Wednesday, July 26, 2017

Possibly the best book yet - and it's a freebie! Plus 2 bonus books that also look amazing

The Archetypal Imagination by James Hollis

Free PDF download (Official and Legal)

I was looking at this book on Amazon (link below the image) when I discovered a link to a free PDF version on the publisher's website. A godsend, because it's a fairly expensive book, and though it seemed like the best of all the books I've got in this recent spree - the one that speaks most personally and profoundly to me - I wasn't prepared to shell out more money. Not $20 plus shipping anyway. But the preview really did stir my imagination deeply, so I grabbed the PDF and started in on it (though I'm currently into about half a dozen books already hah!)

James Hollis seems to be one of a group of recent-ish post-Jungians who have absorbed and advanced his work in ways that I personally find exciting. As much as I like Edinger for his incredibly clear and well delineated explanations of Jung's ideas, Hollis just has a knack for writing that captures the numinous spark - he's more of a creative and inspired soul, or so it seems to me anyway.

I would say the same about Lionel Corbett - author of these books:

The Religious Function of the Psyche 

(Sorry, no free version)

Traditional concepts of God are no longer tenable for many people who nevertheless experience a strong sense of the sacred in their lives. The Religious Function of the Psyche offers a psychological model for the understanding of such experience, using the language and interpretive methods of depth psychology, particularly those of C.G. Jung and psychoanalytic self psychology. The problems of evil and suffering, and the notion of human development as an incarnation of spirit are dealt with by means of a religious approach to the psyche that can be brought easily into psychotherapeutic practice and applied by the individual in everyday life.

The book offers an alternative approach to spirituality as well as providing an introduction to Jung and religion.

Psyche and the Sacred: Spirituality Beyond Religion

(Nope, this one either!)

Lionel Corbett describes an approach to spirituality based on personal experience of the sacred rather than on pre-existing religious dogmas. Using many examples from Corbett's psychotherapy practice and other personal accounts, the book describes various portals through which the sacred may appear: in dreams, visions, the natural world, through the body, in relationships, in our psychopathology, and in our creative work. Using the language and insights of depth psychology, he describes the intimate relationship between spiritual experience and the psychology of the individual, revealing the seamless continuity and intermingling of the personal and transpersonal dimensions of the psyche. Corbett also discusses the problems of evil and suffering from a psychological rather than theological perspective, and suggests some of the reasons that traditional religious institutions fail to address adequately these problems. Based largely on Jung's writing on religion, but also drawing from contemporary psychoanalytic theory, Corbett describes an approach to spirituality that is gradually emerging alongside the western monotheistic tradition. For those seeking alternative forms of spirituality beyond the Judeo-Christian tradition, this volume will be a useful guide on the journey.

Monday, July 24, 2017

All Booked Up!!

I've been on an insane book-buying spree. All set up with long-term reading material. If you click to enlarge the picture you should be able to see all the titles - if not you can download it and blow it up on your computer. Or I'll just grit my teeth and type up the entire list here:

*Still waiting on the first volume of the Bible to come in - they sent me another copy of vol 2 by mistake. 

Oops - looking back I see I had already shown 3 of these books in the last book-related post. My bad! With this many coming in it's hard to keep track. I should have checked the blog before snapping the pic. 

I've now made most of the listings into links. I didn't just buy them full-price but found decent used copies. In the case of Existential Psychotherapy I found it cheaper on eBay than on Amazon. I didn't post a link to the Reader's Digest Bible because there isn't a listing on Amazon or elsewhere I could find that really explains what it is. I learned about it from Jordan Peterson - it's essentially had the repetitions edited out and things explained in a way that's understandable to a modern readership. Also it reads like a story - straight through rather than being broken up into numbered chapter and verse. I think it will be much easier to understand - hopefully anyway. The other versions can be pretty incomprehensible. 

