Illustration Friday - Transportation

Another week, another 'Illustration Friday' challenge, this week the word is "Transportation." My first thought was to do something with futuristic cars and monorails, but then another thought popped into my head, and that had to do with bicycles and dogs. The original idea was to have a bicyclist transporting a little dog in her bike's basket. But as I thought about the idea, I began to embellish it. I thought it might be funny to have other dogs chasing after the bicycle. Then, I thought it would be even better if the bicyclist were carrying two dogs, one riding up front, the other in a basket on the back of the bike. The dog in the back basket would have a self-satisfied look on its face, as if it were taunting the dogs that were chasing it. The last two things I decided to add were extra little details - a small puppy watching from the window of the building and an upset cat, hissing at the dog parade below while balancing on a balcony railing.

Here is my original pencil sketch. You can see that off to the left of the building, I had originally intended to add some stylized clouds and the edge of another building, but in the end, I decided to eliminate those details, keeping it simple with just the suggestion of some tree shapes.

I created the image in Corel Painter and primarily used the digital watercolor brushes, especially the New Simple Water brush and the Coarse Mop Brush which gives a nice fuzzy bleed effect after you've applied the stroke.  For the details I used a couple of Painter's pen brushes - the Smooth Round Pen and a modified version of the Leaky Pen.  I colored the bike rider's hair and most of her clothing, as well as the bicycle baskets with Painter's gouache brush. In the screen shot to the left, you can see where I've begun to color in the background.

I used a lot of layers so that it would be easier to make changes. In this screen shot, you can see the list of layers that I set up. When you have this many layers, it becomes very important to name them so that you know what is on each layer.

In this last screen shot, you can see a close-up view of the little dog in the window and the hissing cat that I added as background details.

One of my inspirations for the style of this piece, especially as far as the background goes, was the artwork in Disney's 1961 animated "One Hundred and One Dalmatians." That film's sketchy drawing style, brought a big change to the look of Disney's animated films.  It's my understanding that a new technique for xeroxing the artist's pencil drawings directly on to the animation cels, is what gave the film its unique look. But even the character design and coloring of the backgrounds was unique to a Disney feature, it had more of the look of some of the mid-century modern cartoons that were being made at UPA studios than the romantic classical backgrounds of previous Disney features. If you're interested in this subject, I highly recommend the book "Cartoon Modern" by Amid Amidi.

Illustration Friday - Acrobat

 "Acrobat" was the 'Illustration Friday' word this week and I knew from the start that I wanted to do something with animals. At first I thought of doing some sort of animal circus, but since I've been reading up on dog training, I instead decided to go with an all dog acrobat troupe. The first sketch that I did showed several dogs performing various tricks - balancing on a ball, tightrope walking, and doing front paw-stands, but at the time I made this sketch, I had just watched Disney's Dumbo and I love the scene with the pyramid of elephants, so I decided to do a new sketch, this time a dog pyramid. You can see my first two sketches below. On the right are the dogs performing various acrobatic tricks and on the right is the original version of the dog pyramid. I scanned this second sketch and then, feeling that the pyramid was too narrow and columnar in shape, I did a new sketch, adding some additional dogs and spreading them out a bit.

To the left, you can see my new sketch, with an early treatment of the sky in the background.

Since I was coloring the image using digital watercolor, I needed to erase the areas of sky behind the dogs, otherwise they would show through the coloring on the dogs. In this screen shot, I've begun to erase the background sky areas.

In this screen shot, I've begun to add color to the dogs. You can still see my digital pencil sketch, which I had on a separate layer.

In the left image, I've inked the dogs, using Painter's leaky pen brush. When I got to the stage that you see in the above right image, I thought I was finished, but as I looked at the image again, I realized I wasn't happy with the sky. There was too much green in it and I didn't like the cloud behind the little dog at the very top, holding the pennant. I thought he might stand out more, if he were standing against a darker sky. I also felt that the grass under the ball should be darker. The very last thing I decided to do was to give the dogs an audience, a little kitten, looking perplexed at their silly antics.

