Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Scratch Art

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Awww, thanks Garricks!

    I hope to see more from others! I'm just really discovering this medium. I'd heard of it but never tried it. I was having one of those identity crisis days that usually ends up with a drastic haircut but decided to go to Michaels instead! I've since had a hair freak out day but am glad I skipped it on scratch art discovery day!
    You're no longer a child when a mud puddle is an obstacle rather than an opportunity!

    Comment


    • #17
      Wow!!! Very cool.

      I have a kit at home. But, have yet to play with it. Maybe this weekend.
      "Go ahead, make your logos in PS. We charge extra money to redraw your logo into vector art so it can be printed on promotional product. Cha CHING! " - CCericola

      Comment


      • #18
        really like the second one, the scratches give it a crazy cool sense of motion. i'd like to give something like this a go. is there a specific name for this or would i just be looking for scratch board?

        "There's something about turning the pages of a book or magazine and the felling of rubbing your hands across the words."

        This is my pen tool. There are many like it, but this one is MINE. My pen tool is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. My pen tool without me is useless. Without my pen tool, I am useless.

        there is no grey area when it comes to 1 color logos.

        Comment


        • #19
          I scratched kitties and palm trees lol

          I couldn't really handle the scatchiness....
          _______________________________________
          Hello... My name is Kittie and I'm a Font-a-holic.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Red Kittie Kat View Post
            I scratched kitties
            Serves 'em right. Turnabout is fair play, says I. *looks sternly at happy, smug Michaux in the window*

            Originally posted by cornfed View Post
            Thanks Meffy! That's Robert Cray!
            Oh, no wonder -- I love his guitar playing even more than the faces he makes while playing!

            Comment


            • #21
              CF and Norbert those are wonderful, love your styles, Cornfed you are getting such nice textures out of that. I have something similar in watercolor, where I painted the whole page dark and erased... used a brush instead of a scratcher
              Attached Files

              Comment


              • #22
                I love the loose technique you've used with the lines Cornfed. So much scratchboard art tends to be so tight. It's great to see a looser style that works equally well. Nice job!

                You know, this thread and the others here remind me of one of the few things that I really dislike about computers — image manipulation has become so easy that many of these more time-consuming, by-hand processes have almost become economically prohibitive. For a publisher, the decision to pay an artist for a full day's worth of work on a hand-done illustration is difficult given that some Photoshop mashup can be done in a quarter of the time. As a result, the unique and rich beauty of scratchboard, watercolors and actual ink, paint and pencil has been increasingly replaced by the monotony of quick-and-dirty "shopped" photos.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by <b> View Post
                  image manipulation has become so easy that many of these more time-consuming, by-hand processes have almost become economically prohibitive. For a publisher, the decision to pay an artist for a full day's worth of work on a hand-done illustration is difficult given that some Photoshop mashup can be done in a quarter of the time. As a result, the unique and rich beauty of scratchboard, watercolors and actual ink, paint and pencil has been increasingly replaced by the monotony of quick-and-dirty "shopped" photos.
                  You know, it's less about the media choice and execution times than it is about the 'design' time of a good drawing/painting. I don't care if it's digital or natural media, photography or a photoshop 'mash-up' -- what I want to see is something with a little more depth than a filter tweak. A pictorial concept that goes deeper than 'realistic' depiction that's executed with great human sensitivity to subject and message.

                  Good imaging takes a deep understanding and appreciation of the form, subject, and context to message. It's rare to find a real market for much more than eye candy these days.

                  But you can't put all the blame on computers. Even before Photoshop, way back in paste-up days, the publishers were always looking for faster, cheaper, ways to 'crank out' the down and dirty.

                  But there's nothing to prevent us from exploring and enjoying alternative image work. Including our own!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Bob View Post
                    But you can't put all the blame on computers. Even before Photoshop, way back in paste-up days, the publishers were always looking for faster, cheaper, ways to 'crank out' the down and dirty.
                    I'm not really blaming computers. I'm blaming the economics of publishing that dictate choosing cheap and monotonous over more expensive and varied. For example, do I spend $1500 hiring a photographer to shoot an on-location photo of Robert Cray or hire a traditional illustrator to draw a $600 scratchboard version or download a $15 iStockphoto image that I electronically merge with a publicity photo in half an hour's worth of work?

                    As you mentioned, before the Internet and desktop publishing, publishers were still looking for quick-and-dirty, but the quick and dirty then was still more expensive than the quick-and-dirty today. And even though the quality of that quick and dirty was no better (and usually worse) than the Photoshop illustrations we see today, the variety was far greater. Despite a by-hand pencil sketch being quick, it still differed enormously from the next artist's quick-and-dirty, by-hand oil pastel sketch or quick and dirty line drawing.

                    Twenty years ago, magazines and newspapers weren't as colorful as today, but their pages contained gems of artistic interest in the form of drawings, paintings and other unique illustrations of the sort that we've seen in this illustration forum over the past couple of weeks. Open that same newspaper today, and it's more colorful, has more graphics and is littered with Photoshop illustration that are easily overlooked because they all look pretty much the same in their stylistic monotony.

                    I'm not suggesting for a second that we give up the advantages of computers, the Internet, cheap stock photos and Photoshopped illustrations. But I am saying that these advances haven't been universally positive.

