Sorry for the long wait! I didn't mean to leave it quite this long. Homework after work takes quite a punch. Or perhaps is one.
Today, I'll cover perspective, as promised.

I'll be covering it basically as described in Ernest R. Norling's classic book Perspective Made Easy, which was originally published back in 1939, and has been a staple in schools for a long time. It's a recommended quick and easy reference book, and is not even very expensive. Just 13.50$CAN. As well as looking at some actual examples from a recent name that was done by myself.


Perspective, if you've ever looked at planning sketches of Leonardo Da Vinci and things like that, can get pretty mathematical, but it doesn't have to. Since there's a lot of step by step books on the market, I'm going to jump around a bit, and fill in some real life examples and such, define terms, and underline some stuff that was perhaps not entirely clear to me way back. It's a tutorial, so I'm going to fill in the role of tutor on this one. Buy a good book specializing in this to become a master. The one I listed is the cheapest, and comprehensive too. Or look around and find one that suits the way you think.

First, let's define some terms. First, we have the horizon. That's pretty simple. Keep in mind that even indoors, there's a horizon, which we call the horizon line. This is where you're going to place your vanishing points. This is a, or multiple spots on the horizon where everything points to. There's no limit in a picture, depending on what it is, to how many of these there can be, but most pictures have one, two or three-point perspective. An example of infinite-point perspective might be a mass of floating balls. Seeing as you can just draw circles and shade them, I think infinite isn't very practical, more mathematical... Anyway, finally eye-level. This is the level at which the 'camera' or the viewer's eyes are at.

Let's look at an example.

Eye-Level - Ernest R. Norling

The term eye level was new to me when I was looking for solid material for this particular tutorial (I talk through my hat only when I can't find material, or you surprise me -_- ). I tend to do a lot of my perspective intuitively because it's one of the first things I learned and I'm very used to it. I had a very textbook development... In any case, it may be new only because of the reference to the eyes - these days, it might always be called 'camera'. So, you might think, what's the point of this if the drawing's all in on a sheet of paper anyway? Why do I have to figure out where I'd be standing? So eye level is a bit confusing, if apt.

A camera, because it takes pictures which become flat, is a bit easier to understand. Though these days cameras are not held at eye level any more as a rule.

The thing to remember is that the horizonline and eyelevel correspond. Norling was very particular about this point in his book, and I had never really thought about it. I suspect this fact may further helping me out in the future.

Now that you know about the parts, let's see about constructing an image. The image above is one-point perspective. Note how lines point to a particular place. If there were power lines on one side of the track, how do you think they would be drawn? The tops of these power poles will be over the horizonline. That means that the invisible line from the top of one pole to the next, the next the next, would in fact point downwards. I'll draw it in. I'll need this in colour due to all the ink the guy has in this drawing... Witness my Photoshop drawing skill!!

Let's add poles
I eyeballed the bottom part, and when I was done, I noticed perhaps I shouldn't have. Take a look at the second pole.

Mistake demonstration

For me, eyeballing is much harder on the computer, and high contrast doesn't help. Either way, it's a lesson that even something slightly off can harm the authenticity of your drawing. Knowing how to use perspective can save drawings, often those where you're not sure what you did wrong.
On paper, my method frequently is to draw roughly what I want to see, find the approximate vanishing point, then rework everything to fit nicely into it. It's hard to think of your vanishing points first, place them down pre-emptively and then have your image still match what you saw in your head, so I would say that after practice with camera angles, drawing roughly first then cleaning up is the easiest way to go about it. But this is where those thumbnails and name come in. Let's look at some very rough work. It's not the example I was thinking of, but I don't have the vast majority of the work here with me at my home. So, let's look at a different page.

Bugger Pg 10 - Name
The example's panels read from left to right.

Okay, not the best work ever, but it demonstrates a few perspectives, which I made using the method I described above. I sketch roughly what I want to see, then draw rough perspective lines that help me keep everything in line. On actual manuscript paper then, I would start strait away with perspective lines, now that I know it will give me what I want to see.

The first panel is two point perspective. This is an example of something called warped perspective and is something you're technically supposed to avoid. However, I wanted the paper to have that particular shape in the panel. Makes it a bit more interesting. There will be signatures on the bottom, and it makes it look a little bit more like the reader's eyes are very close to the surface of the paper - enough to skew his vision. Hold up a pencil box very very close to your eye, similar to how the paper is positioned in this panel. If you were to draw it just how you saw it, it's nothing like a rectangle any more, is it? It gains a strange teardrop sort of shape. Lots of things in our world warp like this when veiwed, but our brains compensate so that you never really question the actual shape of the object. You didn't think at any point that it was an oddly-shaped paper on the table, did you? It's no different in real life, save that you take real life to 'look real' a lot more easily. If you explore your world keeping this sort of thing in mind, you start to have a lot more "If I drew that, it would look wrong" or "I see how I'd have to draw this for it to look right" moments.
Let's draw on the panel and find the perspective I used. I remember that I did this little sketch by eyeballing, so let's see.


It is revealed that the pen is slightly out of perspective. I wonder if it was noticeable before...? It's not too bad at least. Note how the beer glass is not getting larger or smaller at the top or bottom - it's not being very perspecty. This is because parallel lines going up and down, even imaginary ones (think of the glass inside an invisible cube) in this image are going to remain parallel when depicted. It's two point perspective, so all the lines in a dresser, or a box on the table will all point strait up and down. This changes if you're doing three point perspective. It's mainly used for depicting tall buildings, since the warp becomes pretty severe once you start pinching smaller the tops of buildings, for example. I may talk more about 3-point later, but no promises. If you understand 2-point, that's fine. Three just changes this vertical-parallel lines rule to add a third vanishing point. It doesn't need the horizon line and can be placed anywhere on the vertical axis of the object. Playing with these is the best way to learn. Just remember to spread the points out far!

