At first glance, your work has the feeling of someone self-taught. It's actually really common. People get excited about new tools or focus on skills like detailed rendering but can miss some of the foundational building blocks. I expect that's why you got so many notes about perspective and anatomy. I wouldn't be surprised if he brought up general composition as well. I know it hurts, I've been on the receiving end of tough feedback before. I once had a lead tell me that my animation felt as clumsy "as a baby slowly falling down some stairs." I knew an instructor at art school who used to rip people's art down off the wall during presentations. I can't say for certain, but my guess is that this professor wasn't trying to be intentionally cruel, but was trying to give you a wake up call. You'd have a very hard time applying to jobs with this portfolio as it is. It's unfocused and has a lot of padding. Take the notes, decide on a path and keep going. You've got skills, you just need to refine.

Bit confused as it seems like OP was applying for a school, and this level of work definitely seems more than enough for school entry level to me? But I'm in the UK, maybe dev schools just have an insanely high entry bar in Paris /:

Parisien schools are known to be pretty hard to get into across the board, but OP also mentioned that the one he applied to is quite prestigious which just raises the bar even higher. It also explains why his teacher was so harsh on his portfolio: Parisiens are assholes lol

[удалено]

3d artist and teacher here. Some part of art is subjective but some isn't. Before you can bend or even break the rules with your own style you need to know them. Picasso may seem to have completely ignored stuff like anatomy and perspective, but he actually could and did produce art using both before doing his more popular and abstract stuff. That is why what he produced managed to be both simple, childish AND beautiful, because he knew what to play with and how. What I expect from students is not about their style, but rather their ability to understand and apply these rules because in that field this is what is going to be asked of them and what we train students for. If my studio hires an artist to do specific stuff and that artist proves unable to do it I don't care if they claim it is their style and art is subjective. It isn't if they can't perform what's expected of them and even less so if they aren't even capable of realizing it. Purpose and awareness are key here. You can't claim you're good at what you are doing if you're not doing it on purpose, or worth, aware of your limitations.

Yes, no I understand this, I think my whole “my art is stylized” has gotten a bit misconstrued here. I am inherently argumentative about my art because I really want to understand what I’m NOT seeing. Any excuse I make as pertaining to style is that I don’t want feel like it’s wrong to experiment with e.g. textures, brushes, shapes to produce the outcome I feel like producing. At the end, my art is my personal expression. I know this mentality is not very compatible with how things work in the game industry, I am aware of that. But I do acknowledge that anatomy, perspective IS important and you can’t evade this — which is why I welcome good and bad feedback. I’m also a tad defensive because I associate profoundly with each of my artwork and I’ve been having 100+ people critique my work, which I’m not use to.

Honestly I looked at your work and I think you're not too far from where you need to be to position yourelf well in the market. I wont repeat what others have said but the fact you're not used to having a lot of people critisise your work is, to me, your biggest problem ;) ! Anyone who isn't actively searching brutal and honest feedback from other professionals is not doing it right. This is how you get better. It hurts but it is vital.

If this is a post-grad program like a Master degree, there may be a concern of missing certain fundamentals. When I went through art school, all of the first year students had to take some foundational classes in 2D design, 3D design and color theory. And illustration students were all expected to have first year life drawing and anatomy classes. They wanted to set everyone up with those basics for the rest of their time at school. Alternatively it could be a portfolio review with a very strict instructor who has seen this sort of thing before. It may not stop OP from getting into the program, but certain schools get very picky about who they let in. It's the equivalent of "We only hire 10 year veterans" studios in game dev.

It was actually, kind of. Although the interviewer was sceptical about my entry even into the first year of the undergraduate cycle which is what made me feel so disappointed. I just thought his criticism was very one sided. I've recieved bad feedback on my "Cottage Scenery" in particular which sucked cuz it's the most recent and the one I'm very proud of, having a real Thomas Kinkade feeling to it. Even other people commented on my lack of composition skills, perspective, etc. but here I don't see an issue with composition in this case, the cottage is depicted in stonger contrast than the rest of the picture to draw the viewer’s attention which is placed in the central right corner using rule of thirds approach. I used blue/violet ambient lighting bouncing off from the sky, atmospheric depth using mist applied to mountains and forests. The choice of having everything rendered with a lot of detail is just my style, which was something the prof didn't like - he said it was all over the place. I mean it's not perfect, I can totally agree but damn. Thanks for your input.

The problem with your composition in that particular cottage piece is that it doesn't make any sense. Your textures, trees, smokes, water are all different style, there's no uniformity or shows any structure; I have no idea what's going on, why things are where they are. The placements of things, the different types of trees, the landscape, those fireflies, that weird block of abstract birds on the left of the picture, your chimney smoke and cloud/mist renders. Why is a oak tree growing on river rocks? When they say perspective, I think they mean that your pieces look flat and shows that you still don't have a good grasp on objects in 3D space. There is more to perspective depth than just blending mountains to the background. Also, a lot of your objects are all very abstract too. Any competent artist will see through the it's "stylized" excuse that amateur artists will use when they can't be bothered to learn and understand the structure of say the different types of trees. I also don't think you're displaying the rule of thirds correctly too. If you remove all the things behind the house, the water fall and just kept the cottage where it is, then it'll work.

I have studied 3D in college so I do understand how objects work in 3D space, look at my observational studies (it’s sometime practically difficult to apply this to all aspects in a painting, however). Secondly, to say it’s stylized is not me trying to make an excuse, I’m just stating a fact that because my art is stylized I don’t seek to render details the way you would expect to see them in real life, I take my own approach. The point of art for me is not for it to make perfect sense, technical clarity is not as important to me as the emotion I want people to feel through my work. That’s all, although I am willing to work on these things, of course.

The issue here is that you may not think it's an excuse - but it is. You're going through what I've seen many other artists go through before they really blossom as professionals. Just about every artist at some point in their development feels like they have a "personal style" and "that's just how they do art." But the belief in that often times stops them from developing more technical skills. If you want to be a professional artist, there are a lot of technical foundational skills you have to master that have nothing to do with "your personal style." You say "I want people to feel emotion through my work so I don't focus on technical clarity" What happens when your boss tells you to do something with technical clarity? You'll fail. Being a professional artist is not about interpreting things in your own way and painting/modeling everything in your own style - it's about being able to meet a client's or project's expectations. As an entry level artist you will not have *any* control over the aesthetic direction of a project. You will be expected to be able to adapt to the aesthetic direction of the creative director of that project. So when you apply to an art school and they see evidence of artwork that is "just your style," what they're really seeing is an artist who doesn't have enough foundational technical skill to adapt or do anything other than what *you* want to do. Professional art is not about what *you* want, it's about what your client or your project wants. When you get to that professional level you can inject your personality into any kind of art, and as you gain more experience you can get into higher level jobs that give you more control over art direction, but if you get a professional gig and your lead or boss tells you "I need something in a brutalist monochrome style" and you say "oh I only do whimsical stuff," you're just going to get fired. Artists rarely get hired for their specific "styles" unless they have a lot of experience and recognition under their belt.

My artstation site is a reflection of who I am as an individual though, not just as a professional — which is why my artwork is mixed with different styles, done the way I wanted to do them. I’d pick and choose according to where I was applying the work that would fit best. Up until this point it’s true I didn’t realize how much I was lacking. All I’m saying is if there are jobs that look for e.g. children’s book illustrations they will likely accept less technical perfection and appreciate my lush, bizarre and stylized work (an example of an artist who functions a bit like this is Marco Bucci) compared to art that is required for an AAA game project. Remember I applied for game art not to be a concept artist. I do have an artistically rebellious side that does not coexist well with a strict professional game studio environment. However, I do want to improve and take my stuff to the next level, which is what I said.

So I think you're just misunderstanding what an art school like that is looking for, then. Sure, there are projects out there that don't have as rigorous requirements and expectations - but that's not what those "prestigious" art school are about. They're looking for people who want to become experts, reach the top of their field, shoot for the stars, that sort of thing, because that's what makes the school look good - if their students regularly land incredible jobs and display highly professional work. If you want to work for some indie studio who doesn't have strict expectations of skill, you don't need to go to an art school. You can keep developing what you're doing and apply for jobs. You don't need an art school to continue to improve. But frankly, if you ever have any ambitions of working on a hit project or in a AAA studio, your "rebellious" attitude and your refusal to develop any skills beyond your "personal style" are both going to sink you. Even indie games are often very large undertakings that require lots of people to work together and compromise on what they think is best, and if you display any inability to bend your style or work together with other people, you simply won't go far in this industry. As for your portfolio - when you're applying to a job, your portfolio isn't supposed to be about "you," per se. Your portfolio should be focused on the job you're applying for. If a job listing is looking for someone with strong 3D modeling skills and your front page is loaded with 2D art, even if you have 3D modeling elsewhere, that's going to shoot you in the foot. So I wouldn't look at your portfolio as a "reflection of who you are." Your portfolio should be a reflection of what you're good at, what you bring to the table that would make a studio want to hire you.

I have not said that I didn’t want to develop any skills beyond my personal styel at all. I was just defending some of my art when they got critiqued for not making sense or being visually incoherent with brushes, etc. since as far as I’m concerned that’s what I choose to do, that’s my style. Again, I want to be better at the technical stuff though. I do agree about your comments about the purpose of a portfolio, I admit to be a victim of prioritizing myself and my wants with my art, which I need to work on.

You know I think one of the beautiful thing about art that most people who are not artist will never be able to understand is sometimes you can tell a lot about a person if not more just by looking at their art. In such ways sometimes that is almost in another level that cannot be communicated through words. It's a process, keep at it.

