This is the sixth digitally-edited painting in my “2004-Land” art series, a stylised nine-painting series which is very loosely-based on my memories of the early-mid 2000s. It was originally supposed to be nostalgic, but the series also ended up including some cynical satire and stuff like that too.
As usual, this painting is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
“Temporary Shop In 2004-Land” by C. A. Brown
It’s the end of the month and this means that it’s time for me to do my usual thing of collecting links to the ten best articles (plus a couple of honourable mentions too) which I’ve posted here this month.
All in all, this month’s articles went reasonably well 🙂 As for next month, the daily articles will start out in a more eclectic way but will then focus a lot more on art for at least a month or so (including the first half or so of July’s articles at the very least). A lot of this was because I got a chance to experiment with one of the dreaded “A.I. image generators” – expect a few articles about this next month – and then had to spend quite a bit of time recovering my artistic confidence, via focusing on making sketchbook art and stuff like that, after this unsettling experience.
As for reviews, there were a reasonable number this month. As well as the usual “Doom II”/”Final Doom” WAD review (expect reviews of modern WADs next month, although I’ll go back to older ones in July), I also reviewed the amazing computer game “Amid Evil” (2019), a webcomic update by Winston Rowntree, a really creative indie game called “Save Room: Organization Puzzle” (2022) and an interesting art-horror film called “Berberian Sound Studio” (2012) too.
Anyway, here are the lists 🙂 Enjoy 🙂
Top Ten Articles – May 2023:
Honourable Mentions:
This is the fifth digitally-edited painting in my “2004-Land” art series, a stylised nine-painting series which is very loosely-based on my memories of the early-mid 2000s. It was originally supposed to be nostalgic, but the series also ended up including some cynical satire and stuff like that too.
As usual, this painting is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
“LAN Cafe In 2004-Land” by C. A. Brown
Well, it has been a while since I last watched an art-horror film. And, after noticing that Peter Strickland’s 2012 film “Berberian Sound Studio” was being shown on TV a few days before writing this review, I set up the DVR. This is one of those films that I’ve been meaning to watch for at least a decade, and I finally got round to it.
So, let’s take a look at “Berberian Sound Studio”. This review may contain SPOILERS and the film itself contains some FLICKERING LIGHTS.
Set in the 1970s, this film follows a mild-mannered British sound engineer called Gilderoy (Toby Jones) who has been invited to Italy in order to work on the latest horror film by acclaimed director Giancarlo Santini (Antonio Mancini).
Gilderoy finds himself working with Santini’s rude, bullying and abrasive assistant – Francesco Corragio (Cosimo Fusco) – and feeling unsettled by the grisly footage that he has to watch again and again whilst mixing the sound effects. There is drama in the studio, arguments and revenge. Slowly, Gilderoy finds his grip on sanity loosening slightly and his personality changing….
Yes, this is a horror film – but it’s very different to the type of horror film you were probably expecting to watch…
One of the first things that I will say about this film is that it is a stylish, unsettling and ambiguous mood piece which is a really creative tribute to one of the greatest parts of the history of horror films. Yes, some viewers might find the film to be confusing or unsatisfying, but – like the old Dario Argento, Lucio Fulci etc… films which inspired it – the film is more about the overall atmosphere and mood than about the plot.
In terms of the film’s horror elements, I initially wondered whether this film was actually even a horror film. It certainly is! But, unlike the intense gore and shock value you’d expect from a classic 1970s-80s Italian horror film, this film unsettles you in a much more understated and slower-paced way.
A lot of the horror in this film comes from the characters, subtle moments, verbal descriptions, sound effects etc… It’s the literal opposite of a classic Italian splatter film.
A lot is left to the viewer’s imagination, there’s an uneasy atmosphere, grotesque verbal descriptions, occasional close-ups of a spider (albeit a less-scary thin/spindly one), a small number of mild jump scares, tense conversations with unlikeable people, occasional uncertainty about what is actually real, a brief moment of cruelty, some implied crimes and a man’s mind slowly disintegrating.
At its core, this is a psychological horror film. There’s little to no blood or gore on screen. It’s a subtle, slow-burning film about a man going to a harsh place and, very slowly and subtly, being corrupted by it. No-one dies in this film. There are no monsters or ghosts. Just subtle, understated human flaws and quietly realistic human evil.
