Ugh....sorry to go so long between posts. My ancient laptop finally died and I have no funds to get another, so blogging has become really tough for the time being...
Anyway, here's a great scene from "The Verdict" starring Paul Newman and directed by Sydney Lumet. It's been a while since I saw it so forgive me if I'm a little off here, but here's the setup: Newman's a lawyer who's been hired by the family of a woman who, during a routine surgery, was turned into a vegetable by an anesthesiologist who carelessly gave her the wrong medicine. The family wants damages from the doctor so they can pay for her expensive medical care. Paul Newman is an alcoholic has-been disgraced lawyer who, these days, only tackles easy cut-and-dried cases like this - basically an ambulance chaser. For him the case starts out just representing a quick settlement and some money, and he wants to just settle it quick, grab his share of the cash and move on.
This scene, however, is a turning point. As he goes just to grab some quick Polaroids of the injured woman to show the jury for sympathy, he unexpectedly comes face-to-face with the real tragedy of this victim. Suddenly the fact that this woman's life has been totally destroyed becomes real to him. You can see it in Paul's acting really well, which is amazing, of course, but the real reason I wanted to share this scene was two other elements that I think are really smart.
The Polaroid photos are a great, great tool here. The fact that Lumet doesn't show us the girl until we see her in the photos works well, first of all, so we get the full weight of her situation by having to wait - and getting more and more curious - about what Newman is looking at. The long scene where you're just watching the photos develop - slowly - is an awesome metaphor for exactly what is happening here: his long, slow realization that she is a real person who has suffered a terrible blow and she has no voice of her own. This isn't just an open-and-shut quickie case, there was a real injustice done here. This woman can't fight for herself and she needs someone to fight for her, to bring her doctor to justice, and he's the only guy who can do it.
The Polaroids are a brilliant way of showing this idea, and yet it would be so easy to present that idea in a forced and fakey way, but Lumet has such a deft touch that it doesn't feel unnatural at all.
The end of the scene is really amazing too. All through the movie, he's just referred to this as just a quickie case and that he's going to rush through this one and get on to the next. He never really shows any interest in this woman or her problems before this point, he's lost all passion and interest in the law and it's become just a way to make a quick buck to him. Throughout the movie he never refers to himself as an attorney, much less her attorney. So when the nurse asks him to leave the room, his simple answer of "I'm her attorney" has a much deeper meaning. The surface meaning is simply "I don't have to leave this room, I have a right to be here" but the deeper meaning to the audience is that he has had a revelation, that he has been re-energized by this woman and her plight, and that he is now going to fight for her, as her attorney, and do his best to get justice for her. This visit to her hospital room, which he thought was a routine stop to get photos of her, has unexpectedly touched him and become a turning point in his life.
The most impressive aspect of all of this is how naturally all this is accomplished. The idea of using a polaroid developing to suggest his slow realization and the way the simple statement "I'm her attorney" are both simple ideas that come off as very organic and natural but are very powerful and effective. It's always tempting for filmmakers to make sure they hit their "important" ideas over in a way that nobody will miss and get very heavy-handed with them. But Lumet found a way to make natural things that are happening in the scene have a much deeper, more profound impact by the way they are presented.
Saturday, July 04, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Walt Stanchfield "Lazy Lines"
Here is one of my all-time favorite Walt handouts (from Volume One) where Walt talks about "Lazy Lines". I remember reading this and thinking "Nobody has ever written down this type of information about drawing before" and just having this really blow my mind.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Hurst and Hips, Age and Youth, Etc.
The point of my Hurst post (below) entitled "Just One More Thing" was that the girl in the image was drawn with wide shoulders and narrow hips, which is counter to what most anatomy books describe as the way to draw an idealized "feminine" figure. Usually anatomy books tell you that the way to show the difference between male and female figures is that adult females have broad hips and narrow shoulders while male figures have narrow hips and broad shoulders.
I was pointing this out as an example of how to bend or break established "rules" and yet still get the desired effect (in this case, a feeling of femininity).
It has been suggested (fairly) below that it is a bit misleading when I say that the Hurst image below features a girl with broad shoulders and slim hips. It's true that her hips are perpendicular to the viewer and her back is parallel to the viewer, so therefore the position of the viewer makes the broadness of her shoulders and the narrowness of her hips exaggerated. Obviously, in the post below that, I pointed out the twists in the figure so I get how that is the case.
