#this is an illustration of that interpretation of those paintings | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

borninwinter81 · 4 months

Text

William Blake - an introduction for Good Omens fans

I have sent @neil-gaiman an ask regarding his feelings toward the poet/artist William Blake a couple of times, but no doubt due to the size of the poor man's inbox I haven't received a response. So I did a Google search to see if he's spoken about Blake before, and it did indeed come up with a fair few hits. I think you might enjoy seeing this Twitter post if you haven't already, the painting is from William Blake's illustrations to Paradise Lost.

It's not surprising that an author like Neil Gaiman might have an interest in Blake. A visionary from a young age, his imagination was such that he was surrounded by angels made visible in his mind's eye, and he interpreted these visions through poetry, painting and engraving, and self-printed and published many of his own works. This gave him complete freedom to say exactly what he wanted.

Though he had a passionate faith in God, he also had a deep distrust of the church as an institution, and disliked the use of religion as a means of control. This poem from "Songs of Experience" perhaps summarises his feelings best:

"I went to the Garden of Love,

And saw what I never had seen:

A Chapel was built in the midst,

Where I used to play on the green.

And the gates of this Chapel were shut,

And 'Thou shalt not' writ over the door;

So I turn'd to the Garden of Love,

That so many sweet flowers bore.

And I saw it was filled with graves,

And tomb-stones where flowers should be:

And Priests in black gowns, were walking their rounds,

And binding with briars, my joys & desires."

In his poetry there is often an incongruity with the generally accepted religious ideas of what is good and evil, Angel and Demon. In The Marriage of Heaven and Hell (there's a title that should make any GO fan sit up and pay attention) he tells us that "in the book of Job, Milton's Messiah is called Satan", signifying that he feels it is Lucifer/the devil who is the true Messiah of Paradise Lost.

He gives us The Voice of the Devil and Proverbs of Hell, and has Angels being transformed into Demons through enlightenment. He tells us that Jesus broke all of the 10 commandments, yet was still virtuous because he acted according to his own morality rather than rules.

The god-figure of his later works, Urizen, generally comes across as malevolent, seeking to bind and control, whilst Los, the Satan/Messiah figure represents freedom, imagination and creativity.

"Restraining desire" and acting contrary to your own nature seem to be the only real evils for Blake.

He expressed his faith through a love of the world and the beauty in it, summed up in this quote:

"When the Sun rises do you not see a round Disk of fire somewhat like a Guinea? O no no I see an innumerable company of the Heavenly host crying Holy Holy Holy is the Lord God Almighty".

He saw "God" in everything, in all the wonders we have around us, and considered writers/poets and religious prophets as essentially the same, since they both have a connection to the divine, and express it through stories.

It's quite ironic that probably his most famous poem, Jerusalem (the one that starts "and did those feet in ancient times walk upon England's mountains green"), was made into a very popular church hymn, yet it is supposed to be satirical in nature. The poem recounts the myth that Jesus may have visited England in his boyhood, and Blake is expressing his disbelief at that notion and the unworthiness of England.

Did I have a point to all this? Mostly to show my hand as a massive Blake nerd, but also to hopefully demonstrate that there's a lot of common ground between his ideas and those expressed in a show/book like Good Omens, and hopefully to inspire some of you who may not be familiar with Blake to seek him out. In particular I'd recommend The Marriage of Heaven and Hell to any and all.

EDIT: I should have thought to include this, here's Michael Sheen reading a Blake poem. I have the CD this is from, he reads several by Blake, as well as other poets I love ❤️ 😍

youtube

#william blake #good omens #good omens book #good omens 2 #good omens s3 #neil gaiman #crowley #aziraphale #english literature #literature #poetry #go2 #good omens s2 #good omens season 2 #book omens #michael sheen #Youtube

1K notes · View notes

k-hippie · 2 months

Text

NEW ABSTRACT MONOCHROME ARTWORKS & PAINTINGS

So ... to complete our Artwork section, something we wanted to do for a long long time, say hello to some new monochromatic art :)

- 2 sets ( of 11 each ) of square-abstrakt-artworks - 2 sets ( of 11 each ) of vertical-artwork-impasto - 1 set ( x11 ) of square-vintage-astrogeo illustrations ... and to finish, a second set of 11 Fantastic Beasts related artworks

Abstract Art can bring a unique and dynamic energy to any space, making it an excellent addition to a home's déco ! and Vintage ? well, how to resist to timeless things and stuff ? ;)

Abstract Art often eschews realistic representation in favor of expressing emotions, ideas, and concepts through form, color, and composition. This allows viewers to interpret the artwork in their own way, sparking curiosity, contemplation, and introspection :D

Abstract Artworks can serve as captivating focal points in a room, drawing the eye and anchoring the space. Whether displayed prominently above a fireplace, on a feature wall, or in a gallery-style arrangement, abstract art adds visual interest and dynamism to any interior ...

