Eclectic Micks are a collection of Irish professional comic book artists. They include Stephen Mooney (Angel, Half Past Danger), Stephen Thompson (Star Trek; New Frontier, Presidential Material: John McCain), Len O'Grady (Smoke, Ares) Nick Roche (Transformers, Doctor Who), Will Sliney (Star Wars, Farscape), Bob Byrne (Mr. Amperduke, 2000AD), Declan Shalvey (Thunderbolts, 28 Days Later) and Tomm Moore (The Secret of Kells)
Every day there will be a sketch posted here, each artist posting on a certain day. Enjoy
Love my cintiq- a real life saver.
Some really nice little bits and pieces Dec. The only thing I'd worry about in your case with a cintique is the fact that it would be very hard to reproduce the type of mark you get with your splatters and washes, it would all look terribly clinical on the cintique. Sure, the drawings would be solid, but would they retain the character of your normal stuff?
Here we go! I think the use of the word "clinical" as regards doing stuff digitally is very stereotypical moondog. It is what you make it. Dec could make a whole bank of splatters, marks and wash brushes if he wished which could lead to as much of a nice "unclinical" look as desired. I'd be more concerend as regards Dec's work that he'd spend to much time trying to get things right, as he'd have ctrl+z, rather than just letting the ink just do what it does and being happy with the outcome. Basicly what I'm saying is what doing stuff digitally does is give you more control but is it sometimes too much control?
Oh really like these little sketches by the way Dec and I'm sure you'd adapt if you wanted to "go digital" but no harm in doing both. another notch in your belt as they say!
p.s. my verification word for this is "kingu"! cool.
Yeah, I'd say that the 'clinical' look can sometimes be caused, or at least compounded, by the undo button. You can go back and fix things indefinitely so you end up smoothing out all the character from the lines.
I can't really agree Fran. Even with librayries of splatter brushes and washes and the like the stuff would still have to retain a certain uniformity that jus can't match the chaos of the Shalvey brush. It can no doubt do a hell of an impression, but would it retain the values that made the practical stuff so great in the first place? Guess we would never know til Dec actually produced some pages with a cintique.
I defifntly see where you're coming from mooney but in my book having used photoshop and other programs uniformity is just lazyness on the artists part not to mess around with settings and use multiple brushes in different ways. Do you think the brush I use for my tones looks uniform? If so fair enough. I do think though that to try to get dec's splatter/smudge tone look done digitally would end up being more time consuming digitally, at least initially anyway and I do think that a traditional method works better here.there could be something to be said for doing his linework digitally if he finds it saves time and then prining it out to add those final tones and textures. I for one don't see technology as an either or question. it always comes down to whatever works for the individual.
I agree there's an awful lot I don't know about digital art Franner, so what you're saying is more than likely true. I guess if you creatively overlap and intertwine diferent digital brush effects then no two applications would really be the same, thus rendering it a tad more spontaneous.
The organic parts of Dec's art are by far my favourite aspects, so I guess I'm just concerned they'd get lost in translation.
Hey lads. How, interesting debate today...
The Cintiq is class. Obviously i havent gotten the hang of it, but i was surprised how adaptpable the line could be and how responsive it actually was.
At the same time, because i was unsure of it, it led to a lot of weak drawing, a lot of which i simply erased, did acain and it looked fine. That is my inherent problem. The tool make shortcuts very easy and that breeds a lack of confidence in the drawing. The main thing for me is how you have to be sure about a line when you draw one, and digital makes it easy to fix your mistakes. I am more interested in the problem-solving of working *with* your mistakes.
Also; i've yet to see a program that can pull off spontaneous effects, simply bacause the digital process replicates spontenaety; it does not create it.
That is just for me though, and i'm not bad-mouthing digital or the cintiq. I plan on playing around with it a bit more, but i can't see me going fully digital because it doesn't result in the kind of drawing i'm interested in.
Fine then. be like that stupid head!!
Moooney and Shalvey in total agreement shocker.
The cintiq is mearly a tool with which you can create anything on it. You just gotta learn to use it to create certain effects, the same way you gotta learn to use a brush.
Infact, if you really anazlyse it, there are millions of effects you can do with it that are near impossible to do with a brush. In a few years I reckon well start seeing new styles born out of digital art.
As for Dec, he enjoys using a brush more so he should stick with a brush and keep on doing what he does well with that brush.
Tada, look at me weighing in on this arguement
Thompson said fuck.
No I just typed it. That's right, I type words I'd never say.
Post a Comment