I also got myself a nice centennial Smith-Waite Tarot Deck, arrayed here on top of the Jung and Tarot book. In the case of the Tarot cards and the Bible, it's important to note that they are not to be taken literally. For Jungian purposes the Tarot is not for telling the future - rather it's a complex and extremely useful set of symbols that can be used to explore and come to an understanding of the contents of the human psyche, in the same way dream symbolism can. Same for the Bible. In fact Jung stated that before science switched our understanding of the world to one based on reductive materialism and practicality, there came the great age of Religions and Mythology. This was a time when humankind was very unconscious and had a strong tendency to project the contents of their psyche out onto the stars (as constellations to be divined through Astrology), into the Heavens (Religion), and into the Mysteries of Matter (Alchemy, soon to transmute into Chemistry).

There had already been thorough studies into comparative religion and comparative mythology (finding similarities between various ones all around the world), but Jung discovered WHY all the similarities. In his own words (well - loosely - don't feel like looking up exact wording), in the 15th century God fell out of the sky and into the human psyche. For modern people, it's vitally important to understand religion and mythology, otherwise you can fall prey to nihilistic despair.

For example, dreams that seem terrifying can suddenly reveal themselves to be profoundly healing and transformative if you have some knowledge of creation myths. Bloody, violent dismemberments - especially of giants or figures that refuse to die - often represent the killing of the old god who needs to be destroyed and whose body gives birth to the new world, in which the new god can grow and prosper. This is actually a very positive and reassuring dream, and it's only through an understanding of mythological symbols that it can be understood properly. So I'll be filling my head with as much as I can stuff in there.

And my most recent Kindle purchases:

Wednesday, July 5, 2017

About Jung scholarship

A comment found under the listing for the book Carl Jung (Critical Lives) by Paul Bishop @Amazon:

A stimulating amplification of the "textual Jung," not another "Red Book" auntification
ByHapax Existentiel on December 14, 2014
Format: Paperback|Verified Purchase

As a reader of scholarly books and articles on the history of psychoanalysis and C.G. Jung, I would have to say that Paul Bishop's book is the most fascinating volume to appear since Richard Noll's "The Jung Cult" back in 1994. For me, Jung simply does not make sense outside of his German historical and cultural context. The rather fulsome, uncritical Jungian literature sidesteps German cultural influences and tend to portray Jung as a mystical prophet who somehow lived and worked outside of history. In recent years Sonu Shamdasani's early efforts at scholarship have been replaced by weakly footnoted coffee table books and New Age spiritualist dialogues with James Hillman passing as "profound" intellectual discourse. Additionally, Shamdasani's relationship with the Jung family and estate as their "approved" court historian since 2000 renders his Jung scholarship unverifiable and open to a round of charges of being yet another "auntification" and protective whitewashing of Jung's image (he's now an aesthetic literary figure like William Blake, apparently). Jung is big business, after all. No one will be allowed to check the original archival sources against Shamdasani's claims unless approved by the Jung heirs. Good luck with that. This throws much of The Red Book research into question.

So thank god for the many high-level books on Jung by Paul Bishop. This one, however, is his best.

Paul Bishop is now the undisputed "preeminent" Jung scholar.

Bishop securely places Jung in the archaic stream that also carries Goethe and Schiller. He engages the textual Jung, not the biographical or even (much) the historical Jung. But Bishop make the case that it is the ideas of the man that are important, and he does so in a judicious manner, citing the major authors of the secondary literature (Ellenberger, Homans, Kerr, Noll, Shamdasani). Bishop also uses primary sources by German and French authors who may not be familiar to readers of works on Jung because they do not write specificially about Jung but about themes found throughout his work. These are excellent.

This is it -- the best critical biography of Jung in existence. Highly recommended

Saturday, July 1, 2017

Latest haul of books

All this reading I'm doing is an antidote to the reductive and mechanistic nature of rational materialism that has overtaken Western civilization.