Overall, incorporating Abstract Art into your home not only enhances the aesthetic appeal of your space but also enriches your daily life by stimulating creativity and inspiring contemplation ... The addition of artworks can transform your home into a sanctuary of beauty ;)

More pictures on our website / download pages :)

And now the Vintage ...

All about Astronomy and Geography :D 2 subjects I'm in love with ;)

The 2nd set of Fantastic Beasts Artworks come from forgotten but re-found pictures we had for a long time in the deep guts of our Hard Drives :D And indeed the most beautiful posters of the movies : the Chinese illustrations made in 2018 for the Crimes of Grindenwald ...

We added some other posters too ;) And those 11 Artworks completes the first set of 7 posters we released in November 2016 :)

Next week, we should have finished our update of our old artworks ( Malevitch, Magritte, and few other things & stuff )

We are currently working on some kitchen stuff ( counters and islands ) ... stay tuned ;)

xoxo

These objects don't override anything, work fine in-game, and are new meshes 🙂

Send caffeine please: ko-fi // paypal

Made with Sims4Studio and S4PE Date of Release: February 16th, 2024 Expansions: Base Game Category : Buy > Decoration > Paintings / Sculptures Price: 400§

download square abstract impasto here

download vertical abstract impasto here

download square vintage astro & geography here

download fantastic beasts and where to find them here have fun :)

#sims 4 #sims 4 custom content #sims 4 download #sims 4 wysiwyg #sims 4 cc #sims 4 buy #ts4 #the sims 4 #k-hippie artworks #sims 4 artwork #sims4 paintings #abstract #art abstrait #abstraktekunst

115 notes · View notes

iwtvfanevents · 1 month

Text

Rewind the Tape —Episode 1

Art of the episode

During our rewatch, we took note of the art shown and mentioned in the pilot, and we wanted to share. Did we miss any? Do you have any thoughts about how these references could be interpreted? How do you think Armand and Louis go about picking the art for their penthouse in Dubai?

The Fall of the Rebel Angels

Peter Bruegel the Elder, 1562

This painting is featured in the Interview with the Vampire book, and it was important enough to be included in the draft pilot script!

Bruegel the Elder was among the most significant Dutch and Flemish Renaissance artists. He was a painter and print-maker, known for his landscapes and peasant scenes.

Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion

Francis Bacon, 1944

Bacon was an Irish figurative painter, known for his raw, unsettling imagery and a number of triptychs and diptychs among his work. At a time when being gay was a criminal offense, Bacon was open about his sexuality, and was cast out by his family at 16 for this reason. He destroyed many of his early works, but about 590 still survive. The Tate, where these paintings are displayed, says this about the work: "Francis Bacon titled this work after the figures often featured in Christian paintings witnessing the death of Jesus. But he said the creatures represented the avenging Furies from Greek mythology. The Furies punish those who go against the natural order. In Aeschylus’s tragedy The Eumenides, for example, they pursue a man who has murdered his mother. Bacon first exhibited this painting in April 1945, towards the end of the Second World War. For some, it reflects the horror of the war and the Holocaust in a world lacking guiding principles."

Strawberries and Cream

Raphaelle Peale, 1816

Peale is considered to have been the first professional American painter of still-life. [Identified by @diasdelfuego.]

Outfits inspired by J.C. Leyendecker

Leyendecker was one of the most prominent and commercially successful freelance artists in the U.S. He studied in France, and was a pioneer of the Art Deco illustration. Leyendecker's model, Charles Beach, was also his lover of five decades. You can read costume designer Carol Cutshall's thoughts on these outfits on her Instagram.

Iolanta

Pyotr Tchaikovsky, 1892

The opera Louis and Lestat go to was composed by Tchaikovsky, another gay artist. The play tells a story "in which love prevails, light shines for all, lies are no longer necessary and no one must fear punishment," as put by Susanne Stähr for the Berliner Philharmoniker.

