another edgy soundcloud single art thing

So yeah, I wanted to try some things in photoshop and a friend of mine wanted some soundcloud things, so yeah, I did this for him lol.




btw yes i know im shit

EDIT - ok since this post: is causing shit, yes i used a stock image, im not gonna make the whole thing myself. im 15 and i do photoshop as a hobby, you need to atleast assume that im not some photoshop god, its just something I do when I'm bored, I am by no means a god like user of photoshop. I thought the stock image situation wouldve been obvious, but obviously not. if you're really gonna go all mad just because some kid wanted to post something he made (and yet I am quite proud of this, even though you who seems to be a godlike being who thinks its complete ass) i can do so. its not for a proper company, it was just for a quick thing for a friend, not something which is made for god himself.

This is going to sound really off, but this is a "off" post in regards to art. How you present your artwork is also an important step, not just the artwork itself. I'd keep that in mind if I were you. That being said, let us talk about this "art".

The first and most obvious problem I have with it is the complete butchering of the "Golden Ratio" (also known as "Golden Cut"). There is no clear focus for the eyes to land on, the result is a artwork that feels utterly and completely disorienting and messy. This is partly because of the lack of the Golden Ratio as well as the overall lack of clear contrasts. Neither of these are mandatory in any way or form, that being said, they are mandatory if you wish to catch someone's attention which is the idea of a Cover art for music.

The next problem I assumed off the bat is the amount of work you've put into this yourself. A quick reverse search of the image do prove my point regarding this. This is the original stock that you've used. This falls back to what I said about how you present your work. You didn't actually makethis piece, you just took it and altered it in a very minor way. The main art-piece and of it is still something you didn'tmake. Now I have nothing against using stock files under the right of fair use, that being said I do have a problem when the rules of fair use isn't upheld. Those being linking back to some form of source and if you can, link back to the original artist behind the work.

You haven't outright stated that the original was made by you, but you have avoided to share said information, which often is as bad as just lying about it. That is why I noted the part about how you present your work. Now let us talk about the edits you did. I am being completely honest here when I say that the edits you did to the image pretty much ruined an otherwise pretty neat piece of art. This is because while the original doesn't possess weight contrast or the Golden Ratio, it does take your focus in two major ways. Those being the "stop effect" thanks to Ganondorf's stare and the other being the darkness around the image, guiding your focus towards the middle.

You removed the first portion by resizing it, and the second one is also largely ruined thanks to the edits you did to the contrast levels. The grunge effect also doesn't match with the otherwise vibrant, hard and accurate lines of the stock image. The they don't go well together, ruining the overall display. Also, as there shouldn't be much of a reason to explain why, remove the text.

One last thing about presenting your work. Stating; "I know I suck" or anything of that nature is bad regardless of how you view it. In way you could say that because you are looking for attention like a spoiled brat, on the other hand you can actually believe it. If you are looking for attention, then all you will get is either pure hate for it or people feeling sorry for you. In both those cases, the "feedback" they offer will be biased and flawed, meaning you will barely learn anything from it. The result of that is that you will take several times longer amount of time to learn something.

If you do believe that, then you are setting yourself up for mistake. Not everyone is good at something, but everyone holds the ability to master exactly what they wish. If someone says it's impossible, then the person who really wants it will only prove them wrong after all.

10-12-2017, 09:46 PM

Lukecetion Wrote: This is going to sound really off, but this is a "off" post in regards to art. How you present your artwork is also an important step, not just the artwork itself. I'd keep that in mind if I were you. That being said, let us talk about this "art".

The first and most obvious problem I have with it is the complete butchering of the "Golden Ratio" (also known as "Golden Cut"). There is no clear focus for the eyes to land on, the result is a artwork that feels utterly and completely disorienting and messy. This is partly because of the lack of the Golden Ratio as well as the overall lack of clear contrasts. Neither of these are mandatory in any way or form, that being said, they are mandatory if you wish to catch someone's attention which is the idea of a Cover art for music.

