Write What You.....'re Interested In. And Do Your Research

There's an old saying that, when writing a story, you should "write what you know". The reason is that it gives your work authenticity and authority...you won't just be making things up out of thin air. Your work will have a compelling reality to it because it's based on things you're familiar with.

The problem with this conventional wisdom is that it can be limiting. You may not be all that interested in the topics you're already familiar with. So I would change this familiar bit of advice to "write what you're interested in".

Great films and stories always feel authentic and "real" on some level. If your world doesn't feel like a "real" world, then the story feels false and you can't get an audience to connect with the characters and worry about them, feel something for them and fret about how their story will turn out, which is where all the compelling emotion in a film comes from. Even when creating a fantasy world that doesn't exist, it's very important to first understand as much as you can about the world we live in and apply it to the world you create. Because your readers are familiar with the actual world we live in - it's all any of us really know - we use our everyday experiences in the real world as a barometer to judge how real a fantasy world feels. For example, if you have dragons in your story, read up on birds and bats, and dinosaurs that were able to fly, as well as large animals like elephants and whales (and whatever other topics you can think of), and you will find tons of great details that will allow you to make your dragons specific to your story - dragons that are like ones that no one else has ever created. People love that kind of thing and it will make your story memorable, specific and unique. It'll make your fantasy world feel real. And it will make your story come to life and make it compelling in a way it can never be if you're just making things up out of thin air.

So, if you're working on a project of your own, it's very important - and these days, easier than ever - to do your research.

We're living in an amazing age for doing research. The internet has placed an amazingly vast resource at everyone's fingertips. And the fact that there are so many television channels now, like the Discovery channel and the History channel, etc. means that documentaries about a wide variety of topics are being produced like never before.

And when I say the internet, it's not just things like wikipedia that I have found helpful...I constantly use sites like abebooks and alibris to find used and out-of-print books that are not only great help but also available at extremely affordable prices.

For example, here's a photo of just some of the books I've been using for research on my own personal project.

Many of these I was able to get from alibris for a dollar or so. Also, not pictured are the dozen or so books I read on my kindle for research.

I've also found Google Maps to be a great resource. The story I'm working on takes place in a place I've never been. It would be great to visit there but it's not feasible right now. So Google Maps street view is a great option.

I'm old enough that it still blows my mind to be able to type in any place in the world and be able to "walk the streets" by using Google street view (I'm sure there are vast swatches of land to be done yet by Google maps, but so far everything I've needed I've been able to find).

I've you've never tried Google Maps street view, check it out sometime. I know everyone probably knows how to use it already, but just in case you don't know how to do it, here's a quick tutorial:

Go to Google.com and type in any address in the search bar( for example, I typed "2100 Riverside Dr., Burbank", the address where I work).

Now, when the search results come up, click the option that says "view in Google Maps" (should always be the first result).

When the map opens up, it'll look something like this:

Here's a closer look at the upper left hand corner. Check out the little orange man I made a red arrow to indicate him). You can grab him with the cursor and drop him anywhere on the map. And if you've searched for a specific address, there'll be an orange "pin" on the map to show you where that specific address is, so you can drop your man there.

That'll go to street view, where you are seeing what the little man would see, if he were standing at that point. Here's a view I see at the end of my commute every day (this is Keystone Drive, Burbank).

Now, when you're in street view, you can use the circle icon at the upper left to rotate. If you click any of the four arrows around the circle, you can look up, down, left or right. And if you hover your cursor over the street, you'll see white arrows that allow you to go down the street or up the street to see what's around you. Here's the last bit of my commute every morning :

So Burbank's a place I know really well and I could research easily, if my story took place there. But it doesn't. So I've used Google maps - not only to check out how the location where my story takes place looks - but also to research details such as how the garbage cans look there, what kinds of trees and plants grow there, how wide the roads are, what kinds of materials the houses are built from, etc. Google maps has allowed me to spend hours immersing myself in the world where my characters have spent their (fictional) lives, and without being able to visit there, I don't know how else I would've figured this stuff out.

I could have just made it up, but for anyone that lives there or has ever visited there, they'd know it was false. And I honestly think it would feel false to every reader - there's no replacement for the authenticity of actually knowing all this stuff.