On the Hunt or Captain Percy Williams On A Favorite Irish Hunter

Samuel Sidney, 1881

The unidentified painting on the right might be from the same hunting series, though we couldn't identify the exact one. There's also a taxidermy deer, ram, and piebald deer on the wall. [Identified by @vfevermillion.]

The Artist's Sister, Melanie

Egon Schiele, 1908

Schiele was an Austrian expressionist painter and protege of Gustav Klimt. Many of his portraits (self portraits and of others) were described as grotesque and disturbing. [Identified by @dwreader.]

A Stag at Sharkey's

George Wesley Bellows, 1909

Bellows was an American realist painter, known for his bold depictions of urban life in New York City. [Identified by @vfevermillion.]

Mildred-O Hat

Robert Henri, undated (likely 1890s)

Henri was an American painter who studied in Paris, where he learned from the Impressionists and determined to lead an even more dramatic revolt against American academic art. [Identified by @nicodelenfent, here.]

Starry night

Edvard Munch, 1893

Munch was a Norwegian painter, one of the best known figures of late 19th-century Symbolism and a great influence in German Expressionism in the early 20th century. His work dealt with psychological themes, and he personally struggled with mental illness. [Identified by @vfevermillion.]

If you spot or put a name to any other references, let us know if you'd like us to add them with credit to the post!

Starting tonight, we will be rewatching and discussing Episode 2, ...After the Phantoms of Your Former Self. We hope to see you there!

And, if you're just getting caught up, learn all about our group rewatch here ►

#louis de pointe du lac #daniel molloy #lestat de lioncourt #vampterview #interview with the vampire #iwtv #amc interview with the vampire #interview with the vampire amc #amc iwtv #iwtv amc #IWTVfanevents #rewind the tape #in throes of increasing wonder #analysis and meta #art of the episode

65 notes · View notes

jeannereames · 3 months

Note

Shows or movies based on historic figures and events are hard to pull off if the goals are to be both entertaining and somewhat true to history. If we accept that some inaccuracies can't be avoided in order to appeal to audiences what would you consider cornerstones and pillars about Alexander and his history that can't/shouldn't be touched in order to paint a somewhat realistic picture in media based on him and his life?

I saved this to answer around the time of the Netflix release. For me, there are four crucial areas, so I’ll break it down that way. Also. I recognize that the LENGTH of a production has somewhat to do with what can be covered.

But, first of all…what story is one telling? The story arc determines where the focus lies. Even documentaries have a story. It’s what provides coherence. Is it a political tale? A military one? Or personal? Also, what interpretation to take, not only for Alexander but those around him. Alexander is hugely controversial. It’s impossible to make everyone happy. So don't try. Pick an audience; aim for that audience.

MILITARY:

Alexander had preternatural tactical skills. His strategy wasn’t as good, however, especially when younger. Tactics can be a genius gift (seeing patterns), but strategy requires experience and knowledge of the opposition. The further into his campaign, the more experience he gained, but the cultures became increasingly unfamiliar. He had ups and downs. He was able to get out of Baktria finally by marrying Roxana. That was strategy, not tactics. He beat Poros, then made a friend of him; that’s strategy. Yet he failed to understand the depth of the commitment to freedom among the autonomous tribes south along the Indus, which resulted in a bloody trek south. And his earlier decision to burn Persepolis meant he’d never fully reconcile the Persian elite.

So, it’s super important to emphasize his crazy-mad tactical gifts in all forms of combat, from pitched battles to skirmishes to sieges. Nobody in history ever equaled him except maybe Subatai, Genghis Khan’s leading general. In the end, I think that’s a lot of Alexander’s eternal fascination. He fought somewhere north of 250 battles, and lost none (where he was physically present).

But HOW to show that? What battles to put on screen? Oliver Stone combined three into one + Hydaspes because he had only 2-3.5 hours (depending on which cut you watch). The Netflix series is going to show all four of the major pitched battles…or at least all 3 for the 6-episode first part. They had circa 4.5 hours to play with, but they cut out other things, like Tyre.

Another issue, from the filming/storytelling point-of-view is how to distinguish Issos from Gaugamela for the casual viewer. They’re virtually identical in tactics (and players on the field). So it made a fair bit of sense to me for Stone to conflate them. In a documentary, it’s more important to separate them, largely to discuss the fall-out.