So maybe that's not the best example of this type of stylization, but I still contend that Hurst's style was to portray his females with broad shoulders and narrower hips. In looking through the internet archives I can find of Hurst's work and in looking through the excellent book "The Art Of Earl Oliver Hurst" I was unable to find a single example of Hurst breaking this rule. Every female figure I could find of his had narrow hips. If someone is aware of one that breaks this pattern I would be very interested to see it!
The reason I find this such a great concept to study is that if you can draw a figure with slim hips - breaking the established cliche that wide hips are more feminine - and still put across the feeling of femininity, then obviously Hurst is doing other things that put over the female aspect. You then have a great opportunity to ask yourself "what other tools is Hurst using to put over the femininity of this figure"? or "What original ways has he found that say femininity that can't always be found in anatomy books?"
He certainly didn't invent the idea of the feminine woman with the slimmer hips. Erte and Patterson drew plenty of them too.
Also you can contrast his work with artists that tend to draw the more traditional slim-shouldered heavy-hips type of woman and see how the two types create a different feeling. To me the women that Hurst draws have an energetic, athletic, innocent quality - the slimmer hips make them feel younger and more streamlined. They look fast and sleek....for lack of better words.
As a broad generalization women with the more voluptuous, heavier hips feel a little bit older, not quite as innocent, definitely more sexy, and they feel slightly heavier and more sedentary...for lack of better words. Hurst's women feel like they could leap off the page and are always up for a game of tennis....Dedini's women feel like they would rather have a comfortable seat somewhere and enjoy an expensive meal. Hurst's women feel very open and honest while Dedini's feel like they are mysterious and are keeping some dark secrets (obviously this goes well beyond the hip thing. Both of them have many stylistic traits that add up to these impressions. And again, these are just my impressions...they may be totally different from your impressions! No one interpretation is "Correct"...I'm just telling you what my gut is telling me here. That's all an artist really has...the ability to look at something, register how that visual makes him or her feel, and analyze what it is that makes it seem that way).
Sokol
Of course it's said that us guys are more attracted to women with wider hips because they have a better chance of surviving multiple childbirths and passing along our genes into the world (or something like that).
At some point the hips get wide enough that it starts to indicate middle age instead of voluptuousness. Also, the more rounded the shoulders, the stronger the feeling of middle age becomes. Things like the costume and makeup on a woman, as well as many other things, can be additional clues as to their age, as well as their character and personality.
It's hard to find photos of someone aging from youth into a middle-aged woman, but these portraits of Hillary Clinton show her progression over the years to a more rounded fuller figure. It's easy to see how the more rounded version reads instantly as older.
Funnily enough, the process can continue and you can have pudgy old ladies...
...or just as easily old ladies can be gaunt and thin, completing the transition back into a slim figure with thin hips.
So what's the point of this crazed babbling? Have I finally lost my mind completely? This may all sound like madness but, to me, these kinds of thoughts and observations are what makes a great artist great. How could you ever expect to be a great character designer unless you knew how to draw a voluptuous woman and also a frumpy one? What makes each look like their personalities? Unless you've thought about how a voluptuous woman moves and how a frumpy woman moves, and why they move that way, how can you ever expect to become a great animator?
Unfortunately nobody ever tells you this stuff. There's no list of what makes a sexy woman look and move sexily and frumpy one move and look frumpy. And if there was, it would all be a cliche already. So get into the habit of looking at people and analyzing what you see and how it makes you feel. Get used to making snap judgments about who people are based on their look, and then asking yourself what gives you that impression. It's always advisable - if not imperative - to read all you can and learn everything that books and teachers can teach you, but don't always rely on the "rules" put forth in books and in classes to communicate to an audience. Use your creativity, originality and personal experiences to come up with something that the world hasn't seen before!
I found all these great images from different places around the web, including the great Asifa archive site.
I was pointing this out as an example of how to bend or break established "rules" and yet still get the desired effect (in this case, a feeling of femininity).
It has been suggested (fairly) below that it is a bit misleading when I say that the Hurst image below features a girl with broad shoulders and slim hips. It's true that her hips are perpendicular to the viewer and her back is parallel to the viewer, so therefore the position of the viewer makes the broadness of her shoulders and the narrowness of her hips exaggerated. Obviously, in the post below that, I pointed out the twists in the figure so I get how that is the case.
