V1:
V2:
V3:
V4:
V2:
V3:
V4:
which is the best???
M A L I K
Started by Bilal, Jun 16 2007 04:57 AM
5 replies to this topic
#1
Bilal
-
-
- 1087 posts
Posted 16 June 2007 - 04:57 AM
which is the best???
#2
sarah.
-
-
- 5392 posts
Posted 16 June 2007 - 09:49 AM
The colouring seems a little flat, I'd suggest adding a brightness & contrast layer, or a black to white gradient map set on luminosity to make them a little more vibrant. I prefer the colouring in version two, it looks more natural to me.
The background itself looks quite nice, but it's hard to tell because it seems like you've overused the gaussian blur -> lighten effect
It's making it hard to see any details. I think you could do with sharpening his face slightly as well, it's all a bit too blurred.
Um, there's a faint line down the left side (his right) of his face, which looks really weird and is irritating me. Not sure how you managed to do that tbh.
Text is quite hard for me to read, and very small. Personally, I would have tried adding text in the middle of the signature in a font like Times New Roman at a medium size, then blurred/erased it until it blended into the background.
It's not a bad signature on the whole, but it could be improved. Hopefully the c/c has been helpful.
Edit: Wow, I didn't realise I wrote that much O_____o
The background itself looks quite nice, but it's hard to tell because it seems like you've overused the gaussian blur -> lighten effect
It's making it hard to see any details. I think you could do with sharpening his face slightly as well, it's all a bit too blurred.Um, there's a faint line down the left side (his right) of his face, which looks really weird and is irritating me. Not sure how you managed to do that tbh.
Text is quite hard for me to read, and very small. Personally, I would have tried adding text in the middle of the signature in a font like Times New Roman at a medium size, then blurred/erased it until it blended into the background.
It's not a bad signature on the whole, but it could be improved. Hopefully the c/c has been helpful.
Edit: Wow, I didn't realise I wrote that much O_____o
#3
Hlaw
-
-
- 611 posts
Posted 16 June 2007 - 11:07 AM
i like the third one, coz im a sucker for painted effects. the text is good in all pieces, but i dont like no4 it just seems really boring coz theres no colour but the rest are good
but the rest are good
#4
Noitidart
-
-
- 23214 posts
Neocodex Co-Founder
Posted 16 June 2007 - 12:03 PM
Their all great I just think the guy in the frikkin picture is makin a weird face haha. IF he wasn't it would have been a bomb sig
#5
Bilal
-
-
- 1087 posts
Posted 17 June 2007 - 03:58 AM
lol...yeah...some people thought he was singing on another forum...lol...thanks for the comments any how...
wow...all that for me...lol...thanks for all the suggestions dear...might try to improve it if i can be bothered but will definitely help me in the future sig...oh and i don't have a clue how i got that line on his face...hmmm...
QUOTE(xcine @ Jun 16 2007, 05:49 PM) 
The colouring seems a little flat, I'd suggest adding a brightness & contrast layer, or a black to white gradient map set on luminosity to make them a little more vibrant. I prefer the colouring in version two, it looks more natural to me.
The background itself looks quite nice, but it's hard to tell because it seems like you've overused the gaussian blur -> lighten effect It's making it hard to see any details. I think you could do with sharpening his face slightly as well, it's all a bit too blurred.
Um, there's a faint line down the left side (his right) of his face, which looks really weird and is irritating me. Not sure how you managed to do that tbh.
Text is quite hard for me to read, and very small. Personally, I would have tried adding text in the middle of the signature in a font like Times New Roman at a medium size, then blurred/erased it until it blended into the background.
It's not a bad signature on the whole, but it could be improved. Hopefully the c/c has been helpful.
Edit: Wow, I didn't realise I wrote that much O_____o
The background itself looks quite nice, but it's hard to tell because it seems like you've overused the gaussian blur -> lighten effect
It's making it hard to see any details. I think you could do with sharpening his face slightly as well, it's all a bit too blurred.Um, there's a faint line down the left side (his right) of his face, which looks really weird and is irritating me. Not sure how you managed to do that tbh.
Text is quite hard for me to read, and very small. Personally, I would have tried adding text in the middle of the signature in a font like Times New Roman at a medium size, then blurred/erased it until it blended into the background.
It's not a bad signature on the whole, but it could be improved. Hopefully the c/c has been helpful.
Edit: Wow, I didn't realise I wrote that much O_____o
wow...all that for me...lol...thanks for all the suggestions dear...might try to improve it if i can be bothered but will definitely help me in the future sig...oh and i don't have a clue how i got that line on his face...hmmm...
#6
sarah.
-
-
- 5392 posts
Posted 17 June 2007 - 05:47 AM
QUOTE(Bilal @ Jun 17 2007, 12:58 PM)
wow...all that for me...lol...thanks for all the suggestions dear...might try to improve it if i can be bothered but will definitely help me in the future sig...oh and i don't have a clue how i got that line on his face...hmmm...
I didn't realised I'd typed so much, I should do it more often. Hm.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
