Runescape Bits & Bytes :: View topic

I wish luck to all the entrants. Just noticed, I think the link to #2 is down.

Something else that I need to get off of my chest:

Humus wrote:

1 is very bland. Border, text and low-opacity render? Not good. 2 wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the white light, but it just looks like a render with some C4Ds behind it. 3 is too dark and the render has no sort of blending whatsoever. The font is horrible, dunno about you but no amount of love for spiderman would make me want to use it. 4 isn't too bad, but the colours are too saturated, canvas size is waay too big, and the border doesn't work. Just a tip, guys. Don't put text on your signatures unless it REALLY looks good. I've seen so many tags ruined by bad text, and don't put your name on it unless it works, too.

I'm sure you can get your critique across without a paragraph of insults. Last time I checked, critiques were about helping towards improvement, not discouraging the artist.
Try telling someone how they can work on it without telling everyone how horrible they are.

I totally agree with Jay.
Constructive critisms are use to give good and bad things about a work, not only bashing and screaming loud how bad they are. Who are you to say Jay's sig is ''not good''.
A good exemple of critic would be the above posts, who are neutral in their opinion, they don't bring down the author, they give a suggestion to improve instead of free insulting.
Not because YOU are good at making sigs means it gives you the right to bash others. I don't give a **** **** about what you think about my font or my sig. I chose the font because Spidey is my hero plus I wanted to use a font people would reconize and think ''Hey I know that font! It's Maiden's work!''. You have a problem with that? If you want to continue this, PM me, it will be a pleasure to answer, because it's not apropriate right here.
Consider yourself lucky I can't allow myself one more warning because I would tell you the REAL truth.
--

Iron Maiden wrote:

Nobody is screaming.. I listed what reasons I had for not voting for them. Being "neutral" won't bloody help anyone, I'm afraid. Sorry but simply put, someone telling you that it isn't bad won't help you at all. And your post is just a prime example of an artist who has taken critique, whether harsh or not, badly. You would not last long at somewhere like PR or even the tip.it forums with that kind of attitude... and no I don't think of myself as any where near a good artist, but thanks for the compliment.

1. I liked that your signature was blue, very decent
2. I liked that your signature was red, very great
3. I liked that your signature was dark brown, very good
4. I liked that your signature was white, very cool

Warren wrote:

I like the way Warren does his judging.

I think he wins the prize for most non-offensive or biased judging.

Author:	Humus [ December 10th, 2009, 12:37 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: SOTW: Week 233 Voting
Jay wrote: I wish luck to all the entrants. Just noticed, I think the link to #2 is down. Something else that I need to get off of my chest: Humus wrote: 1 is very bland. Border, text and low-opacity render? Not good. 2 wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the white light, but it just looks like a render with some C4Ds behind it. 3 is too dark and the render has no sort of blending whatsoever. The font is horrible, dunno about you but no amount of love for spiderman would make me want to use it. 4 isn't too bad, but the colours are too saturated, canvas size is waay too big, and the border doesn't work. Just a tip, guys. Don't put text on your signatures unless it REALLY looks good. I've seen so many tags ruined by bad text, and don't put your name on it unless it works, too. I'm sure you can get your critique across without a paragraph of insults. Last time I checked, critiques were about helping towards improvement, not discouraging the artist. Try telling someone how they can work on it without telling everyone how horrible they are. [/quote] Ehh.. didn't really mean them as insults. I told each person what I thought of the signature, even how to improve them. I'm sorry but without crit it's very hard to improve as an artist. In real life you go for your art exam and show your work- the examiner doesn't just say "yeah it's really great" when something isn't. He/she will tell you exactly what they think and how you could improve it. Knowing what you're doing wrong will help you improve in the future and become a better artist, whether or not it's worded as nice as you'd like or not, it still gets across the point. And no Iron Maiden wrote: I totally agree with Jay. Constructive critisms are use to give good and bad things about a work, not only bashing and screaming loud how bad they are. Who are you to say Jay's sig is ''not good''. A good exemple of critic would be the above posts, who are neutral in their opinion, they don't bring down the author, they give a suggestion to improve instead of free insulting. Not because YOU are good at making sigs means it gives you the right to bash others. I don't give a ** ** about what you think about my font or my sig. I chose the font because Spidey is my hero plus I wanted to use a font people would reconize and think ''Hey I know that font! It's Maiden's work!''. You have a problem with that? If you want to continue this, PM me, it will be a pleasure to answer, because it's not apropriate right here. Consider yourself lucky I can't allow myself one more warning because I would tell you the REAL truth. -- Nobody is screaming.. I listed what reasons I had for not voting for them. Being "neutral" won't bloody help anyone, I'm afraid. Sorry but simply put, someone telling you that it isn't bad won't help you at all. And your post is just a prime example of an artist who has taken critique, whether harsh or not, badly. You would not last long at somewhere like PR or even the tip.it forums with that kind of attitude... and no I don't think of myself as any where near a good artist, but thanks for the compliment.

