Well said, Scrapper.
<><
--- In SkunkworksAMA_at_yahoogroups.com, Scrapper Black Dragon <scrapperbd@...> wrote:
>
> Yet another black dragon rant...
>
> --- On Wed, 26/8/09, outlawoa <outlawoa_at_...> wrote:
> >-And I meant "It will HELP U go a long way in getting better with your >understanding of character development; Physically and Mentally; and NOT >the opposite." From what you're telling me so far, U are getting the hang >of it just fine-
> >
> It is quite interesting how little plot line you actually need to have in your head for a character - you need to be able to suggest a plot from the picture, but not really have pinned it down yourself. Terrie Smith is an excellent example with her pin-up characters. Most of them have a name and no bio-background! The character is doing something with props and (limited) environment that suggest a story - I'm sure most of us could write a short story or describe what the character was about to do or why from being a given image. Incidentally, Terrie doesn't draw much 'environment' or backgrounds as she can't _see_ them! She is legally blind - just very short sighted, so she doesn't _see_ backgrounds to be able to visualise such things into her drawings! She draws the way she sees the world!
>
> Good plot development usually has minimum characters. Don't introduce an extra character just because you can. Let's examine the plot synopsis of JMH's Caterwaul - in any given episode, it focuses on a handful of characters and how they interact. The next episode is 'retelling' the story, from different character viewpoints. He isn't trying to drag all characters in at the same time and tell everyone's story simultaneously. It would be too hard to follow and you lose interest in any given plot thread as things jump around too much.
>
> I've mentioned this point in writing tips previously - don't cameo a character for a single appearance just to include a new character. Either substitute the role by an already present character, or just make them non-descript and just an actuary with no real description or development. Keep the focus on the characters that matter for this plot thread! Fans tend to dislike you if you suggest a story is about a certain character and they only get a brief cameo role.
>
> With drawing characters, if you have an excellent knowledge of structures and physiology and in in-depth knowledge of the subject being drawn, then you can draw purely illustratively, such as Jim does. This means you can make any of the characters stand in any position, doing anything and you know how things will move, react and behave. If this is not the case, you are far better off to structure the picture (use the circles and lines framework) to ensure you get things in the correct location as well as relationship and perspective. It allows you to move things and reduce the chance of having it look awkward and be able to use more dynamic poses. This technique is still used by people like Fred Perry (Gold Digger - http://www.cheetaholics.net/) who has turned out more comics to date than any of you are likely to draw all together (this counts anything Jim has drawn to date!), so the technique can't be that bad. Rod Tokely also uses this technique,
> he was a story board artist for the movie Queen of the Damned (pity about the resultant movie...) and is the regular artist for Live To Ride magazine (http://www.livetoride.com.au/) for their comic and pin-up poster (featured on the back of the pin-up girl/bike poster). He's been teaching drawing for over 10 years and still advocates this as the best way to develop a picture. Even drawing 'impressionist' most people still 'tick out' fundamental reference points. Shawntae Howard (who may be reading this - http://furry.wikia.com/wiki/Extinctioners - some comics also available from Second Ed) uses this structuring technique. When splitting hairs, Jim may be a better artist than Shawntae, but I don't think anyone here is going to turn around and tell Shawntae he can't draw! (I believe the 'art war' was left in 'your court' before you comment, Mr Hardiman!)
>
> It is often very easy to spot artists who do not use a structure as they frequently have composition problems or all of there characters are basically all the same, as they have learnt to draw one body shape very well. An example of this is Shon Howell (King Cheeta)- http://king-cheetah.deviantart.com/ It means he can churn out a consistent characters, though limited in their body shapes. Shawntae had an interesting page on body shape development in one of his folios (felines, if I recall correctly).
>
> >And no, I don't know of MANY that have a robust character set and >development like U, so in that regard U and a few others are pretty much >ahead of the class in that retrospect.
> >
> I developed a handful of characters that were fully detailed, everything known, all written up. Then just didn't use them. They weren't what I needed for what I was writing about. I tend to find I create a character as the situation requires, apply the features desired to make things work, then not worry about the rest. Much of the time, it just isn't required. Look at many of Jim's pin-up art and similar - just because a character is not fully spelt out, doesn't mean they aren't interesting or fulfill the required role as well as someone with every little detail pinned down.
>
>
> >-Just a thought, hell, this is open to everyone that can answer this; >LATER- -OA OUT-
> >
> OA - love the enthusiasm, but can you please quote the relevant parts of the previous message that you are replying to (make it easier to follow what you are referring) and any chance of 'conventional' spelling as your posts are quite bombastic and can be difficult to read (as Jim demonstrated when he queried your meaning several posts ago).
>
> Scrapper, Black Dragon, who needs to put more theory into regular practise!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________________
> Find local businesses and services in your area with Yahoo!7 Local.
> Get started: http://local.yahoo.com.au
>
Received on Thu Aug 27 2009 - 07:33:14 CDT