New Cars I drew.

These are cars I recently finished.
This is a Acura Intagra
http://files.automotiveforums.com/uploads/301994acuraintagra.jpg
this is a Mitsubishi Eclipse
http://files.automotiveforums.com/uploads/534457meclipse.jpg
And this a Audi A-4
http://files.automotiveforums.com/uploads/485579audiA4.jpg
Which one is the Best? and what should I change to make it better?

they all look really sweet.
i picked the acura because it seems to look the most realistic IMO
great job :thumbsup:

Originally posted by SHOtough
they all look really sweet.
i picked the acura because it seems to look the most realistic IMO
great job :thumbsup: Thanx man.

I like the A4 the best, because of the angle and it's something different. Also, you have a unique drawing style, I like it. The front left end of the teggy looks a little low though. The right side is great, just bring the left end up a little bit, try keeping it the same angle as the bottom of the windshield. Other than that they look awesome.

Originally posted by AirAllen01
I like the A4 the best, because of the angle and it's something different. Also, you have a unique drawing style, I like it. The front left end of the teggy looks a little low though. The right side is great, just bring the left end up a little bit, try keeping it the same angle as the bottom of the windshield. Other than that they look awesome. on the audi, the angle is cool because the left side is higher than the right. If I made it the same it would look chopy like a box with lights and weels on it.
and what do you mean unique style? Like my shading?

Well, it's kind of a rough style of shading, yet the cars come out smooth. I don't know if I make any sense or not. The shading is a little messy (for lack of a better word), but the cars are clean looking, especially the highlights.

Originally posted by AirAllen01
Well, it's kind of a rough style of shading, yet the cars come out smooth. I don't know if I make any sense or not. The shading is a little messy (for lack of a better word), but the cars are clean looking, especially the highlights. Is that a bad thing?

No way! It's a good thing...it's like the Dodge commercial says..."Dare to be Different." You do things different and get great results because of it. Keep up the good work.

Originally posted by AirAllen01
No way! It's a good thing...it's like the Dodge commercial says..."Dare to be Different." You do things different and get great results because of it. Keep up the good work.
Aight thanx

IMO the Acura Intagra is the best, but all of them look very nice.

I like the teg and the ruff style.

In my opinion it is hard to critique unless people state what there goal is.

For example I like your style but if you are going for more realism some things need to change. (just an example)

I personally like how you rendered the cars, they are very unique.

I just might do some blending so they don't look camouflaged, but you might want that. That could be your signature style (ruff, camo) :)

Oh one thing I did notice, your cars have the same (overall tone) meaning the top, sides, and front have the same darkness/lightness. The Audi really brings it out. For example the top edge of the roof should be lighter than the side and back. Cars generally have 3 over all shades top being the lightest, then sides, or front/back (the last two can be reversed sides & f/b). This depends on where your light source is. The Audi seems to have the light source striking the side so, I would have the roof be #3 then side #2 and back #1 (#1 being the darkest) then you have the fact that as things go away towards the Vanishing Point in this case the front of the car they become less detail and lighter in tone value. Now the V.P. thing should ever be so slight, in my opinion, because cars are short in length.

These are just my thoughts take them for what they are worth. If you want take a model car or shoebox and get you a lamp. Turn off the lights except the lamp and move your light source around and you will see what I am talking about.

The benefit of doing this (rendering 123 overall tones) and (some V.P. perspective lightness tone) will make the cars look more 3D.

Just so I am clear, if you like them ruff keep them that way, but the 123 rules still apply.

I like the ruff/grainy style. :)
Very different and unique.

al

I don't think he's going for realism (of course I can't say for certain). But if he's not, then I wouldn't believe that the 123 rule applies. It seems to me his goal is to get a good drawing of a car on to a piece of paper.

123 rules generally apply even on cartoon cars.
But hey who am I.