Author:	Adbot [ December 10th, 2009, 12:37 pm ]
Post subject:	Register and login to get these in-post ads to disappear

Author:	Warren [ December 10th, 2009, 2:53 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: SOTW: Week 233 Voting
Er, Jay never said criticism was bad. He said your criticism was bad. Because none of it was actually helpful at all and aimed at getting across that the signatures were bad. You may have pointed out weaknesses in some of the sigs by saying "this is element of this sig sucks", like the border on Jay's, but that hardly helps. How is he to know why? He could take it as a 5px border is simply not wide enough. It's not the inability to accept "harsh" criticism (seemed more insulting than harsh, anyways). And no, you didn't say how to improve them. You identified weaknesses in the signatures and then said they were terrible. Good criticism identifies strengths, too. And no, "that is really great" is not a strength. Criticism isn't even about choosing a bias.. :S Anyways, 1. I liked that your signature was blue, very decent 2. I liked that your signature was red, very great 3. I liked that your signature was dark brown, very good 4. I liked that your signature was white, very cool

Author:	Iron Maiden [ December 10th, 2009, 3:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: SOTW: Week 233 Voting
Humus wrote: Iron Maiden wrote: I totally agree with Jay. Constructive critisms are use to give good and bad things about a work, not only bashing and screaming loud how bad they are. Who are you to say Jay's sig is ''not good''. A good exemple of critic would be the above posts, who are neutral in their opinion, they don't bring down the author, they give a suggestion to improve instead of free insulting. Not because YOU are good at making sigs means it gives you the right to bash others. I don't give a ** about what you think about my font or my sig. I chose the font because Spidey is my hero plus I wanted to use a font people would reconize and think ''Hey I know that font! It's Maiden's work!''. You have a problem with that? If you want to continue this, PM me, it will be a pleasure to answer, because it's not apropriate right here. Consider yourself lucky I can't allow myself one more warning because I would tell you the REAL truth. -- Nobody is screaming.. I listed what reasons I had for not voting for them. Being "neutral" won't bloody help anyone, I'm afraid. Sorry but simply put, someone telling you that it isn't bad won't help you at all. And your post is just a prime example of an artist who has taken critique, whether harsh or not, badly. You would not last long at somewhere like PR or even the tip.it forums with that kind of attitude... and no I don't think of myself as any where near a good artist, but thanks for the compliment. Being neutral wont help? Maybe, but it would be surely more helpful than going intense bashing on other people signatures. Look at Steven's post, we had a few hundreds arguments in the past, he could have bashed my signature if he wanted to, but he didn't. He gave suggestions how to improve and pointed out weak point to fix them in future use. That's what I call a «Good» critic. Thanks to you, I hope things will be different now. Back to you Humus, You can bash, tell how crap, how much you hate my signature as much as you wish but I NEVER** wanna see you writing something about my attitude again. I wont accept being insulted about my personality in public, is that clear enough?

Author:	Reventon42 [ December 10th, 2009, 4:10 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: SOTW: Week 233 Voting
Voted for jPengu's because it looked the coolest

Runescape Bits & Bytes https://www.rsbandb.com/forums/

SOTW: Week 233 Voting https://www.rsbandb.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=77653	Page 2 of 2

Author:	Al3X [ December 10th, 2009, 4:11 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: SOTW: Week 233 Voting
Warren wrote: 1. I liked that your signature was blue, very decent 2. I liked that your signature was red, very great 3. I liked that your signature was dark brown, very good 4. I liked that your signature was white, very cool I like the way Warren does his judging. I think he wins the prize for most non-offensive or biased judging.

Author:	Shreder [ December 10th, 2009, 6:13 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: SOTW: Week 233 Voting
I like all of them, but #2 appealed the most. #1 has a good render to work with but the text and border need to be improved.

Author:	Adbot [ December 10th, 2009, 6:13 pm ]
Post subject:	Register and login to get these in-post ads to disappear

Author:	Kenny [ December 11th, 2009, 12:54 am ]
Post subject:	Re: SOTW: Week 233 Voting
Al3X wrote: Warren wrote: 1. I liked that your signature was blue, very decent 2. I liked that your signature was red, very great 3. I liked that your signature was dark brown, very good 4. I liked that your signature was white, very cool I like the way Warren does his judging. I think he wins the prize for most non-offensive or biased judging. QFT After all this kerfuffle I wonder who'll win.

Page 2 of 2	All times are UTC - 7 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/