Originally Posted by Alhuin
Both you and Lucifus get a free cookie! Happy Thanksgiving!
Both you and Lucifus get a free cookie! Happy Thanksgiving!
I am training in the shadows.
Currently playing: All of your games, probably.
These pictures have been removed.
Last edited by Nadouku; Mon, 03-09-2009 at 09:30 PM. Reason: Changed the entire format of the text.
I am training in the shadows.
Currently playing: All of your games, probably.
I like the style, especially on the first one. I think you can use better BGs with your second and third one and apply the same sig style to produce even better sigs.
New sig
I tried a different approach compared to the last Nagi sig, which was more soft and tranquil, while this one is dynamic. As always, I try to keep it as simple as possible. Comments please!
Peace.
I like it! I'll post some more signatures and/or wallpapers, maybe.
I am training in the shadows.
Currently playing: All of your games, probably.
@shinta: I'm gonna have to take the bad rep for this, but I'm not really liking your latest sig. The style/simplicity is great, but I don't think it compares to your previous. It may just be because I dislike the colour brown, and the majority of the focal in the sig is the brown of her boots. But, in terms of flow, using your words, your last was more "soft and tranquil". That's the kinda style I like. I do like the kanji though (which I'm guessing either means "Kannagi" or "Nagi-sama", or just, your name). Keep up the good work!
@ Nad: Your sigs are looking better. I like the background on the first one, but seeing as how I have the wallpaper that your second sig comes from, I'm wondering... do you just crop out a piece of wallpaper for your sigs? You're doing fine making them look simplistic yet elegant for what you have shown, but I just want to say don't be afraid to use some cut out renders and make your own backgrounds.Your drop shadow + grey stroke on the border is similar to a past technique from me (well, the drop shadow part at least)... so I'm liking it. Haha... You keep up the good work as well!
It's dangerous to go alone. Take Nep.
I try to keep the original source as tactful as I can, so I don't add my name or anything to it. If I modify it, it would be like adding a criss-cross or some minor blur effect. They don't make a big difference when I view them, but I guess I can try to use some techniques to an extent.@ Nad: Your sigs are looking better. I like the background on the first one, but seeing as how I have the wallpaper that your second sig comes from, I'm wondering... do you just crop out a piece of wallpaper for your sigs? You're doing fine making them look simplistic yet elegant for what you have shown, but I just want to say don't be afraid to use some cut out renders and make your own backgrounds.
Last edited by Nadouku; Mon, 03-09-2009 at 09:30 PM. Reason: Changed the entire format of the text.
I am training in the shadows.
Currently playing: All of your games, probably.
damn where my peeps?
check the new sig, new style im tryin.... nah its just simple cause I havent used photoshop in forever.
Last edited by Kagemane_no_Jutsu; Sat, 12-20-2008 at 10:57 PM.
I'm not so much a fan of that kind of syle in general, but man, you totally nailed the text on that one. It blends with the sig really well.
Been awhile since i truly tried to make a decent signature. I've been immersing myself in other photoshop endeavors and have been having trouble making a decent signature lately.
I hopefully fixed that with this release. I'm ashamed of some of the stuff I turned out before hand; didnt even bother to post em.
I certainly got rusty. Thanks for taking care o those requests Kage, I seriously kept turning out crap with each attempt. Can't let my skills slip again.
Three of em.
Last edited by Lucifus; Fri, 12-26-2008 at 06:02 PM.
the lighting seems off on the first 2, the second one is still nice though. the stock photos in the bg need some more messin with IMO.
Saber ... i miss her.
Whats off about the lighting Kage?
The Blood + one has a radial light source behind the render. I meant for that.
ArchAngel
thats one badass sig
Corrected
I like the Lily Saber one Lucifus. I don't think the lighting is off at all, but I will say the foreground image overpowers the bg a little bit. She'd need to be a little bit more translucent to match more appropriately. Nothing more than 10%.
isnt that another way of saying the lighting is off?
thats what i meant at least
I don't consider "lighting" and the "transparency of a layer" to the same thing personally. They are two totally different facets of techinical principles of photography/image manipulation.
You can't really achieve an effect like transparency with lighting, it is part of the exposure or development process (done with a short/partial double exposure to the negative, or projecting an image onto the print from the negative in a similar way).
Last edited by Ryllharu; Sun, 12-28-2008 at 03:41 PM.
Argh; upon my return to photoshop, I forgot an iron clad rule the members of GotWoot had one beaten into me...
Save PSDs...
Think I'll just recreate another signature with this render.
Thanks for the clarification Ryllharu. By the way, If i'm not mistaken, this is your first venture into this section? xD
Or perhaps before I joined.
there now its cleeean
if the render doesn't look like it belongs to the point where it needs to be lower in opacity, or "translucent". Then the relevant lighting between bg and render is off... no? And that would just be a way to maybe solve the problem...
....Not really. Perhaps if you had said "lighting of the foreground respective to the bg" (as the affect can be done in post-processing) but that wasn't really the issue, as the term "lighting" still inaccurately describes opacity. Opacity is entirely dependent on what in traditional film is called exposure time.
Take this terrible MS Paint illustration I produced.
Lighting really has almost nothing to do with the appearance of the image, but rather the content WITHIN the image. There are plenty of post-processing "lighting" effects in PS, but those still don't affect the opacity of the actual image.
A difference in terminology I suppose. Blame my background in traditional photography dating back to elementary school Tech Ed courses.
This quite probably would be the first. Since I'm one of the holdouts who never uses signatures (in this or any other forums), I can't say I spend a great deal of time in this section.
EDIT: By the way, I am going to stop driving this thread off-topic with this post. This content belongs in another thread.
But anyone can use my terrible image for a sig if they really want to.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