So maybe that's not the best example of this type of stylization, but I still contend that Hurst's style was to portray his females with broad shoulders and narrower hips. In looking through the internet archives I can find of Hurst's work and in looking through the excellent book "The Art Of Earl Oliver Hurst" I was unable to find a single example of Hurst breaking this rule. Every female figure I could find of his had narrow hips. If someone is aware of one that breaks this pattern I would be very interested to see it!
The reason I find this such a great concept to study is that if you can draw a figure with slim hips - breaking the established cliche that wide hips are more feminine - and still put across the feeling of femininity, then obviously Hurst is doing other things that put over the female aspect. You then have a great opportunity to ask yourself "what other tools is Hurst using to put over the femininity of this figure"? or "What original ways has he found that say femininity that can't always be found in anatomy books?"
He certainly didn't invent the idea of the feminine woman with the slimmer hips. Erte and Patterson drew plenty of them too.
Also you can contrast his work with artists that tend to draw the more traditional slim-shouldered heavy-hips type of woman and see how the two types create a different feeling. To me the women that Hurst draws have an energetic, athletic, innocent quality - the slimmer hips make them feel younger and more streamlined. They look fast and sleek....for lack of better words.
As a broad generalization women with the more voluptuous, heavier hips feel a little bit older, not quite as innocent, definitely more sexy, and they feel slightly heavier and more sedentary...for lack of better words. Hurst's women feel like they could leap off the page and are always up for a game of tennis....Dedini's women feel like they would rather have a comfortable seat somewhere and enjoy an expensive meal. Hurst's women feel very open and honest while Dedini's feel like they are mysterious and are keeping some dark secrets (obviously this goes well beyond the hip thing. Both of them have many stylistic traits that add up to these impressions. And again, these are just my impressions...they may be totally different from your impressions! No one interpretation is "Correct"...I'm just telling you what my gut is telling me here. That's all an artist really has...the ability to look at something, register how that visual makes him or her feel, and analyze what it is that makes it seem that way).
Sokol
Of course it's said that us guys are more attracted to women with wider hips because they have a better chance of surviving multiple childbirths and passing along our genes into the world (or something like that).
At some point the hips get wide enough that it starts to indicate middle age instead of voluptuousness. Also, the more rounded the shoulders, the stronger the feeling of middle age becomes. Things like the costume and makeup on a woman, as well as many other things, can be additional clues as to their age, as well as their character and personality.
It's hard to find photos of someone aging from youth into a middle-aged woman, but these portraits of Hillary Clinton show her progression over the years to a more rounded fuller figure. It's easy to see how the more rounded version reads instantly as older.
Funnily enough, the process can continue and you can have pudgy old ladies...
...or just as easily old ladies can be gaunt and thin, completing the transition back into a slim figure with thin hips.
So what's the point of this crazed babbling? Have I finally lost my mind completely? This may all sound like madness but, to me, these kinds of thoughts and observations are what makes a great artist great. How could you ever expect to be a great character designer unless you knew how to draw a voluptuous woman and also a frumpy one? What makes each look like their personalities? Unless you've thought about how a voluptuous woman moves and how a frumpy woman moves, and why they move that way, how can you ever expect to become a great animator?
Unfortunately nobody ever tells you this stuff. There's no list of what makes a sexy woman look and move sexily and frumpy one move and look frumpy. And if there was, it would all be a cliche already. So get into the habit of looking at people and analyzing what you see and how it makes you feel. Get used to making snap judgments about who people are based on their look, and then asking yourself what gives you that impression. It's always advisable - if not imperative - to read all you can and learn everything that books and teachers can teach you, but don't always rely on the "rules" put forth in books and in classes to communicate to an audience. Use your creativity, originality and personal experiences to come up with something that the world hasn't seen before!
I found all these great images from different places around the web, including the great Asifa archive site.
Monday, May 11, 2009
What is Torch Tiger?
It begins!
The awesome cover by Paul Felix.
Visit here for more information, including a full lineup of all the artists who will be contributing - an impressive list of amazing artists!
The awesome cover by Paul Felix.
Visit here for more information, including a full lineup of all the artists who will be contributing - an impressive list of amazing artists!
Saturday, May 09, 2009
Just One More Thing...
I can't help but also notice one more thing about this painting...
Almost all anatomy books point out that usually men have wider shoulders and slimmer hips, and that women typically have narrower shoulders and bigger hips.
