Hi everyone. I'm still alive. I have just been busy with the Snacking Otaku. Now that I have published 20 nibbles, I feel that I can now make nibble in a more relaxed pace, allowing time to work on other things. Here's a quick post.
One thing I have been doing recently is drawing logos.
It's to aid the creation of artwork involving branded stuff, like cars or the content of TV screens. Instead of drawing it on the project in question, I can just photoshop one from a personal library.
Here's a selection.
They do look rough .... on purpose. I want to give them a feel that they were made by hand. I could just make proper gifs on illustrator, but they'll look too clean in a drawing.
Also, it makes them useless in counterfeiting. A simple quick glance reveals its handmade origins.
It's a question you may have been asked so many times you have lost count. I bet many art critics get asked it so many times that they have developed a default answer to which ever subject it is.
For example, movies can be placed on this hierarchical pyramid I just made up.
Here's its breakdown.
Kane's Podium. Named after the protagonist of "The Greatest Movie of All Time." These are the movies you'll find in any critic's Top Ten Favourites.
Near Masterpieces. Those movies that are beyond "good" that can be considered "masterpieces" or "classics." Most high brow and art house movies can be found here.
The Good Movie bundle. Movies that are not good enough to be near masterpieces, but good enough to be worth seeing in a multiplex. If it appeared on TV, you might consider watching it.
Multiplex Filler. Movies you only remember as posters on the walls of multiplexes while going to see a "good movie" or only saw because the "good movie" you wanted to see was sold out or not on a convenient time. Also commonly seen on TV A LOT.
The Direct-to-Video Bargain Basement Bin. It doesn't need explaining.
Now, I know some will question where some of the movies I have chosen to feature are placed on this graphic. But it was made in a bit of a hurry, so shot me. But your disgust proves my point I am making. Also, consider this question.....
Where would you put Star Wars on this pyramid?
Many would place A New Hope in the good movie bundle, due to snobbery against everything sci-fi. Some would place it on Kane's Podium (and defend it with their lives). Only ill-educated morons (and I use these terms very broadly) would place it below the "good movie bundle."
And that's just factors present-day opinions. An opinion of something can change over time, due to many factors that one can't just out, because the relationship between a fan and a work of art can be as complicated as one between two human beings.
You see the problem?
Art (like politics) is a very subjective subject. Every person has their own definition to what is considered "art" or what is a "masterpiece." Its something many people know and don't know at the same time. They know "everyone is entitled to their own opinion" but they will get angry anyway when they hear someone say "I like Digimon/Hollyoaks/James Blunt." You can't win against everyone, no matter what you like. Even if the thing in question is brad new or something that has been part of the wallpaper for centuries.
That's why, if you ask me "what is my favourite [insert thing here]?" my answer may be different every time. It could be because of who is asking or how I feel at the time.
Honestly, I find finding favourites very hard. I find it easier if I'm asked for a "top 3/5/10" of a thing. As long as I can have them in order of what I think of first. No hierarchy. No number 1 top of the pile choice. Just a small chosen selection.
One of the biggest "facts" in the world is that science and art separate things.
This is complete bull$%£".
The separation of art and science, academically, is a recent invention. Until the 19th century the border that separated scientists and artists were a blur. Think Pythagoras, Leonardo da Vinci, and the guyswhoinventedphotography, if you want examples.
The reason I bought this up is because of an idea I just had today....
A science book aimed at artists.
I have the skills and knowledge to do it, but should I pursue it?
The term "artist" is pretty loose in definition here. It can include cartoonists and animators, as well as writers, illustrators, cross-stitchers, and musicians. And I'm sure many of them have wondered about science once in a while.
It'll be like David Macaulay's The Way Things Work,
if you wanted an idea what this book might look like.
But, I'll only do it if you demand it.
If you do, leave a comment.
(especially if you happen to be an artist who struggled to understand science.)
Have you ever had the urge to take a screwdriver to something to take it apart just to look inside it?
I have. Just today I did this.....
I purchased this Acctim alarm clock last year, during my crazy eBay binge. Its fully-mechanical! Yes, you can buy a mechanical spring-powered clock made this century. That's why I bought it. Cost me less than £10.
