. It also looks like that light is a spot-light instead of an isotropic lamp: the torch clearly isn't illuminating the ceiling. Which brings me to my final point: you appear to have an ambient light that just illuminates everything uniformly. That's okay, but a better approach for such a detailed environment-model is to use radiosity. The newest game-developers have special tools that pre-calculate radiosity so the game-engine can handle that kind of dynamic lighting in real-time, but you aren't restricted that way. If this is truly for a game environment, then you'd want to include radiosity anyway, in the hopes that later game tech will permit its use on a home computer's graphics card. For technical delivery of your concept, I rate 6/10 if it's a game (if not, 2/10).

THAT SAID. It's an excellent level design, and the feel of the hall is pretty consistent throughout. It feels like an old castle. And the work on the textures is truly intricate, and it is the textures that are the *most* realistic part of the image. It's obvious how hard you worked on those, in all of your images. The placement of the incidental objects (chairs, books) is also a nice touch. I give you a 10/10 for your ideas and creativity. It's a great level.

6/10 + 10/10 = 8/10 starts and a 4/5 vote

simonoc responds:

Wow! Now that is the kind of feedback I wished I got earlier when I was developing this scene. My mistake on the category, I did not realize there was a 3D art section, I assumed it was computer pixels for me (this is certainly not drawing stuff).

Well the lighting is something that started out going in the right direction and then due to me changing the sky to something more cloudy affected the indoor setup. The original scene had blue ambient lights for the ceiling to create the impression of cold above but the light entity size was too big and created a flat texture look instead.
I have changed the torch light entities to have a better fall off value so that the floor circle light pattern is not too harsh anymore. I have switched both window sides to blue and turned all the central lights to yellow. It certainly creates a better contrast and makes the central area feel warm. I have bumped up the central area lights to give the torches a more hot light feel against the marble background.
The original scene was more about me testing out the photo sourced textures on some architecture to see how well they perform. (Which is why there was not much detail or dirt to the scene) The textures are photo sourced from my summer holiday trip to Italy (Florence area mostly) and should feel vibrant and detailed. I do plan to create a final normal pass for them but I wanted to see if the diffuse is good by itself.
The prefabs (chairs/tables) are really basic 3D items because I wanted to create a medieval theme with a rustic feel. The wooden texture is certainly not great up close and lacking a normal map makes it painfully obvious. The current test engine I am using does not support normal maps so I have doubled the texture density instead.
I have deleted the other artwork images and have updated the image above with the better version. I did not want to resubmit because I wanted to keep these comments.

Thanks for the feedback, it was exactly what I needed. :)

[Darth Vader]

Darth Cylon

I can't help but reminded of Battlestar Galactica. Either way, this is epic and I'm glad you posted this "oldie"!

MindChamber responds:

ha yah I can see that, it was more at a stab at the republic commando troopers, but yeah I see some cyclon

[Jonas brothers]

:-°

I'm having trouble believing this isn't an altered photo. If it is, then I'm not a fan at all. If it is not, then I think you've got epic skill and a singular taste. My rating is the average of these opinions, though I invite you to tell us how you made the picture.

msg2007 responds:

its part of a product design for watchs, No I did not draw the pice but I did do the effects ect, its an altered photo

thanks for the review