  • Shadows of the Sacred - Frances Vaughan
  • Cosmos and Psyche - Richard Tarnas
  • The Eternal Drama - Edward Edinger (Reading Greek Mythology as an expression of the human psyche)
  • The Discovery of Being - Rollo May (Existential psychotherapy)
  • States of Grace - Charlene Spretnak
  • Ego and Archetype - Edinger
  • The Psyche in Antiquity book 2; Gnosticism and Early Christianity - Edinger
  • The Bible and the Psyche; Individuation Symbolism in the Old Testament - Edinger

I'm really loving the Edinger books right now - he's a great explicator of Carl Gustav Jung's ideas. 

Jung's great discovery (one of them) was that in pre-Enlightenment times, when mankind's psyche was still rather primitive, he tended to project it out into the void to create myth and religion, as well as early philosophy and alchemy. By studying these ancient sources we can witness the inner workings of the psyche itself. Each of Edinger's books delves into a different era, but they all demonstrate that the psyche is the real source of the numinous and the miraculous.

Kindle purchases:

Wednesday, June 21, 2017

Important note on Edinger's Ego and Archetype

I've just bought Ego and Archetype, which uses primarily Biblical references and symbols to explain Jung's concept of Individuation. In browsing the customer comments I found this little gem and wanted to put it here as a reminder to myself for when I read the book:

Good start but loses focus
The first two parts of this book are a great condensation of the individuation process which seems somewhat dispersed in Jung's writings. I particularly thought his discussion of the inflation and alienation cycle was very good. He goes into detail of potential blocks in the cycle and where those blocks later lead to difficulties in the process.
Where I thought he lost his way was in his gradual shift from using biblical reference to support his discussion of individuation to what seemed, at the end of Part II, to become primarily biblical exegesis. The quotes slowly start dominating the text and the relation of the symbols, e.g. the blood of Christ, to individuation seem tenuous. He also goes over some material, e.g. Job, alchemy, the Philosopher's Stone, etc., that Jung has elsewhere discussed at length and I didn't think Edinger's take added much new here. If you haven't read these topics in Jung already or only have a casual interest it might be a good summary but for me it was repetitive.
One chapter I found curiously flawed was "The Trinity Archetype and the Dialectic of Development". Edinger starts the chapter by taking Jung to task for being to too focused on finding the "missing fourth" when interpreting trinity symbols, in particular the Holy Trinity. He goes on to make a useful distinction between the quaternity, representing essentially the components of the Self, and the trinity, representing the process of individuation. In his view, the Holy Trinity relates to the process of individuation, i.e. the ages of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, not the actors/archetypes for which they're named. The Holy Trinity being a symbol of developmental process then is in no need of a fourth as Jung proposed.
Yet, I think he misunderstood Jung here and his interpretation is at odds even with his own earlier discussion. The "age of the Son," being the dialectic antithesis of that of Father -- totality, unity, identification of ego with Self -- is an age of *duality*, not the one-sided view promulgated by the Church of the Son looking back to the lost age of the Father. The reconciliation of opposites during the age of the Son is precisely what brings about the new, higher-level unity in that of the Holy Spirit. What is missing in the psychological interpretation of the age of the Son is that very opposite with which to reconcile, e.g. the devil, Satan, the unconscious forces. Even though Edinger quotes Jung as characterizing this age as "a sharpening of opposites," he seems to overlook the import: the "age of the Son" is really a misnomer and might better be named the "age of Two Sons." This is what I believe Jung was alluding to and is supported by many passages in which he discusses the disavowal and externalization of the dark side in Western monotheism.
If Edinger had brought more Eastern religion to bear on the discussion, with its heavy emphasis on the duality of existence and three-phase process of unity-duality-unity, he may have come to an different conclusion on this particular symbol. But his supporting examples are skewed to the West, mostly biblical, and his few forays into the East not very profound.

