Why do these concepts look wrong?
 

The concept artist for a game I'm working on just submitted these two images, supposedly sequential. I had to ask her a few times to explain what was occuring, because I thought it wasn't clear. We intended to use her drawings as an introduction to the game, but I'm afraid that the "progression" of the images isn't exactly clear.

I think she felt bad and got a bit defensive -- "most people knew what it was right away!" I'm not so sure.

What would you change, if you could, to make it clearer??

<a href="http://imageshack.us"><img src="http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/6946/intro1ys4.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us" /></a>

<a href="http://imageshack.us"><img src="http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/9928/intro3xp2.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us" /></a>

Can you tell what's going on? Try to figure it out before scrolling down.




























































Is it clear that the first image is from "inside" a display case, looking out at her? And that the following image is from behind, looking at the same display case? And that the object above her head to the left is a mirror?

I was thrown because I thought the "walls" in the first picture were the room walls, not the walls of a "display case."

I had not a clue...

seeing as her hands are not in the same position in both pictures and there is no purple "thing" how are you supposed to think they are the same picture from two dif view points?

I saw the "walls" of the case as soon as I saw the 2nd picture, alone I thought it was just the walls of the room.

it's not clear at all though, on first pass.

It's obvious that the two pictures are reversals of similar scenes.

I did figure out that the first picture was from inside a display case and that the object was probably a mirror. The blue shading and the fact that her legs are "cut off" are major clues.

I did not notice the mirror in the second picture until I scrolled down and read your caption. I just figured it was obscured by the character.

The lack of purple thing in the first picture is a little weird. Is the purple stuff supposed to be "happening" to the character between the first and second pictures?

The first drawing reads like the mirror (or whatever--we can't see from there) is on a table in a small, square room. Seems like we want the figure to be bigger, and maybe cut off at the forehead too, to really convey that we're looking out of a box at her. From the relative size of the case in the second drawing, it looks like we'd see her maybe down to her mid-chest, not to her knees.

The second one is hard to figure out because it looks like the artist ran out of space (which is just poor planning) around the top-left of the head. The mirror has to be tucked up into the corner of the display case in order to show up at all, and just LOOK at that right hand. Yikes. Also, the perspective of the case in the second drawing is seriously messed up. If it's meant to be square, or rectangular, it should all have one vanishing point. Its lack of consistent perspective makes it look like the back of the glass case is sinking into the stand.

I'm not saying I could do better--and I don't know what you're going for here--but I wouldn't say these convey quite what you want to convey.

I think it was fairly obvious. In the first pic there is (crappy) foreshortening giving a sense of the proportions between the mirror thingy and the girl, and there is this blue "aura" around her fingertips that I interpreted as if she was pressing her fingers against glass. The display case is much too big compared to the girl though. And the second picture (ghastly perspective on the display case!) shows purple ribbons shooting out of the mirror, ensnaring the girl.
I'm positive I could do it better than this "artist" (I mean, look at the hands in the second panel!). I'd do the first shot even more zoomed back, to establish the set-up of girl touching glass display case with glowing frame/mirror thingy in it, and the second more zoomed in, as seen from the girl's eyes - she sees her outstretched hands, the mirror, the ribbons shooting out and ensnaring. Her fingers would be spread wildly indicating her shock. Probably some fancy action lines as well. Action lines are good.

Summary: I think the drawings are really bad, but I understand what's happening.

EDIT: I made a quick sketch of what I'd do. It's supposed to be two pictures but I'm too lazy to split them up. :rolleyes:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...rpleribbon.png

By not showing her shadow casting over the mirror led me to question it at first. These are just concept drawings right? Not the ones coming out with the game? What kind of game is it?

With some extrapolation I did understand what was happening but Pip has it right. There needs to be a linking image to help it make sense.

Pip's makes it clearer as there's now proportions between the case and the girl, but I had no clue that was a mirror and I still don't get the ribbony things. Also, if the light is behind her and there's a shadow on the mirror, why isn't she casting a shadow into the case?
The person who drew it has talent drawing, but her story telling needs brushing up on.;)

This thread is incredibly fascinating. I looked at those pictures and had not even a clue what I was supposed to see. Nada. Yet for you, it was obvious! I do admit that I am a concrete thinker and not a creative type, which likely explains our different perceptions.

Now here's what I find really interesting: Who do you think the artwork should appeal to? Should those with artistic talents be the target audience? Should it be non-creative types like me, who might be potential purchasers of the game but might be perplexed by somewhat abstract artwork? Is there an in between you should aim for?

Yeah, pip! Right on the money.

the first picture looks like she's casting a spell on some blue glowey thing.

The second picture looks like she's throwing laundry around.

We need to at least see the glowy thing in the second picture so we know it's a mirror.

It is not at all obvious that the thing above her head to the left is a mirror. In fact the picture tends to draw your eye to her back, because of the red, and then make the eye circle around the purple whatevers. The eye will not tend to fall on the "mirror" until much later, if at all.

Then there's the problem that the display case is perfectly square in pic 1 and some sort of strange hyperdimensional rectangle. . .thing in pic 2.

Plus, the display case does not at all represent any sort of real display case - - -i.e. who has a display case with a mirror on the flat surface inside, and another mirror on the wall of the case, and that is some sort of weird warpy blue glass which is flush with the stand on the left side and sinking into it on the right?

The girl herself is not bad at all - in fact the sense of motion from the purple laundry in the second picture is quite good - -- but the supporting objects ruin the pictures as the viewer sits there trying to figure out what's going on.