Wow. Quite a few hits on the 18th. I wonder if this means I'm destined for a Halliburton-built concentration camp.
Last time I had that many hits in a single day, it was the result of a singularly hilarous practical joke I played upon a richly deserving mark. People who overestimate their own importance are so easy to fuck with, it's hardly a challenge...
Anyway, here are yesterday’s exercises.
The first is yet another vampire chick. I’m happy with the eyes, and the hair is a step forward (hair is surprisingly difficult to draw), especially the color. She’s colored entirely in Tombow ™ pens, the brush-tips for the most part. Although I didn’t realize it at first, the Tombow pens are double-ended: one brush-tip and one fine point. Upon making this momentous discovery, I used the latter to sharpen the edges of the highlights and shadows.
I also ended up using a technique I borrowed from one of my wife’s watercolor lesson books: putting in the highlights first, then the base color, and finally the shadows – a very different approach from the one I used for painting miniatures with acrylics. Like watercolors, markers are translucent. This means that the lightest shades must be applied first, and worked around, lest they disappear.
The opacity of acrylics, contrariwise, allows the painter to apply the base color first, paint in the deep and contact-shadows with a darker, undiluted shade, add the lighter shadows with a diluted wash, and then dry-brush the highlights last. (Granted, miniatures are three-dimensional rather than two-dimensional, but the general principle still applies.)
This brings me to a bit of digressive grousing. I’m very happy with the lesson books I’ve bought, and I’m glad for the sheer variety of materials available nowadays. I do wish there was a single book that explained everything, though. One title, for example, mentioned that when drawing faces, one should begin with a circle, divide it in half, and then quarter the lower half. A child’s chin is 1/8 to ¼ the circle’s diameter from the lower edge of said, while an adult’s is approximately 3/8 of the circle’s diameter below the lower edge. Very useful information, but the placement of the features is related in less detail.
Open another book, and read on. This one mentions that the nose is placed half the distance between the eyebrows and the chin, while the mouth is placed halfway between the nose and chin. Lo and behold, this, too is useful information. But why must I dig through two separate books in order to learn both?
I think the problem is that the authors are true experts. They’ve so thoroughly mastered their craft, and so thoroughly internalized details of this sort, they don’t even think about them. I wish that at times, they’d go “memory mining,” and put themselves in the position of a complete beginner. Despite the very high quality of the books I’m using, I’ve had to resort to inductive and deductive reasoning, intuition and experimentation in order to figure out a number of things.
Another of my complaints concerns the death of information on traditional coloring. Most of the books include a page or two on coloring with markers, colored pencils, or watercolors – and an entire chapter on coloring with a computer, the assumption apparently being that I’ll scan my drawings and let the computer do the rest. I suppose I eventually will, but I’d rather learn the traditional way.
This brings me to a digression within a digression. Some years ago, one of my drinking buddies was a cabinetmaker – a real, honest-to-God cabinetmaker. The only power tool he employed was a lathe. For everything else, he used a combination of traditional European and Asian techniques, and hand-tools: an old-fashioned auger rather than a drill or drill press, planes, and chisels and gouges rather than a router. His pieces were prohibitively expensive, but worth every penny. They were practically indistinguishable from the furniture I’d seen in various European castles and palaces during my boyhood. In short, the man was a true artist.
That’s the approach I want to take. I want my work to be my work – not a machine’s. Call me a hopeless Luddite, but I think we’ve allowed technology to arrest our evolution, both as a species and as individuals. Instead of developing our human potential, we rely upon gadgets and gizmos for even the simplest tasks. And how do we employ the free time these conveniences and labor-saving devices should, in theory, provide?
“Nothing to do, and no time to do it,” as Horace wrote.
End digressions.
The second photo is my first attempt at drawing monsters. It’s a rendering of the beholder, from AD&D, and its equally nasty marine cousin, the Eye of the Deep. I was an avid (“fanatical” is probably a more accurate term) gamer when I was a kid, and I still have a soft-spot for old-style RPGs. Since I’ll have to draw monsters anyway, I thought I’d start with something that inspired me/brought back a few fond memories.
The Beholder seemed like a fairly easy starting point (it's a sphere, fer feck's sake -- a Madball with eyestalks), and it was one of those monsters no one ever wanted to encounter, as half the party would end up dead or in the hurt locker. The Eye of the Deep is a limp-dicked (or rather, "limp-eyestalked") marine copy of the Beholder, but it gave me the chance to try drawing crab claws -- which I copied from a photo in a Chinese cookbook.