On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 6:57 PM, jmhcustomart2004 <
a_change_of_plans_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> **
>
> --- In SkunkworksAMA_at_yahoogroups.com, "Inkwell" <inkwell_01_at_...> wrote:
> >
> > >Heck, I don't even have time to do folios
> > >anymore!
> >
> [ SNIP ]
> >
> > >No, it's there. The black ink outline makes it
> > >appear smaller since the surrounding area is
> > >filled with black and grey (hence, only the
> > >white area of the tooth shows up). Also, the
> > >online version of the comic is actually much
> > >larger than the original drawn art. The original
> > >comics are only 7.75 inches wide.
> >
> > Ahhh. My bad. I assumed the upper right fang
> > would be bigger, more prominent, than the upper
> > left fang for perspective reasons. When I view
> > Sarina's muzzle that upper right fang looks like
> > it's missing.
>
> When portions of an image are that small, it's difficult for me to get such
> details correct (hence, why newer projects, like "Caterwaul", are being
> drawn over-sized). Shaky hands also make it difficult to get such small
> details correct with ink pens.
>
[SNIP]
Nothing wrong with doing the work over its publishing size. This is very
common; I believe that most comic artists produce their work at between 150%
and 200% of the published size - with the exception of newspaper comic
strips, which are made at about the same sizes, but then shrunk down to tiny
sized to fit on the page of the newspaper by the paper editors. :(
I often do graphics work on the computer, for logos, icons, and the like, at
200%, and then shrink the final product down. It often looks pretty good,
with just a little touch-up, and is much easier to create in the first
place.
Falbert
Received on Mon Jul 11 2011 - 17:23:35 CDT