!~~Show off your sig~~!

[xHaZxMaTx]

Holy crap. I never realised how much of an arrogant bumbum you are, Jop. Congratulations.

[Jopuma]

How am I arrogant when stating a fact?

Fact: you guys are graphical noobs (exceptions are S2K and Djiel their stuff = pwnge)

Fact: it would be a waste to take a picture of a shiznit road just for a picture that's only 400px wide by 150px tall.

The only arrogant person I see is you. You make posts as if you're t3h gr4ph1c$ m4$t3r.

I'm confident in my work and when graphic guru's saw my work they just said something like "needs just a touch of extra lighting" or "a bit of color would help". You guys immediately start acting like you know all there is about graphics and it makes you look retarded and arrogant.

[S2000_Skyline12]

Haha...That was funny xD

[xHaZxMaTx]

Right....take a picture of the road in the ghetto town I live in.... no thanks.

Denver's a pretty big city, last I checked, and from what I remember.

And if you find it distracting that's your problem. Other people who have seen it never said it was distracting.

So the only people whose opinions matter are those who like it.

I can take constructive criticism, but when it's given by graphic noobs I don't do what they suggest.

So you're just looking for asspats from us 'graphical noobs'.

If you think it looks like the car is doing a front wheelie and drifting you have no idea what perspective is.

I won't say that I know all there is to know about perspective, but I did spend 4 years in high school in a Drafting & Architectural Design class, where both isometric and perspective drawings were used and drawn on a regular basis. Perspective is one of, if not the, most important aspect when rendering an architectural design. So I'd say I know a bit about perspective.

How am I arrogant when stating a fact?

I lol'd. Irony? Secondly - whether or not we are 'graphic noobs' is an opinion; not a fact.

Fact: you guys are graphical noobs

Opinion.

Fact: it would be a waste to take a picture of a shiznit road just for a picture that's only 400px wide by 150px tall.

A waste of what, exactly? 1 MB on your SD card? On your hard drive? A waste of your time? Yes, wouldn't want to keep you from spending as much time as possible making signatures. Also an opinion.

The only arrogant person I see is you. You make posts as if you're t3h gr4ph1c$ m4$t3r.

I'm confident in my work and when graphic guru's saw my work they just said something like "needs just a touch of extra lighting" or "a bit of color would help". You guys immediately start acting like you know all there is about graphics and it makes you look retarded and arrogant.

I don't recall ever saying there was anything wrong with the 'graphics'. I only mentioned the perspective as being an issue. Aesthetically speaking, it's pretty nice, but with the differing perspectives, it looks silly.

Yes, the perspectives are very different. To prove this, I've taken the liberty of highlighting key lines in the image (i.e. prominent lines made by the car and the road). Though in actuality, the lines are (close enough) to being parallel, due to distance and perspective, the lines taper and eventually meet at the vanishing point on the horizon (unless obstructed), as evidenced, here. Now, as you can see, the red lines of the road, do, in fact, meet at a vanishing point on the horizon, albeit not visible within the image. Likewise, the blue lines of the car also meet at a vanishing point on the horizon. Note, however, that these two vanishing points are no where near each other, nor are they on the same horizon. Granted, with how the car is supposed to be positioned on the road (not parallel with the road [not sharing a common axis]), this is not an ideal example. However, if both the car and the road shared the same perspective, even if the car were not parallel with the road, the horizons would be the same (seen here), which they clearly are not.

[Stereo]

Opinion: You think everyone is a graphical noob but your best buds, because you can't take criticism from anyone else, and if you can't take it, you call them a "Graphical Noob"
I'm just saying that this is definetly not your best work and that I've seen lots of good stuff from you.

Really, that front wheel doesn't look like a wheel anymore...

And if you're so confident in your work when "Graphical Gurus" comment on it, why the firetruck are you even posting it here? Go, shoo! We're all graphical noobs!
"Don't try brushes either": So I can't have the mass of sparks on the front wheel anymore? Aww...

[Jopuma]

Yes, the perspectives are very different. To prove this, I've taken the liberty of highlighting key lines in the image (i.e. prominent lines made by the car and the road). Though in actuality, the lines are (close enough) to being parallel, due to distance and perspective, the lines taper and eventually meet at the vanishing point on the horizon (unless obstructed), as evidenced, here. Now, as you can see, the red lines of the road, do, in fact, meet at a vanishing point on the horizon, albeit not visible within the image. Likewise, the blue lines of the car also meet at a vanishing point on the horizon. Note, however, that these two vanishing points are no where near each other, nor are they on the same horizon. Granted, with how the car is supposed to be positioned on the road (not parallel with the road [not sharing a common axis]), this is not an ideal example. However, if both the car and the road shared the same perspective, even if the car were not parallel with the road, the horizons would be the same (seen here), which they clearly are not.

You make posts as if you're t3h gr4ph1c$ m4$t3r.

Since you can't think in a 3 dimensional pattern I will now waste a sheet of good drawing paper to show you the real mechanics of how I made the sig.

You think everyone is a graphical noob but your best buds, because you can't take criticism from anyone else, and if you can't take it, you call them a "Graphical Noob"

"Don't try brushes either": So I can't have the mass of sparks on the front wheel anymore? Aww...

Your "opinion" is flawed. I can take criticism from lots of people. I'm a member of quite a few graphic artist forums and I get lots of constructive criticism from them. And I can take it. When noobs say crap thinking its constructive criticism that's when I call them graphical noobs. Because they don't know jack shiznit what they're talking about.

I honestly do wonder why I post my work here. Guess I won't anymore since I get so many complaints.

