|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 4, 2014 13:48:20 GMT -9
I was meddling around with a bit of photomanip and what have we... and lo and behold, I think I cracked the nut! Here's my first attempt of making a mini with a matching backside... what do you think? Critique is more than welcome. And the mini, if anyone cares to try it out: Have at me.
|
|
|
Post by cowboyleland on Sept 4, 2014 17:58:36 GMT -9
He looks very good. The only thing I would suggest is that the fingers seem to disappear more than they should in the rear view. I like the painterly style.
|
|
|
Post by Parduz on Sept 4, 2014 22:49:07 GMT -9
Good job! If i had to split hairs (which i usually do.... hence the verb parduzzing you'll find arounbd in this forum ) i'd take care of some perspective. As example, in the front view you can see the internal of the left sleeve, and all the folds and wrinkles are like " (" (the concave part is toward the hand); this means that you could not see the sleeve internal in the back view, and also the convex part of the folds should be towards the hand. The hat tip suffers of the same problem. As i said, they're tiny details, but on a mini with a less complex trait (like your superheroes) or with weapons drawn in perspective, these details become noticeable.
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 5, 2014 0:26:15 GMT -9
^ Yeah, good point. I actually intended to do the hat tip, but then I couldn't get it right, and when I zoomed out, it didn't look like it would really matter in the end. Haven't tried printing one yet, though. The sleeves crossed my mind, but then I totally forgot all about them again. And yeah, the fingers could use some fine lining as well - hthat is the least part of it. But I'm glad to see that you like the concept in general, and that the backside more or less works. I think it's safe to say that this will end up as a project of its own.
|
|
|
Post by Parduz on Sept 5, 2014 3:11:45 GMT -9
Uh.... pls raise the feet from the black tab, or they will be sunk in the base
|
|
|
Post by mesper on Sept 5, 2014 8:04:55 GMT -9
Uh.... pls raise the feet from the black tab, or they will be sunk in the base Good "parduzing"! You might want to add some sort of "ground" below the figurine, something like attached BTW nice mini - good job! Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 5, 2014 13:30:39 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by Parduz on Sept 5, 2014 14:08:49 GMT -9
The only thing i see is his right boot: as for the sleeve before, if in front view we see the boot "top" having a curve "pointing" down, on the back side we should see the same curve "pointing" up. Here's a very minor thing, as the perspective of the boot is not so much.
Then there's the feet perspective problem.... drawing the feet in perspective in fron view usually means to have problems with them in the back side.... his left foot seems on the ground on fron view, but you had to make his toe raised on th back side 'cause the shape. That's one of the reasons (if i remember well) that made OneMonk drawing the feet flat on the baseline. It breaks the perspective but the effect is nice and give less troubles.
Anyway,seems a really good job, to me.
|
|
|
Post by cowboyleland on Sept 5, 2014 15:24:18 GMT -9
As Parduz says: one of the "rules" I always tell myself when I am drawing backs is : "convex becomes concave and vice versa" In this instance I think you also need a stronger line between the boot and leg, as now they blur together. Also his left hand needs a line to separate it from the stomach. These are minor things I offer because you ask and I can see it on the "big" screen. If you put a band of figures of this quality on the table all at once it is very unlikely anyone at the table would notice any problems with the figures. (As long as the game keeps moving along at a good clip.)
|
|
|
Post by mproteau (Paper Realms) on Sept 5, 2014 15:35:59 GMT -9
I think in general they might be a bit dark - there's a lot of black and dark grey areas, and I always find that when printed, everything is much darker than on the screen. Even on my fairly bright laptop screen, when I zoom the swordsman out, his armor seems very dark and hard to make out details.
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 5, 2014 15:44:13 GMT -9
^ Yeah, I have the same problem. I usually brighten up things as part of the finish. Haven't done that with these, as it was more feedback about my backsides I was after, so I didn't bother to do anything about the colours before posting.
|
|
|
Post by mesper on Sept 5, 2014 16:32:05 GMT -9
<...> I usually brighten up things as part of the finish. Haven't done that with these, as it was more feedback about my backsides I was after, so I didn't bother to do anything about the colours before posting I like darkish colour scheme! But as mproteau (Paper Realms) already stated it could be problematic when it comes to printing, especially when black outline is added. (BTW: this figurine looks blurry / darkish only on TN-type LCD panel and much better on IPS etc. at least in my case) Thing is that after adding black bordering to the figurine some details might be additionally lost - so I'd suggest to add some sound white partial outlines in most "darkened" areas - just to clearly distinguish figurine's body/contour from black border. (and before this I'd suggest removing unneeded white bordering, which is clearly visible on left mini as shown on attached preview - it's removed on right-side mini, but no special/partial white outlines added) Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by mahotsukai on Sept 5, 2014 16:40:55 GMT -9
I would be careful using images of miniatures from the internet as a source, as there are possible copyright issues. Jirelle, Iconic Swashbuckler
|
|
|
Post by oldschooldm on Sept 5, 2014 21:14:37 GMT -9
I would be careful using images of miniatures from the internet as a source, as there are possible copyright issues. Jirelle, Iconic Swashbuckler Cardstock Dane - Did you paint that mini (are you Rhonda Bender), or do you have explicit permission to make a derivative work from it? If so, you're in the clear. But I'm guessing not. If not, you should feel free to make these paper minis for yourself ONLY (and post photos of your builds on display). But don't post here anything that might trigger a DCMA Takedown request for our board (such as your ready-to-print-and-cut adapted models.) See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_workPlease note that, by default, all original work (such as the paint-job on that mini) is copyrighted - it does not have to be declared or indicated - though the image is marked clearly with the painter, so I'm thinking that copyright belongs to her, Reaper, or both of them. --- I would love to see this technique used on some minis that you personally painted or have permission to transform in this manner. I was all ready to test-build and make cutfiles for these until I learned of this little legal hiccup. Please keep trying this! I think it's awesome.