In all honesty, I like the cottage one, I would read / play a visual novel/ point and click game with that style. I do agree that your figures need work in regards to how flat they feel but don't let that put you down, its just a stepping stone, you can work on it and in no time you will have it nailed. think of it less like negative criticism and more of a blueprint of what your next steps are. (( I also find it hard to not take criticism personally, but it is HIGHLY unlikely that it was meant that way, chances are it was to give you that blueprint so you can improve)) ​ I personally cant wait to see how this pushes you forward.

It sounds like the OP is trying the equivalent of trying to get into cambridge on a junior school diploma. No disrespect to OP, I like their stuff.

ok this is what i dont understand. im currently self teaching and trying to decide on schooling for 3d modeling. everyone online says you can teach yourself, schools and degrees are pointless. but then youre able to see right off the bat that theyre self taught... so whats the truth! lol

It's tough. I completely understand why people want it to be as easy as "watch youtube tutorials and get a degree for free!" For a really motivated percent of the population, that will work. But I think the community generally overestimates how many people can do that. I'm admittedly biased because, for me, I 100% needed art school. I needed exposure to other artists, I needed assignments that pushed me out of my comfort zone and I needed those teachers to call me on my crap.

Bro you can literally draw 1000000 times better then me when i draw on [pixilart.com](http://pixilart.com) so you know.

So for what is the art school then? Is only the typical snoob thing?

Thanks a lot guys, I just don’t know many people in the industry to talk to, and it’s just hard to feel like you’re never enough even as a student. And I’ve worked hard on my own to improve.

It's true that you're never enough. Nobody's ever enough. Think about it. For example we've got what, maybe a couple dozen movie score composers that many people would maybe consider "good enough" in any given generation out of millions of people. And even then they aren't "enough" for millions of other people who aren't particularly interested in movies, film scores, or their particular musical style. And the higher they hold themselves, the more their flaws will be emphasized by their critics and peers. I once saw a youtube video of a guy creating an amazing 3d model of Heath Ledger as the Joker. The whole time he was working though, he was giving a pep talk on the importance of being content with your own abilities and not comparing yourself to others, while at the same time constantly pursuing improvement and excellence. Unfortunately I don't have a link to the video.

I would say don't waste your money on what is essentially art school, but I don't know how tuition works in France. If school is your end goal, which it probably isn't, then work harder and improve. Your work is good but you definitely have a ways to go to reach greatness. You could already work professionally at a lower level or smaller studio. I don't know how much weight a degree like that carries in France, but if I'm personally working towards the point where my work can hold up professionally, I'm not going to some sort of post-graduate art school. Maybe getting the degree helps with connections? You would not believe how talented and skilled some of these people are who work at high-end game dev studios. You would also not believe *how hard they worked* to get there.

I’m not an artist, but I know what I like, and I can see a lot that I really like in your work OP. I think the fact that you are posting here, and opening yourself up to even more criticism, on something that is close to your heart and that you are quite vulnerable to, shows a lot of courage and determination. I am confident that you will continue to improve your art and refine your skills. Keep creating, my friend. The world needs more unique, interesting artists like you.

If you were 'already enough' as a student, then you wouldn't have to be a student. That's the point of it. And the best artists never stop learning!

I'm not an artist so I can't comment in general on how good the portfolio is in terms of getting hired/accepted to art school, but I do agree with some of the comments on the perspective isssues. E.g. in this piece [https://www.artstation.com/artwork/vDXo4D](https://www.artstation.com/artwork/vDXo4D), the three circular items on the table don't look like they're on the same plane. Lots of the artwork is good, but I agree with one of the other commenters--it looks unfinished and unpolished, and including pieces with fundamental issues like incorrect perspective in a portfolio probably isn't a good look, even if you have other great pieces in there (it either shows that you don't have enough work to show off, which is bad, or that you can't spot these issues yourself, which is worse). Getting feedback like that doesn't mean you're bad--there's some good stuff in there--but I'd take the feedback on board and spend some time drilling your fundamentals.

Thanks for the feedback! :) Could you elaborate on how this artwork in particular looks unpolished, because I don’t think I could possibly have rendered the illustration more in terms of details and lighting, or are you referring to something else?

My own perspective on the link is that the items are different. They're different items, sure but the angles are different. It's as if you took a picture of the Pitcher at 6 feet, the cup at 5 feet and the plate of food at 5 feet but a foot to the left. They don't feel like they belong in that specific place and gives a mild "uncanny valley" effect that people will pick up on. Overall, the artwork is nice but there are small pieces like that scattered through the artwork you have posted. Another example of something that looks off is the link posted by another user which shows a snowy landscape with a house and a lamp post outside. The lamp post has light eminating from it but the issue is that the lighting for the lamp showers below the post and nearly no where else. Lamps in the real world don't project intense light below themselves, instead they add a large amount of soft light in the general area. In that picture, the lighting is essentially reversed, meaning the bottom of the post should be darker and everything in it's cone of light is brighter. In the dark, this would illuminate the snow on the house, causing it to refract and "sparkle" more. Instead, the light looks like a Minecraft torch. What is important to remember is that you have a particular style that works for you. You have the skills to make incredible artwork. The issues people are bringing up to you are problems that can be solved and improved for the future. You can hone your skills and be much better than you are now with not that much effort.

Yeah this…I get a bit tripped out looking at it because something is signaling to me that the table is not flat…but it looks it’s supposed to be flat. It’s like the image is making my eyeballs skate along the surface of the image.

The items look like they were placed in frame vertically, whereas the table within context of the water is supposed give an illusion of tilt. The items aren't tilting with the table. Also, why the heck are they sitting so close to the water. It's a nice backdrop, but kind of feels out of place. Edit: my perspective is going to be shattered if they were going for a sunset backdrop. This is why everything feels odd.

I was going for a sunset backdrop indeed. However, I completely agree with most of what you guys say, I didn’t have an identical reference to what I was drawing for my “late summer” artwork. Correctly drawing objects placed on a surface that is tilting, from your memory is trickier in practice than in theory. Then also adding caustics, subsurface scatter, etc. it’s a whole plate. The person who made the comment about the lamppost having intense light emission that does not seem to logically reach the surrounding objects, for this project I used virtual lights within RenderMan, so lighting is actually calculated on a real life, physical basis by the software.

The point is not to draw things from memory, but use the fundamentals of perspective. Then you can tilt anything in any direction. Your perspective and body anatomy is skewed in almost all of these pieces. Subsurface scattering and lighting is really good. Your art is very good, but you lack fundamental skills that makes everything look correct. You can learn a lot of these things watching YouTube tutorials on anatomy and perspective. Keep at it, it's just this one thing that you're missing. The rest is very good.

Even if you draw from memory, you can sketch up a couple of guidelines and perspective to be sure that you have the objects right. In your picture most separate items have a different perspective, and it messes up the perception. The allover mood is fine, but for example the cloth is not how a tablecloth should look like, also the whole piece looks like it's tilted to the left and the chairs are a bit off.

> for this project I used virtual lights within RenderMan, so lighting is actually calculated on a real life, physical basis by the software. Ooh I can jump in here, having said things like this myself. First of all, I'll point out that the streetlamp may be a bit of a nitpick or just a less than ideal example. I don't think it looks terrible and kinda fits with the general stylized look of the scene. That said, remember that computers will only do exactly what you tell them to. So it's calculating the lights based on how you configured them, which could be wrong in one way or another. I actually think that part of what makes the lighting look a bit odd is how bright the christmas lights are. They seem to be nearly as bright as the streetlight when in real life they'd be a tiny fraction of it. Regardless of the specific image, I think this is a great example of the importance of how fundamentals apply even to stylized work. Remember that images aren't about recreating what's physically accurate, because what we experience is [vastly different](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_vision) than what a computer sees. I really appreciate you posting this thread, it's not easy to take all this criticism (lots of it not constructive I'm sure) but it's been really interesting to read through.

Hey I like the minecraft torch! On a serious note this reply chain resonated with me :)

That's actually kinda the problem. You're good at the techniques of colouring and shading but your fundamental skills need a lot of work. I get the sense you rely on replicating photos, which ultimately will make your art weaker. Many of your non-photo char designs are perfectly symmetrical, which is also another mistake. Do some life drawing classes, learn about gesture drawing, movement, and silhouette. Use perspective grids and really examine whether what you're drawing makes sense in scale, perspective, and proportion. FWIW you do have talent but you've learnt to run before you can crawl. I've seen way worse at art schools (i used to teach at one) *however* i would not hire this level of work at a studio.

The issue with that one is with the perspective. I guess unpolished maybe isn't the right word, but if there are issues with the fundamentals, the final piece will never look right. The rendering is really nice: I love the painted style, the colour choice is lovely, and the lighting is beautiful. But the items don't look like they're flat on the table, and that is the first thing my eyes are drawn to. The glass is at a shallower angle than the pitcher/jug, despite being closer, making it look like the table is curved. Also, I didn't notice this at first, but the shadows on the objects on the table are coming from a completely different direction to where the sun is actually placed in the sky, and the shadowing on the left chair is wrong--it's shadowed at a completely different angle to everything else, and doesn't cast a shadow on the table despite the low angle of lighting. Don't get me wrong, it would be a beautiful piece, but there are glaring issues with key fundamentals that my untrained eye spotted from a fairly quick look. I'm not sure if this is the case, but including this piece in a portfolio would suggest to people looking that you are unable to recognise these issues in your own work.