The next problem I assumed off the bat is the amount of work you've put into this yourself. A quick reverse search of the image do prove my point regarding this. This is the original stock that you've used. This falls back to what I said about how you present your work. You didn't actually makethis piece, you just took it and altered it in a very minor way. The main art-piece and of it is still something you didn'tmake. Now I have nothing against using stock files under the right of fair use, that being said I do have a problem when the rules of fair use isn't upheld. Those being linking back to some form of source and if you can, link back to the original artist behind the work.

You haven't outright stated that the original was made by you, but you have avoided to share said information, which often is as bad as just lying about it. That is why I noted the part about how you present your work. Now let us talk about the edits you did. I am being completely honest here when I say that the edits you did to the image pretty much ruined an otherwise pretty neat piece of art. This is because while the original doesn't possess weight contrast or the Golden Ratio, it does take your focus in two major ways. Those being the "stop effect" thanks to Ganondorf's stare and the other being the darkness around the image, guiding your focus towards the middle.

You removed the first portion by resizing it, and the second one is also largely ruined thanks to the edits you did to the contrast levels. The grunge effect also doesn't match with the otherwise vibrant, hard and accurate lines of the stock image. The they don't go well together, ruining the overall display. Also, as there shouldn't be much of a reason to explain why, remove the text.

One last thing about presenting your work. Stating; "I know I suck" or anything of that nature is bad regardless of how you view it. In way you could say that because you are looking for attention like a spoiled brat, on the other hand you can actually believe it. If you are looking for attention, then all you will get is either pure hate for it or people feeling sorry for you. In both those cases, the "feedback" they offer will be biased and flawed, meaning you will barely learn anything from it. The result of that is that you will take several times longer amount of time to learn something.

If you do believe that, then you are setting yourself up for mistake. Not everyone is good at something, but everyone holds the ability to master exactly what they wish. If someone says it's impossible, then the person who really wants it will only prove them wrong after all.

holy fuck you overanalyzed this way too fucking much

he's an amateur photoshop artist as he stated who simply wanted to show off a little project

but you wrote SEVEN WHOLE FUCKING PARAGRAPHS critiquing him

this isnt reddit you autist

10-12-2017, 09:46 PM

Lukecetion Wrote: This is going to sound really off, but this is a "off" post in regards to art. How you present your artwork is also an important step, not just the artwork itself. I'd keep that in mind if I were you. That being said, let us talk about this "art".

The first and most obvious problem I have with it is the complete butchering of the "Golden Ratio" (also known as "Golden Cut"). There is no clear focus for the eyes to land on, the result is a artwork that feels utterly and completely disorienting and messy. This is partly because of the lack of the Golden Ratio as well as the overall lack of clear contrasts. Neither of these are mandatory in any way or form, that being said, they are mandatory if you wish to catch someone's attention which is the idea of a Cover art for music.

The next problem I assumed off the bat is the amount of work you've put into this yourself. A quick reverse search of the image do prove my point regarding this. This is the original stock that you've used. This falls back to what I said about how you present your work. You didn't actually makethis piece, you just took it and altered it in a very minor way. The main art-piece and of it is still something you didn'tmake. Now I have nothing against using stock files under the right of fair use, that being said I do have a problem when the rules of fair use isn't upheld. Those being linking back to some form of source and if you can, link back to the original artist behind the work.

You haven't outright stated that the original was made by you, but you have avoided to share said information, which often is as bad as just lying about it. That is why I noted the part about how you present your work. Now let us talk about the edits you did. I am being completely honest here when I say that the edits you did to the image pretty much ruined an otherwise pretty neat piece of art. This is because while the original doesn't possess weight contrast or the Golden Ratio, it does take your focus in two major ways. Those being the "stop effect" thanks to Ganondorf's stare and the other being the darkness around the image, guiding your focus towards the middle.

You removed the first portion by resizing it, and the second one is also largely ruined thanks to the edits you did to the contrast levels. The grunge effect also doesn't match with the otherwise vibrant, hard and accurate lines of the stock image. The they don't go well together, ruining the overall display. Also, as there shouldn't be much of a reason to explain why, remove the text.

One last thing about presenting your work. Stating; "I know I suck" or anything of that nature is bad regardless of how you view it. In way you could say that because you are looking for attention like a spoiled brat, on the other hand you can actually believe it. If you are looking for attention, then all you will get is either pure hate for it or people feeling sorry for you. In both those cases, the "feedback" they offer will be biased and flawed, meaning you will barely learn anything from it. The result of that is that you will take several times longer amount of time to learn something.