Some v. important clashes weren’t the Big Four. Among these, the sieges of Halikarnassos and Tyre are probably the most impressive. But the Aornos Rock in India was another amazing piece. I’d also include the bridging of the Indus River to illustrate the astonishing engineering employed. Again, if I had to pick between Halikarnassos and Tyre, I’d pick Tyre. I was a bit baffled by Netflix’s decision to show Halikarnassos instead, but I think it owed to an early error in the scripts, where they had Memnon die there. I corrected that, but they’d already mapped out the beats of the episodes, so they just kept Halikarnassos. That’s fine; it was a major operation, just not his most famous siege.

Last, I really wish somebody, someday, will do something with his Balkan campaigns. What he did in Thrace and Illyria, at just 21, showed his iron backbone and quick thinking. It’d make a great “and the military genius is born” set-up, drama wise. But you could use the Sogdian Rock to show the clever streak, at least (“Find men who can fly” … “I did; look up.” Ha) Plus it has the advantage of being where he (maybe) found Roxana.

Last, he fought extremely well--wasn't just good at tactics. Being a good general doesn’t necessarily mean one’s a good fighter. He was. Almost frighteningly brave, so show that too.

RELIGIOUS:

Ya gotta deal with the “Did he really think he was a god?” thing, and the whole trip to Siwah. I obviously don’t think he believed he was a god; it’s one of the things I disliked about the Netflix show’s approach, but they were dead-set on it. I DO think he came to believe he was somehow of divine descent, but of course, that’s not the same as most moderns understand it, as I’ve explained elsewhere. It made him a hero, not a god on a level with Zeus, and to ME, that’s an important distinction that Netflix (and to some degree Stone) rode roughshod over.

But I’d like to see more inclusion of sacrifice and/or omen-reading—religion in general. Cutting the Gordion Knot (omens!). His visit to Troy (Netflix tackled that one). A really cool thing would be to make more of the lunar eclipse before Gaugamela. Again, Netflix touched on that, but it’s one of those chance events that might actually have affected a battle’s outcome, given how seriously the ancient near east took sky omens. (A solar eclipse once halted a battle.) The Persians were freaked out. Even his massacre of the Branchidai in Sogdiana was driven by religion, not military goals. Pick a couple and underscore them.

I give Stone big props for the sacrifice before the Granikos/Issos/Gaugamela battle. It was so well-done, I’ve actually shown it in my classes to demonstrate what a battlefield sphagia sacrifice would look like.

Alexander was deeply religious. Show it.

POLITICAL:

Ah, for ME the most interesting stuff surrounding Alexander occurs at the political level. Here’s where the triumph story of his military victories all went south. He knew how to win battles. He was less good at managing what he’d conquered.

In terms of a story arc, the whole period up to Gaugamela is really the “rise” of the story. Post-Gaugamela, things began to collapse. And I would pin the turn on PERSEPOLIS. Yes, burning it sent home a message of “Mission accomplished.” But he was selective about it. Areas built by Darius I were spared, Xerxes’ were destroyed: a damnio memoriae.

Problem: Persepolis embodied Persia, and ATG essentially shat on it. Not a good look for the man who wanted to replace Darius III. That he also failed to capture and/or kill Darius created an additional problem for him. Finally, his lack of understanding of how politics worked in Baktria-Sogdiana resulted in an insurgency. Bessos was going to rebel, regardless. But Spitamanes might not have. Alexander created his own mess up there.

Another matter to look at is why he created a new title—King of Asia—instead of adopting the Persian title (King-of-Kings). I don’t think that was a “mistake.” He knew perfectly well the proper Persian title (Kshāyathiya)…and rejected it. He adopted some Persian protocol, but not all of it. After the summer of 330, he was essentially running two parallel courts, which seemed to satisfy neither the Persians nor his own men. (Kinda like docudramas are a hybrid that seems to annoy perhaps more than satisfy.)

So I’d like to see this handled with some nuance, but it’s intrinsically difficult to do—even while, if done well, it would be the most interesting part of an Alexander story, imo.

