New Sig

well if you could infer what i am saying, you would know what i mean by "you have a long way to go". it means with practice and time his work will get better. read between the lines people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazy Sean

well, i can say this. you have a long way to go. and s far as the sig. i always say that you should use your effects on the render, not the text.

---

This is true. Text is unimportant and a minor touch compared to everything else. Unless you're doing a sig whose focus is the text, but that'd be much harder to pull off and be up to par, in which case you might say you have a long way to go before trying one.

I always try to make the text as insignificant as possible before it becomes unreadable, and it generally works for me. Work on depth too. Basically that means that I can look at the sig multiple times and see something different each time (unless you're going for an extremely clean and simple sig, but it's clear that you weren't going for that for this one). If you're spending like 10-15 min on these then you should spend more time, pay attention and work on details. Also, work on color. Your sig is pretty much one color, and that usually gets boring fast. It looks like you may have lowered the saturation on the stock to match the background, I'd say you should have left it saturated so that it'd have matched the background yet have been distinguished from it at the same time. Then you'd give the stock some focus, and looking at this particulat sig it looks like that's what you should be doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazy Sean

Jesus, i say one thing and you go off. Thats one of the reasons i left this site for while is because everyone goes off on you if you dont say what they want to hear. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and get to say what they want. You dont have to infer all this bullshit, of make up some nonsense to make yourself sound smarter, or w/e it is you are trying to do.

---

That's because your post was pretty much worthless (less the stuff mentioned above) and lacked specificity. So the guy has a long way to go, how so? It's a given that he'll get better with time, there's no point in telling him the obvious. Instead be more specific and help him improve, that's what these people are arguing against you with.

i agree that was a pointless post no ones "godly" right off the bat everyones gotta learn some learn quicker then others.

now about the sig its not a bad sig theres just a few thing that have pointed out already photoshop can be tricky at times its like the pandoras box of gfx it holds unlimited possablitys so try everything some things won't work and some will so keep workin at it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jsoosiah

This is true. Text is unimportant and a minor touch compared to everything else. Unless you're doing a sig whose focus is the text, but that'd be much harder to pull off and be up to par, in which case you might say you have a long way to go before trying one.

I always try to make the text as insignificant as possible before it becomes unreadable, and it generally works for me. Work on depth too.

---

I try to make my text almost blend with the bg but get vary dynamic text also, I don't mean using other fonts when I say that.

I desire a balance between text and render, for either can break a sig. I try and force users to notice both, for text and inhance a sig greatly in a lot of aspects.

Users who don't even use text, even if their sig's bg is full, and with great render placement and brushing, looks empty with out text. Since signatures are so small they're more like logos than actually pieces of art on display. But if your text is bad even if it's small, it drastically hinders the sig. Also this goes for the render.

Work on your fundamentals, learn from a bunch of tutorials first... experiment later... as far as text goes.. just watch how other people do it, and experiment on your own, there's no 'Right' way to do text.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toshiyan

I try to make my text almost blend with the bg but get vary dynamic text also, I don't mean using other fonts when I say that.

I desire a balance between text and render, for either can break a sig. I try and force users to notice both, for text and inhance a sig greatly in a lot of aspects.

Users who don't even use text, even if their sig's bg is full, and with great render placement and brushing, looks empty with out text. Since signatures are so small they're more like logos than actually pieces of art on display. But if your text is bad even if it's small, it drastically hinders the sig. Also this goes for the render.

---

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't saying that text isn't important in the sense that it's unnecessary to have, just that it shouldn't stand out at all in the final composition (usually). Basically it's important to complete the piece, not to be a significant contribution to it, as I see it.

Oh sorry jsoosiah I wasn't really pointing at you really. Though I was replying to your suggestion.

My reply was more of other's to get different aspects of text. As NxtDay said there's more than one way to do this.