Please don't ridicule it too badly.. it really is my first...
Printable View
Please don't ridicule it too badly.. it really is my first...
N00b, GIMP
Don't quit your day job. Ever.
LoL.
Your mars is quite good, you need to blur the white halo around earth more and sharpen earth itself. Also the space looks slightly repetitive, other than that looks ok!
Who said it was Mars or Earth?
You suck.
<constructive criticism>
Haha, just kidding. But really, it's good but they just don't.. blend well. You know what I mean? Maybe it's the halo or something, but it just looks like they were pasted on top of the background.
</constructive criticism>
If they are not then you should deffinatly take mendhaks advice.......Quote:
Originally Posted by timeshifter
I made a few minor modifications to get the planets to blend in against the galactic background.
.......... ??? ....... i mean......... what do you reply to that....
The answer is ROFL.
This one's much less dense, but has two moons... not totally sure what I think of it, but I'm still learning what Photoshop can do...
I must admit: Quite good. I don't even know where to start in PhotoShop, so IMHO: This is great. :thumb:
The second one is much better. But lose the lens flare. There's a reason you never see them in astrophotography.
Remember, that's my second Photoshop image. I'm sure they'll improve over time...
Are you following some sort of tutorial for these, or just "fooling" around in Photo Shop? Where do you guys learn this stuff?
I ran through a tutorial for the first one, and just kinda played with it for the second one... I imagine I'll continue to use that method for learning new stuff. Follow a tut to get the basic idea, then play.
I'm not so sure:sick:Quote:
Originally Posted by timeshifter
The shadows on the planetary bodies are pointing in different directions.
Look at where the light source is.
still working on it
comments plz kthxbai :afrog:
I must say the sun sucks...
Quote:
Originally Posted by timeshifter
My point exactly, bullshifter. The green moon has a shadow almost exactly sideways, implying that the light source is perpendicular to that. However, the red planet has its shadow pointing in the opposite direction, yet the light source is clearly supposed to be behind it. Unless you mean to suggest that the point of light is in fact on, or close to, the surface of the red planet and is projected across its surface in the manner shown. But I don't believe that even you are that asinine.
The shadow on the red planet suggests that the light source should be in the lower left of the picture.
Meh.
Silly monkey, clearly you've never heard of binary star systems.Quote:
Originally Posted by zaza
We are being shown a solar eclipse!
with another star to the side which you can't see because you're all blind.
I agree. The lense flare is the trademark of nub. But hopefully it is out of your system now and will never be used again.Quote:
Originally Posted by penagate
Those are better than my first photoshop creations. Sadly, they also incorporated the nub flare.