So, what events, what events…3-4 leap out after Alexander’s adoption of some Persian dress. The Philotas Affair, the Pages Conspiracy, the Death of Kleitos, the marriage to Roxana. I’d show it all, although I could also understand reducing the two conspiracies to one, for time, in which case, the Philotas Affair because it resulted in the fall of Parmenion. But the fact there were two, not just one, tells a story itself.

What about the proskynesis thing with Kallisthenes? I’ve come to disbelieve it ever happened, even though it’s symbolic of the whole problem. So, weirdly, I’m of two minds about showing it. OTOH, it won’t be in my own novels. But OTOH, I could easily see why a showrunner or director might want to include it. And it certainly appears in several of the histories, including Arrian.

Then we have the two indisciplines (mutinies)…one in India that made ATG turn around, and another at Opis. They’re really two different things as one was an officer’s rebellion, the other the soldiers themselves. But will viewers be able to distinguish between them? It’s like the Issos/Gaugamela problem, or for that matter, the two conspiracies. They’re similar enough to confuse the casual viewer. “Didn’t we already see that?”

But if they were narrowed to one, how to choose? The mutiny on the Hyphasis provides an explanation for why he turned back. But the Opis event was more dramatic. The man jumped down into the middle of a rioting crowd and started (essentially) knocking heads together! So if I had to pick…Opis. The other might could be mentioned in retrospect.

PERSONAL:

Here are five things I think really OUGHT to be shown, or that I have yet to be pleased by.

1) Philip isn’t an idiot and should get more than 10 minutes of screentime. Oh, and show Alexander did learn things from him. Stone had to make his movie a Daddy-Issues flick, and the Netflix thing did very little with Philip as they wanted to get to the Alexander-Darius face off (which was the meat of their story). But there’s a very interesting love/competition story there.

2) Olympias is not a bitch and was not involved in Phil’s murder, although I can see why that is catnip to most writers. She did kill Eurydike’s baby and (by extension) Eurydike. One of the historians in the Netflix story (Carolyn, unless I misremember) talked about the rivalry between the two wives, at least. But I think ATG planned to marry the widow and Olympias got rid of her to prevent it. Now THAT’S a story, no? But they were in too much of a hurry to get to Persia.

3) Alexander was not an only child! He had sisters (and a brother) with whom he was apparently close…and a cousin who was his real rival. To me, missing that cousin rivalry overlooks a juicy personal/political story! Too often all the focus winds up on Alexander-Olympias-Philip-Eurydike-Attalos, but man, a more subtle showrunner could do a lot with the Alexander-Amyntas rivalry. But he’s constantly cut out. I can’t think of a documentary that actually addresses Amyntas except in passing (if at all)l

4) Hephaistion’s importance is a must, but I’d like to see him treated as someone with a personality and authority of his own, besides just as ATG’s lover. At least Netflix Went There onscreen with the love-story part, but otherwise, the writers couldn’t figure out what to do with him. Neither Stone nor Netflix really portrayed him as his own person. I do understand why they can’t show the whole cast of characters. I had to do weeding myself in the novels, but I’m annoyed Netflix showed only Hephaistion and Ptolemy. Where’s Perdikkas (so important all along really, but certainly later)? Or Philotas, Kleitos, Krateros, Leonnatos, Lysimachos (later king of Thrace)? I think viewers could probably have handled at least another 5 people, especially if introduced gradually, not all at the beginning.

This brings me to….

5) Alexander’s apparently very real affection for the people in his orbit, from personal physician (Philip) to childhood pedagogue (Lysimachos [not same as above]) to Aristotle to various other philosophers. He was so loyal to his friends, in fact, he initially jailed the people who brought word of Harpalos’ first flight.

He needed to be loved/appreciated and wanted to give back to people. Yes, generosity was expected of kings, and as a king (THE king), his generosity had to excel that of anybody else. But he seemed to genuinely enjoy giving presents. I think of him like that one friend who heard you say you liked that cute pair of “Hello, Kitty” socks…then 6 months later they’re your Christmas present from them. Some of his gifts were grandiose, but not always. I love the dish of little fish (probably smelts) that he sent to Hephaistion, presumably just because his friend liked smelts!

To me, point #5 would be easy to get in with a skilled scriptwriter, tucked into the corners of other scenes. It’d be fun to highlight the personal side. If we can believe Plutarch, he was a PRODIGIOUS letter-writer. Also, he loved to hunt, so that’s another thing. And he loved the theatre, and to watch sport. These would all be very humanizing details.

