Avatars and sig (like the old'n days)

[Fex]

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

Like the old'n days, signatures and avatars
and shit I used

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

​

 

[Desiigner]

I'm in love with the first 2 one's and the sig. I took them for later use if that's okay.

 

[Fex]

I'm in love with the first 2 one's and the sig. I took them for later use if that's okay.

Take em'. ​

 

[Migster257]

Avatars are really nice.

The sig lacks depth. There's two separate "flows" and they go against each other. So, basically, there is no flow. It's nice overall, but it seems too simple. The only part that should matter with this style really is the flow, which isn't there.

 

[Kingu]

I've seen the 5th Ava somewhere.
These are nice.

 

[Fex]

Avatars are really nice.

The sig lacks depth. There's two separate "flows" and they go against each other. So, basically, there is no flow. It's nice overall, but it seems too simple. The only part that should matter with this style really is the flow, which isn't there.

I see what you are talking about the more I look at it. ​

 

[BlacLord™]

Avatars are really nice.

The sig lacks depth. There's two separate "flows" and they go against each other. So, basically, there is no flow. It's nice overall, but it seems too simple. The only part that should matter with this style really is the flow, which isn't there.

I disagree.

The sig are great, depth would ruin the style they adopt. Not all styles share common traits, nor should they because that would become uninspiring and boring. It's just that the sig requires an avatar to match, of which none are here.

 

[Hei]

Just for the info what are 'old' days for ya ?

Avatars are ok ,signature is really simple so there is nothing to comment on

@Fex there are some common basic things that all type of signature shares,one of them are blending and focus.

 

[Migster257]

I disagree.

The sig are great, depth would ruin the style they adopt. Not all styles share common traits, nor should they because that would become uninspiring and boring. It's just that the sig requires an avatar to match, of which none are here.

Technically all styles do share at least one common trait.

Anyway, I don't see how depth would ruin anything. A little bit of blurring of the background and very little darkening could help it.

 

[Fex]

I disagree.

The sig are great, depth would ruin the style they adopt. Not all styles share common traits, nor should they because that would become uninspiring and boring. It's just that the sig requires an avatar to match, of which none are here.

Our names are so similar 0_0​

Just for the info what are 'old' days for ya ? Avatars are ok ,signature is really simple so there is nothing to comment on @Fex there are some common basic things that all type of signature shares,one of them are blending and focus.

I think what Feu was saying Migster was probably confusing a vector based sig with c4d based sigs. Which c4d based sigs need depth(well most of them) while vector based sigs just need shapes and what not to go with the focal.
And I don't know what I meant by the old days.​

Technically all styles do share at least one common trait. Anyway, I don't see how depth would ruin anything. A little bit of blurring of the background and very little darkening could help it.

Actually I disagree with you on this one because blurring the background for the sig would actually ruin the simplicity which is what I was trying to create.​

 

[BlacLord™]

Our names are so similar 0_0

​

I just realized that myself! Soooo coooool.

Feu + Fex = Sexy.

 

[Hei]

Feu + Fex = Sexy.

That sounds a bit gay but hell..whatever boys lol

 

[Fex]

That sounds a bit gay but hell..whatever boys lol

The way he worded it was a bit gay but I like the names.​

 

[Migster257]

Fexy is my OTP.

 

[BlacLord™]

That sounds a bit gay but hell..whatever boys lol

Are you saying guys can't be sexy? :|

 

[Azu]

Ok, I need to study but I'd rather give CnC to some tags tonight instead of that. #dontjudgeme

Ok, let's start.

You must be registered for see images

First, avatars. Joker came up with this super good term 'elegant avatars' which I really like and when I am searching for stocks for my avatar I am searching for something that could serve as a good base to create those 'elegant avatars'. Your fifth avatar has that touch of an 'elegant avatar' for me. I really like it.

But, tbh, it doesn't look like it was done much on these avatars. Crop + Sharpen + Adjust Colors and that more or less it. But, at least they look good. Especially, the fifth one. Good placement and nice adjustments made it look really georgeus. If I was premium I would wear it.

Btw, do you do requests?

Second, signature. OMG, when I saw it I thought that you are serching somene for collab. Are you? Just checking! xD #dontjudgeme

Buuuttt, if this is the final product, then, having said that about collab you can see that I think that it looks unfinished. But the start is really nice. I would disagee about the flow thingy someone mentioned above. Some rules are allowed to break when you are creating something artistic as long as that looks good. Eh, I just don't like that render. It fits good into a tag but it's bad quality. I would emphasize the colors and add so many things to this tag.

You should definitively return to work on this one more and to actually finish it. And if you are looking for collab send me VM.

Good job!

You must be registered for see images

 

[KameSennin]

NICE WORK