Art Farts

Giddyup!

2010-05-22T23:10:00.001-07:00

Wow, it's definitely been quite a while.

I will be returning to my studies shortly. I would love to be able to promise weekly updates, but it all depends on the difficulty of the study, and how much work consumes my time and energy.

So, please stay tuned. There's more to come.

Spine

2009-03-17T00:36:00.000-07:00

After a very, very long and somewhat-needed break, I came back to rendering the spine with renewed motivation. Here they are.

"From the front" isn't an optical illusion, and it is, indeed, crooked. It was the first spine that I had completed, when I blindly dove into the SPINE months ago. If you put two vertical, parallel lines that run up and down the body of the vertebrae on both sides, you will notice one line is exactly vertical and parallel to the body on the left side. The one on the right is not. This is what creates that crooked illusion. Next.

"From behind" isn't perfect, either, from a proportional standpoint. When I began refining the sketches for Lumbar I-V, I realized that I left out one of the Thoracic vertebra when I was comparing spatial proportions with "From the front". This meant that I had to go back and re-render a large portion from the top and rework what I had already painted. Next.

"From the right side" was rendered entirely too small in comparison to the previous views. I caught this early, though, when I compared what I had "finished" (C. I-VII). It was a relatively painless fix, considering that I subjected myself to my own failures with the previous views. Getting the curve of the spine to look as natural and as close to my reference was the most difficult part, as well as keeping things consistent, overall, in proportional presentation.

Another very difficult thing that I had to adapt to was the very subtle differences, and gradual scaling and proportion of the vertebrae as they progressed from Cervical to Lumbar, and then to include sacrum and coccyx. You can see some of the little landmarks from vertebra-to-vertebra if you look close enough.

Assuming, however, that these little landmarks and subtle differences from vertebra-to-vertebra would make the overall rendering process easy, is a very, very big mistake.

Despite the numerous and near-fatal errors that I had made, which are still present here, I am very, very, very excited about this study. This one, that "gave" me the hardest time, is actually my favorite.

Artician dot com, anyone?

2009-03-08T08:49:00.000-07:00

I was recently invited to join Artician. Hopefully, those who are reading this, have already clicked on that link right now.

Not quite sure who invited me to join the community, but after taking a look around, I decided to join. The user interface is still in its beta stages, so navigating around was a little difficult for me at first. Once I got settled in, however, "WOW!" was the only thing that came to my mind. I can't ask for anything more in an art network, really.

Take a look around. You might like what you see.

Vertebrae, Sacrum, and Coccyx

2008-11-24T18:35:00.001-08:00

Finally, finally, FINALLY! I got derailed again, and I'm back on track!

I don't have a really good memory of actually pushing myself to render these in such detail...

The sacrum and coccyx were particularly hard to do, considering I had show the curve and intricacies of these bone structures and still give them depth at the same time by means of proper and befitting brush stroke direction.

I'll beat a dead horse again and say--I have not-so-good depth perception, so looking at the renderings in the book, and then replicating them through my OWN eyes and actually UNDERSTAND the what's and why's of this particular structure was really a challenge. Very fulfilling all the while. Not too bad for plunge head-first into something I never seriously considered!

Now, unfortunately, it's almost Thanksgiving, and I'll have to start doing Holiday cards soon! I feel kinda silly, considering that the cards aren't going to be digital, but traditional and paper-cut collage--more CUTE in nature, rather than serious-looking. I'll do my best...I just no one is EXPECTING anything, and disappointed with the results.

I'll be back in December, with an ENTIRE pieced-together and labeled SPINE. Now THAT'S going to take some real focusing, and lots of coffee!

9 Skulls

2008-09-08T03:08:00.000-07:00

After an unnecessary reprieve, I finished the 9 skulls exercise! I had started this a while ago--probably in July, even--and had gotten so far up until I needed to render one last skull!

These were layered on one page in Atlas of Human Anatomy for the Artist; four in which were covered by other skulls. So, I had to utilize what I learned in previous exercises to render the entirety of those four skulls. I think they look okay, overall.