I think the biggest issue is that most of these documentaries/docudramas are done by people who don’t know squat about Alexander aside from a few things, before deciding to make a documentary/movie about him, or write a book. Their research is shallow, and even if they bring on the experts, they don’t always listen. Stone DID at least have a long fascination with ATG, but it caused him to try to throw in everything but the kitchen sink. It wasn't as bad of a film as some have made it out to be, just horribly bloated and for all his reading, he never understood the WORLDVIEW. I wrote about that some while back in my review.

The best documentary/movie would be told by an actual specialist who knew enough at the outset to craft a better, more complex story arc.

Or maybe I’m just biased because I tried to do that myself in my novels. 😂😂😂😂

#asks #alexander the great #oliver stone alexander the great #netflix alexander the great #telling the story of alexander the great is intrinsically difficult #docudramas #historical movies #historical documentaries

89 notes · View notes

nightcrawlerzincorporated · 9 months

Text

All of Charlie’s art in Dee Made a Smut film has always fascinated me. But today I want to focuses on a couple that really stood out to me and why I think they help teach the message of the episode.

This painting shows a woman with dirty blonde hair and a halo ripping out a man’s heart while he’s wearing The Boy footie pajamas from Nightman. I think when Charlie painted this, he intended it to be him and the Waitress—she ripped his heart out when she rejected him after his play but he still sees her as an angel.

But doesn’t it also kind of look like Dee and Dennis? Especially with the messy makeup on the woman, the way the man’s face looks like it can have facial hair or be clean shaven depending on how you look at it. In this scene where the painting is shown, Dee is confronting Dennis with his trauma, showing everyone his bloody ripped out heart and acting like she’s doing him a kindness (killing him while seeing herself as an angel). Also super interesting in hindsight when you consider that in DTAMHD Dennis fantasizes about eating a bloody heart to sooth himself, taking the trauma back into his own body in a sense.

Let’s look at some more.

A painting of dogs barking (at a human shape maybe? Hard to tell) and a rat covered in blood. To Charlie, I again think these are pretty straightforwardly about his life—he was illustrating Cricket’s dog orgy and the rats he bashes at Paddy’s.

But in the scene they’re framing Dennis, who is in the middle of trying to make excuses for the CSA he suffered. He’s trapped like a rat who’s being bashed, he wants to scream and howl like those dogs but he can’t. And the dog orgy is literally Cricket being assaulted by dogs and then playing it off casually so that’s also a pretty obvious parallel.

In this scene Dennis also explains that he thinks good art is just whatever the “right” people say is good art. Because he’s never been able to connect with his feelings due to his trauma, Dennis has always had a hard time connecting with art on a personal level (in sharp contrast to Frank, who sees himself in art depicting WWII so deeply he has an out of body experience). Like most things in life, Dennis only sees art for its social and commercial value, not as a way to feel connection. That’s why he’s so dismissive of all art that isn’t porn, because porn at least has an obvious tangible use. But even then, even then, when he tries to make “artistic” porn, his mind immediately (subconsciously) tries to express his trauma, using art to express his deepest wounds in a way he isn’t even aware of. And I think Dee sees that and tries to help him through her own interpretation of his art, continuing the metaphorical conversation he started, but she’s also petty, and bitter about him mocking her art at the beginning of the episode, so she does it in a way that’s vicious and public. Art can hurt you, make you think about things you don’t want to, and Dennis hates that. He doesn’t see the emotional connection he could make with Charlie’s art or Dee’s or even his own because he won’t let himself.

#also the macden apartment being decorated with toys because that’s the artistic medium Dennis connects to most #tw csa mention #dee made a smut film #iasip #dennis reynolds #meta #⭐️#I need to build a real tagging system already jfc

167 notes · View notes

basiatlu · 5 months

Text

On Theft in Art

First: thank you to the anon here and the other many people who brought this to my attention! I know you did it out of support of me and I love you for it.

I was ready to keep it private as I didn’t want anything negative to come up and be associated with my art. But as I was asked across different platforms concerning the art in question I realized it really bummed me out. I’m here to have a good time in the fandom and create with you all. We have a good thing here in the community and I didn’t want any smoke with another artist - a mutual even.