Now, I do already have some form of alarm clock at home when I bought this. So why did I do it?
The answer is above.
Yes, I bought something just to take it apart.
In fact, I bought a few things just to take them apart. It's only now I got the time to do this teardown. And more are planned in the future, so watch out.
Written in 2016. First published in News and Views newsletter.
You are in an art gallery confronted by a painting. About A3-sized, the
oil painting depicts a Parisian bar full of a dozen customers doing what they
usually do in a bar in a style similar to Claude Monet and the like. Behind the
bar is a honey-blonde woman serving the drinks with a perifereia of bottles
behind her.
“This is one of the noted works of the lesser-known French artist Monet
La Trencher – A Bar Scene from 1891. Part of the Neo-Impressionist movement, Trencher
explored urban Paris…..”
“Rubbish!”
“Excuse me?”
“This is a fake.”
“And how would you know?”
“Because I am Monet La Trencher. Trencher never existed. I invented
him.”
“Why?”
“Shut up, whoever you are. The gallery closes in ten minutes and I got
a …"
“Good. Plenty of time for me to spot my deliberate flaws in this
painting.”
“Deliberate flaws?”
“Of course. I put a few in to …”
“Just tell us, man.”
“Fine. Notice the youth drinking a coke.”
“Yes, the man holding the coke bottle.”
“That bottle shouldn’t exist in 1891.”
“But I thought coke was invented in the 1880s.”
“Yes, but that bottle wasn’t introduced until 1915.”
(Gasp all round.)
“And there’s more. Notice the bottle of Iron-Brew behind the bar maid.
Didn’t exist until 1901. That sign in the background, the font I used is
Century Roman, created in 1894.”
“Security!”
Two security guards arrive to drag “Trencher” away.
“The bar serves Strong Bow and Famous Grouse whiskey!”
“Sorry about that. Where were we?”
“He’s right, you know. According to my phone that coke bottle design
was first introduced in 1915.”
“And that lass is wearing a fitness tracker.”
“that’s it. Tour’s over. Gallery is about to close everyone. Gift shop
is on your right.”
Everyone leaves the gallery. The lights go out…
and (thanks to some
luminous dye) the words
“actually painted in 2013 – Monet La Trencher” appear
on the painting.
Welcome to another act of cultural vandalism. Today is a sort of small act of vandalism as the subject in question is small. It's the song - "One Piece at a Time" by Johnny Cash. A song about an assembly line worker who decides to get a free car by stealing parts from the factory one piece at a time over a period of a couple of years. It seems a clever idea. The factory could (back then) afford to lose a piece or two a day. It's probability. But this scheme had one huge flaw - where he was working - Cadillac. Why is that a problem? Cadillac is a part of General Motors, a company notorious for the practice of planned obsolescence - the practice of making products that only last a set amount of time in the hope of making customers buy the next new model. Its something many people have raged against since it first came to public attention in the 1930s and attacked in a number of adverts from European carmakers, such as Volvo.
"Beat the System" Volvo ad (1971)
If the man had been working in a factory making, say, Volkswagen Beetles it wouldn't have been a problem. He would have a car that was no different to the ones leaving the factory, as these classic car ads from the iconic DDBVolkswagen campaign clearly demostrate.
Volkswagen ads from DDB (1960s)
But he worked for Cadillac. He desired a Cadillac, like most Americans then. It was this engineered desire (in the form of high quality engineering and shiny chrome) that made Cadillac the aspirational brand. It was the car you saved up for. Its the car you bought to show off that you made it in the world. Its the car rich texans attach bull horns to. You get what I'm saying, don't you? Cadillac was the car everyone wanted if they had the cash. If you made or saved enough, you bought the Cadillac (which may be the reason why Cadillacs are mostly driven by old these days - they saved enough to afford one).
One thing that fuelled that desirability was Cadillac's habit of redesigning their cars every year or so. This made the newest Cadillac look fresh and exciting while the older models (which can be bought more cheaply in the second-hand car market) looked dated and something from yesteryear. It was this that was the biggest flaw in the factory worker's plan. Without realizing, he wasn't collecting the parts to make one single model, he was collecting parts for multiple models of car. Considering the changing shape of the Cadillacs from 1949-73 its astonishing that the factory worker didn't notice the problem until the very end. I mean, I would have noticed that I got a left front wing that has two headlights and a right wing with just one let alone that only one rear wing has a tailfin. But he had the parts and built a car with them anyway. The result was a mutant Cadillac.