If you do believe that, then you are setting yourself up for mistake. Not everyone is good at something, but everyone holds the ability to master exactly what they wish. If someone says it's impossible, then the person who really wants it will only prove them wrong after all.

He has never claimed in the post, "he made it"

11-12-2017, 05:29 AM

Lakeey Wrote: He has never claimed in the post, "he made it"

If you edited something, it's better to site your sources of the original and other images you used.

He did not claim it as his own in text, but some would assume that he made the entire image given that he provided no sources.

---

10-12-2017, 09:46 PM

Lukecetion Wrote: -snip-

I rarely see you

This must have been a juicy post for you to have responded?

11-12-2017, 05:29 AM

Lakeey Wrote: He has never claimed in the post, "he made it"

If you edited something, it's better to site your sources of the original and other images you used.

He did not claim it as his own in text, but some would assume that he made the entire image given that he provided no sources.

---

10-12-2017, 09:46 PM

Lukecetion Wrote: -snip-

I rarely see you

This must have been a juicy post for you to have responded?

11-12-2017, 01:52 AM

[omitted] Wrote: holy fuck you overanalyzed this way too fucking much

he's an amateur photoshop artist as he stated who simply wanted to show off a little project

but you wrote SEVEN WHOLE FUCKING PARAGRAPHS critiquing him

this isnt reddit you autist

Over analyzed it? I looked at it for about 5 seconds. Anyone with at least a one year of experience and/or education should be able to conduct a quick analysis of a basic image like this and do a reverse search of it in less than 2 min. Yes, he is an amateur Photoshop artist and how do amateurs and beginners learn? By getting specific critique.

There are two reasons to share your work, to get critique or to get attention. I gave the first and second.

11-12-2017, 05:29 AM

Lakeey Wrote: He has never claimed in the post, "he made it"

He also never stated that he used a pre-made source. This is why we have "fair use" and licenses to work. If you use someone else's work with a general licenses that you didn't pay for then you link back to the original artist out of respect. If you didn't, then you could just as well take credit for the original work. It is pretty common sense and if you'd try to do this in any serious setting, you'd get your arse sued.

Also, he did say and I quote;

10-12-2017, 12:05 AM

keno Wrote: So yeah, I wanted to try some things in photoshop and a friend of mine wanted some soundcloud things, so yeah, I did this for him lol.

He did claim that the picture following said paragraph was made by him. As stated above, without linking back to anything, you aren't making what you made and what you didn't clear, thus it falls under what one would refer to as plagiarism. It also gives anyone who wants to critique him a harder job for no other reason than him either forgetting to link to the source or trying to avoid it to appear better than he is.

---

11-12-2017, 05:23 PM

Bubble Wrote: I rarely see you

This must have been a juicy post for you to have responded?

Not really, I just saw that no one had offer actually feedback to it. Which is always sad for the artist who posted it. Cus in either case (if he did it for attention or learning) it sucks to not get any replies.

looks p okay, i like the aesthetic and the text font

it actually fits the lo-fi soundcloud clout aesthetic that's going on rn lmaoooo

11-12-2017, 01:52 AM

[omitted] Wrote: holy fuck you overanalyzed this way too fucking much

he's an amateur photoshop artist as he stated who simply wanted to show off a little project

but you wrote SEVEN WHOLE FUCKING PARAGRAPHS critiquing him

this isnt reddit you autist

Criticism isn't allowed here. The only thing that apparently is allowed is calling others autists.

11-12-2017, 05:23 PM

Bubble Wrote: If you edited something, it's better to site your sources of the original and other images you used.

He did not claim it as his own in text, but some would assume that he made the entire image given that he provided no sources.

---

I rarely see you

This must have been a juicy post for you to have responded?

To an extent, I mean I had the base image (which is from a pack) then by using textures, lighting and stocking, I made the thing. I mean I wouldn't learn how to make some god ass art style for a little project lol

All you did was add a filter and put text making it your own? Lmao.

If it isn't good then don't try to sell us on it.

Also funny how you call Luke a "god" for giving you honest criticism. If you can't take it then don't post it on the internet.