The hard part about research is knowing how to use the information once you've gotten it. After all, a story isn't a documentary. It's still a work of fiction. In the example of researching dragons I mentioned earlier, unless your idea is just about documenting how dragons might actually work, you probably will never actually articulate everything you've learned about how dragons might actually work within your story. Ideally, your research has provided you with some ideas of how to make your dragons look like they might actually be able to exist and really work, as well as maybe some story ideas about what happens when dragons get sick, what conditions they might be able to breathe fire under, what weaknesses they might have that may allow a hero to defeat them, etc. You want to use your research to make your world feel more authentic and real. Research is supposed to give you more story ideas and open up new possibilities that you've never thought about. What you don't want is to feel overwhelmed and overburdened by the research. Doing research may show you that one or more of your ideas actually won't work, which can be discouraging, but the encouraging part is that it should open up many new alternatives to explore instead.

Also, there will always be a moment where your research contradicts what you're trying to do with the story, and you'll have to make a decision as to whether you're going to re-think your story or just ignore that part of the research. There's no story in the world that is 100% truthful and real to life. After all, like I said, a story isn't a documentary. At some point it departs from reality and enters the world of fiction.

I like to think of it as an 80/20 rule. In general, if your story is about 80% accurate I think you can fudge the other 20% (just a rule of thumb - every story is different).

Take "Raiders of the Lost Ark", for example. There's a lot of fictional things in the movie, but all the inspiration for the story and a lot of the details are grounded in reality. The work Indiana Jones does as an archaeologist is definitely based in reality - in the beginning we see him exploring a temple in a South American temple. There are temples in South America, obviously, and a lot of the details of how the temple looks and  works are probably based in reality. It's the extra details - like Jones's comrades betraying him, the bad guys who are on his trail, and the details of his narrow escape, as well as the layer Jones brings to it with his personality and character, that lift it beyond documentary and into an amazing work of fiction. But the realistic details give it a grounded sense that makes it feel real and make us sit on the edge of our seat as we watch his narrow escapes. If the temple felt like a phony, made up place, none of this would work.

Other details of the story are also definitely grounded in reality: there was an Ark of the Covenant, rumored to have mythical powers; it was believed by many to be hidden somewhere in the Middle East; Hitler did have an interest in the occult and was looking for items like that during the second world war, etc.

Chances are there's never been an archaeologist who was exactly like Indiana Jones or did things the way he did....but the realistic framework of the story and locales enable the audience to buy the more fantastic elements of the story.



There are a few pitfalls that I see people fall into when they're in the research phase. The biggest problem with research is that it can be hard to know when to stop researching and actually get to work. There's always more research to do than can realistically be done, and some people just stay in "research mode" forever. This can be tempting because writing is terribly hard work involving constant decisions and wrestling with all the difficult things that writing a story involves. Research can be more fun because it isn't usually as hard as writing is - you're just taking in information (and hopefully interesting information at that). Hopefully you'll find a spot where you can start working and still keep doing research at the same time. For me, the way to balance this is to always be thinking about your story while you're doing the research - force yourself to jot down story and character ideas at the same time you're taking notes for your research. Make sure there's cross-pollination between the two.

The other problem I see is that people do their research, and then set it aside and start working on their story, and the two processes don't affect each other - the research doesn't make any impact on the story. If the research works properly, it should spark a ton of story ideas and make you see your characters in a new light. If you find that the research isn't having an affect on your story, I'd say sit back and take another look at the area you're researching...maybe you're on the wrong path and you should try looking at the subject from another angle, or research a different area.

Or maybe your story just isn't right and needs to be shifted in a way that relates to the research. Maybe your characters and story just aren't the right ones for the world you're interested in.

Or maybe you just have to keep plugging away on the path you're on and the connections will become clear later.


I know this might all seem frustratingly vague, but everyone (and every project) works differently, and always remember that every project explores its share of dead ends and goes in circles for a time. If you keep pushing, you'll find a way forward, and at the same time - trust me - nobody ever feels like their story is 100% solid and figured out (unless they're fooling themselves). Writing a story is a constant process of questioning what you've done, backtracking, re-thinking and re-writing. That's the only way to make it better! And what seem like a dead end today may come back and inform the story at a later point.

The other problem with research is that - let's face it - to us artists, doing all this research is counter-intuitive. For me personally, I started my own personal project as a way to get myself to draw in my free time because I don't really draw at work anymore. But as I got more and more into my story I had to do more and more research....when what I really wanted to do was start drawing! But at the same time I knew all that drawing would be meaningless without the research to make it feel authentic.