What makes my example skewed or 'warped' is how close one of the vanishing points are. Ever wonder why drafting tables are so big? It's not just to draw on really big paper. In most drawings both vanishing points will be way, way off the page, like the second vanishing point in this example. Many serious artists cover their draft tables with huge paperboard so they can pin or draw vanishing points in to keep track of them. Bringing the other vanishing point up close to the other is what causes warp - and should be in most cases avoided. Here's an example by Norling.

Beds - Ernest R. Norling

You can have a point in close, but the other one has to compensate. In my example, it didn't compensate nearly enough for how close point 1 was. This causes warp, but I decided to use it for visual direction.

Panel 2!

This panel was drawn using one point perspective, full on so you're looking strait down the image into the point, like that classic rail roads image.



From an artistic perspective, and I'm not sure why artbooks don't mention this, one point perspective may be less interesting than two point, but it's excellent for visual direction. Now, one thing I was never happy with this panel for was that I seem to be directing the reader to look at Antonio's navel, the guy in the middle. What is so important about his navel? Nothing. It's his expression that is of note, if nothing else, and it's Barry's line anyway. So this isn't the best example, but at least you know what's wrong with it. I also wasn't happy with the size of the table. Still, here, I used perspective lines to figure out how big to draw each head. The rest didn't go so well. I would have liked to place the vanishing point off the page somewhere behind Antonio who is at the end of the table and put Barry in the focus of the panel. This would mean all horizontal lines in the picture would point towards Antonio and his smirky face, leading the eye to him eventually, while keeping Barry the centre of attention while he speaks his line. This way, I can attend to both important things in the panel, and Walter, who is inbetween those two characters but technically in the middle, won't hog all the attention. Or I could put Barry's speech bubble on top of him, haha. --But I'm working off a script, and I don't have that freedom.


The next panel is a good example of approximated perspective, or working perspective backwards, which is a common practice and especially important if you're working off a script where certain people have to be inside the scene.

Panel 3

Two point perspective.

The boys are all sitting around a rectangular table, as I hope is clear by now. There's only one shot that will show all the speaker's faces. Luckily, Eddie, the man in the foreground is talking to himself, so he's literally having an aside. I turned his face. He's not directing his comment at any of the four people with him, so he's not making any contact with them. If I had him looking strait ahead, it would look like he's joining in with the other two's conversation. Lucky. So now that I have it planned in my head, I drew Eddie's head first. I drew the circles for the other two's heads until I was happy with the placement. This gives me enough information, along with the line of the table to draw the rest of the scene if I wanted to. I never drew the line for the booth they're sitting in, so I've placed it in now, in red. I don't even quite need to find the vanishing point to do so.

What if, for some reason, I wanted to draw more? I can keep working backwards to find out where to place more of my image. There's another guy beside the man in the foreground. Let's figure out where to place him. I'll draw one new line that goes right through Eddie (foreground guy) and Barry's heads. Now, I'll do the same with Walter, since this new guy will be sitting right across from him... --but I don't have enough information to place this line! Don't I need two lines to find the vanishing point? --You can estimate by using the horizon line, which we've already 'found' with the last points. Figure out about where it will be and it will give you where to start your new line. Draw a line from the point over the top of Walter's head, and you get the top of the new guy's!

Backwards perspective
Note also the imaginary square it creates. This square should look just like it could really be floating there. If it doesn't, something's probably wrong, and you'll need to be more precise. For this example, I never did figure out exactly where that other vanishing point was. The green line was placed down completely arbitrarily, where I thought it might be given where the lines were going off to. It was all guessing, but that's often enough, as much as it shouldn't be encouraged! It takes a lot of time to be precise, and this is production art! Be precise when you're practising, so it doesn't matter when you have to do it for real! If you do have time though, you'll never regret it.

Panel 4

This is another example of one point perspective that was perhaps done a bit better. Other than visual direction - I have the weight of the image hung mostly on one side, between new guy David and Antonio, it leaves lots of unimportant space at the bottom of the panel for lots of speechbubbleness.

Panel 4
Here, you can see the actual lines I did a bit better. I did this panel the same way I did the others. I drew in Antonio and Walter, to his left, then figured out the rest by drawing in the appropriate lines by finding the vanishing point.

The next two panels don't particularly have perspective at all, and are sort of unfinished.


Some other things to note about perspective, before I leave this topic:

Put everything in boxes if you're having trouble with what something looks like. Foreshorten the boxes and this will give you a clue as to your next step with your object. This even goes for body parts. If you're having trouble with the foreshortening of musculature, what you're looking for is foreshortening - and there are a lot of good books on this too, like the Atlas of Foreshortening, which is unfortunately because of all the picture plates, ungodly expensive (about 80$CAN). This is where good figure drawing classes come in handy. But those are 200$CAN+, if you go to Concordia. (But there are free or almost free classes as well.)

Reflections have the same vanishing point as well, not their own!

Floortile - Ernest R. Norling

What about shadows? Your 'vanishing point' for a shadow is the light source. Say a candle. Draw from that point, down around the edges of the object onto the 'floor'.

What about shadows cast on stuff? Draw through, as if the obstructing object were not there. Where the invisible lines touch the object in question helps form the shadow on that object.

Pages in a book: Keep in mind that the book is like a circle at it's edges. The pages are held in the centre of this circle, and rotate around it. Draw a cylinder in the perspective for your drawing and fill in the pages.

Slopes - Ernest R. Norling

Buildings with irregular faces - Ernest R. Norling


If any of that has sparked your interest, http://www.quadrilateralperspective.com/ might also be of interest to read. It's very strange, but perhaps it's the next big thing, using very different fundamentals. Still, it hasn't caught on simply due to the fact that it's different from the way we've always done it, traditionally.

