Archive for June, 2009
-
First Layer
So this is the first layer after the underpainting. The picture is just horrendous, so try not to judge it too much based on this picture. A friend of mine, Kate Egan told me tonight that she thought I tended to go a little over board on my dark tones, and neglected my mid tones. I’ll be honest, I tried to keep that in mind as I continued with this, but I still feel like it’s very highlight-shadow oriented. Also, the two figures to the right are far too bright and warm, which I will fix in the next layer.
Again, the photo is just atrocious, so please excuse that. I’ll update as soon as this dries and I can get another layer on it.
xoxo,
Jon
-
A New Underpainting
This is the underpainting for new piece I’m doing. It’s just a turpenoid soaked wash of burnt umber at the moment.
-
Daily News
-
Toned Study for New Painting
So, I’ve been trying to put a lot of these concepts together since the middle of this past semester. The sex and gunshot concept I reworked from my “Misconception” piece. I feel like this particular execution is a little more successful, from a compositional standpoint at the very least. The type following a gunshot was something I tried to make work in the Van Gogh piece, but given format restrictions, couldn’t quite accomplish it. Now I know you must be saying, “Now wait a minute, I see no type!” You’d be quite correct in saying that, as the sketch doesn’t have type for a very good reason… I don’t know what to put there. I know I want type in the brains being split in half by the bullet, just don’t know exactly what. I was thinking I could really steal the concept from my Van Gogh piece and have it say “Toujours,” meaning “forever” in French. Get it? The idea of forever being shattered by infidelity, and finally suicide. Then a part of me thinks it’s a little pretentious, being that I am not French and can only barely speak it. Not to mention it’s a little unoriginal, being that I used the same word once before.
So, that’s my current dilemma, anyone have any ideas? Feel free to comment.
xoxo
Jon
-
IF 02: Unfold
I skipped a week for various reasons, but I was determined to have a finished piece for this weeks topic. Unfortunately, since I’m working in oil, drying times are always a hassle. This piece is mostly done. Really it just needs some cleaning up, and a few colors need to be adjusted here and there. I’d also like to make the type on the newspaper a bit more legible. I’m still working It’s supposed to say, “Real Life As Usual.” Anyway, this one is called “Daily News” and it’s oil on board. As always, the pictures are horrible. I need to wait for a sunny day to take a decent one, and at the moment, those seem few and far between in good ol’ Philly.
Next are a couple detail shots, since this photo has zero detail in it.
—–UPDATE———————————————————————
The sun is out now, so I can take a better picture.
-
Internet Plagiarism
The internet is arguably the greatest information medium invented to date. Innumerable resources are now at your fingertips with the click of a button. All that is good and dandy, but that ease of information retrieval has some negative consequences for those in the arts. Google Images (and other similar search engines), Right click saving, and screen capturing all make internet plagiarism painfully easy. In this article I will detail some tips on how to protect yourself without alienating the web attention you want.
Google ImagesIn attempting to protect yourself from this favorite tool of internet plagiarists, it’s important to know how it works. Google sends out spiders hundreds of thousands of times a day to find websites and index them into their engine. A spider is an automated piece of software that looks and indexes source code, page content, meta content, and images. Normally this is good, especially if you’ve coded your website well. Google will place you in such a way that your niche audience can easily find you. However, when we’re trying to protect our creative material, this can be a bit of a problem.
Fortunately, there is an easy fix to all of this. You can control where GoogleBot and other search engine spiders are allowed to go in your web directories. Most of us have a separate folder for our images, and you can block spiders from this folder, and here’s how. First, create a file in your top directory called robots.txt. Then copy, paste and edit accordingly the code below.
User-Agent: * Disallow: /path/to/your/image/folder/ Allow: /
This will prevent Google Images and all other image search engines from indexing your copyrighted material. This will not harm your ranking, though, since that is determined mostly by your page source code and page structure.
Right-Click Saving
Of course, even if your images aren’t indexed in Google, anyone can come to your website right-click and save your images. There are a few ways you can prevent this. Most people instinctively want to just prevent all right clicking on the page. However, I discourage this, unless you isolate right-clicking on images only. Fortunately, I have a script that you could try out.
<script language="JavaScript"> <!-- function imgClick(e) { var rightclick = false;if (!e) var e = window.event; if (e.which && e.which == 3) rightclick = true; else if (e.button && e.button == 2) rightclick = true;if(rightclick) alert("Copyrighted Material. All rights reserved."); }function protectImages() { var allImages = document.body.getElementsByTagName("img");for(i in allImages) { allImages[i].onmousedown = imgClick; } } //--></script>Then, edit your body tag to resemble the following:
<body onload="protectImages();">
However, some people may frown on this limiting of the interface, and it’s not foolproof. However, there are other ways to thwart the right-click.