So that's why my advice to not necessarily to write about what you know, but what you're interested in. That way, doing the research will interest you and it won't turn into a boring chore that you have to wade through. As we all know, writing a story is incredibly hard and can be tedious at the best of times. Most stories get abandoned at some point, so give yourself the best chance you can to succeed and stick with it by picking a world to research that you'll stay interested in for the long haul.

Of course, there's always the other way to do it: the approach Steve Purcell took, in "Sam and Max: Freelance Police".

Using Tones and Values, and Your First Homework Assignment!

Kidding, there's not really homework, but an exercise at the bottom that you could try if you like (but I'm not looking at them, there's no prize for doing it, and no grades involved). First, some background...

At work, on of our story trainees were asking about working with tones and values in story boarding (basically, adding black, white or grey to a story sketch).

My friend Nathan Greno suggested an assignment: give them a complicated line drawing and have them add tones to it to get practice in using values. He suggested that we have them do it two ways: pick one drawing and shade it using only white, black and one grey value. Then, pick another drawing and shade it using as many grey values as they wanted.

The point, of course, is to show how keeping your value scheme simple can give you a clean uncluttered result that works great. Once you start using too many grey values it quickly gets muddy and hard to read.

There's an old post here that I wrote about using tones and values. The simple overview on using values for story sketch is that values can be useful for:

1. Mood, and for

2. Readability

When it comes to using tones to create mood in a sketch, I'd say that drawings with darker, heavier tones tend to feel more somber, dramatic and heavier. Drawings with very light tones (or none at all) seem more fun, exciting and lighter. That may sound like an oversimplification but there are a million variations within that idea.

Some examples (from Bill Waterson, Charles Schulz and Quentin Blake) to show how simple line drawings with little or no tone can feel fun, light and comedic (depending on the drawing style and subject matter, of course):

A couple of Howard Pyle drawings that have heavy tones, and feel somber and weighty as a result.

When using tones for readability, you're basically using tones to either separate things or group them.

A group of businessmen without tone:

 The same group, with tones to separate them from each other and suggest depth, as well as add clarity and readability. Here, the use of tone enhances the idea that they are five separate individuals:

This is the way I use tone in story sketch about 90% of the time. Most scenes aren't heavily dramatic scenes so they don't call for heavy tones (in fact dark heavy tones would work against the feeling you want for a light humorous scene, or even a sincere character scene where two people are interacting). So usually I just throw some quick tones onto a drawing for readability: to separate things from each other and make sure everything in the sketch is clear.


Here are some story sketches from "Tangled" I did that show the kind of quick tones I sometimes use to both clarify and group things in my boards:

So here are the businessmen again, but this time they are all colored the same tone to make them all one group. As opposed to the previous example, here they read as a group of businessmen....and not as individuals.

And when talking about readability, never forget that the eye will always go to the area of greatest contrast first. Usually that means where black is set against white. Then use greys to sublimate the rest of the drawing where you don't want the audience to look. Like so:

So anyway, after Nathan gave me that great idea for an assignment, I searched out some complicated line drawings to hand out and have people add tones for clarity and/or mood. But there was never a good time to give the assignment and I never handed it out. However, if you wanted to try it yourself, here are some high quality jpegs that you could download, open in photoshop (or print out on paper, or whatever) and try adding some tones. Some are by Belgian artist Franquin, the rest are by Jack Kirby.

So do with them what you want (If anything). If you're interested in actually doing this as an assignment, here's how I'd approach it:


Pick one drawing and, using only black, white and ONE grey value, make the drawing read clearly. I'd pick ONE center of interest where you want the viewer to look and put your highest contrast there. Then use greys to create hierarchy with the other elements so the eye will go to the intended center of interest first. Also try using greys to create space and depth and clarity to the elements.

Then take a different drawing and use black, white and as many grey values as you'd like to use, but with the same purpose: pick one area to make the center of interest or the most important and create contrast there, then sublimate the rest. See if you have trouble controlling that many greys and whether you can keep the drawing from getting muddy and mushy.

You could also take a drawing and try creating TWO different centers of interest. Usually in story sketch we only want ONE center of interest because, when your storyboards are cut into a story reel, they may be on screen for only a second or two. They have to read very quickly, and there should only be one thing happening at a time.Two centers of interest is more likely to be appropriate in an illustration, where you have more time to examine the drawing and absorb it, finding hidden nuances as you do. So if illustration is more your emphasis, you might like trying that approach.