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

Latest book acquisitions - Jung and The Red Book

The ones on the floor are new
Here are the latest physical additions to my library - centered around Carl Gustav Jung's Red Book. Discovering that has been foundational - how on earth did I never hear about it before? Undoubtedly because I last bought Jung books in probably the 90's, and it wasn't published until much more recently. 2009 or so, which is when I was beginning my explorations into science by reading all of Carl Sagan's books (those are offscreen to the left a ways and up on the second shelf). That was actually the beginning of a new renaissance of sorts for me, but I was occasionally bugged by the nagging idea that while science is incredibly useful and necessary (if we're to understand reality objectively and to develop technology), the dimension of humanity - of soul - was missing or at least largely overlooked. I firmly believe we need science - we need the scientific method and its removal of values in order to facilitate unbiased searching. But we need it only for the acquisition of knowledge. For the rest of life - the more important stuff - we need values and judgement. In the moral realm for instance. If you try to be valueless there then you're helpless and have no way to make important decisions. So while in some ways science displaced religion, it utterly fails to replace the most important things religion did for our ancestors. And today's rational materialism gives us nothing to help with that.

I refer you to Dr. Jordan Peterson, whose videos I've been devouring lately and who led me to The Red Book as well as back to Jung, Nietzsche, and many other great writers. His focus is on exactly what I just said - the need for values and judgement - and how to develop your skills for them in this value-starved world.

Here are my latest Kindle purchases:

My most recent revelations - aside from the astonishing Red Book - are Edward Edinger and Murray Stein, who explain some of Jung's ideas clearly and make them accessible. I had waded through all the Jung books on my shelf years ago (well, most anyway, just got a start on Aion) and while sections of them blazed brilliantly in my mindscape, large parts of them remained opaque and frustratingly mystifying. Oh, I discovered these guys largely thanks to another excellent video channel; The Carl Jung Depth Psychology Reading Group

I realized very recently that I must have had some very early familiarity with Jung's ideas - and I mean in grade school. Because for whatever reason I've always connected with his kind of thinking. I think it's very likely that my mom called me in to watch a documentary about him when I was young or something similar - it's the kind of thing she was into and she would always call me if there was something on she found fascinating. Anyway, whether it was directly from the Maestro himself or more indirectly, I definitely had access to his ideas from an early age and it has formed my development and beliefs ever since. But due to the problems in fully understanding his theories that I've already mentioned, I was unable until now to get a clear understanding of his entire ouvre. Well that;s changing rapidly now, and it seems to be galvanizing me. So much is clicking into place now, and my understanding of the relation between the psyche and objective reality is undergoing a significant sea change. My dreams are getting very interesting lately - filled with powerful and deeply interconnected imagery and symbolism, and I believe I'm undergoing the re-centering process that Jung dubbed Individuation - also known as Self-Realization

Friday, April 21, 2017

Developing the Body the Right Way part 2

This is a followup to a post I did called Reflections and Projections @ the dawn of the new year - Developing the Body the Right Way, from December of 2015. It was about both drawing the human figure and my own efforts to get in shape - clever, eh? I've come a long way on both fronts since then. Why not sit a spell and let me tell you about it?

On Health and Nutrition
When I made the original post 2 years ago I was doing Paleo - eating like a caveman! I still am, but now I do what's called Keto - I like to think of it as Paleo Plus or Upgraded Paleo. You eat a lot of healthy fats, almost no carbs, and a moderate amount of protein. It re-activates the dormant second fuel system that we all have inside but that we never use. Our ancestors used to go through frequent periods of fasting or of eating a lot of fats and little to no carbs, which kicks in the fat-burning second fuel system. Living on carbs and sugar is actually very detrimental to the body. 