It’s a film that is designed more to slowly unsettle than to immediately shock or frighten. And, in this regard, it works surprisingly well. It’s a tribute to an amazing genre of horror films… which catches you off-guard by doing exactly the opposite of what those films did.
And, yes, it is a cool tribute. Even though the film-within-a-film (which is heard often, but rarely – if ever – seen) is a completely made-up one called “Il Vortice Equestre” , the focus on an academy and witches in it instantly made me think of Dario Argento’s legendary 1977 art-horror classic “Suspiria” 🙂
And, of course, the film includes some cool “Suspiria” (1977)-esque lighting during a few moments too 🙂
There’s also a neat reference to old Giallo films when a film projector is operated by an ominous hand wearing a black glove. There’s a cool 1970s-style title sequence for “Il Vortice Equestre” too. The rotting vegetables in one or two scenes almost look like a “gross out” detail from an old Lucio Fulci zombie film. Whilst this film does its own thing, and is creatively different in a lot of ways, it still wears its inspirations on its sleeve.
Plus, I just loved the mood and atmosphere of this film too. Although it’s a fairly low-budget film, with maybe only three or four different locations, the camera-work, lighting and mood reminded me of everything from Ridley Scott’s “Blade Runner” (1982) to Dario Argento’s “Suspiria” (1977) to old candle-lit Caravaggio paintings.
Enhance thirty-four to… Ooops! Wrong film! This is “Berberian Sound Studio, not “Blade Runner”…
It is a beautiful film, filled with bulky analogue technology, retro fashions and the sort of amazing chiaroscuro lighting – with some more creative moments of Argento-esque red/green/blue lighting too – which used to be a lot more common in films. It genuinely looks like a film from the 1970s/80s at times. It’s a great-looking work of visual ART.
The acting is really good, and the film’s soundtrack sometimes includes the sort of cool Goblin-esque synthesiser music which is instantly evocative of the era that it is set in. Again, the story can be a bit ambiguous at times, but it is a film that is more about mood and atmosphere than anything else (like the films that inspired it).
All in all, if you want an atmospheric slow-paced horror film which has some really cool lighting then this one is well worth watching. Yes, it isn’t a splatter film and you might also find parts of it to be confusing, but it is a creative and unsettling horror film nonetheless.
If you’re a fan of Dario Argento, and you can keep an open mind, then you might enjoy this one. Likewise, if you enjoy quirky horror films – such as “Pontypool” (2008) – which leave more to the imagination than they show, then you might also enjoy it too. It isn’t for everyone, but it’s still an intriguingly creative film.
If I had to give it a rating out of five, it would get at least a four.
This is the fourth digitally-edited painting in my “2004-Land” art series, a stylised nine-painting series which is very loosely-based on my memories of the early-mid 2000s. It was originally supposed to be nostalgic, but the series also ended up including some cynical satire and stuff like that too.
As usual, this painting is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
“Abandoned Masterpiece In 2004-Land” by C. A. Brown
Well, I thought that I’d talk briefly about how artists use reference images. This was something I ended up thinking about in mid-late January when, after a stressful evening, I found myself relaxing by listening to save room music from old survival horror videogames. I’m sure there’s probably an “Introvert after a social situation: ” meme to be made out of this…
Since I hadn’t done any art practice so far that day and because I didn’t have a better idea, I decided to make a small digitally-edited painting/cartoon in the style of an old early-mid 2000s survival horror videogame save room. What can I say? Sometimes the most obvious idea can be the best. The main inspirations included all sorts of classic horror media, such as the older “Resident Evil” games and 1970s/80s horror films like “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” and “The Evil Dead”.
I wanted to create an atmosphere of “ominous relaxation” or “foreboding serenity”, just like in an old survival horror game. So, I went for warm lighting paired with harsh shadows and a few mildly creepy background details (eg: overgrown plants, a bull’s skull etc…). I also made the light source an old lantern, rather than a lightbulb, to add a feeling of remoteness. Plus, in keeping with the theme, I added a few “game-y” elements like highlighting important items via colour and “sparkles” too. It was a lot of fun to make 🙂
Here’s a preview of it. The full painting probably won’t be posted here until next March:
This is a preview of part of the digitally-edited painting that I’ve been talking about. The full version probably won’t appear here until next March though.
Anyway, whilst making the initial sketch, I remembered some military history videos I’d seen on Youtube and thought that it would be quirky and visually-interesting if the main character was carrying a “Sten gun”. This was a bizarre-looking WW2 sub-machine gun that was made by the British military in the early 1940s as a quick and cheap way to replace all of the equipment they had lost after Dunkirk.