Then I'd take another drawing and try to use tones to make it seem like a heavy, dramatic scene (like the Pyle paintings).

Also, if you teach a class where this kind of exercise might be useful, feel free to use these drawings and assignment (or alter it any way you like).

My only request is to please not post your version online. I may end up giving this assignment one day and I don't want anyone to be able to cheat!

There's no right or wrong way to do the assignment. Each one could be done a thousand different ways. The point is to have fun and learn by experimenting and tweaking to get the best result.

"Tangled Ever After"

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention "Tangled Ever After", a short film (and a sequel of sorts to "Tangled") that is opening this weekend along with the 3D version of "Beauty and the Beast". It'll be shown on television in the spring as well (at least...as far as I know).

The short has an interesting past: there were a lot of people who wanted to see (SPOILER ALERT) Flynn and Rapunzel get married at the end of "Tangled". We didn't do that for a number of reasons, the best one being that Rapunzel's journey is about much more than just meeting a man and falling in love; she gains her freedom, discovers her true identity, escapes her life-long oppressor and reunites with a long-lost family. So a wedding seemed like not-quite-the-right ending for the movie.

But apparently there were people interested in seeing Flynn and Rapunzel get married, so the idea came up that maybe we should see their wedding and give people just a little bit more of the world of "Tangled" with a short.

Obviously, it was pretty clear to all of us that just watching Flynn and Rapunzel get married would be a pretty uninteresting short. So Director Nathan Greno had an idea that would give a wedding to people who wanted that, but also have a layer of entertainment and comedy that would give some more screen time to Maximus and Pascal, who seem to be perfect characters to have their own comedic spotlight in the form of a short.

Nathan's idea was to have Maximus and Pascal be the ring bearers for Flynn and Rapunzel at their wedding, but during the ceremony they lose control of the rings and they roll out of the church. So while Flynn and Rapunzel are performing their vows, Max and Pascal are out chasing after the rings as they bounce through the town (without Flynn, Rapunzel or anyone in the church realizing that they're gone).

The beauty of this idea is that you get to have the sincere wedding of Flynn and Rapunzel while the comedic aspect takes place outside, away from the ceremony. As opposed to trying to make the actual wedding ceremony wacky and funny, which would take away from the satisfaction of seeing Flynn and Rapunzel have a nice wedding and finally tie the knot. But if the short was just concerned with the wedding, it would be pretty dry and not fit the comedic and fun world that we established in "Tangled".

Also, I'll be the first to admit that I find weddings rather boring and uninteresting. So this idea has something for people who like weddings as well as something for those who don't.

So Nathan pitched the idea to Byron Howard (the other director of "Tangled" and the other director on the short), Byron liked that idea and the ball started rolling.

Nathan, Byron and I had a brainstorming session early on with some of the story guys and they gave us some great material that helped us figure out the idea. The three of us boarded the whole thing and worked with it and shaped it in editorial. It turned out great and looks every bit as good as the movie, so I hope you'll check it out in theaters if you can or on TV when it's shown later this spring (although it's only in 3D in theaters, of course).

One other interesting side note for me personally was that when I first heard about the short I was really looking forward to working with the "Tangled" characters again. I love all the characters and I know them so well by now that it's really second nature to get in their heads and know what they're thinking and how they act, which is always the part that takes a while to get used to when you're developing new characters.

As much as I loved working with Nathan and Byron and everyone else on the short (and as proud as I am of the way it turned out), I realized that the thing I love the most about my job is the challenge of inventing new worlds and discovering new characters as you build a story from scratch. So even though it was a blast to return to the old characters and their world and work with guys that I enjoy working with, I'm more excited about the prospect of inventing a new world and discovering whole new characters as I work on the next thing that I'm going to be a part of.

So I hope you'll get a chance to see it and, if you enjoyed "Tangled", I hope you'll enjoy the short just as much and enjoy spending just a little bit more time with the characters and their world.

A Good Comic Book Resource

As I've said before, I didn't really get interested in superhero comics as a kid. Mostly I read Disney and Looney Tunes comics and comic adaptations of movies like "Star Wars". I read Mad magazine religiously too.

