3D

-by Arnie Fenner

I've always loved dimensional art. Maybe my interest was sparked at a youthful age by trips to various museums, but I suspect that it was building model kits and playing with Marx army men—holding these detailed figures in my hand that some unknown artist had originally sculpted for casting and manufacture—that nurtured an appreciation that has only grown with time. At the awards ceremony for Spectrum 20 this past May during Spectrum Fantastic Art Live, Jarrod and Brandon Shiflett were the presenters in the Dimensional Category and Brandon joked that sculptors "must be 360 times better than 2D artists" because they not only had to think about the front of the art, but also the side, rear, top, and bottom of the work, too, when creating it. And even though he was kidding (don't anyone think otherwise), Brandon was also being truthful when talking about the challenges sculptors have to overcome with their art, particularly when translating a well-known painting or drawing into a dimensional artwork.

At a recent convention one 3D artist was told by a collector that his fellows weren't really very interested in sculpted works because they only bought "one-of-a-kinds." The guy went on to suggest to the sculptor that he might be interested in buying something if he (the artist) offered a piece as, say, a singular bronze; the sculptor explained that the moulding, pouring, and finishing for one bronze would be extremely expensive and result in a pretty hefty price tag (which this collector admitted he wouldn't pay). Then it was suggested that he do a "one off" using clay or wax or painted sculpy and the artist explained some of the issues with all of those materials over time and why he chose to do limited edition castings, not only for longevity but so that he could also make his art give him more of a return on his investment of time and skill. That didn't make this particular collector happy: he wanted what he wanted.

Above: Collectors have always been interested in sculptures that have castings of more than one copy such as those by Mucha [above left] and Remington [above right]. Just as lithographs by Lautrec or silkscreens by Dali and Warhol or vintage movie posters, despite having been produced in editions of 10 or 100 or several thousand, are highly prized by collectors.

Naturally, that's a silly attitude and a silly thing for this collector to tell the sculptor. It was a blanket statement—and you all know how I feel about those—which actually only reflected one person's narrow opinion, not that of all collectors as a whole (obviously).

Dimensional art is widely collected in a multitude of forms and while there are most certainly singular 3D creations regularly offered for sale (particularly, but certainly not exclusively, in the Art Doll field and with works created with repurposed and found objects) there's absolutely no prejudice against limited editions (as prices in galleries, at auction, and on the secondary markets show). Whether it's a statue cast in resin or bronze, whether it's an Art Toy or action figure, whether it's a one-of-a-kind Art Doll or a superhero maquette released in an edition of 2000...all have passionate and enthusiastic collectors.

Anyway, I thought I'd share some wonderful work by some wonderful artists this morning—and when it comes to 3D art and artists, this really is only the tip of the iceberg. Whether they're one-of-a-kind or one in an edition of a thousand, these are pretty special. And, of course, collectible.

 

Above left: Randy Bowen             Above right: Tim Bruckner

As mentioned above, both of these are prime examples of sculptors extrapolating details not shown in the painted sources (in this case, both by Frank Frazetta) in order to create dimensional artworks successfully.

  

Above left: Marina Bychkova     Above right: Tony Cipriano 

Above left: Joe Devito           Above right: H.R. Giger

Above: Stephen Hickman

Above left: J. Anthony Kosar         Above right: Thomas Kuebler

Above: David Meng

Above: Bruce D. Mitchell

Above: Clayburn S. Moore

Above: Bill Nelson

Above: Mark Newman

Above: Lawrence Northey

 

Above left: Michael Parkes          Above right: Forest Rogers

Above: Virginie Ropars

Above left: The Shiflett Brothers      Above right: James Shoop

Above: Katya Tal

Norman Rockwell: American Originals

-By Howard Lyon

If you are a fan of Norman Rockwell you probably know that he was involved with and supported the Boy Scouts of America. In fact some of his earliest work was for the BSA and when he was 19, he worked as their Art Director for 3 years.



As a boy, I was involved in the scouting organization and earned my Eagle Scout award. I have many fond memories of being on campouts and learning to do things that I might not have otherwise. Rockwell is also one of my favorite artists so when I saw that the LDS Church History Museum in Salt Lake City was hosting 23 of Rockwell’s scouting paintings while I was in SLC, I made sure to stop in.