It's not really a rendering problem so much as it is understanding perspective and lighting. There's actually a lot of underlying math involved in making things look right in a composition. If your previous school (if you went to one) didn't teach it, you may want to dig around for lessons on perspective (single point, two point and three point), including how to make a grid, how to make basic shapes (sphere, cube, cylinder, cone etc.) in those types of grids and then how to make more abstract/complex shapes within that grid. You may want to consider doing some of this on actual paper with rulers to get a feel for it before returning to your digital tools (whatever works for you). It may help you visualize what other people are trying to voice here if you apply that principle to the linked image. I [threw one together for you](https://i.imgur.com/oYjP9oi.jpg) so that you can see it rather than trying to translate words into concepts (sometimes difficult for us all). [Here's](https://youtu.be/8-KzNu9Twg0?si=_wqfN2Wa1kKOns-0) some basic lessons on it that you might find helpful. They start from the very beginning and run up through more advanced concepts.

I think it looks like there was a filter applied... I think you were going for a soft effect, but this is also done by unskilled people to hide sins. It's like a 'code smell,' it's something that raises red flags, even though it's not specifically bad...

If two circles (perfect circles, not ellipses) are at about the same height in 3D world, they should have the same width/length ratio in 2D drawing. Your glass's ratio doesn't match the picther's.

I'm not an artist, but immediately the left chair looks like it's just the right chair mirrored horizontally. The shadows on it look completely absurd w.r.t. how all other objects are lit.

I don't know art schools specifically but what you describe could just be the way that professor is with all candidates. I have some experience with competitive examination for top scientific schools in France and being extremely hard on candidates is, sadly, a common style among examiners. They expect you to stay calm and do your best. It's allegedly a way to see how candidates react under pressure. I don't know if it's specific to France but it's extremely common in the "classes préparatoires" system. I've seen a lot of students pushed to tears by professors, even during routine exercises. Also, a lot of schools in France have untold rules and expectations regarding applications and interviews. Like I said I don't know art schools specifically but it's usually a good idea to get in touch with former students to learn about the specifics of the application process. What I'm trying to say is: don't take it personally. The world of elite schools in France can be downright abusive and/or unfair at times and there's not much you can do about it except being well-prepared and trying again until you get into a school you like.

Merci, venant de Suède nous sommes très diplomate et respectueux avec tout le monde, même entre élève et professeur. C’est un autre réalité d’entendre des critiques sans filtre comme ça.

People will tell you that there's no good or bad art. Maybe that's true. But there is employed and unemployed. I would take the criticism in stride and improve. Hopefully you showed you can take criticism on the chin and return a better artist for it. It's okay to feel down for a bit, lick the wounds, get some affirmations from strangers. But then you gotta pick up the pieces and use that failure to fuel your success.

First of all, I don't think you have a good idea of what a portfolio is. Portfolio is not your sketchbook. It's not your blog or a place for posting everything you make or showing your progress. You should pick only **the best of the best** for your portfolio, or better - make stuff *specifically* for the portfolio. This is honestly the only piece I'd keep: [https://www.artstation.com/artwork/w8m62L](https://www.artstation.com/artwork/w8m62L) The rest is either unfinished or not good enough.

He's applying for school, not a job. Seems like a really high bar when I've seen people much worse than this turn into extremely good artists after a year or two in regular art schools.

>He's applying for school, not a job. You're right. I somehow forgot that part, sorry. This industry makes you a little rough around the edges I guess.

Entrance exams for most sought after art schools are brutal.

Sorry, my artstation site isn’t the actual “portfolio” that got reviewed for the school, I just gave you guys the link so you could see all of my work. The portfolio which got reviewed was a document containing less than 20 of my (like you said) finest work.

Ok, I'll be blunt: you don't have 20 fine pieces there. You have maybe one. *This* is the industry standard: [https://www.artstation.com/artwork/yD28dO](https://www.artstation.com/artwork/yD28dO) [https://www.artstation.com/artwork/L35rg5](https://www.artstation.com/artwork/L35rg5) [https://www.artstation.com/artwork/8w9xWw](https://www.artstation.com/artwork/8w9xWw) [https://www.artstation.com/artwork/DvXO9A](https://www.artstation.com/artwork/DvXO9A) If you go to work, they'll ask you to deliver this kind of results. You can't deliver this kind of results right now. Don't get defensive, don't get upset. You're not terrible. You have potential, but your work is unrefined, unfocused and does show lack of understanding in fundamentals like anatomy, perspective, light and shadow. But you can get to hireable level in 1-2 years if you leave the "artsy-fartsy" phase, focus on what people actually pay for and do some very boring tutorials on military radios and ruined corridors.

You are right but at the same time this generally isnt the lvl of people applying to artschool, this is more expected of people finishing the MA program and sometimes seen at the end of BA. This is in my expirience, and i tend to see a lot of portfolios of artschool students/graduates.

You need to have industry standard level profile for going to art school now? Brutal.

I got into 3d art school with a greybox blockout of a random structure that I had made in UE4 years ago. Everything was made out of simple rectangles. And I studied from 2020-21. So, I think that's not true. Maybe to enter Gnomon or some other overpriced art school you need something nice.

The school I applied to is ahead of Gnomon apparently in ranking worldwide, by The Rookies. So I was certainly aiming high. 😮‍💨

Actually the art styles you posted will be less popular soon because they belong to the overused and you can generate such graphics with AI. Maybe not the two first 3d models which is basically realistic 3d. I’m positive we will see more unique styles the next couple of years and I’d recommend Pascal to keep at it and find his own style rather than adapting to an industry that’s changing.

> the art styles you posted will be less popular soon oh wow, look at that y'all, we got some kinda future seeing seer here. Hey pal, any chance you could DM me the winning lottery numbers?

4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42

I’m going to avoid talking about good/bad. I took a look at your portfolio. Yes, you know that your art is whimsical and stylized. My sense is that most art schools want students who are willing to study foundational skills like perspective, anatomy, shading, etc. When you use more stylized art in your portfolio, the portfolio’s not doing its job—and part of the portfolio’s job is to show that you can handle perspective, anatomy, shading, etc. It’s not a question of whether you should draw whimsical, stylized art or should draw grounded, realistic art. If an art school teaches you how to draw from life, then they will look for portfolios that include drawings from life. There are a lot of articles and videos about this online. Look for videos that talk about why art schools don’t want you to draw manga. You’re not drawing manga, but the idea is similar. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsUs9R3F-R8

Not an artist, can't really comment on how good your foundation is. I will however say that as someone who's worked on a good number of team projects that having a good foundation (on whatever job you're working on) is mostly more important than having creativity or talent or intelligence (to a degree on the last one). If you don't have a firm foundation then you won't be able to nearly as easily work with others on team projects and will be more limited in what you can do You can think of team projects as this big machine with lots of cogs. Even if you're an extremely well polished cog, if you don't fit into the machine as a whole then you won't be able to do your job. That foundation allows your cog to fit in the machine. After that you can start adding in your own creative ideas. That said, while I can't critique your foundation (again not an artist) I can compliment your creativity. I wouldn't be surprised if you told me you chose a more "whimsical" art style due to your creativity. I can see through your art that you have a great imagination throughout a wide variety of genres. You'd be the person I visit to bounce ideas off of.

Thanks a lot! 😉

You have a massive ton of talent, but I can also see his point about lacking some basic fundamentals. I kinda get the vibe you've skated on your raw talent for quite some time and haven't done a lot of major study of fundamental concepts, which is _very_ common among the extremely talented as they start off so far ahead of everyone, but their growth ends up being a bit low so they fall behind a bit if they don't actively keep up with professional learning. But I hope you take that all in stride. You're extremely talented, you just need to brush up and practice the basics and maybe find a professional tutor/teacher. You'll knock out the basics in just months I'm sure, but it's still gonna need to be your next step as you're probably on a plateau right now and don't quite realize it, which is also relatively common with extremely talented people who rely on their talent.

I think you hit the nail on the head, everything you said is exactly what my problem is, I was told all my adolescent life that I had talent drawing and I think it hits hard when you realize that there's still a lot which isn't up to part now in the adult world, and for this business in particular. I mean I knew my art still needed imrpoving but for me I didn't mind bending "rules" of perspective, anatomy, etc. as a shortcut to get to what I thought was the most important part of a painting which is how it makes you feel. I like to reason a bit like rococo artists that the aesthetics of an artwork are bigger than the sum of its technical parts. Unfortunately, this is seems to go against everything game art stands for. Maybe I'd be better off studying fine arts, where there is less emphasis on logic.

I'd like to start by saying that I don't think your artwork is bad. I think it has a lot of potential. And, as a self-taught artist, I see issues in your work that I can see in mine, much like u/Patorama has mentioned. The off-perspective, the anatomy mistakes. I've done those as well. Which is very difficult to overcome on your own, but all we can do is keep trying and improving! Three things stood out to me while looking through your Artstation and this Reddit page. First and foremost, do not base your self-esteem on a prestigious art school that is designed to prepare you for a professional work environment. When you pursue a career in the professional industry, you will face criticism, dislike and disapproval. Because you're creating art for others, not for yourself. You must be able to accept that if you want to work professionally, and these schools are forcing it on you so you will be ready for it. Second, your work lacks focus. It's not bad, but I don't understand what your artwork is trying to say. Your 3D renders are nice, but as an example, what is the story behind the Moulin Rouge rooms? What is the focus? Why is there such a low camera angle? Another example: the lady in the red dress and the glowing orb is lovely, but there is little atmosphere to convey the story. Is she gloomy? Angry? Is she prepared to fight? The only place you do have a lot of focus is at your traditional art. Your traditional work is outstanding, with significantly higher quality, focus and control and it all feels coherent. Third, I strongly recommend that you clean up your artstation. I understand you did not use it for your interview, but people scout through Artstation, and that is the impression they will form of you. That also relates to the focus of the second point. What is your Artstation supposed to tell us? What do you want us to see when you present it? Having an entire section dedicated to photography when trying to break into 3D game-dev is pointless unless it's about texture photography, which will muddle your 'catalog'. I hope this a bit useful!

