This was a quick piece of digital art that I made (using GIMP and an old version of MS Paint) after a dramatic thunderstorm in early September last year. If you want to read about the story behind this picture, then check out this blog post from last December.
As usual, this picture is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
“Thunderstorm Static (September 2022)” by C. A. Brown
It’s the end of the month and this means that it’s time for me to compile a list of links to the ten best articles I’ve posted here this month (plus a couple of honourable mentions too).
All in all, this month’s articles went reasonably well. As well as the usual art-themed articles, I also found myself looking at the history of stationery (Yes, it sounds “boring” but it was fun and nostalgic to write about...) and all sorts of other stuff.
As for next month – whilst there won’t be any “Horror Videogames Series” articles (I might have prepared one or two for November though, if I remember rightly), I’m delighted to announce that Halloween stories should return again this year 🙂 At the time of writing in June, I’ve written six of them and I’m not sure whether or not I’ll add any more, but look out for them towards the end of next month 🙂
As for reviews this month, there were more than I expected 🙂 I reviewed the classic 2002 3D Platformer game “Ratchet And Clank“, the usual “Doom II” WAD, and a really cool “Doom II” mod, as well as a film called “The Love Witch” (2016) and this utterly amazing “so bad that it’s good” 1980s zombie movie called “Burial Ground” (A.K.A “The Zombie Dead”) too.
Anyway, here are the lists 🙂 Enjoy 🙂
Top Ten Articles – September 2023:
Honourable mentions:
Although I was feeling inspired enough to make a digitally-edited painting, this one didn’t really turn out as well as the original idea I had for it.
As usual, this painting is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
“Rainfall Avenue” by C. A. Brown
Well, I thought that I’d talk about why you should make practice art based on action movie stills or screenshots. Yes, this advice is aimed more at beginner-intermediate artists and you’ll also need to know how to copy by sight too – but I was surprised to find that it is one of the best types of art practice you can do.
On a side-note: If you don’t know how to copy by sight, it’s easier than you might think. 2D photos of 3D objects will distort the shapes of everything in order to look “3D”. So, all you have to do is to pay very close attention to the EXACT 2D outline of everything in the photo.
The exact shape/outline of everything will be at least slightly different to what you might expect. Trace around things with your finger if it helps you to spot this. Also, be sure to compare the sizes of different parts of the picture in order to get the proportions right too (eg: “This character’s head is about as wide as the tree trunk next to them”). It takes a bit of practice, but its easier than you might think and it quickly becomes intuitive.
Anyway, making practice art based on action movie stills or screenshots is a brilliant thing to do for so many reasons.
First of all, go for a scene where there is actually a lot of action happening. Not only will this give you practice with drawing people in lots of different poses (eg: jumping, running, pointing, fighting etc…) which can help you to learn and/or practice some of the underlying “rules” of how to draw people as well as opening your mind a bit too. Seriously, I’m certainly not the only artist who has wasted literal years of practice time just drawing characters in the same small number of poses.
Secondly, you’ll probably want to make these pictures look “even cooler” and use a bit of artistic licence. And this is ok – as long as you remember that you should ONLY change things if it actually improves the picture in some way or another. Of course, if you start using artistic licence, then this will mean that you’re shaping the source picture into something that fits into your sensibilities more – and this will teach you about what YOU personally find to be “cool” or “dramatic”. Not only will the lessons you learn from this improve your original art but they can also help you to refine your own “art style” a bit more too.
Thirdly, a good still from an action movie will be filled with lots of dramatic visual storytelling. Characters will be leaping away from explosions, brandishing guns theatrically, doing martial arts, dodging henchmen, grimacing etc… Although you’ve probably already seen the film and know what is happening, a single well-chosen frame from it will still tell a dramatic story in its own right.
Needless to say, this will teach you how to make your own original art a bit more interesting. Yes, making paintings with lots of guns and explosions in them is often derided as an “immature” or “lazy” way to add drama to a piece of art, but it is a good way to learn the basics of visual storytelling. Yes, more sophisticated examples of visual storytelling will often be non-violent, relying on more subtle things like expressions, background details etc.. to tell a story in a single picture. Still, making practice art based on action movies will show you the basics.
Finally, although it can be a bit of a challenge and there is a risk of messing it up, it is ridiculously rewarding when you get it right. You end up with a spectacular practice picture that not only looks cool, but also shows you what your favourite action movies look like in your “art style” too. Seriously, I cannot overstate the amazing feeling of satisfaction you’ll get when you actually make even a vaguely good practice picture based on part of an action movie.
——————
Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂
Well, I was still feeling uninspired, and I eventually ended up making this quick piece of digital art (using GIMP).