By the time I'm through with this, I expect you all to be much better than me. Many of you are far more artistic, and therefore can take this knowledge to much better places than I can. With everything I know, I still struggle every time.


I've talked a lot, you know some things now about basic composition and form. While I'm far from finished with those things, let's look at something I've been asked about recently.


Every illustration except for portraits need depth and every object in a depthed scene needs to observe at least rough perspective. If you move the 'camera' - the place where the picture is taken from - then you will need perspective for the 'foreshortening' of bodies and other objects in the scene.

This knowledge is pretty much invaluable in comics and is used in these two major ways:
To show an object or person in a particular light - that is to say, to make something Greater or Lesser. Show a tall building from below. Show a shy person from above. And millions of other uses to 'look down' or 'up' at a person or thing. Given all the angles one can have, there's a slew of different shades of meaning you can throw subtly on an image.

2 - To break up 'talking heads'. I'm going to talk a bit about talking heads, since it's come up.

Everybody East and West rues the talking heads. This is when a panel shows character 1's face, then the next panel shows character 2's face, then the next panel goes back basically to the first one, etc. during a conversation. While this can be effective to increase tension during an argument or quick face off of wits (or something conceptually similar), it has to be used sparingly or will make the reader start to read very quickly, perhaps too quickly for how much dialogue or information he should be absorbing.

Comics are a visual medium primarily, and the trouble with talking heads is that when the reader sees the same image over and over again, he starts to assume subconsciously there's nothing new. Comic writers and drawers have to remember that the people reading their things are primarily people off the street who are not going to notice anything clever we try to do, because our expertise leads us to try very subtle or unusual things. The average Joe does not particularly care.

Comics are no longer being written for comic afficienados who can name everybody in the industry and can trace the evolution of comics back thirty years. Just the fact that anyone really can is a testament to the bizarre nature of Western comics. The problem with the West is individuality. An artist only feels he's any good if he's 'original' this usually means going way out on a limb, usually way too far. Nobody in comics minds, though because everyone's equally familiar with the history and methods, including many of the readers. But some people can do it, others can't. This severely hampers the genre, if all there is is Indy comics and well-established corporate-owned ones. If more people could be content with being average, with a solid base of understanding the Things that Work, there would be more mainstream comics, different kinds, more to choose from and more regular people would be interested. This is why Manga have swept in, with it's (generally) lamer art and repetitive story lines I keep hearing complaints about. Yes, manga art on the whole rips the western concept of "Comics as Art" to shreds, but only in the sense of useless techniques that the really casual reader doesn't care about anyway. Comics that are readable will always be art, but Manga hide most of the art form itself from the reader, simply provoking from afar. Decent physical art is only the clothing it wears. Manga are normally very clear, and the ones that aren't are quickly tossed aside.
Of course I'll only pick the best drawn ones, or ones with a well-made story, but watching others buy comics makes me think twice about what's really important. Comics need to be less 'interesting' and more 'entertaining'. And one does that by involving the reader, not alienating him with how 'good' you are. And that's what this journal is about. If you can be inventive and do something novel WHILE being clear and mainstream, then you'll have it made. The most successful and popular succeed in this way. It's a horrendous thing to say here in the West, but being popular brings the money, and that's all that matters. Why? Because then you can do what you love without starving. Hook a fanbase then do whatever you want, and they'll love you for it.


Anyway, back to perspective. It's really important for keeping interest. A reader can't see everything in a room the way a character or you can in your head. You can use perspective and angles to help the reader grasp a location, even a room and what it really looks like. It's important to ground the reader to your location so they can easily believe they're there. I've many times felt lost because not enough was shown. I'm not sure where people are talking, and sometimes therefore why. I've seen a lack of backgrounds work unnoticeably only once, and I will get to that in a post about 'omission' and why it's actually good later on. This is another thing that only works if you know how to use it.
Once the talking heads thing starts to happen, (okay, I'm not done with talking heads) you can do many things. Let's imagine a scene. It's crucial that the two characters are on a date in a dainty coffee shop. They talk. Endlessly. But it's really important, so there's nothing that can be done about it! You're certainly not going to have them walk around, and it's even worse to start doing crazy camera angles. This is a quiet, maybe romantic scene, so too many angles is disruptive. So how to do this and not get repetitive? In real life or in a movie, a static shot might be fine, the intonation of people's words, and the subtle movements of their bodies is more than enough to sustain interest when coupled with the conversation itself. However, this is very hard to do if you don't have a very bold style (such as a Film Noir look), or a gimmick that's just that interesting to look at. Like... morphing heads or something. If you're drawing in quite a realistic way, and the topic is very textured, then you might be able to get about doing very different expressions, but I find this draws too much attention to the art itself, and the reader out of the story, especially if it's done well. The reader is not supposed to notice how awesome the art is until he's done, and thinks about it. He should be engrossed before that. Thinking about how good the art is later gives him a really good, logical excuse to buy the next one. I know it works on me.