One of the first things that struck me was the variety of styles and techniques that Rockwell used. Almost every painting in the exhibit had a different feel to it; using a little texture or a lot, smooth painting surface or rough weave, limited palette, high key or low key, all of them felt like Rockwell, except one, but I will get to that.



Photographs of paintings can never capture everything that you see when viewing a painting in person, but I find that when I take notes, along with photos, many of the observations I made while at the museum have more meaning when I go over them back in my studio. Also, if my photography is good, I often find some details or insights that I missed in person. Let’s get started.

---

The Adventure Trail - Oil on canvas – 1950

This was one of my favorites in the show. I love the rich colors and surface of this painting. For me, it is Rockwell at his best. Always the master storyteller, there are many clues to guide the viewer through this painting.

Look at the great color in the scout’s cheeks. Note the variety of colors in the olive green clothing and hat. I love the rich oranges, yellows and reds of the neckerchief and lanyard around his neck. Look at the simple almost abstract flowers peeking through the picket fence and the small hints of blue on the white fence boards. Nothing feels overly rendered and much of the painting is very loosely indicated.

Check out this texture. Looking closely, I think that much of the larger impasto was done before paint was put to canvas. Not all of it, but I do think that for much of this texture Rockwell created it in the ground applied to the canvas. He talks about this in his book ‘Norman Rockwell: Illustrator.’

Rockwell mentions using Benjamin Moore’s “Sani-flat”, “pouring off most of the liquid and stirring in the remaining paste.” After brushing the paste on the canvas, he says it is “possible to do all sorts of things to it to create interesting textures.” Looking at some points of texture here, it doesn’t relate directly to the paint strokes on top, revealing that it was either the ground or thick layers of paint underneath, but I am quite sure it was the former. He uses this often in his work, and to great effect!

Observe the variety of colors in the blue of the boy’s hat and how simple and vibrant the ear is!

One last shot. Rockwell often worked from photos (the exhibit included shots from the modeling session photos), but there is nothing overtly photographic about the final result of this painting. Look how stylized the fur of the dog is and the little bit of ground showing through the boy and dog is nearly abstract. Just enough information to convey the idea.

---

Growth of a Leader – Oil on canvas – 1964

In this painting, the heads were about life sized. It depicts the progression of a boy through scouting to leadership as an adult.

This is another great example of Rockwell ‘pre-texturing’ his canvas to create interest and then painting into it. Some of the texture comes from the paint layer, but the uniform texture comes from the canvas ground. Rockwell talked about taking a piece of paper or plastic sheet and laying it across the wet ground and lifting it off to create texture for some paintings. You can read about that again in his Illustrator book as well has his autobiography, My Adventures as an Illustrator: Norman Rockwell.

One last shot where you can see the paint strokes working across the texture underneath. Look at the neat spot on his cheek, right at the bottom of his cheekbone where he has wiped out some of the paint down to the ground beneath. It makes a nice peachy set of marks, but the darker rosy paint of his cheeks stayed in the lower grooves of the texture. Note the quick brushwork in the hair, adding some sharp lines and edges over softer larger shapes to create the impression of hair. Your mind does most of the heavy lifting here, filling in lots of detail.

---

Carry On – Oil on canvas – 1932

This painting stood out, because it looks more like an N.C. Wyeth painting than a typical Rockwell. Muted colors, strong outlines and the strong silhouettes of the figures against the flat clouds create strong contrast with the first two paintings. Clearly, Rockwell was either trying his hand at Wyeth’s style, or paying homage to one of the giants of his age. I love it.

Look how thin much of the paint is. Gone is the texture of the ground and instead, he used a larger weave canvas. In a few places did he paint thick enough to cover it, like the side of the backpack, but for most of this piece the paint was very thin.

Looking at this close up you can see how Rockwell would lay in a color and then rub it back out in places to create highlights and texture. It almost takes on a kind of reversed ‘ben day dots’ or Roy Lichtenstein effect. It just speaks to Rockwell’s artistic versatility that he can put on a different hat and still pull off a strong painting.

