ONLY Linear with 3 to 12 triangles.... most of the times it looks like a blurry picture, but then use the MUTATIONS on random and most of the time you can find really nice nebular stuff,, then play with the triangles, usually the first 3, to shape it some more.
I really admire the "plasticity" of this one. One can almost feel the heavy presence of the dark dust clouds smothering the stars and of the luminescent gas pockets between them. This is truly 3D space!
This is the best so far. This is because of both flame and starfield blending in together. Your star field is very, very well produced and realistic. If you look at any astrophotography from the Hubble, or David Malin, you will be able to understand the concepts involving what a basic field should look like. This is something which I see so many space artists not focussing on enough, but you, in this particular piece have shown great skill in capturing the stars. Together with the nebula they create an amazing view, from right to left.
I was not too fond of the blending of the fractal and the field initially, but as I have watched each of your recent works become released I have slowly gathered a liking towards your current genre.
Another aspect which many space artists neglect is dust. Dust in any space scene is imperative, and provides a natural mood amongst the image. The progression from the dust into gas in the flame makes it unrecognisable as a fractal at all, and of course knooked and crannied and the right places are stars, varied in size and tone.
For example: the triplet of stars which are located towards lower right of the image are blue, and are not shrouded by any gas or dust, where as (by contrast) all the stars which are in either the dust or gas are changing tone or colour appropriately to match the density of the media which they lie in. You also remember to add the outlier star which doesn't respect the above observation, but heightens the natural look.
The spontaneity of the flame is highly realistic. It gradients itself from dark, through a brighter section and then falls out well, and continues to the images outer edge calmly. What this does for the image is adds another dimension; the third. All too often space scenes are too flat, where as astrophotography shots seem to be able to capture the three dimensionalism which does exitst in space. This piece grapples the third dimension very, very well indeed. The random packets of dark tones the flame also help this factor.
My only suggestion would be to remove the straight edge of gas which a light trail from the supernova reveals in the lower middle of the piece. What also might be required are a few more stars in and around the dust area of the nebula. And also remember to place little light reflections of stars which are nestled in the nebula, making them look like they are being cradled by it. This you already have done with one particular star, located a little to the left of centre.
Excellent work with this casperium, you may be creating a new movement of art here as I write this, well done.
Thank you very much for your wonderful critique! My main drawback right now is that I dont know how to do some of the techniques in PS that I want to do,, so learning more photoshop is essential. I have the book Universe (Hubble pictures) and I am going to be using it more and more to learn about galaxy and nebular formations... While I do wish to maintain some realism in my pics, my main aim is for beautiful colorful nebulae, and i know there will be many times when "realism and fantasy" clash.
Well you see my interests involving art revolve around traditional forms at the moment. I have created my own space art, but nothing worth truly admiring, at least for the moment. Perhaps one day I will focus more attention to digital art forms, but for now I'm heavily involved in my year 12 art studies, which will be submitted on here by next year, well I hope.
But thankyou for acknowledging my work . I have also done some astrophotography myself, though not submitted I have a lot of knowledge in the are of space, simply because I teach it to various ages, from 5 to 18 sometimes, so yeah, it have been a deep interest for me since the age of six.