Next I'll be doing some simplified gestures of the skull, and I won't be posting those exercises/sketches, because those really WILL be for my use, and my better understanding of how to quickly, yet accurately, lay down the base-work for the head.

Back to the Basics: Relation of Skull to Surface Features

2008-07-04T22:56:00.000-07:00

As an illustration, this one by Peck spoke volumes to me. I absolutely enjoyed how he was able to overlay surface features over the skull, and the cervical vertebra. I found it positively intriguing. Beautiful.

I always knew I had my own "ideal", versus what truly "is." This was by far the most troublesome study I've had, but also the most fulfilling to render. I learned a great deal from this.

I hope that I will be able to keep my "ideal", but still keep it true. There are a lot of characters that I had been working with over the years, believe it or not, and it'll be ...interesting to see how I'll end up rendering them, once and for all, when all my studies are finished.

I hope that they will be as real as I wrote them to be--as real to everyone on the outside, as they are to me. As real as I am.

That is why I'm doing this.

Back to the Basics: Skull overview

2008-07-04T22:37:00.000-07:00

I've had experience rendering the skull before, but not with this intensity.

It goes without saying that the skull as always given me a run for my money: 22 bones, 8 for the cranium (excluding ethmoid, since it "is of no structural importance") and 14 for the face (excluding lacrimals, vomer, nasal conchae, and palate bones, as the "are of no structural importance").

So here we have it. Almost 22 bones of structural artistic importance.

I color-coded this for myself, referencing back to Peck's written word of the skull. Each skull view was difficult because, again, I tried to keep them of even proportion and size without resorting to digital resizing/distortion tools. So far, so good.

It was also difficult in the sense that I truly wanted them to look organic: not perfect in shape, and as close to the original renderings of Peck as possible. Again, I had no physical object to refer to, so I might have misinterpreted the studies. Whether or not that is true will reveal itself to me in time.

Back to the Basics: Skeletal overview

2008-07-04T22:27:00.001-07:00

There are a lot of parts in Atlas of Human Anatomy for the Artist that I won't be copying because it isn't particularly necessary and is solely reading material to be used hand-in-hand with the illustrations and studies.

So why publish any of this stuff at all? To show that I'm not slacking.

Looking back at this, I can say it's already primitive and underdeveloped. My methods for producing it in even proportion and size for each skeleton were simple--drawing horizontal lines across the page for measurements. I've omitted those lines. Despite the fact that this was all done digitally in Painter X, I refuse to abuse computer program options, like scale, rotate, and free transform. I like to work digitally as close to using traditional media as I possible can. Otherwise--I consider it cheating.

Back to the Basics: Start

2008-07-04T22:17:00.000-07:00

Once again, I'm returning to the basics, trying to reteach myself and solidify all that I had once started learning back when I was in school. Everything that I will be posting will be copies of anatomical studies and illustrations from Stephen Rogers Peck and Giovanni Civardi (it's good to crossreference).

I'm very much so learning from scratch, and understanding how anatomy works as I go. It's really difficult considering I don't have a live model or model skeleton in my room to observe, and touch, for my own uses. But I'm doing my best.

So here goes: back to the basics--start!

Thoughts on New Perspective Systems and their applications

2008-05-04T23:15:00.000-07:00

In my never-ending search to find advice and/or tutorials about 3-point perspective, I finally stumbled across Dick Termes' Termespheres. He has a 44-page manual titled New Perspective Systems: Seeing the Total Picture. One through six point perspective. How cool is THAT?

I purchased the PDF manual for ten dollars. Not at all bad for being lead, finally, in the right direction.

The manual is very straight-forward, explaining the purpose of each point of perspective. He starts with non-perspective (cube grid; popularly known nowadays as isometric in our fantastic, pixelated digital age), then moves on to one, two, etc. points, and ultimately ties it all up together into the "big picture". Termes provides examples of each perspective from an indoor and outdoor view, as well as grids for practice and personal use. One thing that I really liked was the fact that he referred to "horizon" as "eye level", which would in term take on a whole new meaning when you're plotting down your points, and deciding exactly where you are in relation to your setting. That is to say, there really IS no horizon in space, is there? Only what your eye sees at its level.

