On the right is the line inking (the page on the left of the image), and the initial sketch done on tracing paper (on the right)
Thursday 7 June 2012
Eye/flower
On the right is the line inking (the page on the left of the image), and the initial sketch done on tracing paper (on the right)
Wednesday 30 May 2012
Robot Step-by-Step II
Hey again, everyone, welcome to part two! I decided that it would be crazy to put all the pictures I have of the process in one post, so splitting it up seemed like the smart move. If you came here before Step I, here's a link to that. It's probably best to do things in chronological order.
Step Four: Working into the layers:
Here I've added more Burnt Sienna to the landscape, especially in the foreground. It's undiluted, so the colour is stronger, and in the hills behind, I've worked in a mix of Burnt Sienna and Yellow Ochre wet-into-wet, and then added a little Titanium White to that mix and worked that wet-into-wet as well.
More after the jump
Robot Step-By-Step
Hey again, fellow travellers. This post is a step-by-step of the process I used to do my Robot with Lady painting.
I'm posting this because I would like it - I like step-by-step articles on just about anything, because I always like to see processes as they happen, and I figure, write what you love. So here goes:
Step One: Transferring the sketch.
(Doing the sketch I'm treating like a whole other process)
So this is the start of me transferring the original drawing to the painting surface. I drew the image directly onto tracing paper, turned it over and traced the lines with a soft pencil (e.g.4B). What you see is the result of putting the soft-pencil side of the tracing paper onto the painting surface, and running over the lines with a hard pencil (e.g. 2H) or a ballpoint pen (I used the pen).
The surface I'm using here is a sheet of hardboard cut to about A4, and coated with a couple of layers of gesso, applied with a housebrush. I like the housebrush, because it gives a grain to the surface that you can really get some paint in (I'll later experiment with applying the gesso with just a flat edge, so that it goes on smooth).
More after the jump.
I'm posting this because I would like it - I like step-by-step articles on just about anything, because I always like to see processes as they happen, and I figure, write what you love. So here goes:
Step One: Transferring the sketch.
(Doing the sketch I'm treating like a whole other process)
The surface I'm using here is a sheet of hardboard cut to about A4, and coated with a couple of layers of gesso, applied with a housebrush. I like the housebrush, because it gives a grain to the surface that you can really get some paint in (I'll later experiment with applying the gesso with just a flat edge, so that it goes on smooth).
More after the jump.
Monday 30 April 2012
Wednesday 25 April 2012
Asteroid Mining and Subsea exploration
I recently came across an article in Bad Astronomy (linked) that was about a new startup called Planetary Resources, featuring the investment of several billionaires, including James Cameron. This sounds plenty amazing to me - I love it so much when sci-fi becomes real. I suggest you read that blog article that I linked, as Phil Plait does it better than I will. Go read it, then come back
Ok, you done that?
OK, so those who know me know that I have a degree in Microbiology and Immunology Bsc Hons (the letters at the end are important for my ego - they mean Bachelor of Science with Honours (always makes me think of Bachelours Super-Noodles, which are what you eat when studying for your Bachelors - I wonder if there is a connection?)) . This is important for establishing why I love what I'm about to talk about.
When I think about space, it takes me almost no time at all to get to thinking about alien life. This is because it seems to me to be most likely that the first and later, most common Extraterrestrial Life we will find will be bacteria or bacteria-analogues (things that aren't bacteria, but are very much like them, and fill a similar evolutionary niche). Now since the kind of environments we are likely to find on other planets (or indeed on other sorts of celestial bodies like comets, asteroids and maybe even gas clouds) are generally considered extreme by Earth standards, it makes sense to imagine that any bacteria or bacteria-analogues that we find will be, by any reasonable definition, extremophilic. That is to say that they live and thrive in environmental conditions so bizarre, so extreme that until recently people thought that life could not live in these places.
The really deep ocean - like a few kilometres down (link to my new favourite graphic of this), can have a huge number of extreme conditions for life - super-pressure, super-salinity, super-heated water, totally unlighted water, liquid water below freezing point (yes, really), etc. Deep-sea is very unexplored, much like space in general. Deep-sea submersibles are very much like spacecraft in many ways, and deep-sea exploreres very much like astronauts. The research also ties in very nicely with each other - they're two sides of the same coin.
Take black smokers, ( link complete with sound recording - from the depths of the sea! How freaking cool is that!!!!!!!!) for instance. Discovered at the bottom of volcanic ocean trenches, they spume noxious chemicals at horrendous concentrations and super-heated temperatures, at depths with pressures that can scarcely be imagined. It is an environment that anyone could be forgiven for imagining was utterly inimical to life. But it's not. Not only does life exist there, but multi-cellular life. Complex life. Simple life like bacteria (or somewhat-living nucleic acid chunks like viruses) seems even more likely that complex life.
So what we have is evidence that life can live, sometimes in surprisingly complex forms, in environments that are mind-bending to conceive of. We also know that other planets have really harsh environments.