While this is generally true, and can be a big help in drawing the differences between the two genders, the girl in this Hurst painting has rather wide shoulders and rather narrow hips (seems to me that Hurst's figures are usually pretty tall and thin, with slim hips - it's part of his style) and yet she comes off as very feminine and there's never any doubt as to her gender at first glance.
So it just goes to show that you can break rules and still get the desired effect. Her pose, particularly, is uniquely feminine - try to picture a man standing that way and it wouldn't look quite right.
Also her clothes - particularly the ruffled skirt - is distinctly feminine and helps give her that quality. Also the bathing suit peeking out from under the skirt is pretty distinctively feminine.
Okay, seriously, moving on.....
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
Hurst: A Simple Painting (Over)Analyzed
One of my continuing themes here has been that often when we look at a drawing (or painting or character design, etc.) we have the reaction of "Wow! What a great drawing!" and then we move off to look at something else without bothering to ask ourselves what makes it great and why it inspired us to react to it so strongly.
So in casting about for a new post to write I thought I would find something on the internet and just analyze it a bit. In this case, a painting by Earl Oliver Hurst.
I started writing and then I just kept going....I could keep going on and on but at some point I just have to stop myself and post all of this stuff....hopefully I wrote it out in a clear way, let me know if it's confusing.
A lot of what makes this simple drawing work like gangbusters is how Hurst exploits CONTRASTS to make it interesting like simple areas vs. complex ones and tilts and twists in the forms, among other stuff - you can see that I started with the contrasts and then got more and more into details and surface forms.
But this is proof that in a very simple-looking piece there can be a lot of good stuff going on. The simpler the drawing (or painting) the more each piece has to add to the effect of the whole. And any line that's in the wrong place or doesn't describe the form can be detrimental to the whole thing working.
One more great shape that wraps around the forms well is the lower lip - as it curves around out of sight it describes the form of the area between the lower teeth and the chin well. Also the curve of the lower lip contrast well with the straight of the upper lip...but I have to stop somewhere so I'll end it there.
So in casting about for a new post to write I thought I would find something on the internet and just analyze it a bit. In this case, a painting by Earl Oliver Hurst.
I started writing and then I just kept going....I could keep going on and on but at some point I just have to stop myself and post all of this stuff....hopefully I wrote it out in a clear way, let me know if it's confusing.
A lot of what makes this simple drawing work like gangbusters is how Hurst exploits CONTRASTS to make it interesting like simple areas vs. complex ones and tilts and twists in the forms, among other stuff - you can see that I started with the contrasts and then got more and more into details and surface forms.
But this is proof that in a very simple-looking piece there can be a lot of good stuff going on. The simpler the drawing (or painting) the more each piece has to add to the effect of the whole. And any line that's in the wrong place or doesn't describe the form can be detrimental to the whole thing working.
One more great shape that wraps around the forms well is the lower lip - as it curves around out of sight it describes the form of the area between the lower teeth and the chin well. Also the curve of the lower lip contrast well with the straight of the upper lip...but I have to stop somewhere so I'll end it there.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Walt Stanchfield on Glen Keane
Here is a section from one of my favorite all-time Walt Stanchfield handouts - in a discussion about how to convey depth in a line drawing, Walt lists the six ways to convey depth simply and easily, and then analyzes a quick sketch from Glen Keane's sketchbook to show how well these techniques can work, even when applied in a very simple and loose way.
You'll notice that there are a couple of repeated sentences which goes to show how accurately the new Walt Stanchfield books are at reprinting word-for-word Walt's classic handouts.
These are from Volume One, which is available from Amazon here.
I am wrapping up my work on my entry for our group comic book and I promise I will resume regular blogging very soon.
You'll notice that there are a couple of repeated sentences which goes to show how accurately the new Walt Stanchfield books are at reprinting word-for-word Walt's classic handouts.
These are from Volume One, which is available from Amazon here.
I am wrapping up my work on my entry for our group comic book and I promise I will resume regular blogging very soon.
Monday, April 06, 2009
"Raiders" Story Conference Notes
Nice people keep sending me this link, so I'd better post it here.
Back when George Lucas and Steven Spielberg were first developing "Raiders of the Lost Ark", they had a brainstorming session with screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan. From what I've heard, those sessions were recorded and transcribed. I've seen xeroxes of those pages for years, but someone has finally posted all 125 pages online in .pdf format.
The link is here.
It's really great reading, especially because Lucas and Spielberg are so secretive about their process. You actually get a sense of their personalities from reading their quotes and an insight into how they both think.