People can do what ever they want.


al

Well yes you are right, but in his particular style, his drawings don't depend on the shading, to me it looks like they depend more on the highlights. If you look on the front bumper of the Integra, in the middle area, where the curve is on the left wall, it is highlighted to show the curve. Where the hood meets the fender is a big highlighted area to show its curve. Surrounding the windsheild and mostly the windows is a white line, and seperating the car from the shadow on the ground is another white line. The same goes for his other cars. If he were to use actual shading as a change in value, as both you and me do, then that's when I believe the 123 rule applies. I could be completely wrong, but that is my interpretation of his unique style.

Ok, like I said people can do, think, draw what ever they want.

:)

al

Originally posted by asaenz
I like the teg and the ruff style.

In my opinion it is hard to critique unless people state what there goal is.

For example I like your style but if you are going for more realism some things need to change. (just an example)

I personally like how you rendered the cars, they are very unique.

I just might do some blending so they don't look camouflaged, but you might want that. That could be your signature style (ruff, camo) :)

Oh one thing I did notice, your cars have the same (overall tone) meaning the top, sides, and front have the same darkness/lightness. The Audi really brings it out. For example the top edge of the roof should be lighter than the side and back. Cars generally have 3 over all shades top being the lightest, then sides, or front/back (the last two can be reversed sides & f/b). This depends on where your light source is. The Audi seems to have the light source striking the side so, I would have the roof be #3 then side #2 and back #1 (#1 being the darkest) then you have the fact that as things go away towards the Vanishing Point in this case the front of the car they become less detail and lighter in tone value. Now the V.P. thing should ever be so slight, in my opinion, because cars are short in length.

These are just my thoughts take them for what they are worth. If you want take a model car or shoebox and get you a lamp. Turn off the lights except the lamp and move your light source around and you will see what I am talking about.

The benefit of doing this (rendering 123 overall tones) and (some V.P. perspective lightness tone) will make the cars look more 3D.

Just so I am clear, if you like them ruff keep them that way, but the 123 rules still apply.

I like the ruff/grainy style. :)
Very different and unique.

al
well I guess ur right about the lighting issue. I didnt make one side darker than the other or the roof lighter becouse there's no background and you cant really tell from where the light is coming from so i made all sides have about the same amount of light. I know exactly what your talking about though, it will make the cars look more realistic if i used the right lighing.


thanx for the tip

No prob. I was looking through my superstreet mag and noticed that when the sun is near the horizon like dawn or dusk the side of the car could be #3 in value, the lightest. I guess it all depends that is why I said, generally speaking. I am working on a car now that has all kinds of mix values (123 rule) so it is kind of hard to figure what to do. I decided to draw exactly what I see because I am going for the most realistic drawing I can do. That is one reason why I like your style because it is not photorealistic (completely).

Sometimes I wonder (to my self) why produce an (exact) copy of the photo? I mean someone already took a picture and if you want a picture then just print it and forget about rendering. Those are just my thoughts some times. But it is amazing to see a person draw a car and wonder how the hect they did that because it looks so real.

Sorry to carry on. :)

I guess I am will focus on 'soft realism' meaning realistic but not completely photographic realism.

al

Originally posted by asaenz
No prob. I was looking through my superstreet mag and noticed that when the sun is near the horizon like dawn or dusk the side of the car could be #3 in value, the lightest. I guess it all depends that is why I said, generally speaking. I am working on a car now that has all kinds of mix values (123 rule) so it is kind of hard to figure what to do. I decided to draw exactly what I see because I am going for the most realistic drawing I can do. That is one reason why I like your style because it is not photorealistic (completely).

Sometimes I wonder (to my self) why produce an (exact) copy of the photo? I mean someone already took a picture and if you want a picture then just print it and forget about rendering. Those are just my thoughts some times. But it is amazing to see a person draw a car and wonder how the hect they did that because it looks so real.

Sorry to carry on. :)

I guess I am will focus on 'soft realism' meaning realistic but not completely photographic realism.

al

I dont think i ever drew a photorealistic pic. When ever i draw a car from a photo i always change something about it. It might be perfect as a photo but when u draw it on paper it wont look as good as the pic so i add some of my stuff to it and in my opinion it looks a lot better becouse ink and pencil are a lot diferent.

