Works in progresses

[Anonymous No.4104177]

I'm trying to do my first serious drawing
using a cheap screenless tablet + Krita.
I have no idea how this will turn out.
I'll regularly post progress, so if you have advice/warning to give please do so before it's too late, thanks.

P.S.: feel free to use this thread for your stuff too if you want

[Anonymous No.4104178]

ok

[Anonymous No.4104180]

ok
Post wip

[Anonymous No.4104183]

>>4104177

[Anonymous No.4104185]

>>4104183
Anon, I...

[Anonymous No.4104186]

>>4104183
that dick's about to explode

[Anonymous No.4104196]

>>4104183
Cool spaceship, keep it up!

[Anonymous No.4104212]

>>4104183
pls no dirty jokes, it's supposed to be a cathedral...

[Anonymous No.4104225]

>>4104212
If I want to design a church or a cathedral the last thing I want it to look like from the front view is to look like a dick

[Anonymous No.4104245]

>>4104212
I was joking about the spaceship but now it actually is a spaceship.

[Anonymous No.4104252]

>>4104212

[Anonymous No.4104258]

>>4104252
I believe in you senpai. Go and finish this cathedral :)

[Anonymous No.4104273]

autism

[Anonymous No.4104310]

>>4104252
dunno...should I start coloring?

[Anonymous No.4104342]

>>4104310
Fix the perspective on the top balls.

[Anonymous No.4104365]

>>4104310
Did I get the bronze color right?

>>4104342
>Fix the perspective on the top balls.
are you referring to the way they meet the underlying cylinder?

[Anonymous No.4104406]

>>4104365
>are you referring to the way they meet the underlying cylinder?
For the top blue one yes. But I was talking about the gold ones on top, the ornaments on them.

>Did I get the bronze color right?
No, reads as gold.

[Anonymous No.4104555]

>>4104406
>For the top blue one yes.
They are supposed to be like that, they're seen frontally
>But I was talking about the gold ones on top, the ornaments on them.
What's wrong with them?

More importantly, pic related is where I think I really messed up... I literally have no idea what I'm doing there anymore

[Anonymous No.4104570]

These fucking legs mane.

[Anonymous No.4104587]

>>4104365
Added marble effect.

That's all for today, I'll continue tomorrow (maybe(

[Anonymous No.4104588]

>>4104555
Here's what I mean.

>More importantly, pic related is where I think I really messed up... I literally have no idea what I'm doing there anymore
Well, neither do I, I guess there's a circle floor there.

[Anonymous No.4105707]

>>4104588
>Here's what I mean.
I see, but the stairs are not in perspective: they're actually supposed to be physically converging (see pic rel.)

>Well, neither do I, I guess there's a circle floor there.
Now I get where I went wrong... the floor is tilted. I think I should to fix it asap

[Anonymous No.4105716]

>>4105707
>I see, but the stairs are not in perspective: they're actually supposed to be physically converging (see pic rel.)
Okay, but we're still supposed to be looking at the top balls from below. In general, your perspective is all over the place, but that is the one thing that's definitely true. If we were looking at them from above, we'd see the whole cathedral from above.

[Anonymous No.4105724]

>>4105707
If the stairs are angled like that, then the vanishing point would be lower than the redliner's, and the difference between your current lines and what they should be in perspective is even more drastic.

Draw a vanishing point, imagine your towers as rectangles and render the plane where they meet the balls on top. Then draw a circle inside of that rectangle, which should be the line you use.

If you're drawing this with the intention of thinking out a concept, you don't have to stress about perspective and can ignore it, but if you want to make something aesthetically pleasing to show people, things lacking perspective are very boring.

[Anonymous No.4106439]

>>4104587
clouds and some small structural tweaks, but I'm not entirely sure I'm going the right way...

[Anonymous No.4106444]

>>4106439
grind the fundamentals and use traditional
then go back to this

[Anonymous No.4106452]

>>4106444
>and use traditional

[Anonymous No.4109561]

>>4106439
FUUUUUCK
I tried to do shadows with a black brush in some alternative mode ("overlay" or "burn" or something like that I don't remember well...)
and saved everything when I was satisfied...
But for some reason when I later re-opened the file everything I did the last session was changed to normal mode and as a result it looked like a heap of plastic trash has been burning for days near the building!
What the fuck?

[Anonymous No.4109628]

>>4109561
Ooh, I've been waiting this whole thread for the moment when Gimp reveals its gloriuos true nature. Can't you change the layer mode now?

Anyway
>shadows with a black brush in some alternative mode ("overlay" or "burn" or something like that I don't remember well...)
And nothing of value was lost. Think of the color of your light source. Use a color that's shifted towards the opposite of that from the local color of the object. Use multiply for shadows.

[Anonymous No.4109784]

>>4109628
>Gimp
But he's using Krita, allegedly. Unless they're derived from the same code?

[Anonymous No.4110299]

>>4109784
Oh, my bad, thought it was Gimp for some reason.

[Anonymous No.4110674]

Here’s where I’m at with my current piece. I’ve got to fix the vegetation by the waterfall, finish the foreground, and a few other tweaks and I’m gonna call it finished and move on. I’ve got 30 hours on this and don’t want to dwell on the flaws. Time to start another. It’s all up on YouTube as I live streamed all of it if anyone is interested. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjMTBZQBxws3OhNur0Jqv5A

[Anonymous No.4112711]

>>4106439
I'm trying to restore the shadows; I'm still not finished, but I'm not really happy with how they're turning out...
can I fix this by keep going forward or should I delete the layer and start over?

[Anonymous No.4112796]

>>4112711
Never mind, I'm redoing them