Be a Supporter!

Coagulated Whirl Pool

Report Abuse View Full Size
Coagulated Whirl Pool

Credits & Info

Views
4,514

Date
01/07/2012
File Info
1680 x 1050 px
JPG
767.3 kb

Share this submission?


Related Stuff

Licensing Terms

You are free to copy, distribute and transmit this work under the following conditions:

Attribution:
You must give credit to the artist.
Noncommercial:
You may not use this work for commercial purposes unless you make specific arrangements with the artist.
Share Alike:
If you alter, transform, or build upon this image, you may distribute the resulting creation only under a license identical to this one.

Author Comments

My latest piece of art. Made it using some tricks with gimp so it didn't take me a huge amount of time. Thought I'd see what you guys think. THIS IMAGE IS BIG SO MAKE SURE YOU CLICK ON IT TO GET THE FULL EFFECT.
***Constructive criticism is appreciated***
*UPDATE*- IF YOUR GOING TO GIVE ME A SCORE AS LOW AS A ONE THE LEAST YOU CAN DO IS TELL ME WHY.

Reviews


HipnikDragomirHipnikDragomir

Rated 2 / 5 stars

Here's why

I get that it's made digitally and is probably a wonder to make through that, it just looks like a bunch of mud swashed around. That and it's really simple. It does look nice when viewed in actual size, but that's it. It doesn't really seem "artistic". Plus, almost all Newgrounds users want instant appeal, not something that you have to appreciate.


penguin100 responds:

Art is a matter of perspective. I mean if a bunch of blurry blocks or splattered paint can be considered fine art and people will spend bags of money to get their hands on it just because a particular artist made it then why would you consider this not to be artistic. Simplicity can be a fantastic tool when making art and should not be underestimated. I understand that most newgrounds users want instant appeal, but looking at it at first glance without really "looking" at it then just tossing a one or less at it isn't really fair unless they can at least justify the fact.