So what did this mutant Cadillac look like? Although a fictional object, an actual car was commissioned for promotional purposes. It featured in a music video for "One Piece at a Time".
In case the video is no longer available, here's a photo of it.
Incredible, isn't it? Although the parts weren't made to fit, with some bodging and tinkering, you can make a car out of any collection of mismatched parts. The very car from the video is currently a museum piece in the Historic Auto Attractions museum in Roscoe, Illinois.
Yeah, when I first wrote this back in 2013, I was thinking of featuring Cat in a "final sketch" at the end of each post. I had sketched out the car back then. It's only today that I finally drew it!
According to one of those anecdotes that a person tells so many times that the person later forgets the actual event and only recalls himself telling the story, one night in 1971 a young man was hitch-hiking across Europe, like a number of young people did at this time, before hitch-hiking lost its "cool." On that night, this young man was drunk, lying down on a field near Innsbruck, Austria. He was looking up to the stars. Next to him was his copy of Hitch-hiker's Guide to Europe. He then had a thought - "Would it be a good idea for someone to write a hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy?"
Also, I have been looking inward to myself and my work. Been almost 30 does make you do that. For years (maybe since I started writing fiction back in 2003) you could say I was in my "finding my voice" phase of my artistic career. A phase pretty much every creative goes through. You start off copying other people's work, dissecting it to find out why it works, and using that knowledge to improve your own. Finding originality is overrated - mostly by lawyers who specialize in intellectual property. If you marry this with a lot of practise you (eventually) get a true creative. But a potential creative in this phase can be vulnerable, so don't insult their work so called "friends." Leave the most serious criticism to people who really know their stuff ... and Simon Cowell.
Recently I began writing a big story. It was of an idea I had for years. (I wont's say what it is let) While I was doing so I realized something - I'm becoming Douglas Adams. Of all the sources of inspiration I have ever found (and I have found a LOT of inspiration all over the place) the works of Douglas Adams can be seen as the most significant. And thinking back its no surprise.
I first read his stuff back in high school. I was looking for a book to do a report on for English class and I found in the school library The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul. I found it interesting. The ridiculous situations with (some) logic, how technology is used in the story and how he describes things were things that stood out to me when I first read it.
I had heard about The Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy some time earlier (in 2003 it was voted fourth most favourite novel in the UK in a televised survey). But it wasn't until the movie came out in 2005 that I finally got familiar with the story. Not long afterwards I read the books. It was by this time that the idea of the big story I just started writing was beginning to form....
I don't what to reveal what it is about right now. All I can say that its basically a fictional account of a world-changing event that happened in a cartoon I was watching back in 2005, caused by an object in a way that'll make the idea of tea been the source of creation of a new form of spacecraft propulsion look like a lead balloon.
As I began writing this story I noticed the Doug Adams hallmarks in my approach to storytelling - the ridiculous situations with (some) logic, how technology is used in the story and the long-winged way he describes things. They are there as clear as day. I can't deny it now. I'm becoming Douglas Adams.
Outside writing fiction, Douglas Adams does share some similarities to me, particularly on the subject technology. He was a avid fan of computers, especially the Macintosh. In fact, he is claimed to be the first person in Europe to own a Mac. He was an Apple fan boy long before it became cool and then annoying.
It's a shame he died before he could see the iPhone. That device would have pan-galactic-gargle-blasted his mind.
I first found out about this book from Jason Godfrey's Bibliographic: 100 Classic Graphic Design Books(The title is self-explanatory). As soon as I found out about it I searched Amazon and found it .... and placed it in my Wish List .... and (eventually) bought a copy. (I'm not an impulsive buyer.)
The Dictionary of Visual Language began life in 1975 as one of the "Pentagram Papers" (a series of promotional booklets made by the famous design firm). Even though the authors (Philip Thompson and Peter Davenport) took a year to make it, this prototype (entitled ABC of Graphic Clichés) only covered A, B and C. It took a couple of years to cover the rest of the alphabet.