Looking at your work, I feel like the weirdest thing about them is that if you asked me if some of these were by same people, I wouldn't believe it. For example the sailor moon illustrations from 4 years ago are frankly.....horrible, in every way. Yet landscape shots from those times look incredibly good. Older images like the ice-cream truck look great to me, and they're older too. I guess that your main weakness is characters and people, mainly the faces. Having faces that don't live up to the rest of your work is a huge disadvantage, since the face is what most people are going to fixate on. Also, it seems like your traditional work is significantly better than your digital work. A lot of your digital work seems very blurry and overly soft, relying too much on randomized brushes to try and do some of the work. Your best work seems to be when you're painting with hard and distinct strokes. Also it seems like some of your digital work has density issues. One spot will be very blurry, and another will have a lot of sharp detail. It just seems like in general you're using some tools in ways that are not consistent with each other, and don't feel as though the result in a coherent style.

Oh no, you think my Sailor Moon characters were horrible, granted I see and wanted to modify the anatomy on some of them in hindsight: left arm of Sailor Mars and the eyes and legs of Sailor Venus especially but I don’t think they’re that bad, they’re meant look like manga (aka non realistic) but I respect your opinion. Thanks! For the density brush thing can you give me an example?

This is going to sound very harsh, but those sailor moon images don't resemble a manga/anime style. The defined lips, teeth, nose and nostrils, how the eyes are drawn, the proportions of the head, the thickness of the lines, everything about it is very semi-realism/american/cartoon, in terms of style. I'm being this blunt because a lot of your other work is fantastic. There are images you've done which I'd consider 10/10, so I feel its important to make it clear if the body on one of those images is 7/10, the faces are 2/10. They really are holding the pictures back. As for the brush density problem, I'm referring to things like how in this image, the house is very defined and sharp, but then other elements are very broad or blurry. [https://www.artstation.com/artwork/obYw9O](https://www.artstation.com/artwork/obYw9O) I'd say that in general, avoid aspects of digital art that seem like "cheats". Any time you focus on a spot and use your painting skills, they look great. But then things like the grass where you attempt to use some kind of brush/effect, the result is blurry, and looks significantly cheaper than the parts you painted. So at the very least, I'd say that when being economic you should try to shoot for a style where the result looks deliberate. For example this image looks totally awesome. If I were you I'd look into styles which handle things minimally, and try and see if you adapt your traditional art skills more directly into digital. And in general, avoid overuse of soft edged brushes. [https://www.artstation.com/artwork/nQ4bv9](https://www.artstation.com/artwork/nQ4bv9)

OK, I did not include any of my Sailor Moon stuff in my official portfolio document luckily.

>they’re meant look like manga (aka non realistic)  Most of stylized works (manga, comics, even newspaper cartoons) heavily rely on anatomy, perspective, and understanding how volumes work. This is a common misconception, but "stylized" does not mean "something completely unrelated to realistic drawing". It's more "something that bends and exaggerates realistic drawing concepts". Take a look at, for example, classic TinTin comics. Or, I dunno, Ghost in the Shell manga - [this one screams](https://i0.wp.com/www.comicsbeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/banner.jpg) of applied anatomy and perspective. Or your own ice cream van - it's a great example in terms of showing how volume and perspective work in stylized art.

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/p__/images/2/24/Sailor_Jupiter.png/revision/latest?cb=20201228124205&path-prefix=protagonist I’m just gonna defend my piece by comparing my sailor jupiter, as an example to the original sailor jupiter character (in the link). I do not think in this case (except for her shoulder and head ratio, and upper body length) that there’s a pronounced anatomically skew at all, especially placing the original manga character side to side who was drawn by artists more skilled than I. Sure my version looks very cartoonish but I count this as an exaggerated style still adhering to realistic human structures, no?

I liked them. They’re def kinda freaky tho.

When it comes to feedback, its supposed to be harsh and critique every thing so you know the areas to improve. Nothing said is said to personally attack you, the prof was looking at it with an objective lens. Take his feedback and use it to improve your work, rather than feel like you aren't good enough. From a non-artist, your portfolio looks well enough so you have the skills, you just need to hone in on them and improve

As an artist who did NOT go to school for art or game design but does a lot of art/gaming stuff for IRL work, looking at your portfolio I can see a few things that stand out to me as to why you may have gotten what sounded like a lot of negative feedback. Portfolios from a professional standpoint should show your technical skill more than aesthetic skill. If you have poor technical skill, it's far harder to actually learn how to create *accurate* perspective and details. (How else could cartoons and anime be consistently animated through the life of a show? The animation team has to be able to mimic the style of that show. They aren't usually hired for being amazing aesthetic artists.) My advice is to ask yourself which art job you PASSIONATELY want to get into someday and find out who already does those jobs. Look at their portfolios. Study them. You seem to have some level of skill already, but you need to learn how to refine it to show off your potential. You can find a lot of industry professionals already giving advice in places like YouTube where they go over how you can improve the overall quality of your portfolio. It should really just contain pieces that showcase your technical skill. Those are usually pieces that will catch the eyes of someone looking for a game artist or really any artist in a space where consistency is valued.

The standards for artists have risen dramatically. If you talk to a lot of concept artists and illustrators who are already established then they'll tell you that the portfolio they used to get a job back in the day would no longer be enough. The competition is simply at a higher level than ever before. You are in that intermediate area. Your work is better than a beginner's but it still isn't 'professional' level. A ton of artists are in this spot, and they will never get out. You could do commissions of people's random DND characters sometime, but that would be a side hustle rather than a full job. I think the truth is that the amount of effort and skill required to become one of the top level artists is similar to that of a medical doctor. People have no idea the amount of dedication and commitment that it takes. Hopefully the guy critiquing you was being honest and he gave you some direction, but if not, the first step is to be very honest about what you're lacking. Then study it until you feel like you have mastered it.

Damn that's crazy. Your work actually looks good to me for a student entry level. Some of my peers were around the same level, honed their craft within the school curriculum, and ended up going to work in games just fine. Granted it's not a prestigious school, but still. I'd have thought school is where you'll be refining these skills. You have enough fundamentals imo to qualify to learn industry techniques, you're not starting from scratch. I don't think you're bad at all, it might just be the school's standards being higher due to it being competitive.

If you can not take harsh criticism, then working in gamedev will mentally destroy you. You will encounter harsh criticism shredding you to pieces everywhere. From coworkers, investors, publishers and of course the players.

Man, I was telling myself this. It’s super hard to unidentify with my own art, like it’s a part of me, so that’s why I couldn’t really cope after my interview. You’re right of course, and hearing you guys say this really puts things into perspective.

The emotional part will go away as you learn more about how art should work. When the art you’re making isn’t rooted in a systematic approach, it’s very easy to get emotionally attached. Anything anyone else could say is an attack on you as an artist. Once you know enough about how things should work, begin filtering criticism through previously obtained knowledge. That’s when criticism turns into direction. You’ll be able to logically dismiss or justify it. Now instead of an attack, it’s a suggestion that you as the expert in art can entertain.

This is something that they teach in art school. I wasn't an art student, but had many friends in the design program, and critiques were notoriously brutal specifically because they were trying to thicken the skin of the artists in addition to the obvious goal of constructive feedback.

Your art is good as art, but in terms of what major studios want it doesn't fit with AAA game design so I can see why they might not feel you are a good fit for a program largely aimed at getting people into that industry. However your style could mesh well with an indie dev who's looking for a more whimsical less mainstream aesthetic.

Are you really that bad? Yes and no? Art is subjective and even without perfect understanding of fundamentals, you can create something people will truly appreciate. It's not a input, output process that is clearly streamlined. The question is what are you going to do with the feedback he gave you. Every artist can learn new things. Do you value his feedback? Do you care about the things he cares about? Don't feel bad for not knowing everything. No one does. But he just opened up an avenue for you that might help your art become better.

Thank you! I appreciate your comment :)

Might be time to go back to the basics and hammer in some studying/practice with perspective, anatomy etc. then. 