Of course, since I don’t live in the US and – not only was the nearest military museum at least a few miles away but was also probably closed at the time of night I was painting – I couldn’t exactly look at one in real life.
So, of course, I looked online for reference images. Thankfully, since it was both official and old, there was a fairly detailed public domain photo at the top of the Wikipedia page about the weapon. Though, of course, it was from the wrong angle and perspective for what I wanted to do in the painting. But this wasn’t a problem.
The whole point of reference images ISN’T to copy them directly. It is to build up a “3D model” inside your imagination which you can then apply to your artwork. It is to show you the correct positions and details of something, so that you can move it around in your mind and still make it look vaguely realistic. It is, as the name suggests, something to refer to.
Don’t get me wrong, my drawing of the “Sten gun” wasn’t perfect. It was a fairly small drawing, not to mention that I messed up the position of the “stock” slightly, I had to guess how the character would hold the gun’s weird-looking handle, the gun’s “magazine” is probably at a slightly steep angle (and the holder for it is too gloomy) and the character is also holding the body of the weapon very close to the ejection hole too.
The drawing certainly isn’t perfect but, at a glance, it looks like what it is supposed to be – and, most importantly, it was probably a lot better than if I hadn’t used any reference images at all. Again, the whole point of reference images isn’t to directly copy them but to give you enough information to form a clear mental picture of whatever it is you are trying to draw or paint, a “3D model” which you can rotate and move around in your imagination until it fits into the artwork that you are making.
Again, it might not always look “perfect” in your artwork – especially if you can’t closely examine the real thing – but it will at least look better than if you just try to draw something unusual from guess-work or imagination.
——————————-
Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂
This is the third digitally-edited painting in my “2004-Land” art series, a stylised nine-painting series which is very loosely-based on my memories of the early-mid 2000s. It was originally supposed to be nostalgic, but the series also ended up including some cynical satire and stuff like that too.
As usual, this painting is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
“Newsagent In 2004-Land” by C. A. Brown
Well, I thought that I’d talk briefly about “celebrities” and learning skills today. If you’re learning a skill, it can be easy to look up to the people who are the most well-known for it. It’s perfectly possible that seeing or reading something about them actually inspired you to start learning a particular skill in the first place.
And a certain amount of this is actually good. If you just enjoy or respect the stuff that they create or do, then this can be enriching and satisfying. If you study their techniques in order to see if you can learn anything from them, then this is also good too. If you take inspiration from their work, as well as the work of many others, this can help you to develop your own personal “style”, techniques etc…. Again, looking up to someone who has more experience than you currently have can be a good thing.
The problem starts when you start comparing yourself too much. This makes you look down on your own progress, to feel inadequate or like you just inherently “aren’t as good”. This can actually drain your motivation for practicing your skill. And, whilst it might be true that you currently have less experience or knowledge than someone else, the only way that you are going to reach their skill level is through practice. I mean, forget “talent” or whatever – literally everyone who learns something, even your “idol”, was an inexperienced beginner once. Everyone fails sometimes too, it’s part of learning. Yes, it happens less often when you gain more experience but it still happens.
Likewise, whilst it can be fun to read about famous people in your chosen field, don’t make the mistake of putting too much importance on their life story. Why? Because it will always be different to yours. You cannot and should not try to be a perfect imitation of another person. Not only is it impossible, but it also means that you’re missing out on all of the interesting, unique and fascinating stuff that is uniquely YOU. Everyone is different and you have to find what works for you.
Seriously, focusing on learning more about your own unique “style” with whatever you are trying to learn is infinitely more rewarding than bemoaning the fact that your life story isn’t an exact copy of someone else’s.
Ditto places too. Sometimes, a place can be associated with someone famous. It’s easy to daydream about visiting there or living there, but it is literally just a place like any other. It isn’t enchanted or anything. It was just where they happened to be when they learnt or practiced whatever they became famous for. If they’re especially well-known, then they probably made the place famous by practicing there. Again, there’s nothing inherently magical about any given place – it is what you make of it, what they made of it. And, if you put in the practice, then people might eventually think the same thing about wherever you are. That is, if you even want to be “famous”.