|
|
|
Post by oldschooldm on Sept 5, 2014 21:44:05 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 6, 2014 0:38:12 GMT -9
This is stuff I'm making for a D&D campaign I'm running for a band of teens - and at the same time, I'm using it as an excercise. It's not something I plan to publish or anything. So no worries, all is good and in the clear.
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 6, 2014 0:44:25 GMT -9
I would love to see this technique used on some minis that you personally painted or have permission to transform in this manner. I was all ready to test-build and make cutfiles for these until I learned of this little legal hiccup. Please keep trying this! I think it's awesome. Well, basically, what I do is to 'patchwork' bits from the back onto a silhouette of the front, trying to fit it all together. Then I 'cartoonize' the photo, and the result is what you see. The cartoonization process also helps to smooth out the patchwork on the back, so it ends up looking good rather than like a mess.
|
|
|
Post by oldschooldm on Sept 6, 2014 6:24:29 GMT -9
For those interested in where the "how-much-photoshopping-is-enough" line is, this is pretty close (over or under, depending): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_%22Hope%22_posterI'm looking forward to making some original paper minis that look like this. The rich colors are amazing.
|
|
|
Post by cowboyleland on Sept 6, 2014 18:22:05 GMT -9
I really like the look of these as well. The irony it is a kind of splotchy look I'm sure most figure painters are trying to avoid.
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 18, 2014 4:22:27 GMT -9
A little update - I found the time to print and cut a few of the minis I've made this way (don't worry, you won't get the files). Here's a few photos of them - again, I'm quite satisfied myself. Forgive the bases - I had a few, sloppily cut modern concrete bases without good edging lying around, which I just threw them into. I'm going to make some proper bases at a later point. Fronts... ...and backs.
|
|
|
Post by Parduz on Sept 18, 2014 5:00:41 GMT -9
I have some problem at understanding the green one (i mean, i had to look longer, harder and closer to get what it is), the other two are pefect 'cause the anatomy is defined better or the diffrent colors helps at getting what is what. Said this, they are good minis for sure
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 18, 2014 5:03:41 GMT -9
Ok... I can see it at first glance, without even putting on my reading glasses. But then again, I already know what it is, so maybe that's why.
|
|
|
Post by Parduz on Sept 18, 2014 5:53:07 GMT -9
Yep, now that i'm aware of what it is, i'm not mistaking the staff top as a head anymore It's the same for me when i make music: i need to put away the piece for at least 2 weeks so my ears forgot how it was and i can detect new defects and problems when i'll listen it again
|
|
|
Post by oldschooldm on Sept 18, 2014 7:22:32 GMT -9
I love this style!
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 18, 2014 15:08:05 GMT -9
Glad you like it - here are some more. Front - the Zulu Warrior (at the left) came out a bit to dark for his facial features to be visible. I feared that, because the original is pretty dark to. I may work a bit more on that one. The blitz seems to overexpose a bit, too, even after running it through PS - I shot these last ones after dark, maybe that's why. Also, the camera mercilessly shows me where I missed a spot when edging. Anyway, backs: And if anyone is interested, here are the links to the originals I made them all from - that should take care of crediting, too. Zulu Warrior: www.ralparthaeurope.co.uk/shop/ral-partha-fantasy-c-37/fantasy-adventurers-c-37_40/03003-zulu-warrior-p-1272.htmlDuelist: www.sodemons.com/rhmordheim/associates/empireguys/index.htmWizard: www.daysofknights.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=667Female Swashbuckler: www.reapermini.com/Miniatures/previews/latest/60174Female mage: www.shakandara.com/reality/minis/robral.htmlMonk: thebaldingninja.blogspot.dk/2012_07_01_archive.htmlI can't share the pdf's I made, but what I can do, is to share the technique I used to make them, so you can make your own. It's relatively easy, allthough it takes a wee bit of low level photoshopping, but I will make a guide anyway - I hope to post it during the weekend. And next projects is the adventure group I'm going to DM for, and a city guard, and... dwarves! I can't wait to make more of these.