What I'm trying to say is that with the knowledge of extremophilic bacteria that we have, we have a reasonable hope that we might one day find ET life. Actual aliens. Real, genuine, real-life, for reals, for serious, in reality xenomorphs. Not quite as nightmarish as Aliens, hopefully.
What does this have to do with asteroid mining? Well, if you've read Phil Plait's post on the plan proposed by Planetary Resources, you'll notice that it makes a hell of a lot of sense. Step 1 is study. Step 2 is study more. Step three is do something about it. Look before you leap.
With increased space exploration, there comes an increased chance to find ET life - and here's the important bit - whether or not you actually notice it. It could be lurking entombed in asteroid ice shelves. We just don't know and can hardly predict. So we should be ready to recognise whatever tiny signs of life there are. The study of extremophilic bacteria and extreme environments, with which the ocean and other water environments are replete, gives us an insight into what kind of environments we know can and do support life - so that we can be more aware of the chances of finding life beyond our cradle.
What do you think about that?
Ok, you done that?
OK, so those who know me know that I have a degree in Microbiology and Immunology Bsc Hons (the letters at the end are important for my ego - they mean Bachelor of Science with Honours (always makes me think of Bachelours Super-Noodles, which are what you eat when studying for your Bachelors - I wonder if there is a connection?)) . This is important for establishing why I love what I'm about to talk about.
When I think about space, it takes me almost no time at all to get to thinking about alien life. This is because it seems to me to be most likely that the first and later, most common Extraterrestrial Life we will find will be bacteria or bacteria-analogues (things that aren't bacteria, but are very much like them, and fill a similar evolutionary niche). Now since the kind of environments we are likely to find on other planets (or indeed on other sorts of celestial bodies like comets, asteroids and maybe even gas clouds) are generally considered extreme by Earth standards, it makes sense to imagine that any bacteria or bacteria-analogues that we find will be, by any reasonable definition, extremophilic. That is to say that they live and thrive in environmental conditions so bizarre, so extreme that until recently people thought that life could not live in these places.
The really deep ocean - like a few kilometres down (link to my new favourite graphic of this), can have a huge number of extreme conditions for life - super-pressure, super-salinity, super-heated water, totally unlighted water, liquid water below freezing point (yes, really), etc. Deep-sea is very unexplored, much like space in general. Deep-sea submersibles are very much like spacecraft in many ways, and deep-sea exploreres very much like astronauts. The research also ties in very nicely with each other - they're two sides of the same coin.
Take black smokers, ( link complete with sound recording - from the depths of the sea! How freaking cool is that!!!!!!!!) for instance. Discovered at the bottom of volcanic ocean trenches, they spume noxious chemicals at horrendous concentrations and super-heated temperatures, at depths with pressures that can scarcely be imagined. It is an environment that anyone could be forgiven for imagining was utterly inimical to life. But it's not. Not only does life exist there, but multi-cellular life. Complex life. Simple life like bacteria (or somewhat-living nucleic acid chunks like viruses) seems even more likely that complex life.
So what we have is evidence that life can live, sometimes in surprisingly complex forms, in environments that are mind-bending to conceive of. We also know that other planets have really harsh environments.
What I'm trying to say is that with the knowledge of extremophilic bacteria that we have, we have a reasonable hope that we might one day find ET life. Actual aliens. Real, genuine, real-life, for reals, for serious, in reality xenomorphs. Not quite as nightmarish as Aliens, hopefully.
What does this have to do with asteroid mining? Well, if you've read Phil Plait's post on the plan proposed by Planetary Resources, you'll notice that it makes a hell of a lot of sense. Step 1 is study. Step 2 is study more. Step three is do something about it. Look before you leap.
With increased space exploration, there comes an increased chance to find ET life - and here's the important bit - whether or not you actually notice it. It could be lurking entombed in asteroid ice shelves. We just don't know and can hardly predict. So we should be ready to recognise whatever tiny signs of life there are. The study of extremophilic bacteria and extreme environments, with which the ocean and other water environments are replete, gives us an insight into what kind of environments we know can and do support life - so that we can be more aware of the chances of finding life beyond our cradle.
What do you think about that?
Tuesday 3 April 2012
Painting, permission and plagiarism
I love the tattoo style. One day, I will tattoo. Until then, I practise, and try to develop a style of my own.
Recently, I have remembered being blown the hell away by a gentleman called Derek Noble. I looked him up, and looked at his paintings. I love his work. I think I should reserve a large patch of skin for him. Right lower leg, I think. Both sides. More likely, I will be able to get him at a convention some year, and he'll do a few hours worth on me. That's all off in the future though. Right now, I want to talk about influences.