You could call this a dictionary of our visual culture. A catalogue of memes, even. From abacus to zebras, this book explains and shows how and why various things have been used in various graphic designs, from the 19th century to the 1970s (the book was published in 1980).
This book intrigues me because it kind of taps into something I did back when I was a child. Back then I had a small obsession with dictionaries with illustrations in them. It may have started with a DK CD-ROM. It was the app of the moment for me on my Dad's PC and it inspired me to do something. For about a few years I was drawing the alphabet. On the first sheet of paper I drew everything I could think of that started with "A". Then on the next sheet I did everything I an think of that began with the letter "B". And I go on until I reached "Z". I can't remember how many times I did this as a child. But one thing do remember is that the number of stuff I drew increased overtime, as I learnt about more stuff. It was an intellectual challenge that added to the 10,000 hours of drawing practice I had before high school.
Since then this may have developed into a fascination in cataloguing the world. I know they are people who do just that with nature (realandfictional). But my fascination in human ingenuity has made it focused on manmade things (artworks, buildings, manufactured objects and so on). But I'm also a visually-minded culture explorer (as evident with my comic and movie collection). So what if I combined these two obsessions into one single project?
What if I made my own "Cultural Vandal's Dictionary of Visual Culture"? The Dictionary of Visual Language was made as an art book for graphic designers, which is why its contents were mostly ads, magazine covers, and logos. It was made at a time when the profession was becoming more sophisticated and professional, especially after the "creative revolution" in advertising in the 1960s. (The writer of the foreword, George Lois, was a part of this revolution.).
But my version will cover all visual culture - cave art, tapestries, frescos, movies, video games, internet memes and so on. What many don't realise is that the same meme can have the same cultural values across every medium. No matter what medium, an image of a dove in it can represent peace.
Its just an idea I just had. Do you think its worth perusing?
The idea of
making a tribute to Sargent Pepper has been one I have had since I realized that
its 50th birthday was coming back sometime in 2016. It was a
backburner idea while I muddled with my Pokémon history tribute and my computer
book. Then I realized that 2017 was also going to be my fifth year as a blogger
(My first post on this blog was posted in November 2012) and the Sargent Pepper cover
provided a great way to celebrate that milestone.
I did want to start work on it as soon as 2017 began and
planned to have it done by June (when the original album was released in 1967).
But life intervened. It wasn’t until November when work on this tribute really
began. In the following weeks before Christmas on any free time I had I was
busy with a sketchbook and tablet/phone (for reference material). I admit that the drawings were done in a hurry, so its not my best quality.
Long before that, when deciding who to put in my version of
the cover, I asked a couple of friends for suggestions. It was one of them who
came up with the great idea of putting in every person who was a “Fifth Beatle.”
This idea probably filled up one third of the cover. The rest were a mix of
friend suggestions, links to trivial facts about the album, and personal choice.
An original plan I had was to have other artists to contribute
stuff to it and to have portraits of them as the psychedelic Beatles in the
centre of it. But this was scrapped when I decided to place the VW Beetle in
the centre of it. I did get two artists to make stuff for it. There was a third
I wanted to collaborate with, but he was too busy. I did consider using a piece
of work he previously made (and posted online) as his contribution. I found a
piece that would be a good addition and I asked him (UNLIKE SOME). He declined
to have it used and thanked me for asking.
I did get two unlikely people to make a thing or two for
this tribute. One is a student of my drawing classes and another is a friend
who only started taking art recently because of my work. Emma drew the Alolan form Exeggutor and Gary drew Alphonse Elric (I asked him to draw him with a cat
inside him. He delivered something way better than I imagined.).
It was in the final week before Christmas that the drawing
was done and scanned into Photoshop. It was challenge for my old laptop (the
same one I have used to post that first post back in 2012 when it was brand new).
It took until about 2am on Christmas Eve that the version you saw was complete.
I did think about colouring it in, but there was no time for that (and then I
thought about the craze for adult colouring books, so I figured that getting
you to add the colour would give you a means to explore the piece more closely….)
But for those too lazy to do that, here it is in full techincolor.
Work in progress.
(Posted to show that I am working on it.)