|
|
|
Post by wyvern on Sept 19, 2014 1:02:45 GMT -9
Front - the Zulu Warrior (at the left) came out a bit to dark for his facial features to be visible. I feared that, because the original is pretty dark to. I may work a bit more on that one. The blitz seems to overexpose a bit, too, even after running it through PS - I shot these last ones after dark, maybe that's why. Just a thought, but were these printed on normal card, or matt-surface photo-quality card? I ask, because this past year I discovered there's a significant difference in quality using my inkjet printer, to the point where I now only use photo-quality papers and cards for paper modelling. Normal card minis tend to look paler and more washed-out, even using the same standard of printing, which might explain some of your difficulties. Another option might be to set the minis against a lighter baseboard and background, as automated camera flash units sometimes set their level and exposure timing based on the average brightness in the field of view. This can result in washed-out objects when set against a darker backdrop. You might also be able to work it better using natural light only, with the flash-unit turned off.
|
|
|
Post by cowboyleland on Sept 19, 2014 3:41:16 GMT -9
I am looking forward to your tutorial.
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 19, 2014 4:20:15 GMT -9
Just a thought, but were these printed on normal card, or matt-surface photo-quality card? Normal card. These are for an old school D&D campaign for a bunch of teens (nephews and their friends), so there's a limit to how much money I intend to throw after them. I'm aware of the superior quailty that matte photo card would provide, but as they cost more for 50 sheets than normal card costs for 200 sheets, the choice is easy for me to make. I am looking forward to your tutorial. Working on it as I type this. I have to work tonight, but hope to have it ready for tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 19, 2014 5:18:13 GMT -9
Well, whaddya know - I finished the tutorial faster than I thought I would, so here it is: 1. Get some photos of lead/plastic minis. The internet is a good source, but if you have your own 3D minis lying around, take some pics of those and use them – the latter has the advantage, that you can share the paper flats afterwards. As I can’t hand draw very good (except from the Sarge from ‘Beetles’), what I do is to find minis with photos of both fronts and backs. In this tutorial, we will be using the duelist I showed you in a couple of posts ago. Here’s the original: www.sodemons.com/rhmordheim/associates/empireguys/index.htmNow you have to pull out Photoshop, GIMP or whatever your choice of graphic software is. Set the basic layer to transparent, and clean out all of the background – the magic wand tool may or may not be your friend here, depending on how precise the background allows it to make the selection. Some – or a lot of – freehand cleaning may be necessary. If the base is a nice, scenic one, I like to keep it. If the base is an old, boring black slotta base, cut it out as well – you can always find a nice, alternative scenic base and photoshop your mini to stand on that instead. After this, the monk looks as you can see here (you can’t see the transparency, but it’s there): I then add a thin outline to the front photo. In Photoshop, I do it by using the Layer Style ‘Stroke’. I flatten the photo, so the background becomes white, and save it. The front part is now ready for further processing, but the back will need a bit more work, as it doesn’t align with the front, being a photo of a three dimensional figure (see next step). Now, the front photo looks like this (it’s bigger because I expanded the resolution to 300 dpi, so it’s easier to work with): I keep the outlined and flattened front photo open in Photoshop, and add a new layer. In this layer, I take bits of the back photo (after flipping it horizontally), and ‘patchwork’ it onto the front, so to speak. Don’t worry if some parts are a wee bit too bit, or extend outside the outline – you can clean that with the eraser (but be sure that you have only selected the ‘patchwork’ layer, or you will erase parts of the front photo as well). After you’re satisfied, outline and flatten the layer, just like you did with the front photo, and save it. My patched back now looks like this… …not something that would slip past Parduz’ critic eyes, but it’s not supposed to, so don’t worry – the next step with clean up ugly edges pretty smoothly. Note the difference between the original back and the patched one, by the way. IF there is an edge or two that looks a bit too sharp, do a bit of photoshopping (blurring, painting and general smoothing) before proceeding. Now, here comes the secret ingredient: Go to cartoon.pho.to/, upload your photos, let the generator do its thing, and download the results, which should look something like this: Basically, what it does is to generate a rotoscope image of the photo, to make it look like a drawing. From here on, it’s merely a matter of cutting out the white background, (magic wand tool should do precision work at this point), add black outlines, scale, change resolution to 150 dpi if you want, and add to template and print. There are other tools that can do something similar, if you want a different style. I downloaded FotoSketcher (http://www.fotosketcher.com/), which has some alternative styles, but I haven’t tried it out for real yet. There are others as well, so Google is your friend. Enjoy and have fun!
|
|
|
Post by Cardstock Dane on Sept 19, 2014 9:54:56 GMT -9
Ooops, forgot one tiny but important addition: After you cleaned out the background, outlined the cleaned images and patched the backside photo, but before you run it through the generator I posted the link to, it is a good idea to run an "unmask sharpen" to enhance the brightness and intensity of the colours - that has given me good results regarding colours. If you dislike bright colours for some reason, just skip this.
|
|