So to help me feel a little better about it I want to turn this into an opportunity to teach others on the differences between Reference, Inspiration, Reinterpretation, and Theft

Reference: (usually) a visual source of information in order to better understand something. Example here is of my reference board and the art I am currently working on.

My favorite example of a professional using reference photos is by Hirohiko Araki (creator and artist of JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure), who uses fashion editorials and photoshoots ALL the time it’s awesome - tysm @yumiaiyuma for showing me this goldmine

Study and Inspiration: here is a great example from the wonderful Stephanie Pepper. Notice the caption stating these are studies, the movie it is from, and I will even go on to say that this artist is influenced or inspired by the prolific works of J. C. Leyendecker (but what’s key is that Stephanie Pepper has developed and practiced to the point of deviating from his work and become a style of art completely her own - and she’s so recognizable in my opinion!)

Personal Example for Inspiration:

An Example of Reinterpretation: note - Both these classical artists whose works are being recycled are dead and no longer missing out on potential work and income. Where stealing ideas and art from current artists hurts them financially and mentally and emotionally. Howl as The Fallen Angel by _mimimaru on Instagram is an interpretation of a 1847 painting by Alexandre Cabanel and is now considered public domain // the Mickey Mouse self portrait was by Charles Boyer and is a parody of the famous illustration by Norman Rockwell and was commissioned by Walt Disney, himself.

Now here’s the part that is concerning to several people, myself included.

Recently, an artist found the reference I used, and decided to draw Andromeda, Bellatrix, Narcissa, and Regulus staring at Sirius getting supposedly punished by Walburga Black off screen.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t a matter of tracing or claiming my image as their own. I do not mind at all if myself and another artist end up using the same reference. It happens all the time. Referencing and studying is not stealing. Reinterpretation is great for meme art challenges and paying respect to old classics. Even being inspired and doing one’s own version of another artist’s idea is totally cool, especially if you tag and/or shoutout the artist that inspired you.

I genuinely love and appreciate everyone who has brought this to my attention and who has been supportive and defensive of me with this. That reaction means more to me than anything else in this whole ordeal, if I’m being honest. So thank you all so much, with all my heart.

In closing: Do I hope this is all one gigantic coincidence? Absolutely. It’s one of those very uncool things that hurts my heart as an artist. I just want everyone to enjoy art and inspire each other so we can all grow. I do not want any malice to come from this either. I just wanted to inform everyone that I am aware of this, and give some of my thoughts on it. I also wanted to use this as a way to educate everyone on artistic process and why these things might happen sometimes.

Edit: me and the artist have chatted and we see it as a silly coincidence ♡ and honestly I'm happy and so relieved with that. But I think a lot of this info is still good to be mindful of in a creative community where we circulate ideas and content regularly.

#shushbosh #ugly business sorry #I’m happy to talk with anyone on this of course #art thoughts

139 notes · View notes

cypressure · 26 days

Note

Have you got any recommendations for dinosaur nonfiction books?

Your art makes me so happy 🥺

hey thank you, i appreciate your saying so (and also giving me the opportunity to talk about dinosaur books)! under the cut for length--

starting off with an overview before getting down to specific topics, my first recommendation is Dinosaurs: How They Lived and Evolved by Darren Naish & Paul Barrett. this was first published in 2017, but the third edition was just released with plenty of updates to reflect new discoveries and hypotheses. it's very thorough and accessible, and takes you through all the major clades of dinosaurs and everything we know about their evolution and ecology. this is definitely the best starting point for getting up-to-date with dinosaur science.

the end-Cretaceous extinction has been getting lots of popular attention lately (thanks to DePalma and the Tanis site I suspect), so if you'd like to learn more on this subject, I love The Last Day of the Dinosaurs by Riley Black, also from 2022. this is the scariest dinosaur book i've ever read--she paints an incredibly vivid and horrifying picture of the aftermath of the meteor impact, and of how the animals which survived the event managed to live on.

if you want to read about how exactly we know all these things about dinosaurs, I just recently picked up Dave Hone's How Fast Did T. rex Run? (titled The Future of Dinosaurs in the UK i think), published in 2022. he delves into what we know from the fossil record and how paleontologists work to figure these things out, as well as what we don't know yet and what we probably will never know, and the difference between those two. i suggest it for learning about paleontology as a scientific process, and it's a very interesting read.