Before we totally trash talking heads and move on to how to fix it, let's give an example that does work:

Deathnote Tennis - Written by Tsugumi Ouba, drawn by Takeshi Obata

This example actually displays the example I mentioned above, that of a battle of wits:
A very interesting work, a large part of the manga Deathnote revolves around Light Yagami, known as the killer Kira and L, sometimes known as Ryuga, such as when he enrolls in Light Yagami's school. Both different shades of genius, they play a complicated game of chess with each other as L, a mysterious detective heads the investigation against the mysterious Kira whom also no one has seen, who has the power to kill people by knowing their (real) name and face. The tennis match is little more than a physical, pared-down representation of their lives for months if not years, as they dance around each other. L suspects Light as being Kira, but can't quite catch him. An even match, they wait for each other to make a mistake. This of course means that most of this boy's manga is, in fact, talking heads, so it's interesting how artist Takeshi Obata goes about all the many words Tsugumi Ouba throws at him. A true professional. Deathnote is available domestically from Tokyo Pop and is currently up to volume 7. Scanlation services have long had all of Deathnote available for download in English, and it's been quite popular!
I remember reading this scene extremely quickly. Not only did it have a bit of the talking heads thing, it was also a tennis match, and you know how quickly this must all be happening! It's okay for them, they're thinking at the same time, but for us, we have to absorb twice as fast! The conclusion is very strong though, with half a page with the words
That we should go to the taskforce headquarters together.
and
Whoever makes the first move wins.
written boldly. In this way, even if you missed half of their logic throwing, you still get the point of all that, and was cleverly done. The mood was the important element, not how they got to their conclusion. Racing along over several pages, you can feel how fast they're thinking, and the scramble they're making to one-up each other.
Also note that each page of this fast sequence allows us to take a breath and cliff hangs us just long enough to the next page to not lose the feeling of tension. Some thanks goes to the translators for preserving that.
I'm anxious to see how this can be done efficiently in the movie! I would personally try to run both audio tracks at the same time (the one in focus having a slightly louder voice) for scenes like this, since you can't stretch out time conveniently like you can in comics - but it would suck in subtitles. : \


Anyway, back to perspective. At this point, I'll only cover the uses for it. I'll do another post on perspective later. Got sidetracked. ><

Let's consider that cafe proposal. Flipping through my book, I realized that this volume of Deathnote also has just that (what were the chances?), o _ o ...minus the romantic element. >_>; I guess the chances were pretty high, given that I already said those were two ways talking heads worked, and talking heads is what this manga's all about...

L and Light Have Tea - Written by Tsugumi Ouba, drawn by Takeshi Obata
Here, Light talks for more than a page, just himself. This is such a ridiculous amount even L notices. Note how the artist changes it up. The last panel of his talking is what I call a blahblahblah!! panel. It's where a character exausts himself to the point that you sort of have L's reaction and it starts to feel like the character's just over-emphasizing his point or going blahblahblah! >:O The artist isn't afraid to point it out - it's part of the characterization. It's just one of the many things that work. Note the other panels used - why were these shots used in the order they were used? How about the angles?


Speaking of some things that work, panels, and talking heads, here's Wally Wood's 22 panels that work, courtesy Jihatsu, who found them for me:

Wally Wood

And we'll end with that. No homework for today! Homework when I finally get to perspective!

Alright, let's get to something a little less lecture-y, for this time around. Today we'll look at the human body. I plan to do a section on each part of the body as well, but let's look into some of the general things first.
We all draw human beings, and they're generally pretty convincing, they're not being confused for something else. But this part isn't about 'how to draw' this or that. It's about knowing the theory to make both intuitive drawing easier and increasing our range.

Comic and cartooning are generally simplifications. This can allow us to draw very simply, ignoring most of the rules of a photo-realistic rendering and is therefore considered to be easier. This isn't really the case, though. Cartoonists need to know everything a 'photo-realistic' artist does, plus all the rules of cartooning in order to make his simplifications and exaggerations convincing enough to charm or convince the viewer. Cartoons are fast, but it doesn't mean any easier.


The biggest thing when it comes to drawing a form is proportion. Let's start with something every drawing book in the world is going to tell you: A human form is measured in 'heads'. In all my books everything from 61/2 to 10 heads high is listed. Seven and eight are the most commonly cited ones, with 6 1/2-7 considered to be normal human being size, but not suited for idealized illustrations. Western style comic books list up to 10 heads, but I consider ten far too strange-looking to be viable. Think Jafar types and 90's radical bishounen. But there's nothing stopping anyone from doing that, or using 5 heads or anything, when it comes to characterization.

So, let's put this into practice and see what it looks like. We'll use scans from the Famous Artist's course, which has a very nice section on this. Albert Dorne says:

[...] There is a distinct difference, however, between the "average" and the "ideal." Artists have always sought to discover the ideal, the perfect figure. The Greek sculptors, for example, established a "cannon" for the human figure. This cannon was a set of proportions for the ideal figure. In many respects the concept of the ideal changes from nation to nation and from period to period. The hefty, voluptuous beauties of the Rubens murals were much admired in their day, when women were considered beautiful only if they had monumental proportions. Today popular taste has swung in the opposite direction. Since we are attempting to draw people who will seem handsome and beautiful to the average person of today, we must set up a canon of proportions based on present-day taste. This canon need not necessarily be the same as the measurements of the present-day average man or woman. In the photograph on the opposite page [below], the model is a well-developed male of average height. He is a "seven-head figure" People today, however, do not consider a seven-head figure tall enough to satisfy their concept of the idea. They prefer the eight-head figure, which they feel is handsomer and more elegant. It is therefore the eight-head figure which is used in modern illustration. [...]

The eight-head figure is today considered the "ideal." It is this set of proportions which we will expect you to follow through the Course. [...] Occasionally you will want to draw people who are obviously not average. If you want to caricature a person or show that he is shorter than average or taller than average, you can do this very easily by retaining the same width measurements used to draw the eight-head figure, but reducing the height to five or six heads or increasing the height to nine or ten heads. However, any departure from the eight head formula should be deliberate. [...]

Rely on your eyes for correct proportions. The head as a unit of measure is convenient and helpful while you are first learning figure proportions. You must realize, though, that you do not make figure drawings with a pair of dividers or a ruler. You make them with your pencil and your eyes! Actually the only time you can literally measure the body and see how many heads long it is, is when the figure is standing bold upright, in a position of attention. Any other time - which means most of the time - the figure or parts of it are foreshortened to some extent. If it looks right it is right. By all means study the chart above and fix it in your mind the save of one part of the body compared with another, but put your ruler away when you start to draw. Never forget for a moment that skillful drawing is simply skillful seeing, transferred to the surface of your paper.