It takes a while to get this fuel system to kick in - to do it you have to starve yourself for sugar and carbs (which become sugar when you eat them). After a while your body will fire up the fat-burners, but until that happens you go through some weird and sometimes scary stuff - like sleep deprivation, extremely low energy, and inability to concentrate. I've been going through this for around a month now, which is why I haven't been doing any art stuff. But I did my research first - I knew to expect these symptoms and I knew that once you get past them it's smooth sailing. Keto is sort of like Boot Camp - it breaks you down to the core and rebuilds you from stronger stuff. 

On Art
The big advance in my art this year has been a new smoothness, which happened over the last few months of 2016 through a series of paintings. Weird, but it seems like each year my big advances are always in the fall and winter - the end of the year for some reason. Possibly because when I got myself a tablet and started digital painting it was fall? I kinda doubt it’s that simple, but whatever!

Detail of an older painting- ragged and harsh! 

Detail of a newer one - what a difference! 

(pronounced VAN-der lay)
So - how and why did I make this transition? It really began around the end of 2015, when I was doing this painting of an MMA fighter named Wanderlei Silva - who has a total Neanderthal barbarian look about him. I wrapped up work on this one at 11:30 on New Year’s Eve 2015. 

Wait - let me go back even farther to set the stage - why was I painting so ragged and rough before? It was because I wanted my work to look like alla prima brushwork done in oil - in particular the kind of rough loose style you see in parts of paintings by Frazetta or Kent Williams. They both have a very vigorous, often chaotic style which is something I want to be able to emulate. Also, I dislike a certain kind of lackluster over-smoothness that I see a lot of in digital artwork, which just drains any life out of it. So I made a deliberate effort to let my brushstrokes show and to not blend much if at all. People on ConceptArt kept telling me I shouldn’t do that, but of course as a noob on the wrong side of the Dunning/Kruger effect, I knew better than them, so I persisted.

I don’t know exactly what made me break down and decide to smooth things out. It was in the early stages of the Wanderlei painting - in fact I believe it was the whole point of it. I decided to go ahead and start rougher than I usually would (thinking about Kent Williams) and then use blending selectively where needed - only to the extent needed - to create smoothness and decent transitions, while still letting the roughness show through. It’s like chunky peanut butter - a smooth matrix with chunks suspended in it.

It made a huge difference!! This painting hangs together much more coherently, in spite of the chaotic roughness of much of it, than anything I had done before. So I broke down and decided ok, time to go all out on blending and see how far I can take it. 

The result was this one:

A quantum leap into smoothness!! It takes on an illusionistic look because the new smoothness allowed me to see what every millimeter of the surface looked like - sort of like swapping up from very low resolution to ultra HD. 

But this new smoothness isn’t the whole story - there are other contributing factors to my recent advances as well…

The Mouser Portrait
This was a vitally important landmark for me, begun back in 2014 and finished the following year. Even though it’s really just a character study rather than an action-oriented illustration, it still stands as my best piece - but after finishing it I became frustrated with certain things about it, and the thoughts I had then have guided my development ever since.

The importance of self-critique
In fact, I’ve come to realize that this is a good way to advance your skills, and to get the specific kind of results you want, rather than just flailing around doing aimless practice with no particular goals. Critiquing your work - and not necessarily just a single piece,but it’s also a good idea to critique your entire body of work from time to time and develop an idea of where you want to go. So I’m going to spend the majority of this post explaining just what my critique of that Mouser piece was, and how it’s helped me advance my skills in very specific ways since then.

A re-dedication to Gesture
My biggest critique on it was the stiffness of the pose. I decided then and there to dedicate myself mainly to gesture for the time being. I was able to envision what I wanted it to look like - not precisely, but I had a vague image of smoothly flowing power and graceful curves. At about that time I saw somebody’s sketchbook on Conceptart who was working from Mike Mattesi’s Force books, and I could see this was what I needed. I ordered 2 of the books and launched into studying from them. My figure drawings started taking on the qualities I was looking for. 

