Eugh, dont add to our plate
| Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
| Revisiting the style rules http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=5204 |
Page 3 of 8 |
| Author: | Colosseum [ May 10th, 2014, 5:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Revisiting the style rules |
Gollevainen brings up a very interesting point: that perhaps we have been "too" ambitious in our overarching goal to draw every ship ever made... Just as planes and tanks are best shown in FD scale (or maybe even a larger scale than that), and personal weapons in Gunbucket scale, I think modern ships are best shown in SB scale. It might be interesting to see a "Sail Scale" created at some point. |
|
| Author: | Rodondo [ May 10th, 2014, 6:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Revisiting the style rules |
Eugh, dont add to our plate
|
|
| Author: | CraigH [ May 11th, 2014, 12:26 am ] | |
| Post subject: | Re: Revisiting the style rules | |
Gollevainen brings up a very interesting point: that perhaps we have been "too" ambitious in our overarching goal to draw every ship ever made...
I was pondering just this while at work today. Why not? We can leave the SB Rules intact or at least take sailing ship considerations out of that "Rules" mix. Do a new branch rules set based on SB that accommodates sail.Just as planes and tanks are best shown in FD scale (or maybe even a larger scale than that), and personal weapons in Gunbucket scale, I think modern ships are best shown in SB scale. It might be interesting to see a "Sail Scale" created at some point. SB Scale works with the larger sailing ships. Anything smaller than 80' with multiple masts get's very crowded...an artistic mental meltdown. 2xSB might be something to consider. FD works pretty darned well, I'm finding it's great in regards to complex rigging. It's much better than SB for anything smaller than 75-80' (30m) or so. Downside is that larger ship drawings need big monitors. There's the likelihood of having to scroll to see the whole ship. I was pondering a derivative of the Gun Scale. Might be fun to do old cannon. How difficult would it be to create a new Forum Section? CraigH |
||
| Author: | denodon [ May 11th, 2014, 12:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Revisiting the style rules |
If there was to be a new forum section I would like to see FD scale get its own rather than being nested inside the non-shipbucket category, especially since it has certainly become a lot larger and more adopted now by many artists here. |
|
| Author: | Colosseum [ May 11th, 2014, 1:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Revisiting the style rules |
I think once we revise the style rules it should be no issue whatsoever to create new forum sections for FD. I'm not sure we should create a new section for "Sail Scale" or anything else just yet - they aren't big enough to warrant that (at least I don't think) - but we can definitely start some threads in the Non-Shipbucket section. I vote that we make CraigH the honorary administrator of Sail Scale given his fine work and cooperative attitude when it comes to style and scale discussions. |
|
| Author: | Rodondo [ May 11th, 2014, 3:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Revisiting the style rules |
I agree with CraigH wholeheartedly While its possible to do SB scale for under 100-80ft, you just loose so much detail behind rigging. |
|
| Author: | Gollevainen [ May 11th, 2014, 6:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Revisiting the style rules |
Yea, that would be intresting direction to take things. FD scale works for sailing ships, as said, and anyone who had taked peak of Alavama's drawings on that scale can manifest, that indeed gives one the celebration of detail. Some other scale between FD and SB would also be possibility for such project, but since I'ven't drawn sailing ships myself, I kinda have no ideas of myself what it could be. |
|
| Author: | eswube [ May 11th, 2014, 8:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Revisiting the style rules |
Very interesting point about creating "Sail Scale" (that would be fifth "official SB scale", wouldn't it? after the SB scale, FD scale, Gunbucket scale and Carbucket scale). I support the idea, though perhaps indeed it's too early to make a separate part of forum for that - thread in Non-SB drawings is probably enough for a while, though of course it would be nice if it eventually expanded to a sub-forum and even forum for itself. As for the scale itself - if it were not to be FD scale, then most obvious choices are 2xSB as CraighH mentioned (1 pixel = 3 inch = 7,62 centimeter) or 1 pixel = 10 centimeters. (1 pixel = 5 centimeters wouldn't make much sense as it's almost FD). I also concur with Denodon's suggestion to upgrade FD section from sub-forum of Non-SB drawings to forum part in itself. @Colosseum Technically speaking we will never be able to draw "every ship ever made". For too many there just wouldn't be enough sources available. (and I'm just speaking on "every class/type", not "every single vessel"). 
|
|
| Author: | Garlicdesign [ May 11th, 2014, 1:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Revisiting the style rules |
Hello again! My 5 cents: - I think we should not become too restrictive about underwater shading, because if that 30°/45° rule is set in stone, only ships for which exact frame-by-frame width measurements are available may use underwater shading at all. The older the ships are, the fewer information is available. I've done ships from a crude drawing in a 100 year old edition of Weyer's and a few photographs with underwater shading, and no one complained, so this should not be taken too far. An educated guess should be enough (provided it IS educated and not wild-ass). - Generally, the style rules should discriminate between minimum requirements and a limit on how far one may go, and everything between these extremes is cool. - I have no problems with anyone kitbashing any of my drawings without asking, that's what the style is supposed to enable, after all. - I support the Idea of 'official' colour tables; I just don't want to have to put them together. There is pretty little information on the web about the time I am interested in most (WWI and before) and many of that is contradictory. And, there is one question that bothers me: So far, a ship that has been drawn 'belongs' to the original author and any scratch redraw is considered a hostile act (sort of) even if the drawing is old, outdated or even faulty. I am not sure whether this rule applies to sister ships or renderings of the same ship in an earlier or later stage of its career? Can they be drawn from scratch without permission from the original artist? Greetings GD |
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ May 11th, 2014, 1:29 pm ] | |
| Post subject: | Re: Revisiting the style rules | |
An educated guess should be enough (provided it IS educated and not wild-ass).
agreed, but if you think about on about which angle your shading line is, it is no longer uneducated or wild-ass. nobody cares if you are 2 or 3 pixels wrong, but you represent the shape correctly. that is the only thing I want to offer with those rules, not stone-set rules, but I think it should be listed in the style rules not as rule but as education on how to.
|
||
| Page 3 of 8 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|