Sometimes I wonder (to my self) why produce an (exact) copy of the photo? I mean someone already took a picture and if you want a picture then just print it and forget about rendering. Those are just my thoughts some times. But it is amazing to see a person draw a car and wonder how the hect they did that because it looks so real.

I guess I am will focus on 'soft realism' meaning realistic but not completely photographic realism.

al

I was thinking the same thing!

EDIT:
I voted for Audi A4... I used to want that car so bad. And besides we see too many Jap cars already. He-he! But they all look awesome.

:worshippy to aseanz. yeh, personally, i dont like this style shading, i prefer realism but the cars are nicely proportioned and thy're good, the one thing i'd change is the shading, but those arent my drawings so, it doesnt matter. good work

Your stuff looks really cool, but there are a few things that I feel that I need to point out.

1. Your ellipses aren't the greatest. A perfect example is the tailpipe on the Audi. If I were you, I'd work on that.

2. What you need to get are a set of blending stumps (smudgers). You will get a WAY cleaner look to your shading and darker areas. It will really improve your work.

3. Just the overall perspective and proportions are off. They don't quite replicate the actual cars... Just take a look at the Eclipse. Both tires, mirror, c-pillar and tail light are all a bit skewed. Take a lot of time to try to get it perfect, it makes it a whole lot better. Slow down and take your time, it will be worth the wait. Saenz took 50 hours to do his Skyline and the time paid off with a spectacular project.

Just keep up the good work. Slow down, be carefull on your ellipses.

There all nice but the Acura got my preference. It's proportion are not as distorded like the other two.
Regarding the shading like azaens pointed it out, it's a bit monotone to my taste. Even without going into realistic drawings (by all mean keep your style), putting more contrast make the drawing coming out of the page.

There all nice but the Acura got my preference. It's proportion are not as distorded like the other two.
Regarding the shading like azaens pointed it out, it's a bit monotone to my taste. Even without going into realistic drawings (by all mean keep your style), putting more contrast make the drawing coming out of the page.
My cars come out like that becouse I don't use any guidelines, you know like some people start with a box and then draw the shape of the car. Well I just start from the windows and go down from there, maybe I should start start with a box to, it might help me.

Keep it the way you draw it, I just prefered the acura cause I like perspective drawing. It depends if you're looking for realistic drawing or not, then may be, apply guide lines, otherwise keep it as it is, you've got your own style. My point was more on the shading.

hey, i dont draw the box either, i start wherever is the easier, usually i just do an outline and then fill it in, i have a skyline i have been workin on, its been 10 hours so far, i want to put another 30 hours in it to try and make it perfect. well, that was a nice change of topic.

sorry bout that :)

the teg looks the best imho but your bumper goes in...unless that's how you made it..

Thats an integra? :sly: I voted for the Eclipse, I like the shading on it, it has much more clarity than the other two. Good job on all of them, thats one crazy lookin integra though.

Thanx everyone. I preiciate all of your compliments and coments

nice drawings all of em.

Don't Bump Old Threads!

Who ever said that I suck at drawing(in the poll), I wanna know why, unless your just being stupid or jelous or for whatever reason.

Who ever said that I suck at drawing(in the poll), I wanna know why, unless your just being stupid or jelous or for whatever reason.

That's a good point. Don't worry about it, eslipseaudi, you will always find those that wont like your drawings, just next time in a poll, include something more mild like "I dont like those drawings" or something like that. People run out of options. Some dont understand english well enough to know what that says, and they assume it says "none of the above"

Jumping to conclusions will only ruin your mood.

MALIX

P.S. I dont see why bumping up an old topic a bad thing. I would actually encourage that.

ditto, but if you have a question or a remark about the picture the thread starter drew, then you should pm them about it.

That's a good point. Don't worry about it, eslipseaudi, you will always find those that wont like your drawings, just next time in a poll, include something more mild like "I dont like those drawings" or something like that. People run out of options. Some dont understand english well enough to know what that says, and they assume it says "none of the above"

Jumping to conclusions will only ruin your mood.

MALIX

P.S. I dont see why bumping up an old topic a bad thing. I would actually encourage that.

Yeah, you're right. But I just wanted to know why some people think they suck, maybe its something I can fix.