FA+
Shop
591
Views
Views
25
Favorites
Favorites
Category
All / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1102 x 844
File Size 23.8 kB
Report this content
More from Saara
I've been posting Schirm's work for a while now, so it seems only fair I put a few of my own up for a change. I've picked four pieces that I did for other people though. Two commissions, one exchange, and one I don't know why the devil I did since I got nothing for it...
That would be *this* one, that I did for one of Jim Groat's folios. It shows Red Shetland at a crossroads in the desert, consulting a road map of dubious accuracy. I loved doing the rocks, which are more than realistically eccentric, as well as the distant desert landscape. It was just about the last piece I did for Jim, since I'd done three or four before (and one after) that I got nothing back for except the "fun" of contributing to the Red Shetland saga. Even getting a copy of the folio took a little persistence. By this time I'd figured out that Jim was taking advantage of the artists he knew for profit, and while most were probably content with this, it wasn't for me.
I later tried to get the piece published on an SF fanzine. The editor was happy to have it, but objected to all the wasteful black space, and wan't to trim it for the cover! I asked him if he would consider trimming a few paragraphs from a written article so it would fit on the page? Naturally he said he wouldn't, so I said I felt the same way about my art and wouldn't let him publish it. Eventually I found another fanzine that didn't have an idiot for an editor. But incidents like that go a long way to explaining why I withdrew to a large extent from SF fandom for a number of years.
That would be *this* one, that I did for one of Jim Groat's folios. It shows Red Shetland at a crossroads in the desert, consulting a road map of dubious accuracy. I loved doing the rocks, which are more than realistically eccentric, as well as the distant desert landscape. It was just about the last piece I did for Jim, since I'd done three or four before (and one after) that I got nothing back for except the "fun" of contributing to the Red Shetland saga. Even getting a copy of the folio took a little persistence. By this time I'd figured out that Jim was taking advantage of the artists he knew for profit, and while most were probably content with this, it wasn't for me.
I later tried to get the piece published on an SF fanzine. The editor was happy to have it, but objected to all the wasteful black space, and wan't to trim it for the cover! I asked him if he would consider trimming a few paragraphs from a written article so it would fit on the page? Naturally he said he wouldn't, so I said I felt the same way about my art and wouldn't let him publish it. Eventually I found another fanzine that didn't have an idiot for an editor. But incidents like that go a long way to explaining why I withdrew to a large extent from SF fandom for a number of years.
Category All / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1102 x 844px
File Size 23.8 kB
I love the handful of trips I've taken indeserts in the American southwest. Alpine beauty is all its cracked up to be and rain forests are mind-boggling, but they're usualy wet, full of nasty bugs, and you can't see anything for the bloody trees in the way most of the time. In the desert you can see DISTANCE and SPACE. And if you don't go looking under any rocks for trouble, you probably won't have any.
Backgrounds are such a necessary and enhancing element to images. I wonder why nobody takes the extra time to do them? They do such a good job establishing mood and place. As in this one, where the scenery goes on forever and ever, never seeming to end or change into something recognizable. There is a way to go here, you've given that to the character, but the openness overpowers. "Great, I've got to go through that?" Is what I get from this image.
I'd hazzard a guess that backgrounds properly done are a lot of work and often don't print well in cheap media like the funnies page or comic books printed on pulp paper. Inevitably the neccessary was promoted as a virtue. Expers on comics insist that the medium is about story-telling, not art per se, and that unnecessary detial like backgrounds are a distraction that slows down the narrative.
But of course, who's to say what's unncessary. Nobody ever critized Hal Foster for the lavish backgrounds in Prince Valiant, and every fan of Tin Tin loves it as much for the exotic settings as for charcters or plot. Setting can be very important in a narrative, and I've no use for snobs with fancy theories about why rushed work is good.
But of course, who's to say what's unncessary. Nobody ever critized Hal Foster for the lavish backgrounds in Prince Valiant, and every fan of Tin Tin loves it as much for the exotic settings as for charcters or plot. Setting can be very important in a narrative, and I've no use for snobs with fancy theories about why rushed work is good.
Some people can't see that the environment and setting can be part of the storytelling.
Setting could be less important in a comic that is supposed to be set in a mundane reality: once given an extablishing image (inside a taxicab), then the viewer could be expected to supply their own impressions from TV or riding in cabs. So the story could become all close-ups of talking heads. Maybe.
Might not work as well in an alien setting: SF, fantasy, exotic adventure. Why does this taxi have no driver?
Setting could be less important in a comic that is supposed to be set in a mundane reality: once given an extablishing image (inside a taxicab), then the viewer could be expected to supply their own impressions from TV or riding in cabs. So the story could become all close-ups of talking heads. Maybe.
Might not work as well in an alien setting: SF, fantasy, exotic adventure. Why does this taxi have no driver?
Since graphic arts are computerized, I have seen many print publications (fanzines and pro publications that should know better) where an editor has distorted the horizontal or vertical on some art, to make it fit layout space. This is often done with comic strips, too.
There could be some art where this would not change the effect -- but most of the time it is a distortion that makes a difference. The editor needs a demonstration with a photoshopped photo of themselves.... I think such a demo would be effective most of the time.
There are editors who would not be able to see the distortion, even in their own photo. Some people (even editors) are just not wired to see things.
There could be some art where this would not change the effect -- but most of the time it is a distortion that makes a difference. The editor needs a demonstration with a photoshopped photo of themselves.... I think such a demo would be effective most of the time.
There are editors who would not be able to see the distortion, even in their own photo. Some people (even editors) are just not wired to see things.
Some of these are quite old files, made on a Mustek scanner that's primatibe by today's standards. I also made rather small files, out of the naive belief I'd be selling these images in folios, and wanted to discourage people from being satisfied with just the digital copy. Since then the folio market has pretty much collapsed. As well, I want a high quality copy for my own needs. Having a newer, much better scanner is a help to. (Thanks to Al Fishbeck, who gave it to me.)
Bah! Editors! Tell me about it. I remember when Turner started shortening Western movies to make them fit their schedules. They were cutting out the beautiful senery shots! That's when I lost interest in watching television.
Heh. I built and run a cable tv system with almost 200 channels on it and I don't watch TV. Can't stand it most of the time. I have noticed Travel Channel and Discovery are very big on scenery. PBS HD too. Those I can watch but have found other things I like to do. So here I am.
Thanks for all of your postings.
Heh. I built and run a cable tv system with almost 200 channels on it and I don't watch TV. Can't stand it most of the time. I have noticed Travel Channel and Discovery are very big on scenery. PBS HD too. Those I can watch but have found other things I like to do. So here I am.
Thanks for all of your postings.
I used to get the Discovery channel, but when I pulled in the belt and downgraded to a cheaper package I lost it, much to my regret. Mind you, while I had Discovery, I was far from satisfied. A lot of it was repitition. And the eponymous Discovery .ca program often annoyed hell out of me. For a science show it spend entirely too much time on items like cleaning an elephant's toes, or the aerodynamics of a football. Obviously they were courting idiots who liked animals and sports but couldn't care less about science. The trouble with that approach is that it turns off science geeks like me, and never attracts the intellectual light-weights.
Oddly enough I find myself missing the family squabbles of the Teutles and their motorcycle studio. And those two geeks who prove urban legends wrong.
Oddly enough I find myself missing the family squabbles of the Teutles and their motorcycle studio. And those two geeks who prove urban legends wrong.
Comments