Which ones do you like and which you don't? Which kind of extremenesswould you prefer more: too blurry or too dark? Or even very saturated? Or maybe too blured and too dark and very saturated together?
i'm not crazy about "too" anything. but if you balance it with too much something else it can be really effective. like make a piece overall too dark and then the subject is too saturated. works much better than either by itself. they each have a particular effect and it only means something relative to something else.
the omega heads have the strongest composition. the rest are much more interesting in the details. i'd suggest working out the composition more before adding the details. if it looks interesting and readable at thumbnail size, half the job is done. i always keep a thumbnail view on screen for that purpose. it's easy to get lost in the details and forget about the big picture.
Totally agree. It's quite difficult to keep concentration on composition all the time. The whole view could change at once because of adding just one detail. Everything turns upside down several times. All depends on some kind of "calibration", which is hard to execute too because of adapting eye. As for me, most of obvious composition nuances become visible only after long time after "finishing" the picture. So it makes possible altering the finished picture, but most of the times this causes literally absolute transformation and distortion of main idea, and you got absolutley different image which is often undesirable, and it also needs correction and calibration. Several times i encountered this situation and discovered that this process can go in cycles and last forever, but maybe it's only my own expirience. And i always try to represent my MMAs as a quick self-expressing outlines. Sometimes i let them have really nasty compositions, but when i don't, sometines they seem to loose some charm, for me at least. So, other people vision help a lot at defining whether the picture achieved its goal.