As usual, this painting is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
“Sunset Cove” by C. A. Brown
Well, although I don’t have time to write a “proper” film review, I just have to talk about this movie! It is literally THE most laugh-out-loud “so bad that it’s good” unintentionally hilarious corny zombie movie I have ever seen 🙂
I am, of course, talking about Andrea Bianchi’s 1981 film “Burial Ground” – also known as “The Zombie Dead”. This film is late-night unintentional comedy perfection in so many ways!
I should probably add a SPOILER WARNING here.
Seriously, I love how melodramatic the titles of old zombie movies are. And how they often had more than one title as well. This film is more well-known as “Burial Ground” apparently.
I’ve been going through a bit of a “1980s Italian horror movies” phase recently and, whilst shopping online, I stumbled across a second-hand copy of this film on DVD for about £3 including postage.
It’s the 2002 “Vipco’s Vaults Of Horror” UK DVD edition (with the title “The Zombie Dead”). I remember seeing these Vipco DVDs in the shops all the time when I was a teenager during the early-mid 2000s – back when all of the old 1980s “video nasties” were finally being un-banned and/or allowed to be released without cuts from the censors. And now I’m finally getting round to watching some of them!
The BBFC, in their over-protective zealousness, gave this film an “18 certificate”. I can theoretically understand why – it’s a gory splatter film with gratuitous nudity and some transgressive humour in it too – but this is one of those brilliantly silly and immature films which I would have enjoyed even more if I’d watched it when I was about thirteen or fourteen.
Anyway, onto the film itself. It begins with a bearded archaeologist stumbling across an old Etruscan tomb. He chips away at a plaque on the wall and, as you would expect, it isn’t long before the stone coffins start opening and the zombies start lurching.
Meanwhile, a group of eccentric aristocrats have decided to spend the weekend at a local villa. Of course the villa doesn’t have a telephone, one of them even says that the lack of a phone is very relaxing. There are a couple of couples and a family with a hilariously creepy teenage son. Naturally, it isn’t long before the zombies shamble towards the remote rural villa and brilliantly funny melodrama ensues!
I say! How splendid! Wouldn’t it be absolutely beastly if this weekend was ruined by shambling hordes of the risen dead?
Seriously, this film is just so much FUN. It is the film you picture in your mind when you imagine a “cheesy zombie movie”, but in the very best possible way 🙂
Everything from the gloriously corny English dubbing and ultra-polite dialogue (even in the most horrific situation, the strongest expletive the characters use is “damn” and this is just too funny!), to the genuinely brilliant melodramatic acting that is so wonderfully “over the top” that it instantly alchemises any hint of fear into pantomime comedy.
Seriously, the film often can’t go more than about five minutes without a ridiculously loud theatrical scream from one of the characters. There are also the wonderfully low-budget “Paper mache, offal and stage blood” special effects too.
No, that isn’t a statue, it is a zombie. The “paper mache mask and old artist’s smock” variety of zombie, to be precise. It moves almost as slowly as a statue, but this certainly doesn’t stop the actors from screaming and fleeing in the most gleefully hammy and melodramatic way possible. This is too funny!
Oh my God, and then there are the random “WTF?” moments! The fact that the zombies have somehow evolved the intelligence to use tools… including scythes and battering rams! The “We can set them on fire!” scene! The fact that two of the aristocrats are doing random target practice with a pistol… in a room filled with historical statues… before the zombies show up!
Oh and how could I forget? The ZOMBIE MONKS! This film has zombie monks and I couldn’t stop laughing throughout the whole scene. Then, to cap it all off during the final couple of minutes, there is the “breast-feeding” scene – a moment of transgressive gross-out humour which was so funny that I actually went into a light-headed stupor from laughing so much at it.
Yes, this film has ZOMBIE MONKS in it! I mean, when the characters find a random monastery, you can kind of guess what will be in there… but the sheer predictability of it – combined with the complete “Oh, these friendly monks will help us!” obliviousness of the characters – just make this scene about twice as funny as it already is!
This isn’t a “horror” movie! It is an unintentional comedy film in the very best possible way! And I haven’t had THIS much fun with a zombie movie since I watched Lamberto Bava’s “Demons” (1985) about two or three years ago.
Best of all, this movie made me think of the original 1996 Playstation version of “Resident Evil” in so many ways! Ok, given that this film was released fifteen years before “Resident Evil”, it was either ahead of its time or maybe even an influence on “Resident Evil” (though this is unlikely). Still, it reminded me of this old game a lot. Whether it is the ridiculously “wooden” way that the zombies walk around. Whether it is the contrast between the beautifully opulent mansion and the decaying, lurching zombies.