-Albert Dorne

Famous Artist's Course 7 and 8 head high model - Albert Dorne

The key thing to note here is that this isn't a matter of height but proportion - everyone's a different size, but certain body parts will just always be a certain number of heads high. Where each head-height line strikes the figure, look carefully how long it should be. The eight-head figure really does look great. Chin to pectoral muscle, then waist, crotch, mid-thigh, knee-bend, mid-calf and floor. Look at the comparatively odd places the seven-head figure brings. One line seems to cut just above the knee, for example.

Of course, normal people aren't like this. Consider yourself as an example. How many of your own heads high are you? I did this myself, and I come out to just under the very normal 6 1/2 heads, though I'm terribly short. I would suppose this means I have neither an uncharacteristically small or large head for my body - leaning towards large, actually. However, my proportions don't match up well to the figures above. After the chin, I have the line at the pecks, bellybutton and crotch, leaving less than two and a half for my legs. It cuts me high above the knee, and mid-calf (roughly done). I would look wrong, or curious, if I was drawn in an illustration. At the very least like my pants were strange. You only want to do this sort of thing on purpose.

Here are some examples of how a romanticized 9 head figure differs from 'ideal/illustration' 8 and 'realistic' 7 head figures:

Women - Herbert Greenwald
It may be a matter of 'modern taste', but I'd make her hips bigger than that...

Men - Herbert Greenwald

The 'Heroic' 9 head - Klaus Janson
I still find things other than 8 head to look sort of strange, because of where the math splits the figure. However, so long as the heads high is respected, it won't look bad. Also, he strangely places the eight and nine head figure on the same measuring scale. It should always be done in terms of the figure's own head! This means this 9 head figure is almost just the same thing as his 8 head figure, in terms of proportions. Measure yourself! Take a look at the 9 head figure's head, and count downwards, ignoring the eight-head figure's lines. How many heads do you get, if you measure in terms of his own? Now you'll be able to do this will all figures! Even your mom!

Klaus Jansen whose work I haven't shown so far, is a current illustrator, who's famous for working on DC comics and teaching at the School of Visual Arts in NYC for the past ten years. With a solid grasp on musculature that is absent in the other examples I have to work with, I may pull examples from him again, but since it's a current, domestic publication, I may not do so so much. This excerpt is from The DC Comics Guild to PENCILLING Comics, which is pretty available, unlike some of my references.


My figures are often just seven heads. I learned this was average for a human being, and went with that. When first establishing my drawing skills, 'ideal' didn't matter to me, and I ignored the eight head figure for the most part. The eight head looks great though and feels balanced, and I would encourage its use. A lot of the critique I get today circles back to people noticing this difference, even if just intuitively. The 8-head 'illustration' and the comic-and-manga 9-head has surfaced in my drawings.

Heads-High Example - Simon Gannon

The taller man is almost a nine-head figure. The smaller one is a seven. Try to remember heads-calculation has to do with proportion even though the shorter does happen to clock less heads-high as well as being short. Proportion is measured in terms of their own heads in relation to their own bodies!
The taller one's head is much smaller in relation to his body, his body parts will also be lankier. The one in front has a more solid form, if actually smaller, and is less bird-like. Despite being quite different heights, their heads are approximately the same size. Though risky, it can be good for characterization. The smaller one manages not to look as tiny or young next to the much taller man, and he seems much sturdier than if one drew him with the same kind of ratio as the tall one. [imagine their rib cages, for example]
Further exaggerating this for better or worse is the small one's hat and the tall one's thin, strait hair. This further dis-balances the picture in favour of making characterization. Everyone's eyes start on the tall 9 headed figure, who's demeanour and romantic proportions demand attention, but all eyes fall very quickly to the smaller one. Comments are always made on this small one first, and then the large one. I'm lucky that for the purposes of this section, this image happened to have had me watch people's reactions to it. :p
Of course, there are other reasons the eye tends to focus on the smaller one. There are strategic lines on the tall one's coat. His shoulder too, frames the little one's face. The small one's also admittedly better-drawn. His eyes are bigger and his head is at a more original angle. All these things contribute, and mean that you can very easily control a person's eye movement and his attitude towards a character. Who ends up being more intimidating? The romantic tall one might be hard to approach based on looks, but there's something more to the smaller, and that was the aim of the illustration. In comparison, no one was interested in the tall, romantically proportioned figure, because the composition pulls all attention away from him. At the same time, having such unusual, glossy proportions ensures he does not become completely irrelevant or uninteresting to the image either.

At least, that's the idea. We don't always succeed in quite the way we want to, so it's good to have a lot of tried and true rules of thumb running in the background.


Making things complicated, people at different ages have separate proportions. This is a bit more advanced, so I'll let Mr. Dorne explain it.

Heads High - Children - Albert Dorne

We have a character named Dorne. Saying "Mr. Dorne" makes me giggle. 83

Tip of the day: I've been noticing a trend to think that if it's been published, it's automatically good. There's a lot that can be gotten away with, and still fully publishable. None of these technical bits are written in stone, and there are many things that very viably can make up for less than solid art or even storytelling. A lot of things make up comics, and to say that something is doable just because it's out there doesn't make it either right or the best way to do it. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should, like in all things. Strive to be better! Comics (and illustrations) are as filled with mistakes as they are with references and good things. Learn to see where artists and illustrators go wrong and where they succeed. You'll double your learning speed! It's still okay to find fault with illustrations better than yours. However, most artists find it annoying when someone points out theory they can't accomplish themselves, so I wouldn't try that! So practice, so then you can fairly criticize! :D

Homework: Draw the three main types of figure, the 'ideal' 7 head figure, the 'illustration' 8 head figure and the 'romantic' 9 head figure. Pick the style you like the most and draw him/her in some other position, respecting the lengths of various body parts that correspond to your heads high chart for him. It doesn't have to be a fully complete drawing, as we haven't covered actually drawing a figure anatomically. It should just clearly show the lengths of things. Later, we'll go into how to draw each part.