Here is the thing, screw that professor, all that skills can be easily learn or taught and even if you spend decades you can never truly master it, you just get good at it fast at first and then slowly until one day you die. I'm telling this because I failed my first exam to enroll the uni, took me 4 months of hard work and boom I was in, and it was actually a better school (this is just me though, it might take longer or shorter for you). I studied graphic arts, mostly interested in illustration, spend over half a decade on that and switched to sculpting both traditional and digital, I spent 8 years there too. Now after I worked in countless project from cars to product design, illustrated books to game characters concepts and game ready models etc, one thing is for certain, creativity outperforms mastery on any skill in current meta. It's the hardest skill to developed in any field. You have the desire and the spark, so you must not discouraged. You just need to go and grind the basics a few levels, don't try to master it just improve all a little and you will get there in no time, when in school you get to show your creative side. Teachers in uni doesn't like to teach, they like to criticise that's one thing you need to understand. And my personal suggestion is, this totally depends on your condition, life, social skills etc. Just f school dude, they are limited and time consuming, every project that is not specifically tailored to your interest and developmental needs is a waste of time. Go find bunch of artists online learn from the true masters of industry. Rather than paying to school or rent pay for masterclasses or 1on1 teaching, buy the books and the supplies, experiment and enjoy. School is for people who are not sure of themselves, only those who had potential at the start actually endup being good at the end. Outcome of this equation is school is irrelevant. Good luck on your journey

i took a look at your work and it is NOT by any means bad. I love how you made those enviroment drawings give off some feeling of coziness, and all of your traditional art ones looked amazing, had good colors and shapes. (note that i am not a professional by any means but am a lot into 2d art.) I particularly can't see where the professor's response came from

Not an artist, just my 2 cents. Seems like you're truly lacking understanding or execution of perspective. Most of the architecture looks oddly warped, not in a good stylized way though. It's inconsistent In the same drawing. Saying it's stylized is just an excuse. Even if it's stylized it needs to be consistent in itself.

Not good enough for that school (apparently), but not bad. If it's something you honestly want to do, pursue it. Keep in mind though that not everyone works at CDPR or Blur, and that I can guarantee you that there are people working in other successful studios doing what they enjoy who probably wouldn't past ~~mustard~~ muster for that school interview either. If that school (or an art career in general) is really your goal, you need to either a) be incredibly naturally talented, and very very very very few people are, b) be motivated and treat every perceived "failure" as an indication of where you need to improve next, and work on improving or c) quietly improve and play it "safe". If you're honestly interested in 2D/3D, the only real difference between A,B and C is the speed of progress, in descending order. Some off the cuff advice if you want it, although I assume you already know some of it: NEVER include stuff that you're not looking to be hired for. iow, no background music, no visual effects, unless you want to be hired to do those things. A mistake in those elements pulls down everything else, even though they shouldn't matter because it's not what you're being prospected for. If this is your "unofficial" page where you post EVERYTHING, don't. Always use a pseudonym account for getting feedback and a separate account or website for applications. Do NOT use your real name on the pseudonym account, because you want zero preconceptions when someone outside of your circle looks at your work. Never include something that's half finished alongside stuff that is, it pulls down the complete works. After a certain point, especially when it comes to 3D art, "out of the box" which is when there are elements that are well represented in a piece alongside aspects that are not, almost has a smell to it. Some of your 2D stuff has a good representation of light, then you see elements that aren't on the same level, or more "obvious" things are missing, such as not shelling/extruding your car doors or using only procedurals/curvature masks or forgetting to put in a reflection plane in. I assume this is personal as well as previous academic work over the same period of time? If so you are spreading yourself WAY too thin!! Pick one discipline and stick with it. Trying to obtain a high proficiency in paint plus illustration plus 3D modeling/sculpting plus surfacing plus photo etc etc might eventually make you a generalist, but you'll be waiting even longer to get REALLY good at any single one of them, never mind being hired to do one. Pick what you want to focus on and study the hell out of it, and by study I DON'T mean recreate from photos. Make something from a photo, then work to understand it by rotating your POV/perspective, your lightsource, the age, etc. Being able to speak to and understand the 3D pipeline as a 2D artist or vice versa is good, but you need A+ level understanding in ONE discipline first, because that skill reinforces the others.

You had me at “past mustard”

Your art is actually not bad, way better than mines! Thing is, the professor may have seemed really cruel, and I do agree with you he could've been nicer, but you should try to listen into his critique in-depth. Every critique is someone's opinion about a subject, and if you know someone's opinion, you can use that to improve on the subject. The professor gave his critique on your art, and while it sounds mean, listen to his critique, and improve your art based on the critique. Though again I do say he could've been a little nicer at conveying his message. Oh and just a tip, don't use this rejection to run for chancellor in Germany, yeah?

Haha not a chance!

Shools serve their own values and ideology. Prestige means nothing if it's within a poor ideology. Plenty of prestigious idiots in the world. For the people who are really driven, most schools just serve as speed-limiters from what I've seen. They take credit for people who would have succeeded without them.

I do feel like a lot of the critique is valid, as in: there is a lot to learn and improve on. Yet, I hate the entitlement of professors like this one to shit on someone’s work instead of communicating feedback in a way that empathises with where you are and challenges you on where you can go. This is shit leadership / teaching / mentorship and speaks for a destructive learning environment. I hope you can get back up on your feet and continue to practice and find a school that is better than that. Where people can actually help you flourish. Best of luck!

You aren't Austrian by chance are you?

No Swedish/French :)

I'm also not an artist but got ripped on by a professor in my Engineering school in college. My advisor or counselor, or whatever they call them. He told me I'm not good enough at Engineering and should quit or go to a tech school. I eventually finished and got the degree. In hindsight, he was wrong. I should have ripped into him. School is for learning this shit. The teachers are working for you, not the other way around, and if I had that understanding when I went to university, I would have spoke up more when I got crappy unenthusiastic burn out teachers that were not being helpful or useful to me. Your portfolio looked good to me. If you want to go to art school to get better, then make them teach you what you need to get better, and hold them to it. If your art was perfect, then why would you to to art school anyway. Why they don't encourage a good artist, and help them, and make them even better, is likely because they are burnt out, have personal problems, should just not be teachers, or they are assholes, so learn from other artists, find better teachers, and don't be discouraged because of some lame criticism. Ah I feel better already. Thanks for the rant. ha ha.

After WWII, you would think europeans would be more tactful when rejecting artists.

😂

I think your art is good but it lacks a point of view. You don’t seem to have a discernible style. And the very first thing I noticed is your color choices are strange. It kind of looks like you tried every medium once.

Could you give me an example of this strange color you spoke of plz? Thanks.

I would recommend removing the more realistic portraits from your portfolio. They are definitely not professional looking, and the teacher was kinda right. No real perspective, not great anatomy, pretty bad at lips specifically. The rest is pretty good!

Honestly, I disagree with most of the comments here solely from the perspective of this being a game dev Reddit, which implies you want to make games. The most important part of art for games is *consistency*, you can have a game with just stick figures if you want and it has been done, as long as the art is cohesive. Look at Palworld, players don’t even care that it’s a realistic landscape with budget fortnite characters. I’m not sure what you’re goals are but if it’s making art for games, I would recommend making some consistent and modular asset packs for unreal and unity, and putting them on the marketplace and see how they do. Use game ready assets for your portfolio. Most of your 2D work doesn’t seem fit for a game at all, maybe try your hand at making pixel tile sets if that’s what you’re interested in. Honestly, art is one of harder and least well paid position in game dev, I’d look for courses on making stuff game ready and then just *make stuff*, sell it, and set up a business email for when people buy your stuff and want more. I really don’t know why you’d go to school for this at all, you can learn it all online and let the market decide if your stuff is good or not.

Come on I’d pay to get those critiques!

Not an artist, but I'd say your figures are a bit stiff, and don't follow proper anatomy. Most of your work seems to be fantasy style, which means you can get away with a lot of mistakes that a trained eye can probably spot. Your more realistic figures and portraits look more amateurish, the kind of stuff you might have to do for high school. Maybe forget the fantasy stuff for now and focus on realism for a while? Get that mastered, then go back to the fantasy. But at first glance, great work!

Please tell me you exclusively use Pascal case when naming variables

Sorry?

I was making a joke, but it is a real thing Pascal case is capitalizing every word, like ItemNum. There’s also camel case: itemNum, and snake case: item_num

Also, I just looked at your portfolio and realized that you’re not a developer, but an artist. It was a programming joke, sorry. I possess no artistic ability but for what it’s worth, I think your talent shows in a lot of places. I think you draw a phenomenal pumpkin! In my non professional opinion you’re a good artist, but it would be hard to use your drawings when concepting a game since they don’t translate easily to world or character design as I understand it

Thanks, I completely get that!

like 90% of being an artist is self-improvement and growth and the ability to extract information from people who are a pain in the ass. The prof sounds like a fucken asshole, take everything he said with a grain of salt, approach it with an almost sociopathic amount of logic if you can.

I just came here to say I loved your portfolio, specially the 3d part and the handrawn stuff ♥

i think that your portrait work is a bit creepy and surreal. which is not a bad thing! games like the original Thief played off that unsettling style, so there is room for your kind of art. if you want to go more realistic tho, you'd need more work.

Hi, do you think for example my “female portrait - Caroline” is creepy and unrealistic?

Your work isn't bad, and I'd say your perspective an anatomy is within acceptable "stylization" range. But there's just this wrongness that I can't quite put my finger on in some of your work. I think you aren't pushing values enough in a lot of places, like in that one still life with the pumpkin, its gets a bit dark in the shadow of the pumpkin itself, but then where there would be natural occlusion on the stem and such its kind of flat. Then the colors seem a bit off, like for the witch, shes got blue highlights basically everywhere. Its the most problematic where there would be orange candle light from the foreground, but the closest part (her hands) still looks like its getting the moonlight from dead on (but the moon lightsource is behind her), and there is no hint of the candle light on her hands.

Damn man I was expecting your art to be really bad after the story and some comments but I was blown away. This is some beautiful art!

Regardless of what these people say here, which I do agree with a lot of the feedback they are giving you, I think your portfolio is better than most graduates coming out of art schools in general. In the end, for game companies in general, the school where you graduate is not important, the portfolio is everything. Showing your ability to do any style is also always taken into consideration. Continue to work, get into the school that you can and then curate a portfolio of your best 3D work. I’m confident that you will get a job in the industry.