Anyway the point is that my knowledge of comics and their "rules" is pretty non-existent. When I decided to try and create my own graphic novel I started looking around for resources to learn more about comics and how they're put together. One great free resource I found is all the articles on Blambot.com. Nate Piekos has written a few helpful pieces, including this one on grammar in comic books, which I found pretty fascinating. I am ashamed to admit that I had no idea that comic book grammar was so regimented and specific.

And yeah, I know there are probably other schools of thought, and more than one way to do it! But what Nate says makes sense to me (and looks right) so I'll stick with it.

He also wrote an article about designing a logo for your comic that I really liked. The same advice could apply to designing any kind of logo and I found it helpful. It's not something many people write helpful advice about, and I always enjoy that kind of thing: analysis of a topic that I never thought about before.

The full page of article topics can be found here.

Blambot also offers some free comic book fonts and sells some as well. I bought the "Hometown Hero" font to use for my comic because I really don't have the patience to write out my own dialogue, it was more reasonably priced than most other font sites and because I really like the font.

Anyway, I really like the site and I found it very helpful. If you're interested in that type of thing, I hope you will enjoy it too!

New Changes Coming

 In March I'll have been posting for six years and it's been amazing - thanks for all your great comments and kind words. I wanted to take a moment to mention some changes that are coming.

This is kind of a long post so here's the tl;dr (too long; didn't read) summary: I'm going to put ads on the blog this year, and also in 2012 I am going to start posting my graphic novel online for free.


Here's the long explanation:

Originally I had a different plan. I've been working on a graphic novel for over a year and a half and my plan was to always post that in installments on a different website online and put ads on that website because I've always wanted to keep this site ad free. But the more I looked at online comics the more I realized that having ads on a comics site really distracts from the experience - it's hard to get involved in them and get wrapped up in the story when there are ads flashing all over the page. So gradually I realized that I didn't want to put ads along with my graphic novel....I just wanted to post my story so people would read it.

So eventually I'll be posting my graphic novel for free. It's turned into a massive undertaking and I can't quite start posting it yet. I need to get farther into it before I can start sharing it. And my work schedule is always changing so I don't know when exactly I'll have enough done to start posting. Sometime in 2012 for sure.

I would leave both sites ad free if I could. However, my children are getting older and, of all the things that keep me awake at night, one of them is that I'd like to set more aside for their college funds. So it seems appropriate to take any money I might make off this site and apply it towards their education. I appreciate your understanding on this and I hope the ads won't negatively effect the experience of visiting the site.

Working on my graphic novel has definitely cut into my blogging time over the last year and a half or so, but I am excited to get to a point where I can post it and I hope you will all check it out when I do.

Best wishes for a happy 2012!

Happy Holidays!

Here's my Christmas card this year (once again featuring our Miniature Schnauzer).

Best wishes for a wonderful holiday and a happy New Year!!!

"I've Got a Plan..."

Have you ever noticed that, in movies, when a character says, "I've got a plan", there are two things that can happen next.

One of those options is that the film cuts away at that point, and we (the audience) don't get to hear what the plan is as the character explains it to whoever he was talking to. Then, as the plan goes into action and it unfolds, we are surprised at how it twists and turns as the characters execute their plan.

Here's the scene from the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" where Jack steals the Interceptor out from under the British Navy that illustrates this first approach.



Jack never says "I've got a plan" per se, but it's pretty clear he has one and at no point do we (the audience) know what he's up to (nor does Will Turner, it seems). So as the plan unfolds, everything is a surprise to us and fun to watch...all the way to the end, where he anticipates every move his enemy will make to try and stop him. If we had heard all those details in advance, it would take all the fun out of watching it unfold.

The other way to go is that after the character says, "I've got a plan...", we do the opposite: we don't cut away. We stay with the character as he or she lays out their plan in detail. That way the plan - as the characters are expecting it to unfold - is clear in our minds. We know exactly what each character's role is in the plan, what they're supposed to do, and when, and what the characters expect to happen at each point and what they expect the final result to be.

The reason to play it this second way is so that they audience is completely clear on what's supposed to happen....and then dramatic tension (or comedy - think "I Love Lucy") is created when the plan starts to go completely wrong. Maybe the world doesn't react the way the characters thought, maybe the guards decided to change their schedule that day, maybe one of the characters falls asleep and misses the crucial step everyone was relying on him or her to perform. Doesn't matter....the point of this second way is to set up an expectation and then create drama (or comedy) by how the plan doesn't match what we were setup to expect.