                    Specifically, one drawback has been the lessening of variety and style caused by the economic and time advantages that Photoshop has over nearly every other illustration medium. For example, twenty years ago, nearly every daily newspaper in the world had a staff of in-house illustrators with a variety of skills, techniques and styles. Today, there are few dailies that have any staff illustrators at all they've all been replaced by a smaller staff of Photoshop technicians who churn out three times as much in half the time. It's often pretty bland and lacking in both character and variety, but it's efficient and cheap.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I agree with all you said there <b>. The other aspect of illustration vs. 'Photoshop Illustration' (do they still credit this as 'photo-illustration') is the great risk gulf between photography and illustration. Illustration has always (in general) been the most stylized, and personalized of the two approaches. And consequentially, the most emotionally laden and subjective. A stylized photograph is still, in essence, a photograph. And as such, enjoys a scrutiny immunity that few illustrations styles escape (with the big exception of the countless computer/vector style variants).

                      So it's not as simple as tighter publishing timelines and budgets -- there's a lot of editorial risk evaluation going on around the political and social mindfield each approach represents. Reader/viewers are still more tolerant of photo-manipulated messaging than they are of reality 'interpreted' through the mind of an artist or illustrator.

                      I trained and worked in illustration in the 80's. Punk culture -- the whole 'warts and all' style approach was king -- at least in the editorial market. It was a seismic shift from the hyper, and magic realism movements it largely replaced. Now, in many ways -- hyper/magic realism has returned. Only it's not drawn as much as it is digitally assembled and manipulated. And just about as slick, boring and anonymous as the original hand-drawn version that once reigned the image planes. (And certainly a lot more affordable and a lot easier to execute).
                      Last edited by Bob; 04-21-2012, 07:28 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Bob View Post
                        Reader/viewers are still more tolerant of photo-manipulated messaging than they are of reality 'interpreted' through the mind of an artist or illustrator.
                        I don't know about that Bob. We're going off on a tangent here, but...

                        I was the design director at a good-sized daily newspaper in the mid to late '80s when the desktop publishing revolution hit. Traditional illustrations enjoyed an immunity to the sort of questioning and reservations that surfaced when digital imagery manipulation came into play.

                        The news media depends on believability and trust. Most every reader realizes that hand-drawn illustrations are an artistic interpretation and accepts them as such. Prior to Photoshop, readers drew a sharp distinction between photos and illustrations. One was real and the other one wasn't. One was proof of something, but the other was art.

                        When our illustrators started basing their photo illustrations on manipulations of actual photos that dividing line between truth and interpretation came crashing down. There were endless debates in the industry at the time regarding the ethics of manipulating photos and compromising the believability of news photography by running photo illustrations of artificial realities that never actually existed.

                        Take the other illustration thread that's active right now Rachel's very nice watercolor. As a watercolor, the juxtaposition of a large vineyard with the redrock cliffs of Sedona seems fine. Artistic liberties are a given and nobody assumes that it's an actual photograph. On the other hand, merging a photo of a Sonoma Valley vineyard with northern Arizona redrock country comes across as a deliberate attempt to mislead since it looks real.

                        The photographers at our newspaper and the management there agonized over this dilemma for several years, as did the news industry as a whole. It almost seems like a moot point now that the general public no longer assumes that photos represent proof of reality, but at the time, it was a big, industry-wide deal. I think the ultimate softening of that boundary between perceived truth and fiction is one of the many factors that has contributed to the decline of journalism and the public's appreciation of it.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I agree completely. The reader viewpoint has evolved. In fact, I made a real error in my phrasing there, and made a sloppy, incomplete inference. It should have read:

                          "Clients, editors and publishers believe that reader/viewers are still more tolerant of photo-manipulated messaging than they are of reality 'interpreted' through the mind of an artist or illustrator."

                          This fear of reader scrutiny has more to do with political correction anxiety on the publishing side than the actual ability of a reader to distinguish interpretation from reality. And my guess is that what's is starting to eliminate this 'gag' on creative expression is the raised expectation of creative liberties expressed online.

                          And I like your point about the erosion of the truth/fiction boundary and the decline of the value, both real and publicly perceived, of the field of journalism.
                          Last edited by Bob; 04-21-2012, 11:17 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            And I like your point about the erosion of the truth/fiction boundary and the decline of the value, both real and publicly perceived, of the field of journalism.
                            Not just journalism... sign of the times

                            (by the way <b> that's not Sonoma, it's San Gimignano, in the interest of truth in media)... never been to the Sonoma Vineyards

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              The accordion player in my band, Goldman Thibodeaux, turned 80 on Sunday. I'm going to have a birthday dinner and play some tunes with him this evening and give him this scratch art that I did of him! I hope he likes it! It always wracks my nerves to give art gifts! This is the best pic I could manage to get out of my phone!

                              You're no longer a child when a mud puddle is an obstacle rather than an opportunity!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Wow! Very cool cornfed! I am sure he will be very pleased indeed!
                                Sketching not only helps you work out good ideas, it helps you get past the bad ones.

                                Comment

                                Search

                                Collapse

                                Sponsor

                                Collapse

                                Incredible Stock

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                GDF A division of Mediabistro Holdings Adweek | Mediabistro | Clio | Film Expo Group Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy Copyright 2016 Mediabistro Holdings
                                Working...
                                X