7 replies to this topic

[bÆko]

v1


v2 w. C4D


v3


comments?

its pretty hard mixing so many colors making them look allright..

Edited by bÆko, 07 December 2006 - 03:05 PM.

[sp0173d_24]

nice tuts mate. keep up!

[Luke6006]

Overall, in my opinion version three is the best. As much as the other two are good, they're too 'crowded' with many colours. I'm the type of person which tries to stick to a mix of suitable colours, or just one.

If you coloured version two, with the Cinema 4D render, then that may also become as good as version three.

Just a question, though. How did you colour it? It seems you've just filled a layer with a colour, and changed the blending style. Personally, I'd go for 'Hue / Saturation'. Although, at the end of the day, it's down to personal preference. You may also want to try to use 'Color Balance'. They tend to keep the shadows, which, unfortunately, seem to be missing on the third version of this signature.

Just have an experiment with the different features, I'm sure you're capable of deciding which is the better one.

[bÆko]

i used photofilter for the 3rd one

[Luke6006]

My mistake, I thought you was using Adobe Photoshop. Sorry about that misconception.

[bÆko]

I did.. but to color the sig i used photofilter.. a thing you can do in photoshop...



(psst.. Image > Adjustments > Photofilter)

[Luke6006]

I know a program that goes by a similar name.

Maybe try and play with your levels, in this case it'd give more depth. The shadows, I think, are an important part of creating an atmosphere for the signature.

Edited by Luke6006, 07 December 2006 - 05:12 PM.

[shimano]

Just IMO, that you blended the render too much, and made the sig too dark,try a curves level to brighten it a bit,just to see what it looks like then.good try though