The finished illustration - "The Acrobats"

Work in Progress - Above and Below

For the past couple of days I've been working on a somewhat detailed illustration that was inspired by the old Masterpiece Theatre show, "Upstairs Downstairs." For those of you who don't know this program, it detailed the lives of the wealthy Bellamy family (the 'upstairs' part of the program) and their servants who worked downstairs.  Their story, set in London, begins in 1904 and ends around 1930. Both the upstairs and the downstairs families are touched by such events as the sinking of the Titanic, World War I, the 1918 flu epidemic and the start of the depression. It's a show that often discusses social class, the discrepancy between those born of nobility and wealth and those born to more common circumstances.  But the show also had elements of high class soap opera detailing the scandals of both sets of families - extra-marital affairs, children out of wedlock, suicide, and even a hostage taking.  Yes, the show could sometimes be a bit 'talky' but above everything else, and what made me such a big fan of the show was the careful attention to the creation of the characters and how they grew over the course of the 25 years that the series covered.  This was a time of great social change and upheaval, a time when class distinctions began to break down.  This is especially evident in season 4 that covers the World War I period.  Some of the servants get jobs outside of the house to aid in the war effort.  These characters, who in the beginning of the series believed that they would spend their entire lives in domestic service, are shown that the world outside offers them other opportunities.  Some, like the rigid household butler, Hudson, cling to the ways of the past.  He sticks to the moral code of the past and feels that society is crumbling when changes in the household bring about new attitudes and behaviors.  Others, like Rose the upper house parlor maid, who as played by the wonderful Jean Marsh, becomes the heart of the show, are young enough to have an open mind and adapt to the changes in the world.  This show is in my top 10 of all-time favorite television shows.  The last episode of the series, when it first aired in 1975 brought tears to my eyes.  As I recall, it was the first time that a television program made me cry.

Over the past few weeks my partner and I've been watching the show on DVD. My partner had never seen it, while I have fond memories of watching the show with my family when it first aired in the seventies.  As I've been watching the show, which as I've mentioned is about two families (and yes, the servants, though they're not related to one another, do make up a family), I began to think about an idea for a children's illustration. My illustration wouldn't have anything to do with servants, or class issues, but two very different types of families that live in close proximity to one another. The above ground family would naturally be a human family, while below ground is a family of rabbits. Since I love the look of the Edwardian period in which "Upstairs Downstairs," is set, I decided I would set my illustration in the same period. While working on this illustration, I've been looking at a lot of work by Mary Blair, the artist who was one of Disney's top designers in the late 1950s and 60s. She excelled at stylized backgrounds and creating scenes with lots of characters. I love the way that she drew children and especially the look of her plants, flowers and trees. So, I still have a lot to do on this illustration, but here is a shot of it in progress. This shot shows the original sketch superimposed on top of the painting, which, by the way, is being done using Painter 11. When it's finished, I'll post the completed image.

A Paper Doll That I Can Call My Own Part 1

Okay, I admit it - as a kid, I not only played with dolls, I played with paper dolls.  Between my sister and myself, we had lots of them and we spent hours playing with them.  Being the pack rat that I am and a hoarder of vintage ephemera, I still have most of them.  A few years ago, when we were preparing our family home for sale, my sister decided to part with many of her old paper dolls. Since I couldn't stand to see them thrown out or sold at an estate sale, I decided to adopt them. So, my collection now includes many of those that once belonged to her as well.  I spent this morning scanning many of them.  You can see from the yellowed scotch tape that has defaced many of them, that they are nearly worn out from years of childhood play.

These first two (upper right) are paper dolls of singer Rosemary Clooney.  They are printed on rather thin paper and were cut out by hand. You can see that time has not treated them well.  The poor Miss Clooney on the right has lost a hand.

The next two dolls are of Hayley Mills. The Hayley on the left in the pink underclothes was from a set that came out to tie-in with  "The Moon-Spinners," the 1964 Disney mystery based on the Mary Stewart novel.  The film is often classified as Disney's answer to Hitchcock.  It may not be Hitchcock but it is an entertaining film and made even more enjoyable by some of Hayley's costars - the wonderful Joan Greenwood, Eli Wallach and a former siren of the silent screen, Pola Negri.  The Hayley on the right in the blue undergarments is from "Summer Magic," a 1963 piece of Disney fluff based on a Kate Douglas Wiggin book.

The three beauties on the left and the two men and little girl on the right are from a large set called "Bridal Party" that came out in 1955.  From all of the yellowed tape that as children we employed to reinforce their necks, you can see that they were well loved and played with a lot.