---

Our Heritage – Oil on canvas 1948

Rockwell’s patriotism is on display here showing the scouts looking back through history to be inspired by George Washington and his prayer at Valley Forge. When you see this painting in person the first thing that will stand out is the intensity of the color. The blues and yellows are as bright and saturated as any oil color I know of right out of the tube. The next thing is the pronounced texture of the canvas. It was the roughest of any of the paintings on display. It looked more like canvas for murals than work this size.

The temperature contrast between the warm background and cool background couldn’t be stronger. Add to that the strong values of the composition and this painting reads from 100 yards away.

I think from now on, if someone disparages Rockwell as a painter, I will show them this shot of Washington’s head and tell them they can’t stop looking until they change their mind or agree to never comment on art again. There is so much artsy magic going on here, I don’t know where to start. The way he used the canvas texture, the paint texture, the color of the ground, the splashes of color throughout the flesh tones (look at the daub of yellow on his forehead) and then the glazing and wiping out that left intense blues in all the valleys creating a strong relief of the paint texture. Admire the hands and the economy of brushwork. Bow down to the vibrancy in the shadows! Build a small shrine leave a bowl of fresh cherries for the way he handled the impasto in the hair!!

One last shot. I love the way he indicated this sword. Some of it was rubbed out to create highlights, and some of the highlights were painted thickly, but then the whole area was glazed with intense blue and wiped out again to keep the texture strong.

---

Pointing the Way – Oil on canvas 1960

This painting had a flatter style to the rendering, kind of like the Growth of a Leader painting. Rockwell simplified the shapes a little more than usual and there is more of a local color rendering. Compare the nearly monochromatic clothing in this piece to the clothing in the first painting, The Adventure Trail. Almost like a tinted black and white photo, at least for the clothing.

Look at the texture in the sky! You can see how he worked the texture around the initial drawing, limiting it to the sky and background and keeping the figures pretty much smooth. You can see again how the texture was done in the ground, as the areas of color are independent of the texture beneath. I am inspired to do this on my next oil painting!

A good look at the masterful way Rockwell could paint a face. Look at the light filtering through his nostril and bouncing warm light around and the way he broke the eyebrow and hair down to simple shapes. You can also see clearly how the reds and greens of the clothing are very localized.

---

All Together – Oil on canvas 1945

Yet another approach for Rockwell. We get the intense colors like we saw in Our Heritage but the palette here is analogous color. The surface is very smooth on this piece with very little texture of canvas or paint. What stands out to me is the way he used the silhouetting and shape welding to forge the composition here. Look at how the boys in the foreground are set apart from the darker rock and the boy on the top of the rock is just slightly set apart from the darker boy in the middle-ground, who is very nearly the same value and color as the rock. Squint down at this painting and it makes a wonderful complex and interesting shape.

---

Beyond the Easel – Oil on canvas 1966

This is the least favorite of the styles that I see Rockwell work in, but still much to enjoy and observe. This feels more like a copy of a photograph than his usual carefully arranged narrative work. Still, look at the way he handled the grass in the foreground, especially in the lower right. Rockwell himself looks sharp and spry, ready for a new challenge. Some of the boys that are depicted here talked about the excitement at having the legend there to paint.

---

Ever Onward – Oil on canvas 1958

I love the contrast in this piece. Rockwell was experimenting with Pollack’s drip painting style in the background. The mimicry wasn’t as successful as his later piece, “The Connoisseur” done three years later in 1961, but it still provides an interesting backdrop to his beautiful rendering of the figures and an insight into Rockwell’s thoughts during what were turbulent times in the art world.

A great shot of the beautiful textures and the great lettering work done in this piece.

---

A Good Sign All Over the World – Oil on Canvas 1960

One last painting. I love the storytelling here. Scouts from around the world meeting and all bringing their different cultures together. It is a great uplifting painting with a wonderful message. Simpler times maybe, but I admire Rockwell’s espousal of the good and the ideal. He managed to do it in a way that I find admirable and not kitschy.

Note the interesting way he used heavy impasto to create the globe in the background and the thick white paint in the lower right making a great contrast of texture with the fabric and figures. This time it appeared to be all paint texture and not texture created in the ground.