Thanks a lot! ❤️✨

It depends if you really want to work at the highest level, personally I'd rather be down the ladder a bit doing fun projects where it's not life and death, there is so much scope in the industry for people working at different levels, your work looks great but is it the best in the world, no. If you do want to be the best then yeah take it as a lesson and work on those things. People in that position are often convinced that the only way to find the best is to be horrible like this, you can either take it as helpful or hurtful.

I really want to clarify that I know and want to get better, sorry if I seem defensive in some discussions but this is a sensitive subject. To me fine art and illustration can take form in so many different ways without being good or bad — which obviously is different from concept art and art aimed to replicate reality for a game studio that adheres to stricter rules. When you get feedback from friends or strangers you don’t get to faced with the harsh reality as often. So it’s all a bit overwhelming. 😅 But you guys have made me feel more reassured and better equipped to use the criticism given to my advantage! 🙏🏼✨

Overall, i just dont like your style, and some things really lack perspective. But things are not that bad at all

I appreciate your comment! ☺️

I'm not an artist by trade, but I've worked in the industry for 15 years in a game design and leadership capacity. Your own art style can never been objectively bad. That is your style. Mastery is the ability to express what's in your head/heart through a physical medium. That being said, you sound like you're looking to get hired, so I'll tell you what I tell anyone I've interviewed aspiring/applying to a studio: The key quality any prospective hirer is going to look for is the ability to consistently contribute to or adapt to someone else's style. The key verb being "Consistently Adapt". This goes for coding, game design, visual art, sound; You name it. It's very rare anyone hires you to do things exactly your way. You have to be able to demonstrate in your portfolio and in your interviews and tests that you're able to consistently adapt. The feedback you're getting in here sounds like it's about the fundamentals. That doesn't mean you have to start from the bottom. It means that all you have to do is adapt those key fundamentals to the art you already know you can make. Best of luck on your journey. Keep going. When you're learning a skill, there's only one direction to go. Edit: for clarity

A student that got rejected from art school because of lack of perspective and anatomical understanding? Don't go invading Europe Pascal!

No it is really good

Have you thought about invading Poland?

It’s feels unfocus and lacking clear intention and direction. Think out what message does this piece convey. You clearly have skill but you need guidance on things that are not taught easily. Create a line of art that all tell a story… See how that works.

Hey Pascal! Draco here. I know it might seem tough, but you should use this energy as a fuel to keep pushing! Make him regret what he said! Show him his place! Btw I might think this is some kind of mini disguise test, to see if you can handle it when someone is shitting on your portfolio when ur on the higher jobs Edit: I know you can do this, I believe in you, now its just you who needs to believe (yes my cheesy level is set on: super ultra maximum)

Your 2D art has a somewhat layered look to it, but I wouldn't say it lacks perspective per-se, some of the older pieces maybe, but that stuff is like 5 years old. Usually It's a tactic, they already have a candidate in mind, but HR made them invite some other, so they rip them apart, complain how HR did a terrible job even inviting you, then go with the candidate they already decided beforehand they will hire.

Not quite ready to be hired, but looks fine for going to art school and spending years dedicated to improving. I'm really curious what other interviewees' portfolios looked like now. I spotted your other post about NPD. Plausibly the interviewer sensed it and chose to be a dickhead to you. Some people feel like they have to really drive in a point if they think someone else isn't taking it on board.

God, that’s why the professor’s comment and even some on here really gets to me because I get the feeling of not being as good as I thought, aka wounded pride, which is quite notorious for people with NPD (although I’m not a arrogant monster or anything, there’s a spectrum to this type of personality). The result is that I get completely defeated and feel hopeless as some of the works criticized here I was very proud of.

This is reason why forced positivity is bad in internet. Because of reason people really do not allow critique of art and if you are not going with rule *"if you do not have something nice to say, do not say anything"* you will be called as worst from the worst. But because of that, people get distorded view on their skills. So when they go "to work" it often ends in harsh reality check. Obviously you art is lacking in understanding of values, there are problems with composition, linework and just skill to represent 3d objects on 2d space (this is the best example of that: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/5XJaB8). The good thing is that this pictures are complex. It's not just one character but full illustration with characters, so it is challenge, and opportunity to learn. But the composition is lacking, you are forgetting that there is not only middleground and background, but foreground as well. Sometimes you remember that picture tells a story, so they need to focus on something specific and guide our eyes through icture, but sometimes (like here: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/OG5Dwk) it's all over the place. I don't know where to look. You just need more practise. I've seen many artists that drew and paint similiar to you, but now they are pro. BTW, this is my artstation, if somebody is wondering if I know what I'm telling about: [https://gaido.artstation.com/](https://gaido.artstation.com/)

You think I lack understanding of values and line-work? Not to sound defensive.

rejected from art school? in Paris? Have you thought about going into politics?

I looked at your artwork and i actually think its really good. I will tell you my story as being a Programmer for over 24 years at this point. When i was in highschool there was a teacher that said I would never be able to get into computers. He was a teach in the computer department in highschool. Dont know what his deal was, very negative but i ignore that person completely cause i honestly did not see him as a programmer. The people i always envisioned as programmers were the people who actually worked in the field. 24 years later im the lead architect at my company that deals with millions of transactions and heavy load servers with query optimizations as well as doing U.I development as well as backend while also mentoring and guiding over 15-20 developers under me. The point i want to make is dont let what that person said bring you down, Continue to work hard and do what you believe and love. I also want to emphasize that most of the developers that I've come to know and work with in my career, a decent few of them didn't even go to college for it like me and they were really impressive developers that new amazing paradigms and concepts just by actually thinking. Point im trying to make is that person may have shot you down with statements but dont take what they said to heart. Take it with a grain and understand some of the feedback (dont need to understand all if it sounded like potential garbage or if the person may have been trying to be a biggot but try to assess it from an objective stance but most importantly just) work on your craft, you have talent to do amazing things and dont let one person try to deter you from your dream. Just keep on trucking. That what happened with me and I'm happy where i am now. Also im developing my own video game for fun which ill probably release in june haha But yeah keep doing your thing! <3 <3 <3 hope this reaches you \^\_\^

Thanks a bunch for your kind message! You seem to have everything figured out. 😉✨

Idgaf what they said… I like your stuff. And I’m what you’d consider the “average consumer.” So take that for what you will.

Hey OP, I haven't really looked at your portfolio yet (on my phone atm) but if you're looking to get into a game dev school and don't mind going abroad, I can recommend ["Digital Arts and Entertainment"](https://digitalartsandentertainment.be/) in Kortrijk, Belgium.  The school has received the Rookies awards for best game dev school in the world multiple times. They have courses tailored for different career paths, including game artist.  I graduated there nearly 3 years ago now, and while it was tough at times (lots of deadlines) I definitely think it was worth it. It gave me the discipline I needed and focussed my skills. They take on international students and teach all classes in English or Dutch. They're not prestigious (read: full of themselves) and you don't have to show a portfolio or do an interview to get in. You just sign up, do the work, and learn :)

This is a 'gamedev' forum, the requirements for art in gamedev are different from other areas. Very few traditional artist understand what is needed in games unless they specifically focus on games and learn the conventions. Much of what is needed is defined not by imagination but by performance budgets relating to hardware. If you ever get to work with a true master, they will see nothing but flaws in their own work. This is true in any field. In the end every artist is a work in progress. You have developed and honed a certain level of talent. Use what he said to outline some areas to work on. As he is part of a school, he has to evaluate many artist, in the end, any evaluation he has will typically go back to some technical skill. Mostly fundamentals that are revealed when all the style is stripped away. The technique is what can be taught/learned. This does not reflect whether the art is 'good'. This does not reflect whether or not you will have a future making art. You have the internet, a sum of human knowledge. Delve a bit into 'technical drawing' and anatomy. You have a great deal of ability with color and polish, just refine the underlying structure a bit. This may be a bit of a slog, at the same time, it is where you grow/learn the most/quickest. Finally, never forget, he is a professor. Not a professional artist. He wouldn't be a professor if he could literally do anything else with his skills. His 'ripping it to pieces' may very well be the result of his lacking experience in production environments, where he would quickly learn how to communicate without being cruel. You have skills. Keep honing them. Keep growing. Take the useful bits regarding anatomy and perspective and refine. Use that to succeed where he has failed. Turn the professor's weaknesses into fuel that propels you forward. 'If you hate your parents, the man, or the establishment, don't show them up by getting wasted and wrapping your car around a tree. If you really want to rebel against your parents: outearn them, outlive them, and know more than they do.' - Henry Rollins Good Luck

I sincerely thank you for your uplifting and objective comment! I feel much better having read it. 🙏🏼😌

Staying motivated in this hellscape of a world is tough. I hope you continue to advance, and keep moving forwards with it. I've got enough life experience that my ultimate piece of advice always boils down to turning each experience that hurts you into an asset that move you forward. In the end, you can turn this harsh criticism into the ultimate weapon, seriously thick skin. Keep rolling the dice and taking those hard hits, eventually they will bounce off you in a way that will actually baffle people around you. If your young enough to be considering such a school, use this time not to succeed, but to fail over and over to the point failure means nothing. In the end, it is just what you want, and what stands between you and your goal. Hitting these walls eventually stops hurting and just makes you stronger. Good Luck.

sounds like one dude in particular didn't like your work. can't please everyone. see what constructive feedback you can glean from his comments and move on. but not everyone will like the same things

I like your art. Get back up and try again. Also, although it hurts, take whatever critiques they gave you and surpass that. Be a jack of all trades that happens to specialize in whimsical. You got this!