Today, let's look at something a little more practical. What's the production workflow for a comic? This really depends on how you work and how many people you're involving, but there's always a:


Plan - this can be a script, thumbnails or name, which can be a combination of the two
Pencils - which are actually done on the manuscript paper
Ink
Finishing - which can include speech bubbles, lettering, toning, effects and lots of other advanced techniques.
Sometimes also is pre-press, but when you're being published, the publisher takes care of this for you.


Let's go through each part. Keep in mind each one of these parts will have much entries posted on them each, and this is a very brief intro to them. Many of these steps I also use in my one shot illustrations as well, such as thumb and sometimes name. Since I don't have my how-to books with me or my own work for examples, I will use yoshitoshi Abe's lain works to illustrate. (Abe's name is spelt with a capital A and B, lowercase e, but I can't seem to make this program let me do it.) I scanned these myself off the English publication version of it, in low quality.
Now, let's get started!


The plan is written by whoever's writing the piece. Even when you're working solo, it's a good idea (by that, I mean a must) to get your idea down enough to think it over. The plan consists of a script, thumbnails and/or name.

A writer will use a script. Scripts can come in many forms. Some script writers include every detail and angle for each panel and leave nothing to the artist's discretion. Only the very best artists can really work efficiently under these kinds of circumstances, and the writer has to have enough knowledge about the art form not to make this a total nightmare. However, the writer's vision stays intact, and is efficiently conveyed to the reader. Others are looser, allowing the artist to get his hands on composition, as I talked about in the last post. As a comics writer, you have to be aware of composition, not to make it too frustrating for an artist, that or trust your artist with your vision and let him take care of it. If this is what you're going to do, you can even go as far as to write prose, and have your artist interpret freely. When you do this, it's crucial to pick the right artist, since two people reading the same thing will have very different takes on it. Then, the responsibility is in your quality of writing to get the timing and mood right so your artist can pick up on it.


Once the artist has the script, thumbnails are next. Thumbs, like in design, are small, probably not much larger than your thumb itself, and are used to determine page and panel layout. This is so the balance of each page is right as a whole and with its facing page. Keep speech bubbles in fully visible places - don't keep much important information towards the binding of the book. Does the balance of white and black feel lopsided? What about the angles of the panels? These are what you're considering at this stage, you're designing pages. Thumbs should be viewed as discardable items, so never spend too long on them. If you have the time, make many for each page and pick the best ones.

Thumbnail excerpt- yoshitoshi Abe lain illustrations - yoshitoshi Abe


For a group effort, the Japanese name is better. When I do solo pieces I also create name, since writing out a script in only words tends to limit me and slow me down. Solo artists should start with design thumbnails, but sometimes it's hard in terms of time. A well-done name suffices. Names (pronounced nameh) are larger, more detailed layouts. Here, you'll find facial expressions and written notes. The detail level is often higher as well, such as backgrounds and rough perspective lines. They can range from very rough to very detailed. When working for yourself, anything that's sufficient will do.

Name-type plan for an illustration - yoshitoshi Abe
This example is a high end thumbnail or a low end name. If you had to draw from this, what would you ask him to add? Always be sure you know what you're drawing.

Finished Illustration - Layer:pre PRVW - yoshitoshi Abe
I'm really liking the new scanner. Can you believe it just scanned just like that? :0

Note the differences. Why did he make the changes he made, other than the added figure in the middle?
Making rough drafts enables you to make these sorts of decisions to change things, and improves your final look. Your own personal design docs are mutable. Have fun with planning.

When you're looking over my name, I'm open to suggestions on how to make scenes better or clearer. Sometimes I have to rush, and scenes aren't as fleshed out to someone not in my head as they could be. Name and thumbs are discussable. Sometimes though, this sort of discussion goes quickly back to the writer if he's a panel-describer.


Next, comes pencils. Pencils are done strait on the manuscript paper and are intended for inking. The people or people pencilling are responsible for the over all technical quality of the drawing itself. Pencillers have to be strong in many of the technical items I'm going to cover here, such as perspective and anatomy. Pencillers should be the most technical of the artists, since more creative people can do thumbs and inking, effect and tone. The ones who follow after will simply follow the guidelines set in place by a skilled penciller. Unlike the more creative jobs, however, one doesn't necessarily need to be a fantastic 'artist'. Just getting the name onto the manuscript page in a skilled way is enough, and these things can be taught.

Pencils - yoshitoshi Abe
These are almost acceptable pencilling levels. Pretend you were given these to ink. What would you ask the penciller for with regards to the figures? Are there backgrounds? Not every panel will even have a background (necessarily), so this should be explicit. If you're going to photocopy in a background or phototrace, be sure to mark this somewhere.

Lain illust pencil - yoshitoshi Abe
Here is a nice image that shows the inker just what to do and combines some of the last lesson. The composition here is really professional, study it closely, what do you notice about the direction of lines? This is something I'll be getting into with more detail later. Also, the perspective is great along the curved wall.

Previous image close-up - yoshitoshi Abe
Here's the image of the figure, Lain, a bit bigger. If you were picking it up as an inker, wouldn't you be pleased? At the same time, you might not be pleased by the heavy shading which you'll probably have to end up erasing. Abe does not appear to ink, so he colours right on top of his shadings. Imagine what a good balance might look like, from an inker's perspective. You want to be told what parts should be dark and what to be light for the composition, but all that erasing... It's handy if the inker can be trusted with a more simple drawing, and makes 'beta' decisions by himself:
Tip: Depending on the style, things with heavy shading, such as the inside of her sleeve, might well be inked in 'beta', which means solid black. Instead of the penciller shading in a heavy black, why not outline the area and write 'beta'? If, as a penciller, you want to shade in so you can see the colour balance yourself, that's okay too, but be cleanly when you hand it over to the inker.