This next group is from a set called "Tiny Tots."  They were some of my favorites, probably because they included a little boy and because their poses were so dynamic. These tots are not standing still with their arms behind their backs or hanging at their sides like so many paper dolls.  They are running, skipping and waving.  Note that the little boy has received a hand-drawn, right-arm transplant.  We often made our own dolls and their clothes.  If something was worn out, or we just wanted an additional doll or item of clothing, we traced ourselves a new one and colored it with crayons.

The sitting baby on the left of this group is also from the "Tiny Tots" set.   She is in relatively good condition, leading me to believe that she was not played with as much as some of the other tots. The three upper figures, including the elf in the red union suit were from a Christmas set put out by Colorforms.  They are printed on heavy cardboard, unfortunately, none of their clothes seemed to have survived.  I don't know the origins of the other two infants (who as you can see on their diapers are named Sunny and Honey).

I was always fascinated by the dolls that were printed with a front side and a back side.  What was the purpose of this?  Was it so that in your pretend game, you could show them walking away?  Or was it just so that you could view their fashions from all sides (yes, even their clothes were printed on the front and back).  Here are a few examples of 2-sided dolls.

  Even though they were printed on rather flimsy paper, these were some of my favorites.  They were large, about 11" and had a wide variety of outfits.  Of course, I look at them now with my jaded adult eyes, and I feel that with their big eyelashes and heavy make-up, that they look like they could have stepped out of a junior beauty pageant.

Here are a few miscellaneous dolls.  The one on the left with the missing right arm was a Colorforms doll.  As I recall, her clothes were made with the same stick-on vinyl that other Colorforms toys were made from.  I don't recall much about the origins of the other two dolls, but I have to say that the smaller one on top looks something like an inflatable adult love toy.  Maybe it's her pose and her partly opened mouth, not to mention her outfit which looks like that of a barmaid, that causes me to think that.  The larger tall blonde paper doll, with her petticoat showing from beneath her skirt, and her adult style neckline, also looks a bit provocative.  But once again, that's my jaded adult voice speaking. I would like to think that things were more innocent back then, at least I know that I was.  Looking at these dolls now, jaded comments aside, does take me back to my innocent childhood and some very fond memories.

I have more paper dolls put away somewhere.  When I find them, I'll post more.  In the meantime, I hope that you have enjoyed these.

The Art of Animaton, Eyvind Earle and childhood dreams

My dreams of being an artist can be traced back to my early childhood. As a somewhat sickly child, who seemed to be constantly sniffling or wheezing, I was often made to stay indoors or to come in before my cavorting in our backyard triggered an asthma attack.  My mom, whose dreams of being a commercial artist, I've written about in earlier posts, always encouraged me to draw. If I wasn't drawing, I was probably partaking in one of my other favorite activities - coloring in my coloring books (hmmm, that gives me an idea for another blog post).

When I was very young I knew I liked to draw, and as I got older, feeling incapable of following in my father's scientific footsteps, I began to feel that when I grew up, maybe I could be some sort of an artist. I think at some point, probably due to my mother's influence, I felt that maybe I would be a commercial artist and work in the world of advertising (now, after watching 'Mad Men, I'm glad I didn't pursue that path). But then probably around the time I was 13 or 14, I decided I wanted to be an animator and to work for Disney. I can trace my love for Disney films back to when I was 5 years old, the year that "Sleeping Beauty" was released. At that age, I didn't get to see it in the theater, I would have to wait until its rerelease during my high school years to do that, but I do remember seeing the advertisements for it on TV. I also remember all of the merchandise that was put out for the movie - a board game (which I received for Xmas as a child and which I still have), paper dolls (which I still have remnants of), storybooks (which I also have) and many other things. The thing that I remember most vividly about the advertisements though was the image of the handsome Prince. I think my first child-hood crush was on the Prince. But I'm digressing.

Being shy, I felt that being an animator would be the perfect career for me.  My image of an animator was someone who was allowed to sit alone all day at their drawing table, just drawing.  I had no idea at that time that an animator also needed to be something of an actor, a collaborator and maybe even a bit of a pitchman who had to sell his story ideas to the producer.  So, for many years I harbored my dream of working for Disney in my imagined world of what I thought of as the hermit-animator.