Whether it is the gloriously… and I mean gloriously… corny dubbing! Seriously, it’s almost “Jill Sandwich” levels of cheesiness at times and it was an absolute JOY to watch 🙂 Seriously, if you played the original PS1 version of “Resident Evil” back in the day, you HAVE to watch THIS film!
“Stop! Don’t open that door!” Ooops! Wrong thing! But, this film from a decade and a half before “Resident Evil” does include some fixed camera angles….
Then there’s also the music too – the film begins with some absolutely amazing chilled out 1980s synthesiser/electric guitar music with is both retro and cool in the best way possible. But even the music ends up being comedic after a while due to the way that the film uses melodramatic “organ trill” type music during virtually every “scary” moment, and this just adds to the unintentional comedy.
All in all, this film is FUN. It is literally THE perfect example of a laugh-out-loud low-budget late-night zombie film and I had eighty-one minutes of pure, solid FUN watching it! It is literally “so bad that it’s good” in the sort of way that ONLY a corny zombie movie from the 1980s can be! This review really doesn’t do it justice. If you want a good laugh, and aren’t prudish or easily-shocked by stage blood and/or offal, then watch it!
If I had to give it a rating out of five, it would get a solid five. It is “so bad that it’s good” 🙂
Although I was still feeling a bit uninspired, I tried to make a digitally-edited cyberpunk painting. Alas, it didn’t turn out as well as I’d hoped though.
As usual, this painting is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
“Corridor Window” by C. A. Brown
Well, I want to talk about why the art medium that you use matters. And, yes, I’ll be talking about whole mediums – types of art supplies – rather than specific brands today. Because, whilst there might be some subtle differences in quality, consistency etc… between different brands, it is the actual type of art supply itself that matters the most.
But why? Simply put, different mediums are best for different types of art. A ballpoint pen or a fine-liner pen is brilliant for small fine details. A graphite pencil is better for subtle graduated shading (although you can sort of do this with ballpoint too). Oil paints are best for large dramatic canvases and/or for creating the impression of realistic detail. Watercolours are traditionally best for thin, transparent washes. Marker pens and/or gouache are best for bold dramatic opaque colours. I could go on for a while.
Whilst there are artists who are skilled in lots of different mediums, some artists will just focus on one. Personally, I’m somewhere in the middle and usually use a mixture of about three or four different mediums (eg: graphite/ink, watercolour pencil and digital). And, to show you the effect that this – along with my own “style”/sensibilities – has on my art, I’m going to make a small study of an old oil painting from the 1930s by Signe Munch Siebke. Here’s the painting I’ll be copying:
“Model In Red Skirt” (1933) by Signe Munch Siebke. Image via Wikimedia Commons
I chose this painting mostly because the model’s outfit reminded me of the historical costumes in a fun modern horror movie called “The Banishing” (2020) which I watched a couple of years ago. It was also good practice with drawing poses as well.
Anyway, I made my study in a small A6 watercolour sketchbook that I usually use for fan art. I started by making a sketch with a light 4H-grade graphite pencil before adding ink using a 0.2mm waterproof ink fine-liner pen and then erasing the pencil lines. As you can see, I’ve already had to add more detail – such as in the model’s eyes – because this medium doesn’t really “do” the sort of impressionistic brush-strokes used in the original oil painting. I also apologise in advance for misspelling Siebke’s surname in the attribution I wrote on the painting (don’t know how I made this mistake, but sorry).
Here’s the initial pencil/fine-liner sketch, with the materials used beside it. And I apologise again about the spelling error too. Still, at least it’s good old fashioned human error rather than modern artificial “intelligence”…
After this, I wanted to add some colour. Despite what I mentioned about gouache or marker pens being best for bold opaque colours, I don’t own either of these mediums. Not only that, I also want a bit more precision than they can offer. So, instead, I used watercolour pencils in a particular way.
I used a lot of heavy pressure when adding pigment to the page, then I used a waterbrush with a small amount of water on it to “activate” the paint in a fairly concentrated way. It doesn’t look as bold as markers or gouache, but it looks bolder than “traditional” watercolour and I can make it look bolder a bit later with other tools as well. And, yes, until I started this sketchbook, I often just used a limited palette of a few colours – but my range of pencils (everything from low-end student grade pencils to fancier name-brand ones) has increased a bit.