Pencil in colour - yoshitoshi Abe
For a complicated image, using coloured pencils is an option. This illustration continues on the second page with the background in green showing a building and a tear in the blue fence, to make the building clear. Generally this isn't used for comics though. Perhaps for a colour cover illustration?
To ink this, a light table would be used.
Some artists like to use photo-blue pencil. This is a kind of pencil that doesn't need to be erased when photocopied. I would like to look into this, as having a dedicated team member to erase manuscript paper is fairly injurious as well as time and resource wasting. Can someone do this for me?

High detail pencil - yoshitoshi Abe
I could say that pencils don't have to be this detailed, but I might be lying. What would lain's room be without all this detail? Why should this detail be left up to the poor inker? The inker has enough trouble creating smooth lines and deciding on lighting and other things. If you can produce this sort of work in reasonable time, then you'll be a very valuable penciller. Luckily, we're not trying to reproduce lain's complicated world. If the style is complicated, then the pencils are complicated.

The person in charge of pencilling is in a position of some responsibility. If there's an inconsistency, it's usually the penciller's fault. This is why it's important to have reference sheets. If the writer or name artists have not made one, request one, or present one yourself. This can be done on a separate sheet you can have handy as you draw, so no details change or get left out from panel to panel. This is even more important when there is more than one penciller on a job.

Object design - yoshitoshi Abe
Here's some design for the lain-famous Navi. It gets a lot of screen time, and lain eventually turns it into the detailed set shown above. If you had to draw lain using it, isn't this helpful? The writer or originator of the concept should always design the technology of a time and place. It's possible he can't draw it, so it's crucial to have good communication for objects in the world. Almost nothing is quite as important to give grounding and flavour to a story than the objects the characters use. A strong setting makes the reader believe.

lain costume design - yoshitoshi Abe
Generally costume design shows more of the character wearing each article than this example, but this is a collage made for the book. Fabrics are made clearer when wrinkles are made; have the character lift an arm. Show him from the back, and the side too, if it's complicated. Show him doing things in his outfit. Look closely; how does each costume affect the personality of the different lains? If you saw only one of these, and knew nothing of the story, who would you think lain is? (On an interesting note, one of the themes of the show is "Who is lain?") Remember, people judge at first sight, at least to a point, and this is especially true in comics. Be clear in your designs what you want to portray!

Production designs like this can also be inked. It depends on the artist. I prefer the versatility of pencils for folds and texture, but there's no reason someone can't do the same with pen. I've also seen toned and roughly coloured production sketches.


Inks!

There is a lot to say about inks, and Abe doesn't appear to have any. Inks almost always have their own book alone. For illustration, inks aren't always necessary, but for comics, it's a vital part. The responsibility of the inker is to clean the pencils and make sure things are clear. He brings the foreground forward and the background fall back. He has to know how to use a pen and ruler and fix any minor mistakes the penciller has made. It's always best when the inker is well versed with some pencilling and vice versa. It makes the job for both easier. Suffice to say that the inker has a strong word on lighting. The bright sun falls on a youth, you're seeing him from slightly below, and the sun strongly hits his shoulder. Chances are, that part of his shoulder is not going to be inked, perhaps parts of his hair as well. Shojo manga has excellent examples of omission, flip through some. Omission, like in music, often has as much to say. In the words of Kevin Smith, inkers don't just trace! Inkers have to be their own artists too.
Line widths is also a major judgement on the part of inkers, and establishes their style. This is especially true of western artists. Finally, how they approach shading also defines style. And how much is left to the tonepaperists or colourists? Again, this is its own section, so I'll move along. Examples are all around you! Note how different they all are! In western comics, the style is less varied, but once you learn how to read the lines, the differences will jump out. More on that stuff some other time.
Tip: I find it hard to flip through books without reading them, so going back to front helps a little.


Finishing, like pencils, and ink can be a whole book just in itself, even an encyclopedia, and compromises everything from the inks to when the reader sees it. In manga, tonepaper is a big deal, but this too will be covered in depth later. Tonepaper adds mood, the same way colour would. Many, when tonepapering, take colour into account. Boosting the clarity of the inks is also part of the tonepaperist's (or colourist's) job. The closer to the 'camera' the more detailed your tonepapering will have to be. --But not necessarily. There's less and less I can say as standard truth as we get along in the production line. This is where the style really comes alive, though it's no less complex than the job of the pencillist.
Whole courses are built around pre-press, which is closely linked to the reasons for tonepaper and inking in the first place. All this will be covered in detail at a later date.


And that brings me to my conclusion. Aw, this was another lecture, wasn't it? But you'd rather if I kept this one that way, don't you? :p Haha, this would be some pretty intense homework. The key is to start looking at your world a particular way. Carry around a sketchbook or a camera. When something appealing shows up, save it. Notice light and shadow, the convergence of lines in real life, and notice when something is being particularly effective in the comics you read. Feel free to share stuff you feel is being effective, that's the only homework this time other than looking over Abe's work here.

There's lots of ways to make comics. Comics are just sequential illustrations. But, that's how they have to be approached, and it's a complicated thing.

Bikeh-chan

Looks like I'm only going to update this when I'm too tired to do actual work. So, I don't promise anything in the way of spelling (despite spell check), or making sense. But I'll try, and maybe quote a lot.

