Team Droid - Slot Challenge - PshycoDelic

Well let's see what some good artists around here think, and we'll leave it at that.

 

Not only is that not a fucking transformer, but whoever gave the first critique on both sigs is either blind or just some kind of ape. (Which would explain the orgasming over the whole Droid thing)

 

I agree.. and disagree, I wouldn't give either of them above a 2/10. They're both very sharp and don't use text correctly. Neither have a sense of lighting. That overlay boarder on physco is replusive and completely uncontrasted.


Inverses could be much better. TO be honest I don't think either is ultimately better. if inverse changed a few things I'd say his tag is the winner, but thats just me

 

lololololololol.

 

TBH clash... i think that is the worst C&C I've ever seen you give... and I only rate your tags so low because you guys did do a lot of things I could comment on for you to improve...

 

Would you rather I made my text the same as yours? Set on softlight with ridiculous drop shadows?

 

lol my text's are not soft light with drop shadows first off.... and I'm not commenting on it being like mine. I'm also not rating your signature compared to mine. If you really wanted me to go into detail I could tear my signatures apart. I wouldn't rate my signatures above a 5/10 and thats on a bias point of view. Your signature has the potential to be good, but it's not. its got random sharp splashes of orange crappy filters and annoying random brightness. and a horrible lighting source, and not to mention your incredibly retarded text.

 

*sigh*

I'm not even going to argue this anymore. This site no longer has any members who know the slightest bit about design or sig-making, and the few that have genuine skill (Neuron for example) no longer give a shit.

You would rate mine a 2/10, and yours a 5/10. That's either incredibly insulting to me, or incredibly generous to yourself. Clash rates a total beginner sig over my relatively advanced sig, yet he struggles to make even the most basic sigs himself. His and your text usage is rudimentary at best, and it doesn't surprise me at all that you struggle to understand any kind of bold typography in sigs.

Let me critique you for 5 seconds.

Your first sig looks like a stock, with a very unbalanced and over-treated bit of type (in a horrible font), and maybe a bit of colouring (very bad colouring).

Your second is over-contrasted, has no real light source, and looks like its had a orange-violet gradient map applied and had nothing else done to it. The text treatment is not only interfering with the composition of the sig, but that stupid thick yellow line is ridiculous, and again, the font choice is horrible.

Your third is the only one that's any good, because it actually has some depth, and the text is pretty passable. However your blending is very weak, and the composition needs work.

The sig I posted here was only a 10 minute job, and is nowhere near my best, BUT THE THINGS YOU PEOPLE ARE CRITIQUING ABOUT IT IS PLAIN FUCKING RIDICULOUS, so stfu and learn SOMETHING about what you're talking about before you throw your oar in and piss everyone the **** off.

You wouldn't know correct text use if it hit you in the fucking face.

 

LOL, buddy... I don't think I've ever laughed so hard. That signature you just posted was horrible especially because I've seen what you can do. You have good depth on it. but your text is large, your signature is SHARP AS ****. and you have some really simple filters that are making it choppy. Your orange soft brush doesn't fit because of the stock or render you used. You also didnt' attempt to make it fit. So please besides the depth you have in the signature what am I supposed to say is good about your tag?

I also stated I was being bias, because I happened to like my signatures. I don't care that there not fit to exact I made those out of expression not to get a 10/10. All 3 of those are horrible if I wanted to rate them. I have 2 focals in the 3rd signature. That line I for some reason wanted to add is totally stupid and ruins the tag. That text I took 10 seconds to slap on there. The first I wasn't even going to add text, and the only thing thats a stock in the picture is the bottom right building. The rest I made except for the hearts.

Post a signature that you didn't slap together in 10 minutes and you wouldn't here me complain. Your signature looked like it was a POS job and that's why I said 2/10. All I was saying was a few minor changes and it was fine.

 

The up side
--
- Good Depth by using blur
- Nice Coloring
- Good flow

The down side
--
- Text is distracting
- Coloring is good but i would like to see the "transformer" or whatever it is, pop out some more, because it blends too much.

All in all... 7.5/10

--

PshychoDelic:

The up side
--
- Blending is alright
- Border came out alright in this tag



The down side
--
- Random black spaces
- Bad quality smudging
- No Lightsource
- Bad Text
- Random C4D Placement

Overall 4/10 and i'm being generous

--

Final Score:
--
inverse - 7.5
PshycoDelic - 4

 

Oh @ Clash i would like to see an advanced tag from you, go all out i just want to know what is really a good tag in your opinion.

 

inverse:

The up side
--
- good flow and depth perspective
- Good font choice
- not overdone

The down side
--
- not enough visual contrast, lighting/shadowing could have remedied this
- not a fan of the size/implementation of the text
- feels "dull" and lacks vibrancy
All in all... 6/10

--

PshychoDelic:

The up side
--
- variety of composition
- visually balanced
- several interesting effects

The down side
--
- over shapened
- random text placement
- border seems random
- TOO MUCH contrast
- hand is a focal point
Over all, I'd say 4/10


winner: Inverse

 

Thanks guys. I remember when there were so many amazing sigmakers on this forum, that you had to EARN your feeling of superiority.

 

with all due respect, i believe that my sig is a lot better.
my sig has got a nice flow, good coloring, and nice text.
it is slightly over sharpened, but not too the point of rendering it bad sig.
the border is controversial, but even if you don't like it, it's barely noticeable in the first place.
Inverse's sig has depth, but that's pretty much it.
the lighting is no more that a yellow brush over the focal.
the background is too blurry on the left and too sharp on the right.
so sharp, as a matter of fact that i wouldn't be surprised if it was just displaced and forgotten about.
the text is grossly huge.
and while most of you have been ranting about my border, at least my sig has a border.

you people are just so fixated on one style of designing that if something isn't like it then you'll just ignore it.
you guys always look for the exact same kind of sig.
you need to think out of the box a little but and understand that signatures are made spontaneously and not in a routine pattern.
my sig is clearly more inviting to the eye, but because he blurred the BG and slapped on a yellow soft brush, he's gonna win.

 

i have to say you couldnt be more wrong.

your sig has no flow,boring colors and simply bad text.

you say we have to think out of the box. the sig you made i made in the first week i had photoshop, it shows no creativity at all. i even looked up my old photobucket account for you

http://s24.photobucket.com/albums/c45/inREACH

that are sigs i made back in 05/06