How are my proportions /ic/? I'm going to do this picture over and over again until I get it right.
Come on you pr/ic/ks
>>2247473
show the reference and it will be a lot easier to crit
>>2247492
There was no reference, that's why I'm not sure if if looks alright or not. I don't use my imagination often enough.
>>2247461
I'm not familiar with birds very much but the proportions look okay...drawing looks pretty flat though....could use some more darker values and contrast...like that beak looks like it has literally one 1 value of grey...the beak is not a flat distorted triangle...its a 3 dimensional shape...when there is a plane shift, aka the shape changes, there should be a value change even if its small...most obviously is the bottom beak shouldnt be the same value as the top one generally...add some spots of shadow in the feathers.
I may be wrong because the picture quality is not that good....
>>2247500
Alright I'll take your advice and post again when I'm finished. Also, the picture quality is horrible because I took a picture with my kindle fire. So be prepared for more of that.
>>2247504
please use reference on parts you need to improve on...you only hurt yourself when you dont....e.g look at beaks in black and white
>>2247505
I was going through my sketchbook and I found this from a few months ago. it's not very good, but I was grasping shadows a little bit, what happened?
Value study I did. The original linework was actually fairly then when I started to paint over the lines, the accuracy went to shit. I wanted to spend longer rendering this but considering the accuracy was so off I couldn't be assed to do a good render of it.
My value accuracy is getting better though so I got something out of it.
>>2247500
>values, like that beak
You mean ONLY the beak, OP hasn't even begun to add values, he's working on proportions first like he should.
Jesus christ does anybody even look at the drawing before posting the same old pasta crit
>>2248232
Unfortunately this is /ic/ so no