Did you know that you can put copyright information in the meta data of your images? Were you also aware that the meta data follows the image, no matter how many times it’s copied or downloaded? My mind was a little blown when I discovered that. I embed my copyright information through Photoshop. If you go into File > File Info… you will find a while mess of options for copyrighting your work. Like I said previously, the meta data follows the image around, it’s embedded in the actual binary.
Screen Capture
Though we may have thwarted plagiarists from saving our images by disabling right-clicking, and embedding copyright information, that unfortunately does not stop the image from being screen captured. Realistically, there is no way through clever scripting to disable this. There is only one method to stop it, and it is probably the oldest one in the book.
Watermarking is the act of superimposing your logo, name, or copyright information on top of the image itself. In my opinion, it is ugly and dirty, and usually compromises the aesthetic of your art, but it is effective. Below is a link to a tutorial on watermarking.
Creating Safe and Effective Watermarks
Conclusion
Unfortunately, even if you take the previously mentioned measures to protect your work, it is still susceptible though they’ll have to work for it now. It’s just as the old proverbs go: If you wanna keep something safe, don’t put it on the web. Obviously, that is entirely unrealistic in the Age of Information. If you do find yourself in a legal battle over the originality of a piece, a good defense is the “Poor Man’s Copyright.” This is a preventative measure in which you compile all of your work onto a disk, and snail mail it to yourself. The Post Office stamps every piece of mail with the date. Being that the Post Office is a federal institution, it’s seal is admissible in court. Again, it is a preventative measure. That means do it before you run into problems.
Anyway, good luck with all of your interwebbings.
xoxo
Jon
-
Happy Pills
-
Rant 03: Google
There is a very disturbing trend that I’ve been noticing in the world of Illustration. It seems that lately the entire institution of illustration is becoming increasingly less respected. In searching for jobs, I can’t even count how many ignorant mooches think they can pay peanuts or nothing at all for a very specialized and difficult service. Most of these are low level, going nowhere, Craigslist ads. However, this recent one made my eyes light up with laser beams, and sent a chill down my spine.
Google–yes, the search engine that everyone has a hard-on for–has enlisted the service of numerous illustrators to help in their latest project, Google Chrome. Here’s the catch, they expect these illustrators to give their services for free! It’s bad enough when low-level publications or businesses expect a professional service for free, but it summons a whole new wave of nausea bubbling at the base of my esophagus when a big name, profitable company like Google expects the same thing.
I think people tend to forget that illustration is just as challenging and specialized as any graphic design project. Basically the same rule applies: many can do it, few can do it well. Though we all enjoy doing it, it is a far cry from just a simple doodle or banging out a watercolor sitting on the beach with the wind in our hair. It is challenging. Composition, conceptualizing, drawing and rendering, and strict deadlines all have to culminate to conceive the brainchild that is an illustration. I don’t know about the other illustrators out there, but I personally decided to stop making free art as soon as I decided I was above Elmers and macaroni.
Granted, I was not asked by Google, more than likely because I’m still a student, and not prominent nor prolific… yet. I’ve decided to rant about this now, so that when I finally do get my foothold in the field, these sort of corporate condonations of professional rape will be behind us, though I fear that this is wishful thinking. Basically, I’d like to address all illustrators who happen across this article, and implore them to oppose (if they already haven’t) all those who think our services aren’t valuable. Exposure isn’t compensation, it’s just a sugarcoated way of saying “we don’t think you’re worth paying for.” Take pride in what you do.
Did Google compensate its programmers with exposure? Its designers? I highly doubt it. So what makes illustrations so expendable? Hell, less than a hundred years ago, illustrators like Leyendecker were treated like first-class celebrities. A couple hundred years ago, we were considered valuable members of society, and would paint for kings and dukes and the like.
Google, this is not a hobby, this is our livelihood. Do you ask plumbers for their services in return for exposure? Hey, here’s an idea. How about you index my website as #1 under illustration, and I post a link on my website and tell people about you? I mean, it get’s you exposure, that’s good enough, right?
Attention to all those that think illustration is a cheap sideshow attraction, you all know where you can shove it.
The article that started it all.
xoxo,
Jon
-
IF 01 – Adapt [completed]
I know it’s nearly two weeks late, but I’ve just now decided it was done. Is it great? No, but I’ve really lost my drive to make it as good as I wanted it, and this medium is taking forever to dry. I usually use Liquin, so I’m used to it being dry within a few hours. I just started using 1 part Linseed Oil and 1 part Damar Varnish. I think I’m going to have to add a few pinches of turps or Japan Drier or both. Anyway, here it is as done as I’m going to make it. As usual, the picture is just awful, so I’m not adding it to the portfolio until I get a better picture.
-
Illustration Friday 01: Adapt
So unfortunately, this one is unfinished. I ran out of time before I had to head back to the shore for the weekend. I’ll probably finish it during the week.
UPDATE: I’ve finished this piece, you can see it here.