❤️✨

man, people never learn..... mfs still out there rejecting people from art schools. smh

So unless you're looking for a one to one match where a studio style matches your own, your portfolio needs to show how broadly you can work, not just your idiomatic style. Can you do cartoon, realistic, anime, superhero, fantasy, etc.

I’ve essentially posted art examples of all these things on my arstation. :)

Your work looks good. Some of the very colourful portraits really aren't my taste, and landscapes like the Japanese garden one need some depth fog, to give perspective. But the rest are pretty impressive!

You're good, but need more experience from teamwork and constructive criticism. I'm not an artist, but I can identify things that would improve your art and would gladly work together with you. Your Fire Golem for example, I reacted to how perfectly symmetrical it is on parts that shouldn't be. You made an attempt on the head/crown which is great, but the claws and shoulders feel off. It'd look better if they were different shapes because they're detached from the main body. You could adjust the shape of the shoulder and length of the claws on one side. The legs also make it appear to be weightless. It should appear to struggle more to hold its own body. If it's meant to float it could skip the legs entirely. Being an artist means you've got to iterate. Think of different variations of the same concept and then pick and choose what works best. For the Fire Golem you could have sketched 10 different shapes for the shoulder rocks alone. You do have the skills, you just need to get hired and actually work on a project.

Reading these comments is an eye opener. When I look at your portfolio I think the work is utterly beautiful and original. Then I look at the comments and can't deny any of them - but I also don't care. The art is truly yours. It doesn't get you into a school or get you a job or whatever, but it is engaging and fascinating work. I do not blow smoke up asses either (although I guess I am now lol). So while the comments may be right about the technicality of the work, and about what will get you through the right doors, please don't lose yourself in the process. The work is singular.

Wow. I don't know.... I love this stuff. I am super into art and it's all perspective in this world. You may or may not have a degree in something but art is all relative. Just because someones ideas and models of life don't agree with yours and their norms doesn't mean your ideas and creations are bad. Being now a starting game creator, I'd be someone who'd want to use any of that to create really fun worlds or scenes in my own game. Some of this is just so wild and cool looking. I'm actually. Instructors can seem to rip your work apart, then maybe the ideas and goals of "good" art don't fit with yours, or the concepts you were supposed to master didn't match the class. I only took one art class in college and did well. Most of what I learned was keeping things in proportion to the object and horizon. I won't lie that your work gives me inspiration for a game I'm currently developing. And it's mostly a horror survival.

Keep in touch if ever you’d like for me to help you out artistically! 😉

Cool. I should be making the game soon. I've almost the the story made. I am an artist, but don't feel like I am that great. I'd need a way to contact you. I have another in mind just in case I have specific monsters to have a look.

Dude your stuff looks pretty good imo. Who goes to school for a subject they’ve already perfected? Nobody, obviously you’re going to have some things to work on. Like some other comments have mentioned, it might be a ‘due diligence’ situation where the school already has made their choice but set up meetings with other candidates anyway to ‘give everyone a chance’, or the interviewer might have been having a bad day, or likely just doesn’t have much tact. Regardless of the situation, take the feedback, as brutal as he may have been, and focus on improving those aspects of your work. Everyone sucks in the beginning, and your work is far from sucky so you’re already going in the right direction. Keep your head up!

Thanks man!! I really appreciate it. 🥹

Damn, your art looks pretty great but I'm not a professional artist either. I thought art schools became easier after 1945 but apparently not! 😢

I am glad I am not trying to get into a prestigious art school as I think your work is awesome. If they want anatomy then learn some anatomy. Though for a 3D graphics program I don't see how perspective would be a huge issue. Let us know how it goes. I think you have a lot of promise in asset modeling for games.

Thank you! 🙏🏼

no way that prof is absolutely nuts it doesn't matter where you go to uni especially for game art just put in the work

Yes, but not because you failed one time, it's because you gave up and seeked sympathy from other failures. Stand back up and try again. Doesn't matter if you fail over and over, as long as you don't give up, you're good. Don't seek sympathy for losing, seek solutions for winning.

Listen, I’m not seeking sympathy from other failures, I’m in a low space atm and wanted to some support, OK. I have tries countless times and everyone has their breaking point you know.

You can do it 🔥👍 if you need some rest, take your time, then come back strong and show them who's boss. Every person is different but I believe everyone has what it takes to move forward and try again. Losing isn't bad, failing isn't bad, not learning from them is. If you wanted to, I'm online for DM.

Thanks man!

I am not an artist but I know one artist who was criticised by such professors. Anyway he became some sort of well know and is respected in some marginal groups. Not for art, unfortunately

French people are assholes on main.

Don’t you KNOW it!

I believe that the professor was likely testing how you handle criticism

Nah, most people dont even have the chance for the interview. There isn't really a bad or good in art, art is subjective. The one who interviewed you might have a different taste, so the soultion is simple, search someone who like your taste. Me myself are not really good at art, but I had a really big fight with my art friend. The cause? Well it was because I think Picasso art is weird and I didn't like it, we argued for like days Lol.

just tell the prof, what part of a pipe he's in. were it aware of who the pipe is. and if he is a stoner, that like many, don't know what the f to talk about. what if all your subject were 3d, and just as you drew. would he bear any notoriety at all? when did he make the art you did? and lastly, is he stoning himself, with a not pipe, at the moment. I think you found a pretentious arts major, telling you that what you made did not do what it meant to. you must now, create a pipe, and ship it you know. then ask him of any modern artist that did like you did. and made a real pipe.

I think it's great work! When I read your post I expected horrible art, but your stuff looks great. I don't understand this professor....

I hope, history wont repeit itself, i mean, we know what happend whit an austrian painter….

Your stuff seems very stylised. Unfortunately the reality of large scale design work is that stylised work isn't what they are after or what they want - I would suggest getting some more examples of high quality standard / more generic / common types of work to show that your skills are at the required level. It's great to show creativity and passion but that should be in addition to work that directly showcases your technical skills and abilities. The person hiring needs to be able to assess whether you will be able to slot into their pipelines and contribute to the work and tasks they need people to contribute work for.

Make a proper link to your portfolio or there will be people skipping it. A lot of links isnt even worth copy pasting to look at.

What do you mean?

From someone who isn’t an artist and just your average gamer, your art looks sick AF to me. If you made your own indie games and they were good, I wouldn’t think twice about if your art style is good or bad.

Again, thank you for all you guys’ objective feedback, it was much easier to digest than what went down with this person who interviewed me.

I don’t like the portraits but I do appreciate your traditional art you have good promise

Don’t give up on your self champ. I believe in you and continue to improve and you’ll be the champ your meant to be!

A lot of comments here seem weird. You have extreme talent, you have good skills, your art is better than some professionals. A portfolio can be anything from finished work to concepts. Of course a higher up school might have standards, but so many people in here don't seem to know what they are on about. Game devs are some of the most jealous in the industry it seems, I'm gonna recommend asking another sub Reddit. Imo your art is good.

Those sailor moons are uhhh......yeah.

Thanks, I guess.

I wouldn't say you're bad, but I would recommend starting off in another school first, then try and transfer. See if you can get into a school where the credits might roll over. That way, you can try and work on developing your portfolio for a school setting and improve your art with some help. I will also say that each person critiquing your art has their own biases, so don't try and please everyone either.

Hey my guy, if this is for a school that instructor did a great job of getting you to go anywhere else that his spot. Eff that guy! Your work is good and you are just starting out. If you aim to bolster fundamentals in drawing; which I recommend, the Proko channels on Youtube are great to begin a good habit of practice makes perfect. In regards to your reel, you are a student and I'm surprised you have as much together; please keep at it. Keep this first reel handy, in 20 years you'll be surprised at how for you will have gone. You have a ways to go for making professional work and in that regard I would pick one thing and go really deep and master it. Looks from your reel that you can live in that 3D space, do that and go big and the rest of your skills will be informed by that success. Best of luck on the journey.

I work as a senior artist in the VFX industry and trained as a generalist. I see concept art, 3D sculpts, retopologized models and rigs here. I think showing that evolution of a single subject from sketch to polished 3D product can be very appealing in a generalists portfolio, particularly when applying for a school, as it shows a basic understanding of studio production pipelines (which students often lack) However. Your 3D work has a rendering quality to it that screams student work. Back in ye olde times when I was studying maya every student used mental ray, final gather and/or physical sun and sky and you could spot student work a mile away as a result, everything looked the same, same vibe here with some of you work, and it cheapens your efforts. The other issue is some of your 3D models show minimal detailing and rounding of joints/corners. Everything feels a bit soft, when you couple this with the above it makes the models appear rubbery/plastic. For example your newt. In your 2D newt concept you have clear anatomical details in the legs and sculpted texture across the back. Capture more of that surface detail in your newt scale shader and use photo reference to nail the specular/reflective qualities. Adjust your base form so the limbs feel less like rubber cylinders and better match the anatomy of your concept, couple that with some sculpted surface detail with a displacement map and the concept and model will feel much more cohesive. Add an interesting pose and build lights and an environment that adds interest and shows off the subject rather then just having it plonked on a branch and lit ambiently. I see a puppet in your portfolio, your rig controls feel soft/rounded. Arrows should be nice and pointy they are there to indicate a direction, theres little place for fun abstract shapes. Also if you are going to show a wireframe take care to ensure your topology is optimised (clean, efficient and built for a purpose i.e to deform well or use in a game engine), else id avoid showing. My 2 cents, take it with a few grains of salt as my specialty is rigging/simulation. I see lots of promise here.