Strangely - or maybe not - this more recent piece actually looks a lot like the image I envisioned in response to my Mouser critique. Specifically I wanted a strong arch through the ribcage itself and a certain kind of curvature on limbs - very much like the curvature I put into Miesha’s thighs and hips. And the fact that I finally broke down and decided to use outlines was a big factor in making it work - it really smooths out the contours of the body and allows a very linear gracefulness of form.

And this brings up the next important factor I want to discuss —

Visualize the results you want to achieve
One thing that happened during my self-critique of that Mouser portrait - I could see what I wanted my future work to look like. Simply as a result of looking long and hard at the one I had just finished and thinking about its flaws. This allowed me to develop a sort of vague hazy idea of what a better version of it would look like. It wasn’t crystal clear or anything, more of a dim notion but what I could see more clearly was, as I mentioned before, a strong bend running through the ribcage and powerful arching curves along the contours of the body. That’s because the things that disappointed me the most about the painting were the boringly straight spine and resulting stiffness of the torso, and the sort of straight, tubular look of the limbs themselves. There’s something about creating a strong image in your head - a fantasy, or something like a daydream - that shows you the positive results you want to achieve. It sets the wheels in motion inside your head and gives you something concrete to aim at and work toward. Even if you can only see it kind of vaguely or hazily, which is how it works for me.

Practice Practice PRAC-tice!
There was a point - I believe it was fairly early in 2016, when I noticed I had developed much better control, just from getting so much practice. When I noticed this advancement of control I went back and re-worked a few older pieces that suffered from ragged edges and shaky work, and was able to be much smoother and more controlled.

This is the manual dexterity aspect of improvement - it happens just from a lot of practice. Gradually your hand gets more sure and you can put marks just where you want them, even drawing with a plastic stylus on a plastic tablet, which feels like drawing with a thick sheet of glass laid on top of your paper!

Giving up the brush strokes
This was the single most important factor in why I improved so suddenly. I believe it’s because - when you paint smoothly you can clearly see how everything is working. It’s like switching up from a blocky low definition YouTube video to HD - suddenly everything springs into crisp clear focus and you can clearly see every part of the image and how they relate to each other. As I mentioned earlier - it’s recommended that you give up the brush strokes or weird styles when learning how to paint. Painting smooth allows you to feel the surface and the form, sort of like sculpting it or modeling it from clay. After you’ve learned what you need to know, then you can start to use brush strokes or stylized effects.

Carefully controlling the movement of light across the figure
I call it Prioritizing the Lighting. You decide where it’s going to be the brightest and from there outward it fades until some parts of the image drop off into deep shadow. This is one way of directing the viewer’s eye - making the most important part of the image jump out at them first. You also use lighting to prioritize which parts are of secondary importance, and lesser, and which parts can just drop out of visibility almost completely. This is like visual storytelling - you’re leading them through the image. The standout part is like the hook at the beginning of a story that captures your interest and draws you in. 

This is the second most important factor for my improvement, and I cannot emphasize enough how essential it is to learn!! It's a way of orchestrating the light, and it causes you to think globally about the whole image. Imagine a bunch of pianists, trombone players, and cellists sitting in a room all doing their own thing, not orchestrated properly by a conductor. Each of them may be doing something amazing, but they're not working together to create a unified whole. But get them all on the same page, thinking about the musical composition they're supposed to be contributing to, and the magic can happen (assuming they're good enough at what they do). 

Learning to arrange things for the good of the overall composition is what makes or breaks a piece. The more you can learn to think through your work comprehensively the better it will become. As well as playing all the instruments, you must also be the conductor - decide what to pull up and put the spotlight on - what to push back a bit and what might be better just removed or changed for the good of the composition.