And this proves your lack of graphical knowledge. Number of brushes used in this piece totals a smashing 0. Effects aren't all made by brushes you know.

There are extremely useful things called C4D's which greatly enhance your signature.


EDIT COMPLETE: Take a look at this. This is what I was thinking when I made the sig. I WAS THINKING IN A 3D FORMAT. If you can't see the pictures you must be friggen blind. There's one with a flash and one without. Now I can offer a nice big STFU.

[xHaZxMaTx]

The sig and your drawing don't match up. Try reading what I typed, again. Pay close attention to the part about sharing horizons.

[Jopuma]

I don't give a rats bumbum about "matching" horizons. It makes it interesting using 2 completely different perspectives. But it seems you don't have complex thinking patterns. I'll just leave it at that.

[xHaZxMaTx]

Ah, I see, going for an abstract look, now. ...Maybe you should make more floating cars.

Nice try. You try to defend yourself against the accusation that the perspectives don't match by trying to prove that they do match. Now, you're admitting that they don't match and claiming that you did it purposefully. You're awesome, Jop. I'd like to buy you a drink, sometime.

[Jopuma]

I never said they did match or went the same direction. I automatically assumed you knew how to think outside the box (apparently not). That's probably the reason why graphics guru's didn't say anything about matching horzions. They thought about the bigger picture and looked at all the aspects of it rather than trying to be an bumbum and nitpick about stuff.

[S2000_Skyline12]

Yeah, seriously, it's just a sig. Not a big piece of art in a gallery, not a 5000*5000 poster, A sig, tag, whatever. In most graphics forums, abstract ideas are promoted, along with not being a freakin' go-hard about every single, bone dry aspect of a sig. I could see if he was putting it in a video game cover or something like that getting paid for, but he isn't. Come off it, it's a sig, wasn't made to be something from the artist of the Mona Lisa's protege. Let it go.

[xHaZxMaTx]

Aesthetically speaking, it's pretty nice...

There's your asspat. Feeling better? Got any booboos you want me to kiss?

[Jopuma]

Honestly, I was done with this with that last post. I have better things to do than argue with some guy over the internet.

[Stereo]

Then why did you?














































HUH?!?!
And I wouldn't give a shiznit if you were the #1 sig maker in the world or if you were some super guru at a Photoshop Geek forum, the sig is still weird. =p I know what C4Ds are, but you said I could only use two stocks to make the whole pic, which is saying "Background+Layer 1" and that's it.

[Zero260]

Wow, I hate to drag this on even one post more, but I'll go ahead and give my opinion. Intended or not, the perspective is off and it looks terrible that way. And HaZ is right, those drawings don't match up to the sig one bit.

Besides the perspective, it's a poor looking sig in my opinion (Especially coming from you, Jop). The somewhat dull real world photo doesn't go well with the vivid ProStreet screen shot. It's not a bad concept with the C4D flare and all, but I think it'd look a whole lot better with an in-game background. And I could care less if you consider me a graphic noob, that's just my opinion. We've all seen much better from you.

[Carcrazy]

Forget 'em. The sig actually looks really good, I guess you just have to have the eye for it.
Although you could do away with the C4D's over the front wheel.
And trust me, I know how it is making sigs on a laptop, most of mine are now that my damn desktop is broken, and will probably stay this way for a while because I'm in no mood to spend the money or the time fixing it. It can sit here untill I either win the lottery or sell it imo. >.<*

@ The Haters:

FIRST OFF, a CRAP load of ppl shouldn't be talking about poor C4D usage here... I'm dead serious.

Secondly @ Haz, not everyone has $300 to spend on a high-quality camera for a 150x200 som-od image, nor do most care. It's a picture, it comes from your mind and what you're feeling, if that's what he's feeling then suck it up. CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM, NOT JUST CRITICISM!

Somehow I don't see how 'Get a camera and take your own picture' is helping...

(And yes, Im' still in my bad mood.)

[xHaZxMaTx]

Who said he had to have a good camera? It's a small image, he could take it with a cell phone, if he wanted to. The point of taking a picture, himself, isn't to get better quality - it's to get the right angle.

[Carcrazy]

Angle wouldn't matter for shiz, then someone would complain about the quality of the picture and go, 'Why not just get an image online?"

[xHaZxMaTx]

Jop's Mr. Photoshop. I'm sure he could make a phone picture look good.

[boganbusman]

To me it looked like Jop was going for a cartoonish style, where the car has sort of squashed up under extreme braking load, and I thought it looked really cool.

But then he was trying to defend the perspective of the shot as if it was normal, and it just ruined it for me.
I really thought there was some creativity going on there, but no, Jopuma's eyes are just broken

[jacoja06]

I find this perspective argument interesting. I know you all want to drop it (especially Jop), but I have to add something (because I have nothing else better to do)...



… if you can see where I’m coming from. I realize the top-right frame isn’t actually a car drifting… but the bottom-right would be a solution.

[Jopuma]

Wow you guys really have nothing better to do than b*itch about a perspective issue.

After another 20 pages of pictures I found these 2 but even these would be difficult to work with.
http://elderoftimes.deviantart.com/art/Road-71752492
http://red-hat.deviantart.com/art/Endless-Road-51798425

But if I use either of those it would ruin what I wanted the sig to be.

[jacoja06]

I don’t see the need to get even slightly angry about our comments… or even mine. I was explaining a few things on paper, then added a suggestion. You're welcome.

[Jopuma]

Who said I was angry and who said my comment was directed at you?

[boganbusman]

We say that you are angry. Or at least very agitated.

You kicked up a big fuss over a reasonable comment left by someone else, which is rather typical of you.