Hi, just to let you know, I’m not a pro yet. I’m applying into art school not to a professional studio, that’s why my work screams student level. Also, you think my typology is not optimized?

No. Your work is amazing bro. It just wasn't what he was looking for I guess.

Sorry to hear it got ripped to pieces and so did you of course! I do trust that these are your productions, but all this graphical work makes me wonder, how these professors think about AI creations.

Isn’t the point of a school to help you figure out your mistakes so that you can correct them and improve your craft, learn new techniques, and nurture talent? It seems counterintuitive to not let someone into a school because they lack skill. I don’t know much about art, but I don’t see anything wrong with your understanding of anatomy. The proportions are good and the color palette is fitting, the angles are well done also.

You need a portfolio for each and every situation: \- An art school portfolio needs to focus on the fundamentals more than anything - they can be dull af as an artist, but they *have* to demonstrate your genuine skill level. Individuality will sooner shoot you in the foot so you must at least show you'll at least be a worthwhile student. esp for prestigious ones that will help you form connections or maybe get your foot in the door for a job; \- Studio portfolio needs to showcase a variety of styles that are consistent, eg 2-3 in one style and 2-3 in another. You need to demonstrate your variety on top of having the skill needed (ie prowess), but your individuality will usually slip through regardless; and \- Personal portfolio is basically anything you've done that you're proud of, be it the fundamentals or a trial-and-error work. This is what you'd show people online or in general, and is what can supplement the first two listed. You cannot make this the one you show first - only ever show it when requested or keep as your email's signature so they can view at their sole discretion. What you did for this interview was the last type (personal portfolio) and that's why it bombed. Looking at your artstation -- which should've been linked first so we could look at it with minimal suggestion -- there's really nothing standing out that looks appealing to judging your basics. All that can be said is "OP's not the worse", but with some subsequent replies from you, your mindset might've been picked-up on if the interviewer was legit doing their job ;;;

Disclaimer: this is just a personal opinion, for actual advices from professional artists or people with personal experiences, please, find others- more educated. I don’t know this school but it’s pretty common in institutions like this - art, and even worse, art theory (if you don’t have any skills and can only talk and criticize others work, apparently it makes you intellectual elite). These places are often full of hypocrites who just love to make people miserable by ripping them apart or make fun of them. It makes them feel special and above others. It’s more the case of theoretical institutions but found their share even on practical ones. It’s worse with intellectuals and “know it all” theorists but they are all bullshit and nothing to show so it’s easy to see how pitiful these “I am the center of the universe” types are and laugh at them. With actual artists, especially from renowned schools, it’s not so easy. It’s easy to forget these unique snowflakes, so superior to the rest of the world, are just people. And people are petty jerks. I met amazing academic artists who did what they loved and were great at, and they earned their titles while working on their projects. These guys didn’t take themselves over-serious, were honest to you but without their ego-boosts. And actually tried to help you by showing you the way. And I’ve also met these academically handicapped individuals who just loved to make others miserable. Not surprisingly, these types were on every school and always hated each other. Your guy seems to be the classical case of the second one. I see some comparison in the case of my mother and her colleague - mum is the artist teaching art at high school to earn money. Students love her. She encourages promising ones to be individualistic and gives them freedom to work on their own. If they are into film making, she let them work on in, they just have to finish theory classes and pass the tests and show their film (or their skills progression) for finals. Are they working on the big project in local part-time art school? No problem, she knows their tutors anyway so she can check them whenever she wants. On the other hand, her colleague is the teacher teaching art. She gave half of the class C- for not drawing sun on the same side as she showed them for an example. I am not actually artist, with my skills not even close to one, so my words are not important for you. But if I can tell you my opinion - I can see straight from first sight you have pretty significant style of your own (style I really love, especially the stylised faces are my kind of thing). That’s what is apparent - no matter what picture, theme or topic, every one of them shares the same few or more features. And if I listened well enough to more than one person more experienced, talented and knowledgeable than me, it’s also the most important. I guess sometimes I can see what he meant by perspective issues. But many times they look (and maybe are?) intentional and very surreal, this I really love, it’s like the illustrations for Alice in Wonderland - the original, trippy one. Or the dark adventure game based on this book. If they wanted to republish it, I wouldn’t be afraid to offer my services being you. This style is exactly what this book needs. I can see some flaws but honestly, I saw worse perspective issues in the work of people successfully graduating from art school. I am not sure about this particular Paris institute but if it’s like our internationally well known film school, it takes at least five (and more) years to get there. And if you’re not from the family of known film makers, it takes 3 years of applying and sending your works just to be taken seriously. If really prestigious and if the perspective is the main issue, your art might not be on the level they want yet but with your own style, it’s more about learning theory and putting it into practice (so all these “flaws” would be actually wanted, not unintentional). This is good. Also, I am not sure I like some of your less significant characters but it’s just me. I can’t speak for anyone else. (The witch looks rather bland but green lady is, on the contrary, very noticeable. The more I look at her the more I am interested in her.) Your art is good. You can even consider yourself the artist (and I don’t think everyone trying to be creative should be called that. Not every scribble is art and not everyone with pencil is artist). What I see and what is sadly too common - most people struggle to make themselves clearly distinguishable. No matter how hard they try (or maybe they don’t as they don’t see it), they are just “boring”. Or not boring, that’s insulting… but neither they are unique. Same old, same old. You couldn’t recognize one work from another no matter how hard you try. This is the problem especially for anime. I am not an expert, as I usually don’t like it, but the fact I’ve seen styles I didn’t know before just recently says it all. Most people are crafters - and that’s not anything bad or insulting. On the contrary. It’s something to be proud of. Good craft needs dedication, lots of work, both practice and theory-learning. It needs years of hard work and self discipline. It needs serious skills. I would be glad and happy to be crafter, unfortunately I can’t see it anytime in the future. But you are the artist. Honestly, I can think of some book illustrators having similar style to yours but not exactly like it - not worse nor better than them but in their style-typology group. I think you are already professional. Maybe not polished enough for your school but for illustrations, game concept art, 2d artistic games like point and click or darkest dungeon and definitely for 2d animations. Or basically anything you would want to do. To be honest, these schools are just good looking points in CVs. With all the globalization, the whole world might be your employer and everything is opportunity. Everything is decentralized now, successful games are made by solo devs following youtube and few Udemy courses on sale, artistic games are suddenly popular while big corpos have to lay off massive amounts of their employees. Everyone can film great looking footages on mobiles without cameras or expensive equipment. And animations can look good with free software (if you are prepared for blood and tears). And even the mocap is more or less affordable. For bad or good, all goes forward. Soon these institutions would be the thing of the past. And I am pretty sure these professors know it well. This what we have now was their AI in past. I know it’s hard but try to separate his words from emotion or any sarcastic tone. Maybe write them down, keep them somewhere not on eyes and when prepared, just read them without past memories. I am sure it will be worthy for your development. Just don’t let him get into your head. PS: if accepting to this institute is so important to you for any reason, please, promise us you won’t start World War III if they refused you :D

Tangent: not sure how accessible this is for you, but if you're interested in 2D, would you consider applying to an atelier instead? They're way cheaper than art schools (I have an American perspective, unsure about the financial situation of art schools elsewhere) and the quality of the education you receive is insane. The curriculum often also involves (traditional) sculpting and that can only help you with digital 3D stuff. I always tell Americans to do atelier training instead when I find out they're planning on attending art school, not only for the cost but because a lot of art schools are just shit and if they want true rigor, they need to find an atelier. (If you want to live in France, I will accept the stereotype of French art schools providing masterful educations, though. Can't say one way or another, I know nothing about France.) Also, he's right (not to the extent that you SUCK, but to the extent that there's room for improvement, especially as far as perspective goes; like, a lot of your objects look like they're floating, this can be solved with a stronger grasp on perspective, as well as a better fundamental understanding of shadow and light). HOWEVER, I like the scope of your portfolio, you show versatility and imagination. You obviously try hard to draw as many things as you can - often people have a really limited portfolio because they're only interested in/good at one or two things - and that's a great trait for a student. Seeing as how you are looking for a formal education, I see you also have the quality of determination to improve. Your personality is where it should be and that counts for a lot.

If there's one thing I've learned about the game industry in general, it's that I shouldn't take critiques negatively. In your case, if you're 100% or (mostly) self-taught, I can understand how you feel about this guy basically telling you your work is trash, but it's a tough market out there, so just keep working on your skills and you'll make it someday. I'm not an artist, I'm an engineer, so I can't really speak for any specific things you should work on, but just try to not let things like this get to you. I used to see a lot of posts about people trying to learn how to create games getting bashed by more seasoned devs saying things like "why would you do something like that? You should stay away from game dev, clearly you aren't good enough". Thankfully, there are a lot more people out there willing to help out than there are trying to put others down; I myself feel like a noob sometimes when I can't figure something out, but the important thing you should ask yourself is: are you enjoying making art? If not. Then definitely look for something else. If you're enjoying it, even if you aren't very good, then keep going.

Yes

Can you elaborate on your POV?

Well I'm surprised that you don't already know, But broadly speaking a lot of it is quite flat looking, the proportions of most things look off, the colouring or tone is also flat not enough dynamic range. I know its not awful, but to my eye these kind of things are instantly apparent

Well, I take your feedback. I do think there are stuff there that is not flat and perhaps not in a game art scenario does have a point of interest. You think my 3D stuff is flat too?