atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,
atomic_fungus
atomic_fungus

#967: Fractally wrong (And Ed paints his first cel since 1998)

Boortz had a link to this yahoo complaining about "the Conservative radio pundit industrial-complex". It's four pages of typical lefty BS about Hannity and Limbaugh's "hatred" and "propaganda".

The entire article is based on a foundation which is incorrect and I'm not going to do a point-by-point refutation of this nonsense here. But a few things do stand out.

The writer seems to think that Limbaugh is a "journalist", or at least that Limbaugh is not behaving like one. Limbaugh himself, however, says that he's not a journalist, and that his show is meant primarily as entertainment and commentary--two things which don't have "journalistic integrity". Limbaugh is not a reporter and his show is not a news show.

The writer brings up "the public airwaves". Well, I hate to say this, but the equipment used to broadcast a program is privately owned. The station pays money to the FCC for licenses to broadcast on those frequencies. That's where we get this idea of "public airwaves": the FCC has the power to regulate broadcasting in the US, ensuring that if station A is broadcasting on a certain frequency, it doesn't have to worry about someone setting up station B on the same frequency and drowning out station A.

The FCC's role in licensing the broadcast spectrum is approximately that of a traffic signal. It keeps people from running into each other.

The guy writing this opinion piece, though, is of the opinion that because the broadcast spectra are limited, the government should dictate what can and cannot be broadcast. He apparently thinks that "for-profit media outlets" should be subject to government regulation.

...and I've wasted enough time on this nonsense. This guy is one of those people who think that the New York Times is too conservative. Anus.

* * *

Teddy Kennedy is so worried about the environment! He is against a wind farm off Nantucket because he's a NIMBY-man: he doesn't want big windmills spoiling the view from his big vacation house or his yacht.

Unfortunately Boortz' link to the pic of Kennedy dumping diesel into the ocean does not work.

* * *

WorldNetDaily is down for some reason, so I guess that's that for today.

* * *

Last night I had an idea and decided to implement it.

I'm not sure where it came from, to be honest, but I went down into the basement and dug out:

1) my acetate sheets
2) my acrylic paint
3) my fine brushes

...in other words, my cel-painting stuff. I haven't painted a cel since about 1998.

Last week, while doing a little pre-sleep drawing, I did a great image of Cassile, from my as-yet-still-unnamed fifth manga series. And so I traced it onto acetate, flipped it over, did some tracing to establish shadows, and then went to work with the paint.

I'm pretty happy with how it came out, too. (No image yet. Got to figure out how I'm going to scan it since my scanner doesn't work under Vista...) Problems arose because the paint is old--it dried wrong and cracked, leaving clear spots--but for a first effort in ten years, I'm happy with how it turned out.

While working on it I was thinking that this would be a "first draft", ie a test case which would help me to do a final image. So now I know what I need to do to do a really good-quality image.

Part of it is the paint; it's old. I bought this stuff in 1997, after going to Steve Bennett's cel-painting seminar at AnimeIowa '97. It's been kept in sealed tubes, out of direct sunlight, but part of that time period was in my damp, cold garage in Cedar Rapids--the paint is no longer good for cel painting.

I use acrylic paint--cheap stuff--and the cels I painted back then didn't have these problems. I've heard that real animation paint is marvelously easy to use--flows well, hides well, sticks to acetate perfectly, and is flexible--but unfortunately it's expensive: a bottle containing a couple ounces went for $50-$100 and I have to wonder if it's even being made any more.

So the stuff blotched up; it cracked; it failed to flow correctly. And despite all that, I turned out an image which, I think, is not all that bad. So now I'm thinking I may go ahead and buy new paint, and try again--but first I've got to find out if it is the paint; it might be the acetate, because the acetate was stored in the same environment as the paint and God alone knows what those conditions did to the acetate.

What amazes me the most about all this is that I was actually able to find the stuff in that pile of junk in the basement, without having to spend too much time searching for it. The acetate, in particular, was in a box with a bunch of other stuff--the paints were in a toolbox and the brushes were in a box that had to be on top of anything else because it's open--but the acetate, I was expecting that to be the big issue.

I painted a bunch of cels back in 1997-1998, including some crappy ones of early American Dawn artwork. Mainly I traced some real artists' characters and painted them. I did a nice Ranma-chan in a tiger costime which I will never paint again--all those stripes!--and a character from Jen Kolanek's RunAMUCK (which is no longer on-line, damn it). I experimented with ways to delineate highlighting/shadows--which didn't work--and eventually my interests moved elsewhere. But I didn't forget how to do it, apparently.

In this case, it took me a couple hours to find the stuff, trace the image, and paint it, and I worked pretty much continuously--I'd paint one area and let it dry while I attended to some other part--and in the end I had approximately the image I had hoped for.

I'll post it soon.

* * *

Update:

Here it is, captured with my digital camera. Not the greatest quality, but it'll do.



This is all-original artwork, not like the Pretty Cure webcomic.
Subscribe

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 1 comment