HOME | DD
HIMEROSY — Toa Hahli Inika
by-nc
#himerosy #bionicle #hahli #toa #water #inika
Published: 2012-04-13 12:26:19 +0000 UTC; Views: 6808; Favourites: 61; Downloads: 85
Redirect to original
Description
Bah didn't come out anywhere near as good as I'd hoped :/As this was pencil, I enhanced the image so the lines can be more clearly seen and defined. Also, the colours were a bit dull, so I enhanced those too.
Related content
Comments: 34
Very nicely drawn. My only gripe personally would be that I think her legs might be a little too long. Otherwise, a very well drawn and detailed piece of art.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Meh, it's just a drawing style, but we all have our tastes. Thanks for the comment though
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No problem at all! It's understandable that everyone has different outlooks on art. Keep up the good work.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not especially, it's just perspective. Trust me I used a photo reference. The model's feet weren't insanely small, it was mainly perspective.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Sooo... its a fun house mirror image-?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Haha ok, ok I may have messed up a little XD But thanks for the advice
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
While I agree that this picture's awesome, I can't help but point out her feet as well.
What perspective were you using? Right now I'm looking at this and it's a up full body shot. If her feet were to look smaller, you would have to have a high angle shot.
Keep in mind that she's wearing armour over biomechanical bone and muscle tissue. Her feet need to be just a tad larger, otherwise you'd be drawing the thing you're trying to avoid.
Don't get me wrong though, I love this pic and your artwork is fantastic. I'm sure you'll get the hang of it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hmm I hadn't thought of her wearing armour on her feet. I always considered the feet to be some kind of one toed thing that looked like a shoe XD...Also about the perspective it's that it was facing the viewer, so the length of the foot cannot be appreciated. Trust me it really looked like that.
But, if it makes you happy, I will make the feet a little larger in future XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
man, it makes sense if toa have the same amount of toes as their fingers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Not quite. I can see what you're getting at, but not at that angle.
Haha, you don't have to go through the trouble. Just keep the thought in mind when doing future works. Don't do it for my sake. It is benefiting you after all.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I guess...some of them are a bit...explicit though. Often glamour models, sometimes beyond that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Still a lot of poses are stocks from deviantart. You better put some credits before stock creators or other people start to accuse you in tracing or violating stock rules. Because from looking at your gallery I can tell almost none of the pictures are made without some reference or even tracing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Also, I'm curious to know which of my DA submissions you think used a reference?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I had a look at my gallery, did a little maths, and found that less than 40% of my submissions used ANY kind of reference. This is not even counting my whole gallery, only ones that feature some substantial figure that I deem "reference-able". Had I counted my entire gallery that number would have been substantially lower.
Even in my scrapbook, which has over 60 "reference-able" posts, only 1 used a image reference, which I have already credited.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
What are stocks? And I'm sure the photos aren't from DA. I done't trace, only spend ages drawing from observation. I can understand people getting annoyed if it was a trace, or a very distinctive reference, but some poses can't exactly be copyrighted, so what's the problem? Also I don't copy their photos and claim it as my own, the only thing in common would be a pose. I have only traced with these to submissions:
- [link]
- [link]
And I linked my source with both. I only traced it because I wanted to use it again for other characters, but I realised it was tracing so I showed my source.
What do you suggest I do? :/
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I could've prove that some stocks are from dA, but the stock-artist deactivated account, his name was katanaz-stock. [link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's not proof at all. Also that was not my reference for "Hahli Inika". There are a fair amount of differences.
That pose, hands on hips is not something I would say one can copyright, there must be millions of photos like that. Hell, I could take a photo of someone in that pose, use it as reference and is would have looked like that Hahli. As I did not trace the outline for Hahli Inika, or take the reference photo myself and call it my own, I don't see what the problem is.
If you want me to do something, please tell me so directly.
Also what is meant by "Stock" in DA?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You have no proof that's not the stock you used, so we are even here.
Just say in comments that you use references and give a direct link.
There is FAQ that describes every term on dA, so go check it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Yes, it would appear we are even, but I believe it is "innocent until proven guilty" and not the other way around.
Also, I had a quick look at the rules sections, and couldn't find the part where drawing a photograph was wrong. I read the copyright infringement, which would apply if I had taken the photograph, posted it and called it my own. It would also apply if I had subtly changed it. I have not taken any image. I have not called it my own. I have not made direct modifications to the image. I have not even tried to imitate the entire image. All I do is observationally draw a human figure. Maybe, if the model's pose was EXTREMELY distinctive, it would be wrong. But you cannot copyright a pose either. If a woman stands, hands on her hips, facing an observer, claiming she thought of that pose is she violating copyright of a photograph that looks like that? Of course not. If a kid draws his favourite superhero, and changes the colour of the costume, is that wrong?
Besides, you can draw a person in just about an pose you can humanly think of, I guarantee you would find tons of photos of people in that same pose, as is the case with this submission.
I look at your gallery, pick out "GLaDOS Android Form" for example. If I accuse you of copying that pose from another image, you may deny it. If I then find an image with that pose, it does not mean anything. Even if I say "I can tell you traced it" that does not mean I am right. I do not think you traced her, I think you are a skilled artist.
Finally, I do not see an obligation to credit my reference. If there is a rule for that, please tell me, I have not seen it. But know that there must be hundreds of honourable people who do the same. If you just honestly want the reference for artistic purposes, then according to DA rules, linking some of these sources would not be appropriate. If you still want it, I assure you it is very easy to find pictures on the internet.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
tl;dr You missing the point of Referencing from Photos.
I'm not gonna deny anything because I used reference for that image.
You need to do it, because there is a lot of people that can accuse you in any art-sins. I'm not that kind of person, so I decided to warn you about it.
If someone uses a reference, they notify their watchers about it, give the credit to photographer or direct link to reference.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Too long to read? Well then I'll summarise/paraphrase my last post:
""Innocent until proven guilty"". There aren't any official rules against it, so there is no official problem. Also if you draw a person in any pose, there will nearly always be loads of photos that will coincidentally look like your drawing."
So are you saying that it is wrong, though there are no rules against it? If so, why didn't you credit you're GlaDOS picture? I don't credit mine because I don't have to (Although I have done with a couple), and because linking some of my references would be against DA rules of linking inappropriate websites.
I'm grateful for your warning, I really am, but I don't see how there can be any threat under DA rules. If there IS a DA rule against this, please tell me, 'cause I can't find it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Instead of arguing why you don't just put the URL of your reference? I think that any of question would be withdrawn.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I do not think it is a good idea to link some of my references. Some would violate DA rules of linking "inappropriate" websites, due to a kid being able to stumble upon a comment section with a link to a "gory/sexual/otherwise inappropriate" website.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not gory and sexual at the same time BTW, I realise that sounded worse than it is XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
She looks awesome! I love it- you managed to get her Inika look whilst not making her look ugly, like the original mask.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hahaha yeah. They didn't really do her justice with those horrible masks...... I mean, the only quite decent one (for hahli/gali/nokama, they're all the same to me 
Aaaaanyway, as I was saying you really do make her look good
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, I don't think Gali Mata's mask was too bad though, it looked like a mask not a freaky face. Thanks!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hmmm... Indeed it did look like a mask, but then that kinda makes her look less feminine. All the male bionicle had guy-looking faces.... but so did the ladies :/
👍: 0 ⏩: 0