---

There were lots of other great paintings in this exhibit, so if you get the chance, definitely visit. The exhibit will close on the 31st of December, 2013.



In conclusion, I think the thing that I took away from this show, apart from more admiration for Rockwell, was the desire to explore texture in my paintings. Seeing Rockwell’s use of heavy canvas, textured grounds and thick impasto right along with smoothly polished, rendered surfaces was exciting and inspiring. Thanks for letting me ramble on.



One more thing… I used a Nikon D7000 with a 50mm lens to shoot this exhibit. I will usually shoot at f8 or so and as low ISO I can and keep my shutter speed at 1/60th. I shoot in manual mode and in the RAW format so that I can tweak the color a little more back in the studio. I find that I usually underexpose on site but I can get sharp pictures and there is enough information recorded to still get a good shot.

A Terror Process

- by John Jude Palencar

“A Terror” ... well not really but a fun e-story project for TOR Books. Creative Director, Irene Gallo and I were back and forth on the concept: sad concept or more “horror show”.



Here's the link to the short story: "A Terror" by Jeffery Ford.



The finished painting is pencil on board, blocked in with acrylic washes, and gradual building of the form with hatching, scumbling and scratching.



First the rough sketches:

Pencil on board

Initial acrylic washes

Additional acrylic washes

"A Terror" 9.25" x 10.25" Acrylic on board

Book Covers: Illustration vs. Photo vs. Design

-By Lauren Panepinto

For this post I'm going out of my way to state right here at the beginning, that these are my thoughts, my method, and my opinions. I'm not including other Art Directors or other companies in this post, because this is really a topic that I get asked specifically about the work I do for Orbit Books. In fact, I'm not even going to speak for Orbit Books as a company, just for me and my ideas about designing and art directing covers.



This will make some of you laugh, because you've probably had this conversation with me, but as long as I have been at Orbit, the number one question I get asked by artists is some variation of "Why does Orbit use so much photography for book covers?" Sometimes it's even the somewhat hostile "Why does Orbit hate Illustration?" (Which I assure you could not be further from the truth.) I was actually nervous to attend my first Illuxcon, an art convention that specializes in traditional illustration, because I thought there was going to be a lynch mob of oil painters after me.



So how do I choose between hiring an Illustrator, setting up a Photo Shoot, or going for a Design approach?

First a little bit of background. The truth is, Orbit uses roughly an equal amount of photo shoots, illustration, and what I call "pure design" covers. Yet people overwhelmingly felt for a while that the Orbit "look" was totally photographic. I realized that although this style range was standard in the non-genre book cover world I had worked in before, the SFF world was traditionally radically skewed to using illustration on covers, and was kind of shocked by all the photographic goings-on. I think a few things contributed to the "Orbit look": The first year Orbit was in the US, before I became Creative Director, the Little Brown art department handled the Orbit covers. They did a fabulous job, but because no one in that department was a geek or had innate knowledge of the SFF genre history, the covers naturally looked and felt more like mainstream non-genre fiction covers. Then when I started as Creative Director, I brought 7 years of commercial and literary book cover experience with me (along with a lifetime of geekery, a history of working in comic book stores, and an Elvish tattoo) so my covers tended to look more mainstream. I'm also a trained graphic designer, and from the start I designed a lot of Orbit's covers outright, rather than immediately starting by assigning a freelance artist. And last, Orbit had already started gaining a reputation for bringing a fresh look to fantasy covers with many of the UK originated covers for authors like Trudi Canavan, and the immensely popular Night Angel Trilogy by Brent Weeks, which was co-designed by the Little Brown team and the UK. Let's just say Orbit launched the army of a thousand hooded shadowy cloaked dudes on covers, for better or worse.

