There are many accepted precepts to composition, these have developed over all of existence and I like to think applies to all living things. There is a primal appeal visually to anything we see – for example symmetrical faces are typically beautiful, we like forms and values we can easily interpret subconsciously. If there is a large imposing object we may feel threatened, if there are curvy aerodynamic lines it puts you at ease (and the eye enjoys following them), if there is a lot of “noise” or contrasting detail it will get our attention (for better or worse).
Composition is a quite a personal thing, and is a matter of taste. Below is one of the drawings I had feedback on concerning composition (1st year). Meg suggested that I should consider putting detail on the left bank. In my eyes I wanted that space sparse so the viewer is drawn towards the detail of the trees on the right (using the rule of thirds here too). I like the idea that the eye knows where to look, but is also invited to follow the stream, balancing the image. For me it’s a tranquil composition – very light and soft in places, but also with a contrast and a little interest. Here also I used the foreground as a frame, omitting detail and contrast and using hard lines to suggest detail and form. It was by no means a masterpiece, but I find it interesting knowing what others think. Feedback is nice, but I think people are scared of hurting other’s feelings , also lots just stick to “Use the rule of thirds” “Have the foreground become gradually darker “ – I much prefer personal opinion and questions.
The trick to a successful composition is using these precepts to not only create an accurate image (perspective, light and shadow values etc), but to also invoke an emotion and create an attachment to the subject visually. I personally think the best way of exploring this is through examining nature, for example a dark image would remind people of night time or shadow, in the past before CCTV and home insurance this would be a time of danger. In the animal kingdom colours are utterly important, plants naturally tint their fruits to attract animals to aid procreation, animals use colours to attract a mate, warn off predators, or to conceal their presence.
That’s all good, but how does it apply to game art? Game art is slightly different, I did a graphics course and the presentation is very similar, especially for 3D work. Not only do we want pleasing compositions but we also need to present a certain level of detail in the work also and make sure the viewer can see the workings.
Above here is my trash project. As you can see arrangement wise it is a little drab, but I would say it is a successful presentation. I used the variety of primitives to create contrasting shapes among the items here. You can see everything I modelled, along with the wire-frame and three maps all in one shot. I actually spent quite a bit of time arranging the objects so they can be all be seen at once, I previously had the crap scattered around the bin as I was experimenting with a turntable, which was quite different. When It was rotating on the turntable I in reality had many different compositions (from the rotating view) and had to arrange the items so the eye had time to move from one object to the next and always have something interesting to see as the scene rotated. But alas we are posting photos and not turntable videos, so I went back to a single “glamour” shot.
Here I went back after receiving some feedback, I toned down the shine and rounded off the pumpkin & bottle... I think the composition isn't as good, but it should help to improve the assets and grade.
I have seen quite a few “bad” 3D compositions posted on Facebook, where not only is it unpleasing to look at. This may be via bad bordering, clashing backgrounds, and generally erratic compositions, also where it’s actually a challenge to see exactly what’s there. (note: above box is hidden by magazine = bad)
No comments:
Post a Comment