I didn't understand how to do this until I ordered an Asaro head & the associated video material & pamphlet. The one you want is the Original head in grey plastic. In grabbing the link I just discovered they now have the Planes of the Body available - that's an immediate must-buy for me! But if you're considering it, just get the head first and download the pictures of the body planes. You can learn a lot that way. If you're at all serious about becoming an artist - do this!! Both the printed matter and the video are brief and very crudely produced - at first I thought it was a scam or something, but none of that matters - the information is priceless! Watch, read, and pay attention!! Get out a pencil and do it yourself, and keep doing it - keep reviewing the material until it clicks in your head. But first you have to be well versed in the basics - perspective and standard lighting and shading - otherwise it will be too advanced and will just frustrate you.

Ditto for color - both hue and saturation
The same principle applies to color as well - prioritize it to lead the viewer’s eye around the picture. Use the strongest color saturation in the same area where you have the brightest light. You’ll also use other elements the same way - edge control, contrast - but this post is long enough already! And I need to leave some other stuff to talk about in future blog posts!

So yeah - those are the important factors that went into my sudden leap of quality.

Sunday, January 29, 2017


Done with Clip Studio Paint because I prefer the way it lets me draw over Photoshop.

*   *   *   *

Saturday, January 21, 2017

Taking Fafhrd Farther

I can't help myself - I need to just keep working on this one, trying out different painting methods and ideas.

This is probably my favorite version (above).

I don't know - it was looking pretty good, but it's getting kind of pale and delicate looking. In some ways it's an improvement though - it's looking more unified now. 

But really I must say I prefer some of the earlier versions. Ok, time to stop on this one! I feel like I've developed a lot of new tricks and can make bodies look more solid and three dimensional now. And all this practice is definitely helping. 

Saturday, January 7, 2017

Refurbishing Fafhrd --- Squaring Up

I got disgusted with the previous version of this painting due to the items I listed in the critique (last post), so I decided to try to fix it. When I did that version I was doing what I had always done in pencil, only in full color now and using a stylus and tablet. That's why to me it looks more like a fully rendered drawing rather than a painting, or like an airbrushed picture. But that's not what I want my work to look like. So this post details my attempt to correct it according to my critique.

First I just wanted to punch in some real darks - all the way to black in the darkest shadows. And I needed a lot more middle value colors - I noticed the previous version went rapidly from darks to lights with very thin zones of middle value - another factor that makes it look weak. Also, rather than work with soft round rushes and lots of transparency from the beginning, I wanted to start with some hard edged opaque brushes, make some good hard edges and definite shapes, and then blend them as much as needed later, only where necessary.

Pectorals still looking booblike due to roundness...

Much better! 

The big form shadow still had curves in it though. It was fighting the more squared-up form I was going for. 

So I squared that up too. Blocky, baby! Oh yeah!

I'm being careful to light the planes properly - darker or lighter according to where the light source is. Those planes facing directly toward the light will be the brightest, and as they turn away they get progressively darker until they fall into shadow. You can see this clearly in the three tiers of the abdominals. The middle row is more downward-facing, so darker. 

Then it was largely a struggle to bring back in some roundness, but built around the planes and corners I had established - so more like subtlely curved planes with gently rounded corners rather than curves all over. 

Dropping in a few surface details goes a long way toward making it look more finished.

Wednesday, January 4, 2017


Somehow the thin lines - outlines and for instance under the pectorals or between the abs - make the image look weak. So do the colors. And the anatomy and figure look very strange - I really do need to get to the figure drawing and learn what people actually look like. I'm drawing an assemblage of parts - like a mannequin pieced together - ribcage, pelvis, arms, legs, head - all joined weirdly and somewhat mismatched. Especially at the big joints - the waist and where the limbs join the torso. Shoulders especially are difficult - they're so free floating it's hard to understand how they're really supposed to work. Drawing a lot from photos or life will help with all that.

On color - I'm thinking about it a lot since doing this one. I need those colorful grays! I'm using mostly primaries and secondaries - cartoonish colors. What I need a lot more of is the tertieries - the mixtures of a secondary (orange, green or purple) with its complement (the primary opposite it on the color wheel - for instance red is the complementary of green etc). Tertieries are subtle complex colors that are hard to identify - you can't just instantly say That's a pink, or a yellow, or whatever. So they're the colorful grays - also known as dirtied up colors. They make a painting look more realistic because they're less saturated.