Back when George Lucas and Steven Spielberg were first developing "Raiders of the Lost Ark", they had a brainstorming session with screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan. From what I've heard, those sessions were recorded and transcribed. I've seen xeroxes of those pages for years, but someone has finally posted all 125 pages online in .pdf format.
The link is here.
It's really great reading, especially because Lucas and Spielberg are so secretive about their process. You actually get a sense of their personalities from reading their quotes and an insight into how they both think.
Saturday, April 04, 2009
Walt's Books Are Now Available! (and Apologies)
I apologize for being such a bad blogger lately. I have been trying to write several posts but haven't really gotten through them yet. Work is crazy, but the real reason for the delay is that I am spending all of my free time trying to finish my portion of "What is Torch Tiger?", the next anthology from the Disney Feature Animation Story Artists. It's due to be sent to the publisher a month from now. Anyone who is planning to be at the San Diego Comic Con should definitely plan on coming by our booth, meeting the artists and grabbing a copy of our latest work.
Also Walt Stanchfield's books are out! I don't have them yet myself but I guarantee that if you like this blog those books will blow your mind. I don't think there's ever been someone as articulate and thoughtful as Walt when it comes to writing about the are of drawing. I am so happy that the whole world can now get the full benefit of his incredible writings.
Check them out on Amazon here and here.
I will post something good soon.
Also Walt Stanchfield's books are out! I don't have them yet myself but I guarantee that if you like this blog those books will blow your mind. I don't think there's ever been someone as articulate and thoughtful as Walt when it comes to writing about the are of drawing. I am so happy that the whole world can now get the full benefit of his incredible writings.
Check them out on Amazon here and here.
I will post something good soon.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
"Blood and Posture"
I read a quote once that I thought was really great, but for the life of me I can't find the source anymore. I know I read it in relation to "Watchmen" (the comic book, not the movie) and I'm pretty sure I read it on the Wikipedia page for the comic...but I don't see it there anymore, nor could I find it on either Alan Moore or Dave Gibbon's Wikipedia page. I'm sure someone has it or can find it and tell us exactly what it was...but to the best of my knowledge, it went something like this:
Gibbons (the artist behind "Watchmen") said something along the lines of: "I don't use action lines to describe what is happening in the frame; I use blood and posture to tell the viewer what is happening".
Now I always like the kind of quote that points out something that's obvious but that I never really thought about before. Maybe the above quote is obvious to everyone else - and, admittedly, I've never been into comics all that much - but I thought it was a cool thing to think about.
Basically, what I got out of it was that in older comics, to solve the problem of indicating what the action is within a static frame, it was more traditional for artists to use motion lines to indicate the movements of the characters.
Whereas (some) modern comics tend to use "blood and posture" to indicate the character's actions instead.
These are from Jordi Bernet's "Jonah Hex" - in his (relatively) realistic depiction of a Civil War-era battle, motion lines are fairly nonexistent, but blood, posture (and other clues) are used to indicate the action.
A drawing by Mike Mignola that has a tiny indication of an action line for the punch's impact...but even without it, the posture would still carry the meaning very clearly.
There's nothing wrong with using motion lines, of course, and many comic artists that draw "realistically" use them in addition to the clues found in "blood and posture".
But it does seem to me that those modern comics that are trying to achieve a weightier, more serious tone tend to eliminate motion lines because it is a bit of a "cartoony" shorthand.
From "Watchmen"
Posture is a powerful tool for us artists, especially here when we're talking about static, sequential art. Posture can tell you all you need to know about what a figure is about to do, what it has just done or what has just happened to it (which obviously is more of a challenge in still drawings than, say, in animation).
The "language of posture" is a universal one - when an artist gets the pose just right, we all know exactly what the figure is doing. So it's clearly hard-wired into our brains. Why, then, is it so hard to learn how to draw figures so that their poses and posture impart their meanings clearly? I wish I knew.
Even the simplest of anatomical clues can give us a lot of information. A head turned sideways - with the neck turned against the shoulders - tells us the figure turned to look at something (see examples 1 and 2 below). We don't need to see the "before" drawing to get that the figure just turned their head to look. Nobody walks around all day with their head turned to the side; therefore this reads as a look over at something important.
