[Merekat]

The Astronomer.



Photoshop 6.0, 18" x 12.75" at 300 resolution (5400 x 3825 pixels). Novel cover design for imaginary book. Haven't been around much at all, I know, I know. Been interviewing. Got a job. ;} Moving to Seattle to torment Dhabih. ;} heheh

I'll talk more about the pic later, prolly with some closeups. But gotta go! Gotta pack...! ;}

[Asurfael]

imho the landscape could've used some more edges and defining on it. Now it doesn't look consistent with the astronomy lab and the sky, it's blurrier. Anyhow, that's a stunningly beautiful pic, can't wait to see the close-ups...

[jr]

woah nice!

[the_monkey]

wow, excellent image. i always love seeing new stuff come from you meercat. defintely post a larger version!

congrats on the job~!!

[pixelsoldier]

Wow, that is gorgeous. The complexities are driving me insane. My eye is registering this as 3D. That holographic stuff is incredible.

I agree with Asu in that the mountains/terrain looks somewhat fuzzy to me..

Great work, Merekat..

[Merekat]

Thank you!! ;} I'm glad you love it so. I put more work into it than I usually do, so it's nice to know after all that effort it came out well. Here are two closeups:





Actually, I'm not sure I agree with the fuzzy of the background. I will have the rocks zoomed in for you soon (the closeups here don't do them justice) to show you for sure, but it was my theory that if the main focus is in the foreground and there are mountains in the waaaaaaaaaaaay background, then you wouldn't see as sharp a contrast as the point of main interest. The concept was that what is closest has the most contrast and detail and what is farthest is blurrier and lesser in contrasting values. Is this incorrect? I'd love to see examples if you still think so. But remember, this small version really hides a lot. ;} I'll be showing you closeups more tomorrow.

Anyway, to explain this pic, it's entitled The Astronomer and he's that little guy way up there on the platform. This is a rotating observatory with a hologram screen so that the readouts of the stars actually project on the sky itself. ;} Ancient technology with generations of generations running it like monks would a temple. They are an old civilization who has a fascination with the stars and study them as almost a religion in itself. I just thought the old adage of not having a map at 1:1 ratio was interesting enough to figure out a way for astronomy to solve the problem.

Thanks everyone for all your kudos and comments on my work. Thanks everyone. ;}

[Sumaleth]

Nice, but I do have once comment; unless you're really close the whole image looks like a collection of highlights. Even the rocks are just collections of brighter spots, there's no building of shapes between positive and negative space. It's all very mid-grey.

Just my first impression. :}

[ May 15, 2002: Message edited by: Sumaleth ]

[Ian Jones]

Cool, I like the detail and the concept is very impressive!

I'm not so sure about the composition though. IMO it doesn't work. I'm not sure exactly why, but it just feels wrong to me. It looks like you were trying to get it to work by balancing 'visual weight' by putting that rock spire in. Unfortunately it just looks wrong to me... oh well, sorry I can't be any more specific. I'm not sure of it myself.

Perhaps thats why ppl have been mentioning the 'blurry' background, because it looks like there should be something of more interest or detail and sharpness to balance the composition. It's tricky though, because you don't want to lose the aerial perspective, so yes I agree with you that objects in the distance should not be as sharp and detailed as objects in the foreground.

Just throwing some ideas around... Hope that helps.

PS: I love the starfield and the little hint of some nebulae.

[nova]

aw, that's beautemous. so shiny the colors work really well together too.. and it's nice to see sci-fi metal a color other than silver. i can't understand how some artists can get their paintings so tight.. if i don't get an image to a reasonable level in about 3 hours, i quit.

[eyewoo]

Very cool... Wonderful structure with that single lite top part.

Congrats on getting the job...

[Merekat]

Sumaleth and Ian Jones: I do understand what you are saying and I would welcome any visual tweaking of the piece to help understand further, but I'm not entirely sure the trouble bothers me for one reason: It IS supposed to be for an imagined book cover. I mentioned that in the first post. So what you see is actually a wraparound. The area on the left can't be too cluttered because there needs to be rest areas for text. And the center 'blurry' area people are talking about is roughly where the spine and other title text will go. I was planning on mocking up a demo of it to go with my other pic "Flikk, the Egg Thief" if ever I wanted to get into novels. What you would see as the front cover is basically that first highlighted close-up I gave.

Knowing this, is it that far off? If so, please tweak my original post picture to let me fuller understand how to remedy the trouble. After all, I do indeed want to make posters of it, so it kinda has to work as a flat image as well in addition to the wraparound book cover idea.

Nova and Eyewoo: Thank you! :} It's wonderful to hear how well this piece is received. ;}

Oh, ps. That "imagined book" part means I just made this up for a possible book. I don't have a book deal and this isn't to a story that exists. I just mention this because it's been questioned in other forums. :} Just in case. ;}

Thank you tremendously for your comments and your help. I would like to know how to improve this, but I think a scribble on my work will help best. I'm really kinda 'blurry' myself on the idea of changing the composition and atmosphere. ;} hehe.

Thanks!

[Ian Jones]

sorry, I didn't take into consideration that it would be wrapped around to the back, infact I forgot about it being a cover. Sorry. I think it works fine now.

[Xeniu]

Excellent job! The first thought that came to my mind was that those rocks rock! They remind me a little bit of Max Ernsts paintings, high detail yet with a certain uh.. artistic "flatness". Now that you have explained the composition it all makes sense and feels nice.

You have to get an author to write that book because looking at the cover I want to read it!

[Fredrik]

Wonderful pic, but take away the stone spire in the left, I think it would be perfect then

[Cicinimo]

quote

Quote:

also, might i ask, if you've already sai this you may point out my stupidity and laugh at me, but if not, what program did you use?[/QB]

stupid head!

Hey merekat, nice work, of course. Not my favorite you've done, but superb nevertheless. Too bad the tiny jpg does it no favor. I'd love to see that thing on a poster, to see those outrageous details.

Cicinimo

[Dameaon]

yes, yes, i noticed it litterly 3 seconds after i posted... *hits him self in the head with a baseball bat*

[Dameaon]

very nicely done. i love the texture you used for the rocks.

also, might i ask, if you've already sai this you may point out my stupidity and laugh at me, but if not, what program did you use?

[pixelsoldier]

Dameaon, it was the first thing she said.

"Photoshop 6.0, 18" x 12.75" at 300 resolution (5400 x 3825 pixels). Novel cover design for imaginary book. Haven't been around much at all, I know, I know. Been interviewing. Got a job. ;} Moving to Seattle to torment Dhabih. ;} heheh"

[visual myriad]

Very imaginative!

[Imirie]

very pretty! and the details are really nice ^_^

[The Fritz]

Ahhh, great to see some new stuff from you, love it. For the rock thing, what I think is, that the rock closest to the viewer doesn't pick up the atmosphere of the "planet", so to say it's colors. The rocks in the backround blend perfectly into the whole picture, the front rocks look like cut and paste. Mayby it's me, but that's what I think disturbs a bit. Anyway I love it and hope to see more from any time soon (God, your detailwork rocks!)

[The Magic Pen]

Man that is awsome !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ceenda]

Well, all the crits have been made, so I'll just say that this is awesome. Really nice!

(I agree with the comment someone made about removing the left tower, or perhaps moving it down a bit. It's perhaps competing with the astronomer too much for attention.)