It's easy for me to be influenced by another artist. It happens a lot. I imagine it happens like this to a lot of people. You see some new variation on images, some slight change to a set of understood symbols, and you add it to your own artistic vocabulary. I imagine influences apply like this to any creative endeavor (sewing, cooking, woodcarving, writing, film-making etc etc). It can be hard, especially if the new insight you have is really different for you, really profound, really hard hitting, not to fall into near- or outright plagiarism. People want to emulate their heroes. It's really common.
I'm trying hard not to plagiarize. I don't think I am - but seeing Derek's work gave me the confidence - and a sort of grammar of artistic expression - to use something that I have loved for a while. Big fat lines. Big fat fuck-off black lines. Happy man with a chubby marker pen. (of course, it's important to use varied width lines for a nice effect - more of that in the next post.) I swear, it was a revelation. Plagiarism, however, would be to copy something outright, without giving it credit as a copy. It's not creatively healthy to do either, but in science, we stand on the shoulders of giants: I see no reason that I cannot do the same
To get the idea, imagine you want to write a novel. You have a hard time, though, thinking of how to express yourself just right, in a way you like. Maybe it's a fight scene in your book. So what do you do? You can just hammer at it and hope to stumble across a format that you like, or you can look at novels that have already been written, and see what you like. Emulate it. Take someone else's idea and bash it out of shape and into something that fits you better. Like George R.R. Martin, or Dan Abnett. Those guys write fight scenes almost blow by blow, then pull back for a big picture, then go back in close for a gory finish.
That's what it was like for me to see Derek's work. It was like getting permission to do something I had always wanted to do, and shown how it could be done. Shown the gory finish.
Without much more ado, then, I present Snake Lady, in ten parts:
Recently, I have remembered being blown the hell away by a gentleman called Derek Noble. I looked him up, and looked at his paintings. I love his work. I think I should reserve a large patch of skin for him. Right lower leg, I think. Both sides. More likely, I will be able to get him at a convention some year, and he'll do a few hours worth on me. That's all off in the future though. Right now, I want to talk about influences.
It's easy for me to be influenced by another artist. It happens a lot. I imagine it happens like this to a lot of people. You see some new variation on images, some slight change to a set of understood symbols, and you add it to your own artistic vocabulary. I imagine influences apply like this to any creative endeavor (sewing, cooking, woodcarving, writing, film-making etc etc). It can be hard, especially if the new insight you have is really different for you, really profound, really hard hitting, not to fall into near- or outright plagiarism. People want to emulate their heroes. It's really common.
I'm trying hard not to plagiarize. I don't think I am - but seeing Derek's work gave me the confidence - and a sort of grammar of artistic expression - to use something that I have loved for a while. Big fat lines. Big fat fuck-off black lines. Happy man with a chubby marker pen. (of course, it's important to use varied width lines for a nice effect - more of that in the next post.) I swear, it was a revelation. Plagiarism, however, would be to copy something outright, without giving it credit as a copy. It's not creatively healthy to do either, but in science, we stand on the shoulders of giants: I see no reason that I cannot do the same
To get the idea, imagine you want to write a novel. You have a hard time, though, thinking of how to express yourself just right, in a way you like. Maybe it's a fight scene in your book. So what do you do? You can just hammer at it and hope to stumble across a format that you like, or you can look at novels that have already been written, and see what you like. Emulate it. Take someone else's idea and bash it out of shape and into something that fits you better. Like George R.R. Martin, or Dan Abnett. Those guys write fight scenes almost blow by blow, then pull back for a big picture, then go back in close for a gory finish.
That's what it was like for me to see Derek's work. It was like getting permission to do something I had always wanted to do, and shown how it could be done. Shown the gory finish.
Without much more ado, then, I present Snake Lady, in ten parts:
Friday 16 March 2012
Sharing a video.
I know, I'm bad for not having proper original content. But the truth is I love to watch videos like this, and I want to share it as widely as possible. The original animation that was used for this video is a short animated film, about 9 minutes or so, linked in the description of this one on YouTube. I happened to prefer the musical oneI've posted here, but the original is very well worth a look.
Lyrics as follows:
(Verse One)I know of sin by the things momma prayedI know of heaven by the line at its gateI know of truth and America's wayCome drink the water if you want to be saved
(Verse Two)Don't drink the water if it's not from my streamIt's all still water if it's not flowing freeDon't drink the water at the watering holeIf you ain't got money, it can't save your soul
(Chorus)All God's people said amen
(Verse Three) It's not a sin if it can't make me cryHe's not the devil unless there's fire in his eyes It ain't the ghost if it don't speak in tongueIt's not a victory 'till the battles been won
(Chorus)
(Verse Four)Nobody prays unless they lose a sonDon't believe in God till a war's to be wonI know of truth by the lies I've been toldThe biggest one is that we're not getting old
(Verse Five)I know of sin by the things momma prayedI know of heaven by the line at it's gateHeard of a kingdom that's not far awayCome drink the water if you want to be saved
(Chorus)
I see it as a pretty frank allegory of the use of religion as an excuse for violence and the dominance of force.
What about you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)