Quote from: Nucleaon2 on August 21, 2013, 03:16:41 PM
All 3 of them are great. The only thing is with the 2nd sig, it would be better without text and thicker borders.
Text was part of the request so i had to add it, yet i kinda ruined it with the stroke imo. Thicker borders sounds good but didn't came up in my mind at that time
.
Quote from: mo9 on August 21, 2013, 03:39:34 PM
Quote from: Xx Itz Ian on August 21, 2013, 01:22:40 PM
by far the best sig out of all 4
good depth , decent flow , txt is pretty good too
one bad thing is how big of a difference there is between focus and blurr by the hand
8/10 would ****
Quote from: Xx Itz Ian on August 21, 2013, 01:22:40 PM
not a big fan of the smudge tech
flow is really odd too , but the colour scheme is pretty good txt is meh
6/10
Quote from: Xx Itz Ian on August 21, 2013, 01:22:40 PM
worst one out of all 4 too messy
bad depth bad focus no flow
it's just all over the place 4/10
Quote from: Xx Itz Ian on August 21, 2013, 01:22:40 PM
left side is amazing the bg + txt just look so good , effects on the right put me off
pretty decent pop out
txt on top right would be better if it didnt overlap on the arm , but i like the idea of the face + txt
7/10
Veigar sig: I first had the bg next to the hand sharpend, but i really ruined depth in the sig because it looked unrealistic + the c4d is disorted (Low quality) so i had to blur some places to keep the ugly edges invisible.
Ziggs sig: I totally agree on the text, i myself would'nt have added text to it but it was on a request so it wouldn't be finished without the text yet i kinda could've spend some more time fitting in the text better. i disagree with the flow imo the only part where i did not follow the flow of the sig must be left corner where i made this weird curve in the smudge.
Shadows sig: It was another style, so another type of outcome which some like more then others.
Zed sig: Thanks i really needed some good feedback on that one because i couldn't find my own mistakes.
I'll use this in future sigs mo