Adding barely-diluted watercolour paint using a waterbrush and a large selection of watercolour pencils (from five different brands). Even so, the picture still looks a bit “faded”. So, let’s move on to…
Finally, I scanned the painting and then edited it using digital tools. Whilst I also used a couple of old programs (eg: “Jasc Paint Shop Pro 6” and an old version of MS Paint) for small elements, the bulk of the digital editing I did was with a free open-source program called “GIMP” (GNU Image Manipulation Program).
With this free program, I really went to town on the painting. I boosted the colour saturation, I increased the “black level”, I used “selective gaussian blur” effects to smooth the picture out a bit, I adjusted the colours, I added extra shading using airbrushes.
Editing the scanned painting using version 2.10.30 of GIMP. In this screenshot, relatively early into the process, I had selected the model’s sweater and was using a low-opacity black airbrush to add extra shading to the edges of the sleeve.
Whilst editing, I also let more of my own style and sensibilities show through. Whilst Siebke went for a more muted palette in his painting, presumably to make it look more realistic, I prefer to use dramatic visual contrast and bolder lighting (mostly inspired by old movies like “Blade Runner”, “Suspiria” etc…).
I also usually like to separate the foreground and background too. So, during the later parts of editing the painting, I used a lot more artistic licence – such as adding a faint blue “halo” around one side of the model and stuff like that. And here’s the finished semi-digital painting:
Here’s my semi-digital study of Signe Munch Siebke’s “Model In Red Skirt” (1933).
Now compare this to the original oil painting at the beginning of the article and you’ll see how much difference the art medium can make. Yes, I added some of my personal “style” to this painting but, even without that, things like the level of detail and the general “texture” of my painting are different from the original because I was using different art mediums and had to play to their strengths. So, yes, your choice of art medium matters more than you might think.
—————-
Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂
Although I wasn’t feeling as inspired as I’d hoped, this piece of digital art (made using GIMP and an old version of MS Paint) turned out way better than I expected 🙂
As usual, this picture is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
“Galaxy Hills” by C. A. Brown
is released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence.
Well, I was still in the mood for writing about art and I thought that I’d talk very briefly about one of the things that the dreaded A.I. image generators absolutely cannot do. This was something I ended up thinking about whilst preparing the ninth semi-digital painting in an art series I plan to post here in July 2024.
The series is themed around an imaginary videogame convention in 1998 – not one of the famous ones, like E3 in California, but one in a convention centre on a rainy day in a large British city (probably Birmingham, London or Manchester).
I didn’t even pretend to be realistic with it, instead basing it mostly on stylised childhood nostalgia about “cool Britannia” and old videogame magazines, on a Playstation 2-themed exhibition I went to in London in about 2002/3, on the “world” of the classic TV show “Bits” and stuff like that. It’s very much a “fun project” which happened after my imagination went wild after painting a practice study of an old videogame awards show photo from 2001 that I found on the internet ages ago.
Anyway, I was making the ninth painting in the series – showing the entrance hall of the convention centre – and I realised that it didn’t really look as interesting as I’d imagined. Yes, I added a goofy expression to a man staring at a flip phone and tried to add visual drama via contrast (eg: a warm saturated foreground contrasted with a cold desaturated background etc...), but it still felt like it was lacking personality.
So, I added both a nostalgic reference and a joke to it. On one side of the picture, I added a poster which both referenced CVG Magazine and also included a sarcastic joke about how the Sega Saturn seemed to the least popular “major” games console in 1998. Here’s a preview of this part of the painting:
This is a detail from a semi-digital painting that I’ll be posting here in full in July 2024. Note the sarcastic poster: “Sega Saturn Showcase (Utility Room)” on the left-hand side.
Anyway, I mention this because – at the time of writing in early May 2023 at least – I suddenly realised that A.I. image generators can’t do stuff like this. Not only does any text that appears in current A.I. images usually look like incomprehensible scrawlings but, even if it could form readable letters, A.I. can’t really do intentional humour at the moment.
Yes, A.I. can certainly do unintentional humour, but deliberate intentional humour still requires the human mind. Yes, ChatGPT – a glorified “predictive text” type program, trained on parts of the internet – might be able to create the illusion of humour (by cribbing from comedy written on the internet) but it has no real understanding of things like irony, understatement, sarcasm etc… All of the main components of funny humour require human experience, human emotions and a human mind to create.
Image generators not only don’t have text functionality (at the time of writing in May 2023) but, even just sticking to visual humour, A.I. would probably struggle too. Yes, someone could write a comedic prompt but that would still involve a human mind and whoever wrote the prompt wouldn’t have that much control over the subtle details.
So, as well as hands and readable text, we can probably – at the moment – add “intentional humour” to the list of things that human artists can still do better than A.I. programs can.
—————-
Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂
PekoeBlaze - the official blog 