The manual, overall, confirmed suspicions I had about particular points of perspective, but it also instilled a sort of dread. The explanations, and the grids are absolutely grand. It was just like being in high school, learning 1 and 2-point perspective. And yet...there is still a development, and a sort of personal understanding that needs to take place in order to apply said perspectives accordingly.

I am speaking, of course, of not only illustrations and paintings, but of comics. Panels can display cityscapes, encompassing city block upon city block of space, and look fabulous using 3 or 4 point perspective. But what if, in the end, you simply want to display a single character in said 3 or 4-point perspective cityscape, who is looking at his watch on a street corner standing next to a pedestrian sign? Well, surely, scale the character up. Display only what's necessary.

Questions remain: Would perspective suffer? What will happen to your figure's proportions? What will the impact be? Afterall, North and East points, and zenith/nadir would be way, way, way out of the panel. Completely excluded. Perspective grid scaling vs. figure scaling. That's the issue.

Nothing is entirely in perfect perspective. I'm sitting here, looking at the hodgepodge of THINGS around my desk. Nothing is streamlined to "vanish" at one point; objects are rotated, and askew. To be quite honest, I can't tell which perspective I would illustrate it from as-is from my very desk.

Application. Is. Everything. I imagine that with practice, applying it in a much more intimate and even realistic setting would only come naturally over time. I am very glad that I purchased the manual, as I said that it had confirmed suspicions that I had--and even for the dread it instilled. I don't think that I'm really making a huge deal about this. As a matter of fact, I think that some artists don't make a big enough deal about perspective. Or they do, and it ends up being a double-standard to them. Practice, practice, practice. And when you're done practicing, practice some more.

Yes. I love my new manual.

The Principle of The Thing

2008-04-27T21:39:00.001-07:00

There is something to be said about the direction that artists are taking in the digital art world. I don't know if I like it very much. I know it's all about personal preference, a reliable workflow, deadlines, etc. The way that one person does it doesn't necessarily mean it is THE WAY that every one should do it.

But this whole entire thing about layer masks, and layer clipping masks, and applying textures just really frosts my cookies, guys. Simply because you don't have those tools at your fingertips in the traditional art world.

Yes, it does make things easier. Yes, you HAVE to know HOW to use them, and WHEN. But... Personally, I get no satisfaction with knowing that a computer function created an effect for me. I think it's the very reason why I haven't been particularly hell-bent on using 3D rendering programs--like Maya, or Z Brush. Or even breaking in and getting a program like Poser or whatever the hell it is that has all those models for you that you can seemingly effortlessly paint over and say, "OOH LOOK WHAT I DID."

Bullshit.

...

Then again, it takes me months to do any one painting that I actually LIKE, simply because of my personal Principle Of The Thing. I think that more or less things like masks, and clipping masks, should be used as part of the learning process; trial and error, knowing where your highlights and shadows should go until you actually are able to PAINT it on there. Using only ONE layer. Not 10.

In terms of other functions in Photoshop like Brightness/Contrast and Color Balancing... Those are small potatoes, in my opinion. For one, Painter doesn't handle colors like Photoshop, and two...it's also apart of the learning process.

Undoubtedly, I'm the idiot here. Really. Everyone around me is thriving, getting their names out there, getting contract jobs, getting published, and I've got nothing. Absolutely nothing. No portfolio to speak of.

One of these days, I will more than likely be eating these very words. Maybe I, too, will succumb to the (apparent) awesomeness of applying textures and using various types of layer masks--simply for the sake of getting things done in a timely fashion. Until then, I think I'll take my sweet time, learning things on my own, so that I can sit back, and say truly:

"I did that. ALL of it."

Ooh Fabulous.

2008-01-12T09:41:00.000-08:00

I think I'll keep this around simply for the sake of giving into compulsive art updates and feedback. Yeah....

Good times.