GarryP

Nice. Thanks for that.

Really nice work. I think the glowing effect works really well on the artefact. (The background and the back of the head seems to have been pixelated a bit but that's a minor issue.)

Fantastic. The shading and lighting, in particular, are superb. (There's even something in the background that sets it all off very nicely.)

Ah, I see; well that's all fine then. I just wanted to make sure you weren't going down a road where you would be making more work for yourself than was necessary.

You're welcome.

You're welcome. One thing that I would suggest - and you probably already know about this but others reading it might not - is to keep checking your characters at the resolution/size they will actually be seen on-screen. For example, the extra work you did on the hands is important but would the extra detail actually be visible if the character was - for example - 64 pixels high? I've just done a quick test scaling your image down to 128 pixels - still quite large for some games - and a lot of the detail is missing. The scars are almost entirely gone and the little guy's hand is almost indistinguishable from the first version. Similarly, the shading/detail on the bomb looks really nice but after it's been scaled down it's pretty much gone. I guess what I'm saying is that it's great to add the extra detail but you might be doing more work than you need to. Also, you might need to think about how the image will be scaled down. Different scaling methods produce different results and you might find that one method over-emphasises an unnecessary detail while another doesn't. It's probably worth doing some experimentation first to see what will happen rather than just expecting things to work out okay. Obviously this all depends on screen size, and resolution, and whether you have any zoom in the game, and many other things, but it's worth keeping in mind throughout the process. I'm not an expert in this area so maybe one of the experienced game designers on the forum could give you some better advice (which I would also be interested in reading). P.S. For all I know you are one of those experienced game designers. If so then, of course, feel free to ignore anything I've just said and accept my apologies for trying to tell you stuff you already know way more about than I do.

A bit of pointless nostalgia for the weekend. (I haven't quite nailed the "2" logo but it's okay for a bit of throwaway silliness.) For those who are too young to know what the heck this is, this is what you would see on your TV in the UK if the preceding programme ended earlier than expected. No trailers, just a static screen telling you what would be coming up next. It might be up there for five minutes or more!

Nice work. Nice dirt effect. I really like the bag for some reason. The colour and shading just stand out for me. Looks like velvet.

This is so weird. Great, but weird. Things with big heads floating around the landscape reminds me of something but I can't remember what. Might have been a cartoon I think, maybe a Studio Ghibli film?

Bamboozle. Yes, that was its name. Thanks tinpixel.

Brilliant. The details on the reflections are really good.

Really nice. I really like this sort of 'cartoony' style.

Another fantastic piece of work. Great every time.

Wow. I mean... just... WOW! Definitely a contender for this: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/44775-get-your-affinity-work-featured/

Only 20 hours? I think I'll stick to 'colouring in' books. That's more my level.

Bri-Toon: Thanks. Unfortunately it's not before my time. MEB: I was thinking about doing a Spectrum experiment. Any ideas? Kasper-V: I guess they'll be wondering how we all coped without augmented reality glasses. AffinityJules: Yeah, I know what you mean.

Nice and "moody". Threatening, even. Now I'm wondering what that liquid is. Assuming that: * we're looking at a planet(oid)-sized body and not just a part of something small that's really close to the camera, and; * there's little-to-no atmosphere (or none that's readily visible), and; * it's about the same distance from the Sun as the Earth is, and; * the body has some rotation (like most things in the Universe): ... then temperatures on its surface should go from between 100degC & 250degC (depending on where you get your figures from) on one side and down to between -250degC and -100degC on the other side. I don't know what liquid could exist between those temperatures and not boil/sublime off into space in a (partial) vacuum. I did a little bit of a search but the physics and mathematics are way over my head. Or maybe I've just got the whole thing wrong in the first place. Maybe there's a physics bod on the forum that can give an answer. It's not particularly relevant to the image but it might be interesting to know.

Really nice. I was instantly reminded of a painting by Jason Edmiston: http://jasonedmiston.com/portfolio/paintings/teeth/ Different styles but a similar weirdness. Great stuff.

Thanks MattP. I used to do the quiz, where you had to keep going back to the start if you got any answer wrong. (Although you could cheat by seeing which button gave you a different page number from the rest and that was the one with the correct answer!) You don't have to stop watching CEEFAX. Have a look here: http://www.pagesfromceefax.net/ Up-to-date information, but shown in a more relaxed and civilised manner.

This might come in useful: http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/html.php?file=bbcolorcharts.html

Here's a silly bit of nostalgia for those in the UK of a certain "vintage". (All done in AD.) I think I've managed to get the screen reflection and graininess of an old TV about right but it's just a bit of fun. Time to get a cold can of Quatro out of the fridge and sit back to watch The Gaffer on TV.

Lovely work. I wish I could draw like that.

Nice. I prefer the first pair. The colour of the houses looks spot-on to me but I think his face still looks a bit grey. Good stuff though.

Very nice. So many different elements and effects. Great stuff.

Really nice work. So much detail.