I think one of the reasons I tend not to use them is that you can't get them out of the Photoshop color picker. Unless there's some trick I'm not aware of (there are many!) - all I can get out of it is primaries and secondaries - so I need to grab a complementary to some color that's already on the painting or make a floating palette and mix colors on, and blend them together, then paint with it.

Also I need to use a lot more black and white. In fact, I want to do some exercises by starting with a bold line drawing done in black, with the darkest shadows filled in solid black, and put down a middle value color and then white for the highlights, and paint it up from there. That way I won't be afraid to drop in those full blacks and whites, which is a problem for me. If you don't have them already on the image, your eye fools you into believing you have a good full range of values. Until you compare it side by side with another picture that actually has a full value range, and suddenly you see how woefully inadequate yours is!

*    *    *    *

When you see one of these ^ it means some time has gone by since I finished the post but I'm adding some info. And if it's been more than a day I'll add the date. 

I also realized the simple curves everywhere make it look feminine. Which is sort of appropriate actually because this is a very young Fafhrd, and according to the stories he looked like a girl when he was young. This would be slightly after that, in the late teens I suppose or very early 20's, when he was getting big and beginning to brawn up a bit. Later in life he would become more typically masculine, requiring very different shapes and paint handling techniques. 

Sunday, January 1, 2017

Fafhrd Through the Ages

Here's a progression years in the making - beginning in 2014:

There are qualities about this version that I really like - in particular the gesture and the vigorous powerful brushwork, plus the strength of the color, though that orange is overpowering, isn't it? I think it's a very successful sketch, but always wanted to upgrade it.

Then, just a few days ago, I dusted it off and put in some more work, wanting to see what I could do to it with my upgraded 2016 skills.

This is how it currently stands. It isn't really finished - I wanted to get as much done as I could before the end of the year and get it posted - I may or may not work it some more. Not sure because no matter what, there are fatal flaws with this one that I can't fix, like the stupid J. C. Penny's catalog model pose. Weird thing about it - in many ways I like the previous version better. Because it's so smooth now he looks tender and delicate - and I've completely lost the gesture - the spine has become stiff and straight. But the important thing - I'm really advancing my ability to paint airbrush-smooth, bringing it all up to Ultra-HD resolution. Crisp and clean, with no caffeine! That's really allowing me to work the form and the surface, and I'm also getting increasing control over every aspect of color. Plus thanks to the aforementioned Cheerio Buckle saga, I'm now using my improved dexterity for some much more precise and detailed detail. 

Really I don't like this one much. I see it as a transitional piece. I'm halfway to being able to combine the airbrush smoothness with the chunkier, more powerful approach, and hopefully to do it all faster and better. But until then, I guess I'll be making a few weird paintings like this one to develop my control. 

Oops - I took too long making this post - it's 2017 already!! 

*    *    *    *

A thought -- the smooth painting, at least as I'm doing it here, represents the materialist aspect of things - form, surface and light rendered as theoretically perfect - making the body into a mannequin or action figure (or a CGI model). The more painterly or what I'm calling chunky or loose painting is attempting to depict the metaphorical - the spiritual or ethereal, the atmospheric or the inner nature. You must develop skill with both and learn how to combine them in a way that works. It's similar to the differences between prose (prosaic or practical/utilitarian writing) and poetry; the metaphorical/essential/ethereal art of writing. They're two different modes of thought, two different filters for interpreting the world and its meanings, and today it's most common to use either one or the other and to see it as bitterly opposed to the other. That's one of the things I fondly recall about the 60's and 70's - the artists commonly understood how to combine both modes. The world we live in today unfortunately seems to be characterized by divisiveness. 

*    *    *    *