peterku on DeviantArthttps://www.deviantart.com/peterku/art/D-E-V-I-Army-version-262535121peterku

Deviation Actions

peterku's avatar

D.E.V.I. - Army version

By
Published:
54.1K Views

Badge Awards

Description

I'v had busy summer this year so it was long time since I uploaded here on deviantart. But this week I've finished another concept of mine. Here it is.

Concept of sci-fi energy rifle.

Model is fully highpoly, rendered in Vray and some work in Photoshop. I did this concept in two version.

1. savage army camo (this one)

2. shiny black spec ops version. ([link])


P.S.
I'm available for freelancer jobs. If you want to make offer then I'm open for debate.

Tnx for comments if any. Bye.
Image size
1800x900px 394.11 KB
© 2011 - 2024 peterku
Comments86
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
inlocoparentis's avatar
:star::star::star::star::star-half: Overall
:star::star::star::star::star: Vision
:star::star::star::star::star: Originality
:star::star::star::star::star-empty: Technique
:star::star::star::star::star: Impact

I really love the design of this rifle, with that in mind, I am going to try to write as an objective a review as possible.

On vision, I give full marks. This is a great design and very visually appealing. It has a utilitarian look and a few touches that would likely make this a joy to shoot and/or train with if it were a real design. The barrel gives enough length to make use of any intermediate cartridge in production today if it were ever designed for that. Since it is not, the only real question I have, is why add a suppressor to a weapon that does not use standard cartridges?

On Originality I, again, give full marks. The lines are clean and aggressive. The devil is in the details for a battle rifle, and the fact that you've included adjustable length-of-pull, suggests that you "get" the utilitarian aspect of a weapon. I was torn about giving docking you half a mark because I could not figure out if this rifle was cartridge based or not, but decided to give you full marks because of the things you did not include, which were a bunch of Picatinny rails and tons of accessories from mag-pul. Also, you went with an optic that looks to have been designed with seemless integration with the rifle.

On Technique, I gave four marks. Unfortunately, I'm not a master of computer design and, because of that, I am not qualified to really critique your cgi technique. That being said, I do have a background in photography. Your shadows are fantastic, and the way you've rendered it conveys a good understanding of how a product might be lit in real life. I docked you the one mark because in all of the detail insets you didn't show anything that would have been of interest to the end user. In the lower-left corner, you have what looks like a detail shot of what *could* be the gas-regulator system, but it's still not clear how this rifle functions. On the other two insets, I'm not quite sure what you're highlighting.

On impact, you again earn full marks. It is absolutely clear that this is a battle implement. Regardless of method of function, this image leaves no doubt that this is a purpose-built weapon. Great use of a subdued background with just enough texture to make it pop off the page.

I write this as a Soldier and a gun nut.
Thanks for a great design.