Think about the difference between just moving your eyes to look at someone or turning your head to look at them. If you're in a room with some people and you're having a discussion, you're not going to turn your head constantly to look at them as they talk, right? You'll just move your eyes. But if someone starts talking to your left and you didn't know they were there, you might turn your head with a little more emphasis because you're slightly surprised. And if, for example, a loud noise occurs to your left and surprises you, you might turn your head with a lot of emphasis towards the sound while you simultaneously lean away from the source of the sound and duck your head down while raising your shoulders to protect your head and make it easier to flee if necessary (see example 3).
All of these actions would also be affected by the mental state of the figure in question. If you're on edge and tense, your reactions are different than if you're relaxed, or even if you were awaken from a deep sleep, or interrupted while focusing on something very intently. Or if you heard a voice that you didn't expect to hear, or it was the voice of someone you were afraid of (or someone you were just gossiping about or talking badly about) or if it was someone you felt a lot of affection towards...all of these things affect how a person might react and all of these things can be reflected in the figure's posture so that the viewer knows exactly how the figure in question feels about what is happening.
There are an infinite number of other things that can be reflected in the posture of the figure that can indicate to the viewer how a figure feels about what is happening. If, for example, someone enters the room and starts talking, our figure might not bother to turn his head towards the speaker if our figure has nothing but disdain for the speaker (or whatever the speaker is saying) like the figure in example 4. Adding lowered eyelids adds even more of a contemptuous feeling, as does tilting the head away from the speaker (see example 5). Other things like looking down your nose at someone or rolling your eyes are other types of posture that might give you different levels of the same feeling.
By the same token, the more our figure was interested and/or affectionate towards the speaker, the more they might turn their body towards the speaker, incline their head towards them make eye contact with them, and give other clues with their posture as to their feelings and/or intent (example 6).
These are just tiny examples of how posture can illustrate what is happening within a static drawing and how a character might be feeling...here are some more examples of posture used to tell the story.
"Hellboy" by Mike Mignola
"Piracy" by Jack Davis (as a side note: I can't help but notice how well Jack Davis draws shoes, in particular the soles of shoes when they're seen from below. I always think of his drawings whenever I draw the bottom of shoes. But that's a whole other post to be written).
The other part of it, the "blood" part, isn't quite as important, but it is an interesting observation: all kinds of bodily fluids (as well as any other kind of fluid, or even solid for that matter) can be used to indicate movement within a static drawing (as well as to help tell the story). Just like posture, it can tell us what just happened, or what is happening right in the moment of the image.
The possibilities are limitless: if a character is smoking, the smoke from their cigarette could show us the path they traveled within the frame. If a character is bleeding, the trail of blood he leaves can show us the path he took. If a character just got punched, his flying teeth might add emphasis to the punch and show us the direction the punch came from. There are a million subtler ways to do this too.
Don't forget that clothes and hair can also help show us what direction the figure came from and how fast they are moving. Or, as in the example below, they can tell us how hard the wind is blowing and in what direction.
"The Spirit" by Will Eisner
In these two examples Alex Toth uses smoke to show us the movement of objects.
Here Carl Barks uses lines to tell us the path the whale has traveled, but you can see that even if there were no action lines, the direction and action of the water, ice floes, the pose of the whale and the indications on the ground where he landed would tell the same story clearly.
Anyway hope people find that worth reading about! I wish I had a dozen more examples but then I would never get this post up, and my collection of comics is far from exhaustive.
Gibbons (the artist behind "Watchmen") said something along the lines of: "I don't use action lines to describe what is happening in the frame; I use blood and posture to tell the viewer what is happening".
Now I always like the kind of quote that points out something that's obvious but that I never really thought about before. Maybe the above quote is obvious to everyone else - and, admittedly, I've never been into comics all that much - but I thought it was a cool thing to think about.
Basically, what I got out of it was that in older comics, to solve the problem of indicating what the action is within a static frame, it was more traditional for artists to use motion lines to indicate the movements of the characters.
Whereas (some) modern comics tend to use "blood and posture" to indicate the character's actions instead.
These are from Jordi Bernet's "Jonah Hex" - in his (relatively) realistic depiction of a Civil War-era battle, motion lines are fairly nonexistent, but blood, posture (and other clues) are used to indicate the action.
A drawing by Mike Mignola that has a tiny indication of an action line for the punch's impact...but even without it, the posture would still carry the meaning very clearly.
There's nothing wrong with using motion lines, of course, and many comic artists that draw "realistically" use them in addition to the clues found in "blood and posture".