The point of both ways is to surprise you - either by completely withholding information or by giving you all the information you need so that you can understand what's going wrong and how bad that is for the characters.

Think how boring it would be to hear the characters plan out their moves and then see them execute it in exactly the way they planned it out. It'd be like watching the same thing twice....once as they talked through it and then as they actually did it. It's be like watching a movie where everyone says what they're going to do before they do it: "I'm going to punch you now", "I'm going to shoot you now", "I'm going to kiss you now".

In a lot of ways, this little example holds the key to much of film making. Either withhold key information to surprise your audience with later, or setup an expectation that you subvert later by delivering something else. It's that simple. As Jerry Bruckheimer once said about film making, "Just keep throwing 'em curveballs."

WARNING: POSSIBLE SPOILERS (but not really)

"Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol" falls into the latter category: that is, they have a lot of plans in the film and they definitely explain them out in advance for the audience to hear. I don't think there's any other way they could have approached it in that particular case: the plans in the movie are so complicated there's no way to explain everything that's happening to the audience as it's happening. And their plans are so reliant on getting technology to work in unison with the physical parts of the plan that I don't know how you'd ever explain that while it's unfolding. It would make no sense and would create pauses in the action that would totally destroy the rhythm of the action sequences. So they discuss their plans with each other before they put them into action, and they explain the technology-based parts of their plan to the audience in a natural way: they have one tech-savvy guy who understands all this stuff better than anyone else on the team, and so the rest of the team naturally has to ask him questions about all the technology, and he explains it to them....and to us, the audience. So as we jump into the action, we know as much as we need to know to understand what's happening and what the technology is supposed to be doing (and what it's not supposed to do, so we know when it's failing). Otherwise there'd be no dramatic tension if it started to malfunction or do the wrong thing.

There are better examples of this type of thing in the film, but here are some clips that are available online that illustrate the point.

Choices Create a Believeable and Consistent World

As artists, when we create stories in a visual medium, we control the look of everything. Every character, every background, every prop and every detail has to be designed. We have to make a choice about how each and every thing will look, and why. It can seem overwhelming,


So how do you know which way to make those decisions? For me, everything always seems to go back to the story and what will tell it in the best possible way. Each and every detail you draw can contribute to the story you're telling, if you put enough thought into your work and design it right. And if you don't think ahead and don't put much thought into what you're doing, you can undermine what you're trying to say.

Here's an example: our story (be it an animated film, comic book, whatever) opens on our main character's house, before we even see him.

Our character's house has walls that seem to be falling in and a roof that appears to be sagging. Most of the windows are too dirty to see in, but the ones that we can see through have old sheets hung in front of them instead of curtains or blinds. The house is in dire need of a paint job, and the front lawn hasn't been mowed in forever - the grass is waist high. Piles of old newspapers lie on the front step - the owner is too lazy to collect them and they continue to pile up day after day.

When we see a house like that, we make a lot of assumptions about the type of person that lives there. We ascribe a lot of qualities to them based on the way their house is kept. It doesn't have to be a house, of course...the character's car, their clothing, their posture, etc....all these things are choices we have to make as artists and each one can have a real effect on how the audience perceives our characters.

By contrast, picture a house with a fresh clean paint job with brightly painted shutters on the windows. The roof is clean and perfectly straight, and the windows are all sparkly clean. The lush, thick grass of the front yard is trimmed neatly and the whole house is surrounded by a perfectly even white picket fence.

In both types of houses we get a strong feeling about the person that lives there and takes care (or doesn't take care) of their home. We've made strong decisions that help tell our story and inform the audience about our characters.

Many times I feel like I see stories where people think "Okay, I need to show my character's house before we meet him" and then they'll just draw a bland, nondescipt house. The house doesn't tell anything about the character - it's not being used as story ammunition to tell the story in a more powerful, involving way. It's just a graphic symbol that says, "house". And it's a totally missed opportunity.

Or on the other hand, sometimes you see artists make a choice that doesn't quite feel right. For example, imagine if Elmer Fudd pulled out a rifle and pointed it at Bugs Bunny, but instead of his usual cartoon hunting rifle, the gun was a completely realistic looking gun, covered with detail and even tiny flecks of rust. It would feel totally jarring and it would take you out of the cartoon. You'd definitely be done laughing at the cartoon. You would be reminded of the fact that you're watching something made by artists that made weird choice that doesn't fit....the spell has been broken.