My idea of what an animator did and what the job consisted of began to change  after I bought a book called "The Art of Animation," by Bob Thomas. As I recall, I bought this book with my own money, off of a sale table at a Pickwick Bookstore.  My copy of this book (which has been revised over the years) has a copyright date of 1958 but I think I probably purchased it around 1967 or 68.  I remember how excited I was to find this book because it was written the year before "Sleeping Beauty" was released and the book used that film as a way of showing how an animated film was created.

It had sections on character design and development (I was especially fascinated to learn that the design for Princess Aurora was modeled after a young Audrey Hepburn, see sketches above left), storyboarding, background painting, layout, coloring, cel inking and painting, sound, in other words, just about everything that went into the creation of an animated motion picture.

One of my favorite sections was devoted to the artist Eyvind Earle who designed the backgrounds and the medieval look of the film.  Because of the stylized way in which he painted trees, the section devoted to him was titled: "Prelude: the man who likes square trees."  Earle explains his tree stylization in this paragraph, "I like trees to be square. This carries out the primitive technique, which is the style of the picture. You see, all primitive painting is done in horizontal and vertical lines. Only when you intellectualize do you get into diagonals and curves. . . The trees are squared, and everything else carries out the horizontal pattern. . . The hedges, the rocks, the lines of the horizon - all are horizontal.  The primitive style never tilts things." He later goes on to describe his many influences on creating the look of the film, Albrecht Durer to Botticelli, Persian to Japanese art all informed his artistic choices in creating the films distinctive look.  I think I may have also been fascinated by Earle's personal background - from the time he was about 18 years old, he had tried applying for jobs with Disney, being turned away each time. It wasn't until after he had given up and moved to New York for eleven years where he worked in commercial art, and then returned, that he was hired by Disney as a background painter.

My love for animated films never dimmed. In high school, in collaboration with a close friend, I made several animated films as extra credit projects. I guess it was after graduating from high school and facing the realities of competition and assertiveness that were needed to succeed, that I began to feel my dream fading.  After being turned down by Cal Arts (a school that had connections with Disney, and where attendance almost guaranteed you a job with them after graduation) and after unsuccessfully trying for a year and a half to get into USC's cinema production school, I began to ask myself, "did I really want to get a job somewhere where I would be required to sit at a table for hours on end drawing minute variations of someone else's character over and over again?" At least that's the way I rationalized my decision to no longer pursue my dream of being an animator. But I didn't give up entirely. During this time I did stay enrolled at USC and took classes in their cinema department with an undeclared major. Some of my fondest memories of my year and a half there were the hours I spent in an animation class taught by Bernie Gruver, a man who worked for Bill Melendez studios, the studio that created all of the "Peanuts" television specials.

A few years later, after entering graduate school (Otis/Parsons in L.A.), I continued to make films on my own, even getting two of my films accepted into Filmex the huge international film festival that existed in Los Angeles for many years. It was after graduating with my MFA that the harsh realities of making a living began to sink in. I tried in vain to get jobs at a few small animation studios, but ended up instead working for a company that produced computer generated business graphics for slide presentations. It wasn't what I had dreamed of, but it did provide me an opportunity to learn computer graphics (this was way back in 1982 when it was still in its infancy). It was good job experience which eventually led to an opportunity to work in Oslo, Norway for 4 months, but it never did lead to any jobs in animation, which was probably more a result of my own lack of assertiveness and drive than from any lack of experience.

I'm still fascinated by the art of animation and still love watching animated films. Now, at age 55 I guess my dreams really haven't changed that much. I still want to be able to sit and draw in isolation for a living. I still want a chance to be able to tell stories with my drawings. I sometimes get dismayed by all of the young talent out there, all of the kids graduating from art schools with impressive portfolios under their belts, but I've realized that it doesn't do one any good to compare oneself to others. Every talent is unique, you can only do the best that you can do. So, I'll keep plugging away, putting myself out there, and hope that one day, I'll get a book published.

I still have my copy of "The Art of Animation," it's one of my most cherished books. I still love looking at this book, it's filled with some wonderful images and every time I open it, I remember my childhood fantasies, not only of dancing with a handsome Prince, but of being an artist.