Come on, you keep doing this, and it annoys me. You keep seeing things in pieces and coming up with your own convoluted explanation as to why it’s there, and you always err on the side of giving credit to the artist for having a good idea, rather than assuming it’s an oversight or an error. As far as you’re concerned there’s no such thing as errors in art, everything has been planned and has a perfectly reasonable explanation.
What I do is point out flaws, and see if the artist can come up with an explanation for them. I don’t provide one on his behalf. Mostly they don’t have an explanation, and it was just an error.
..and every figure sculpture ever made by every great artist who ever lived. I’d be interested to see one with such disparity it the arms, because I’ve never seen such a thing, in real life or otherwise.
Yes, the same general idea, but rather better than this. The problem with doing it in CG is that the gradient background has no texture, or the slight colour and tonal variations which make it interesting and part of the whole. CG gradient backgrounds look bland and separated from the subject, it looks more like he’s standing in a big room filled with thick purple smog.
I surprised you haven’t thought of an explanation for that.
It’s obvious.
Obviously where he comes from, they are forced to wear shoulder length gloves at all times and never allowed to wear hats, so only the face gets tanned. I remember my sisters husband was like that, he came from some foreign place where they had just such a law.
Another well observed detail.
oddity, I can see this is going to be another heavy discussion and I refuse to draw attention away from raul’s wonderful piece in order to accomodate our verbal sparring and senseless discussions.