But it does seem to me that those modern comics that are trying to achieve a weightier, more serious tone tend to eliminate motion lines because it is a bit of a "cartoony" shorthand.
From "Watchmen"
Posture is a powerful tool for us artists, especially here when we're talking about static, sequential art. Posture can tell you all you need to know about what a figure is about to do, what it has just done or what has just happened to it (which obviously is more of a challenge in still drawings than, say, in animation).
The "language of posture" is a universal one - when an artist gets the pose just right, we all know exactly what the figure is doing. So it's clearly hard-wired into our brains. Why, then, is it so hard to learn how to draw figures so that their poses and posture impart their meanings clearly? I wish I knew.
Even the simplest of anatomical clues can give us a lot of information. A head turned sideways - with the neck turned against the shoulders - tells us the figure turned to look at something (see examples 1 and 2 below). We don't need to see the "before" drawing to get that the figure just turned their head to look. Nobody walks around all day with their head turned to the side; therefore this reads as a look over at something important.
Think about the difference between just moving your eyes to look at someone or turning your head to look at them. If you're in a room with some people and you're having a discussion, you're not going to turn your head constantly to look at them as they talk, right? You'll just move your eyes. But if someone starts talking to your left and you didn't know they were there, you might turn your head with a little more emphasis because you're slightly surprised. And if, for example, a loud noise occurs to your left and surprises you, you might turn your head with a lot of emphasis towards the sound while you simultaneously lean away from the source of the sound and duck your head down while raising your shoulders to protect your head and make it easier to flee if necessary (see example 3).
All of these actions would also be affected by the mental state of the figure in question. If you're on edge and tense, your reactions are different than if you're relaxed, or even if you were awaken from a deep sleep, or interrupted while focusing on something very intently. Or if you heard a voice that you didn't expect to hear, or it was the voice of someone you were afraid of (or someone you were just gossiping about or talking badly about) or if it was someone you felt a lot of affection towards...all of these things affect how a person might react and all of these things can be reflected in the figure's posture so that the viewer knows exactly how the figure in question feels about what is happening.
There are an infinite number of other things that can be reflected in the posture of the figure that can indicate to the viewer how a figure feels about what is happening. If, for example, someone enters the room and starts talking, our figure might not bother to turn his head towards the speaker if our figure has nothing but disdain for the speaker (or whatever the speaker is saying) like the figure in example 4. Adding lowered eyelids adds even more of a contemptuous feeling, as does tilting the head away from the speaker (see example 5). Other things like looking down your nose at someone or rolling your eyes are other types of posture that might give you different levels of the same feeling.
By the same token, the more our figure was interested and/or affectionate towards the speaker, the more they might turn their body towards the speaker, incline their head towards them make eye contact with them, and give other clues with their posture as to their feelings and/or intent (example 6).
These are just tiny examples of how posture can illustrate what is happening within a static drawing and how a character might be feeling...here are some more examples of posture used to tell the story.
"Hellboy" by Mike Mignola
"Piracy" by Jack Davis (as a side note: I can't help but notice how well Jack Davis draws shoes, in particular the soles of shoes when they're seen from below. I always think of his drawings whenever I draw the bottom of shoes. But that's a whole other post to be written).
The other part of it, the "blood" part, isn't quite as important, but it is an interesting observation: all kinds of bodily fluids (as well as any other kind of fluid, or even solid for that matter) can be used to indicate movement within a static drawing (as well as to help tell the story). Just like posture, it can tell us what just happened, or what is happening right in the moment of the image.
The possibilities are limitless: if a character is smoking, the smoke from their cigarette could show us the path they traveled within the frame. If a character is bleeding, the trail of blood he leaves can show us the path he took. If a character just got punched, his flying teeth might add emphasis to the punch and show us the direction the punch came from. There are a million subtler ways to do this too.
Don't forget that clothes and hair can also help show us what direction the figure came from and how fast they are moving. Or, as in the example below, they can tell us how hard the wind is blowing and in what direction.
"The Spirit" by Will Eisner
In these two examples Alex Toth uses smoke to show us the movement of objects.
Here Carl Barks uses lines to tell us the path the whale has traveled, but you can see that even if there were no action lines, the direction and action of the water, ice floes, the pose of the whale and the indications on the ground where he landed would tell the same story clearly.
Anyway hope people find that worth reading about! I wish I had a dozen more examples but then I would never get this post up, and my collection of comics is far from exhaustive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