Now, I know the people reading this are all at different levels. Some draw fantastically, others are great composers, some good at lighting or better at portraiture, realistic style, manga style, some can't draw at all (or so they say). Realistically, anybody can be taught enough basics to be an assistant. A lot in this genre is technical, and that's all you need. The art is all in the layout and planning. The rest is just knowing how to do it and training your hand for control, which is just practice.

Today, we'll take a look into sequential art and some things to consider. Basically, here's a way to pick up and read comics around your house as someone who does comics.

Sequential art breaks up into a couple of things. But mostly, comics are a time-based medium. A friendly resource for this is Scott McCloud (yes, I know he dissed web comics). In my opinion, timing is the most crucial part of comiking. It's often closely tied to clarity of individual frames (and over all pages) as well, which will be thoroughly delved into at a later date, as it's too big in scope for this entry. Both of these involves the manipulation of the reader (which I will occasionally call the user, because that's what I'm used to saying every day...). The reader must stop when you want him to, and never when you don't particularly mean it. I'm going to use manga to illustrate this, since it's much easier to screw up manga-style panelling, and there are plentiful examples, even among good artists.

Actions scenes are the hardest to portray. Here are some examples. Depending on what you're trying to express, your action is going to take on different forms, so it's a little unfair to use different stories from different artists, but sometimes, what you're trying to express is the difficulty itself.

In this example (read right to left), the solo mangaka makes an attempt at explaining the situation by a speech bubble, but that causes conventions and cheesiness, so it should be generally avoided. He doesn't do this a lot though, and he may have just wanted to slip in the mobile suit's name, but if this is happening frequently, then there is a problem or you're writing for 7 year old Japanese boys.


Ecole du Ciel - Haruhiko Mikimoto


Once you start firing lasers and stuff (or falling off bicycles, for a more mundane example), readers tend to read through words and panels very fast to keep up with the speed he feels the action is happening at, regardless of what you put in his way. Wordless action scenes work best, since the words don't drag down the flow of the action's speed. It's easier to control him with panel size and shape than with getting the right word-count - or a dreadful combination of the two.

There are many ways to drag the reader's eye to a slower pace. Words is one, and can be used skilfully with the right illustration. High detail is another. Low contrast. Large panels. Combinations of these can leave me looking at a page or panel ten, even twenty seconds. It can feel like days in story-time. It's always better to show 'days', than tell 'days' (as an example). The reader will have a more lasting and emotional impression. Words appeal to logic and information. Pictures appeal more to emotion. Comics is the skilful combination of the two performing what they do best without conflict.

Something else - the manga panelling style is particularly hard to grasp because it works contextually, like the Japanese language does. An establishing shot would normally set up the scene - you'd get a nice visual of each of the fighters, and it's easier to follow, even if the author doesn't get good shots from then on. The trick is to neither be too small-boy's comic obvious or too 'artistic' with establishing scenes. Trying to explain the action with a speech bubble is a lost cause. A reader will not backtrack just to look at what he now understands, and you've wasted a lot of work.

What would you do with your character who's about to be ambushed in the depths of space?
The optimal would be to convey the sense of confusion to the reader, maybe even scare him, but ground him with something. There must always be something familiar to the reader. Writers might be familiar with this convention, such as the character Alice from Alice in Wonderland. She grounds us to the story, and holds the thing together, just by being comparatively normal. What about familiarizing the reader with the robot - or parts of it - then showing just those parts in the heat of battle? You'll then know who's being hit just by the design. Maybe the machine has particular knuckle joints - you can just show a powerful punch and you know it's the enemy's getting it, even if it's a terrible composition. All you had to do is show it handling a rifle or a knife earlier in the scene.

The next is up to you (read left to right). Does it make sense to you? Why or why not?


BLAME! (fr) BLAM! (eng/jp) - Tsutomu Nihei


How long did it take you to read it? How long did it take you to read the other fight example? What are your thoughts on how long the action actually is and how long you read it for? Too-short can also be a problem, but it depends on the reader, too. See anything else interesting in either?

I guess that makes your homework pretty simple, just reply and discuss.
Sorry to start off on a lecture note! I'll change up with some art for next time.

First, let me make a brief introduction of what to expect from my postings. Most of the material I can expect to come strait from my three gigantic (and therefore non-portable) books which have been the bibles of my work since I started drawing. The only worthwhile parts of my drawings have been strait from these, called the Famous Artists home study course and dates circa 1960. My art teacher in high school had a version that dated around 1970, but I have not been able to find much about getting copies today, not even back prints. They come in 3 hard cover binders in a surprising size and weight and cost a good deal of money for the time, I hear. At the same time, I've never found anything remotely comparable, even when taking into account the many, many how to art books I've purchased since.
The course was written by many famous illustrators of the time, back when illustration for magazines was common. Leading the team of about ten famous artists was Albert Dorne, one of my favourite illustrators of all time. Much of the text was written by him.

Random Albert Dorne Illustration

It's all in the details. Nothing in this image is an accident, and that's the best way to approach a composition. You'll learn how to see how the bottle behind the chicken helps the overall clarity of the drawing, and that's important to us. People must know what's going on at first glance, or we lose them.

So onwards. In no particular order, I hope to cover these topics. Most of these will still be from the comics angle, that is to say, the highest quality in the shortest amount of time, just like the old illustrators.

Pencilling, shading/texture
Anatomy of objects
Inking and pen control
Practice things
Composition
Mood and effect (pen and tone)
Anatomy of people and animals, real and conventions
Backgrounds and perspective
Expressing cloth
Toning the four surfaces
American Illustration techniques
Print, paper and supplies
Toning techniques
and, like, more. Feel free to ask questions. If I can't answer, I'm sure Mr. Dorne can. I welcome constructive observations from the artists as well.
I'll put up some actual stuff as soon as it's ready.
For now, I'm sleepy. Welcome friends. I am Potato.