Good artistic choices feel like they weren't even choices that were "made", they just happened naturally. A good story where everything is designed properly just feels right, and it feels inevitable....like it's a real, actual place where everything actually exists. It doesn't have to be a realistic world, everything just has to relate to everything else properly. Everything has to be at the same level of caricature. Everything in Bugs Bunny's world should relate to Bugs Bunny. Everything in Pinocchio's world should relate to Pinocchio.


As an example, I'd like to point out something I saw in an issue of Jordi Bernet's "Jonah Hex" that inspired me to write about this subject.

First, though, here are some random pages from Bernet's "Hex" work to give an idea of the level of realism and grittiness he usually employs, which help give the story its tone and mood.

The grittiness and level of drawing help enhance the gravity and rather grim level of story telling. The violence feels like it has more weight and there's more danger and suspense to the stories because they're handled in a more serious way.


For contrast, imagine the page where Jonah is attacked by wolves drawn in the "Peanuts" style...the drawing style would feel really inappropriate for the subject matter. You'd never really worry that Charlie Brown would be killed by ravenous wolves. Just as, if "Peanuts" were drawn in the Jonah Hex style, they'd be a lot less funny!


So here's the section that made me think about this topic and inspired me to write.

In the spread below, Jonah is a young boy. His father kicks him into the sewage of the family outhouse and Jonah is forced to spend a long night climbing his way out.

Here's the particular choice that caught my eye and surprised me when I saw it: the stylized treatment of the stars in the panel when the camera shows the exterior of the outhouse.

Now don't get me wrong: this is entirely my opinion, and there's no right or wrong to this stuff, and I completely love Bernet's stuff - I always have.

But as I always say: the best way to learn is to look at other people's artwork and ask yourself why they did what they did, and what you might have done differently. More than anything, this is the method I used to learn whatever I have learned in life...it's the best method that I know to learn anything.

And here's the thing: personally I find the stylized treatment of the stars doesn't quite fit the narrative. The stylized stars are very charming, quirky and quaint. They work great for other types of stories that have more of that kind of feel. But "Jonah Hex" is about as far away as you can get from that kind of story. Particularly when the main beat is about being kicked into a pit of raw sewage (by your Dad, no less) and having to climb your way out. The sewage is certainly handled with a level of detail and rendering that sells the idea that the sewage is disgusting (a great choice, by the way). So why not handle the stars in a more realistic way to underscore the reality and the severity of the moment? Why handle them in a way that (at least to me) lends more of a charm and whimsy to a story?

Here are some pages from the same artist (Bernet) but completely different characters and subject matter: these are from "Claire de Nuit". The characters are more broad and cartoony, which fits the more comedic subject matter, and the stylized stars fit really well. As I said before, those kind of stars are charming and whimsical. They fit better here.

Of course I should warn you that if you go looking for more "Claire de Nuit" examples, they tend to be very NSFW!


Anyway hopefully you will all take this the way I intended: I am not at all criticizing Bernet. I love his stuff. But when I look at any movie, TV show, painting or drawing, I am always asking myself the same questions:


What choices did the artist make?

Why did they make that choice?

What would I have done differently?

Some people get outraged when they think you are questioning other artists, and that is not my intent. I have simply trained myself to ask these questions to learn from other artists and improve my own tastes by learning from what they've done. Agree or disagree with me on this post - that's not the point. The point is to inspire you to ask the same questions. Too many times we look at a great piece of art and just admire it. To get better and learn, we should always be asking ourselves: what did that artist do that I agree with, and what did they do that I might have done differently?

After all, that's what makes us all individual and why every artist is interesting and amazing in their own way!

Paul Felix Layout Notes

The great Disney artist Paul Felix wrote some great notes on perspective and layout years ago. They are full of great information and very clearly written. If you've never seen them before, check them out - even if you're not particularly interested in layout they're full of useful knowledge about drawing.


Links to them at the "Unofficial Paul Felix Blog":
Part One
Part Two
Part Three
Part Four

Or all in one spot at Dan Caylor's "On Animation":
Paul Felix notes

Probably the Strangest Drawing You'll See Today

Sometimes people ask me to post more of my drawings....which I usually can't, because most of them are for movies that won't be out for a while. So here's a card I did recently for my wife for our Anniversary. It's our two family pets - a Miniature Schnauzer and a corn snake.