And, honestly, not everyone – myself included – does and this is ok. Seriously, so-called “fame” sounds incredibly stressful and exhausting in some regards. Despite what popular culture tells you, it is perfectly ok – perhaps healthy even – not to want to be hyper-famous. Not to see it as the entire goal of life or the pinnacle of human achievement. It’s ok not to be famous.
Not only that, don’t fall into the pitfall of thinking that whoever you look up to is somehow “more than human” or whatever. They are a person just like you or I. Yes, they might be really good at one particular thing, but they still have the same emotions, the same sort of unique quirks, the same general mixture of good and bad memories etc… as anyone else. Yes, they have a unique personality or a unique “style”…. but so do you! And you can either have fun discovering more about what yours is – through practice and learning – or you can cheat yourself and waste time obsessing about someone else’s.
Again, this isn’t to say that you should never have inspirations or be a fan of anyone. It’s perfectly ok to admire the work of more experienced people in your field, but just don’t obsess about them. It doesn’t help them and it certainly doesn’t help you either. Yes, learn from them and respect their achievements. But remember that they are just people like you and I. They are unique, just like you are. They were a beginner once and – if they’re really good at something – they have probably failed at it more times than you might expect before they reached that skill level.
In short, focus on putting in the practice. Don’t try to be a perfect copy of your idols, but find your own “style” – because that is what they did. And, whatever you do, don’t compare yourself too much.
—————————-
Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂
This is the second digitally-edited painting in my “2004-Land” art series, a stylised nine-painting series which is very loosely-based on my memories of the early-mid 2000s. It was originally supposed to be nostalgic, but the series also ended up including some cynical satire and stuff like that too.
As usual, this painting is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
“Cinema Balcony In 2004-Land” by C. A. Brown
Well, it has been a while since I last wrote an art tutorial. So, I thought that I’d show you one of the – many – quick ways to create a 1990s-style floral/camo pattern using version 2.10.30 of a free open-source graphics program called “GIMP” (GNU Image Manipulation Program).
For this tutorial, I’ll be applying the effect to the whole image – but this probably works best if you use it for just selected parts of the image (eg: curtains, clothing etc…) using either the “Free Select Tool” in the panel in the upper left corner – which looks like a lasso – or the “Fuzzy Select Tool” – which looks like a magic wand. If you can’t find the icon of either just hold down the mouse button on the third and fourth icons – a menu with other options will appear and it will be in one of them.
So, let’s get started.
First of all, select the “Bucket Fill Tool” – the icon looks like a bucket – and then go into the “Fill type” menu below it and select “Pattern Fill” from the three options. Once you’ve done this, click on the small square below and a grid of textures will appear. You need to select the “Java” texture from this grid.
Here’s a screenshot of the menu, and I’ve also highlighted the position of the “Java” texture, because it can be easy to miss.
Once you’ve selected this texture, fill your selected area with it. Then go into Colors > Hue-Saturation from the menus at the top of the screen. Once you’re there, just mess around with the three sliders. Change the “hue” to something a bit more colourful, increase the “lightness” a bit and increase the “Saturation” to maximum.
Adjusting the hue, saturation and lightness levels of the image.
Once you’ve done this, go into “Colors > Hue – Chroma” and increase the “chroma” levels a bit. If you aren’t satisfied with the colours you chose, you can always change them again with the “hue” slider here too.
Increasing the “chroma” levels and also messing around with the “hue” and “lightness” levels again.
This is starting to look a bit like a floral or camo pattern (Note: for camo patterns, you might want to actually decrease the “saturation” or “chroma” to make it look muted), but it looks a bit blurry and slightly faded. So, we need to give it more definition!
To do this, go into “Colors > Exposure”, then increase the “Black level” slider on the menu a bit. This will make the darker parts of the image bolder and give them a bit more definition.
Increasing the “Black level” of the image.
With these four steps, you can mess around a bit until the pattern looks right. Another option which might be worth messing around with is the “Colors > Color Temperature” option as well. After you’ve made all of the adjustments you need to make, you’ll end up with something like this:
A 1990s-style floral and/or camo pattern created using GIMP 2.10.30 in about 2-5 minutes. And, yes, I made some other adjustments using the features I mentioned earlier too.
Again, this is far from the only way to create patterns like this in GIMP 2.10.30, but one of the cool things about this program – and any image editing program – is that they can often do more than just the pre-set effects that they offer you. If you actually combine the features of these programs, you can do a lot more with them than you might initially think.
————————
Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂
PekoeBlaze - the official blog 