So, given all that history, how do I decide what direction to go for a cover? Well, first of all, it's not just my decision. (If you want to know exactly what goes into the cover process, check out the super in-depth "Making of A Cover" series of blog posts I'm doing on the Orbit blog.) I present ideas on cover direction to the Publisher and Editors, and we debate/collaborate/fight about the best direction for the book. It's actually a really complicated formula that looks something like this:

Budget is pretty straight-forward. Not every book has the same selling expectations, due to things like author sales history, whether the book is releasing e-only, a hardcover, or a paperback, and considerations like that. All the money you spend on the book comes out of that book's budget, so you don't want to spend $10,000 on a book you only expect to make $5,000 on. Here's another myth-buster. Photo shoots are way more expensive to produce than most illustrations are. The photographic covers are more work, more people, more time, and more budget as a general rule. Trust me, we only do photo shoots when we have a serious reason for using that style. They are a giant pain in the @$$.



Schedule varies. Sometimes I have all the time in the world to work on a book and I can hire the slowest oil painter with no worries. Sometimes a book drops into the season last second and I can only hire people I know can turn around final art in minimal time. That's either going to go to an illustrator that works digitally, or it's going to be all design.



"Cool" factor is where my gut comes in. I spend a lot of time up to my eyeballs in the internet and in all kinds of geek media—not just books, but TV, movies, gaming, etc. I also keep a close eye on what trends are happening in the wider world of publishing and book covers, and art in general. It's my job to know the trends and try to stay a little ahead of the pack. My target is to create art that feels fresh and new but is still recognizable to the audience.



Which brings us to "target audience"—which is critical, but most fans and artists don't really consider:  The secret is, the target audience will dictate the style of a cover almost every time.



Call it a symptom of having worked in "mainstream" covers for so long, but I don't only consider Orbit's audience to be geeks. I love our hardcore geek audience, but I also love gaining mainstream crossover fans for our books. There's so many potential SFF fans who don't know they're geeks yet! We're converting more every day, and I am seriously evangelical about it. All those people watching Game of Thrones on HBO? I want to put a Joe Abercrombie book in their hands the second they finish reading the last George R. R. Martin book (god knows, they'll have a long enough wait till the next one). And that's why I went photographic for the Joe Abercrombie covers. I wanted them to look like a movie poster, like a big-budget television show, and also like hi-def sports photography.

Target audience doesn't only mean how mainstream vs. how geek an audience is, it's also about sub-genres and what we call "genre checkpoints". The best example is urban fantasy. There's intense debate over what's cheesy and what's not in urban fantasy, and we all make fun of awkward poses and bad tattoos, but the truth of the matter is, the urban fantasy audience looks for books that are photographic, or at least very tightly rendered illustrations, and they look for the sexy ladies. If you stray too far from that formula you will miss your target audience. (Which is not to say you can't do that in a classy way, or in a cool way, which I try to do for all my urban fantasy series.) I've overshot my audience before, and no matter how cool the cover looks, if enough people don't buy it, it's a failure as a cover no matter how awesome it looks.

Remember, a cover is advertising first, a piece of art second. An ugly cover that sells a ton of books wins over a gorgeous cover that sells ten copies. Every. Time. Trying to balance those opposing forces is often the hardest part of my job.



Another example of a sub-genre with a really strong look is the big space adventure books. The audience loves illustration, is out looking for the next big exciting dynamic painting of a space scene, generally the more dynamic the better, and that's what sells that genre of book. You can play with the rendering style, whether you go more abstract or more rendered, but get an awesome spaceship on there and you're home free.

The more modern, pop-culture, thriller, and comedic SFF books do really well with a more graphic/designed treatment. That's really a broad generalization of that style, it can be really eclectic in subject matter, but a more pure design treatment signifies a more hip or more commercial crossover kind of book.

So that's a little look inside how I narrow down what style is going to be right for what book. There's a lot more examples of sub-genres, and like I said, I am massively simplifying here. There are absolutely exceptions, and a lot of times I break my own rules on purpose. But in general, it's the desired target audience that most dictates the style of the cover. I think it's an interesting part of the art process that most people don't really get a chance to think about. I know a lot of artists think I just get to pick what I like, but my personal taste is really just a small part of the equation.



Again, if you'd like to read a really in-depth series on how one cover gets made, from acquisition right to final books, check out the Making of A Cover series.



I apologize for not individually crediting the covers - the credits would be longer than this blog post. I promise credits for everything are on the orbit blog, and on the orbit pinterest.