so far, all of these books have been about dinosaurs as a whole; if you are looking for popular publications about specific groups, there are not as many options unfortunately (for some reason there isn't a huge audience for 200-page books about obscure thyreophorans. sighs disappointedly). most of what we get is about the large, more familiar clades; you will see books on tyrannosaurs, and there's a few field guide-style books about Mesozoic birds (which tend to be very beautifully illustrated but kind of technical; see below for titles). my pick for clade-specific books is The Sauropod Dinosaurs: Life in the Age of Giants, by Mark Hallett and Matthew Wedel, from 2016. this one goes into serious detail about every conceivable aspect of sauropod paleobiology, which as you can imagine is a huge and fascinating topic, and all the artwork is gorgeous. caveat: it being 8 years old means there's some science in there which will be outdated by now, but as far as i can remember it's still worth checking out.

and finally, as a paleoartist, i have to mention paleoart books! if you're interested in the science behind the choices paleoartists make when reconstructing extinct animals, especially for your own practice, i cannot recommend enough Mark Witton's The Paleoartist's Handbook, from 2018. he thoroughly explains how to interpret fossil evidence and paleontological research from an artist's perspective, and covers about everything from soft tissues to composing a scene. this is one of less than a handful of books on this particular topic, and it's definitely the most in-depth.

with any scientific subject you have to be careful with older books; this is especially true with paleontology since the discipline has accelerated so much over the past few decades and shows no signs of slowing down. i would even hesitate to recommend anything published more than 10 years ago, since new discoveries and technology have made so many questions and hypotheses moot (and in turn created new and more interesting ones)! the only exception to this is a recommendation for historical significance: Robert Bakker's 1986 The Dinosaur Heresies is essential to understanding what modern paleontologists call the Dinosaur Renaissance, or how our perception of dinosaurs changed from lizardlike evolutionary dead-ends into the active, successful bird ancestors we see in reconstructions now. this book kickstarted that change, and it's easy to see how: it's a very engaging read, Bakker argues his points very effectively, plus there are cute dinosaur cartoons. (i also love a lot of older works for their personal significance, but gushing about formative dinosaur books is something for another post.)

finally, thanks to the wonders of the internet, books are not the only way to learn about current dinosaur science! the best way is always by reading paleontology papers, where scientists directly describe and illustrate new discoveries or hypotheses. however, i know jumping straight into the technical literature may be overwhelming: fortunately a lot of paleontologists have social media, blogs, and/or podcasts where they write about their work and new developments in the field. the heyday of science blogs is kind of past, but there are still a few very good ones out there: this list on Feedly has a good selection to browse. being just self-published material, all of these don't have the benefits of peer review that papers and books do, so always be willing to take things with a grain of salt and do your own research.

of course this is a non-exhaustive list, especially limiting myself to both works recently published and which i have actually read. i've certainly forgotten or missed out on many new paleontology books (Dean Lomax's Locked in Time is one of these which i still haven't gotten ahold of yet, but which im very excited to get to); i welcome any additional recommendations or thoughts from the rest of paleoblr!

i hope this was helpful and i wish you luck in your reading :)

#paleoblr #paleontology #book recs #process #cypress #< - the fursona you see at the top of this post. say hi #sorry this took me so long to post! both putting it together and then actually remembering to post it took more time than i expected #but i wanted to be thorough

46 notes · View notes

davidluongart · 1 year

Text

Elysium🪴💐

The last drawing for 2022 have a Happy New Year, y’all! 🌸🌼

For some of the close-ups of the illustration, the hanging carpet was based on Neo-Assyrian sample reliefs of Mesopotamia, where the story of “Aphrodite and Adonis” were inspired by the stories of Tammuz/Dumuzi and Ishtar/Inanna of the early times of Sumer. While the temple ruins laying in the background were inspired by those richly-decorated ones in Palmyra, Syria, & Baalbek, Lebanon- as I interpreted the place as an old former temple of Hades & Persephone themselves; now fallen into ruins and transformed into Persephone’s personal space.

The florals and the trees surrounding the figures were also associated with them, too -roses, myrtles & date palms for Aphrodite, Adonis, and the Graces; while Hades & Persephone were associated with roses, pomegranates, crocuses, lilies, asphodels, larkspurs, irises & daffodils. 🌹🌷

The colorful wool threads behind them were inspired by the fact that many civilizations in the past often use tons of trees/plants + rocks/minerals to create organic colors pigments to paint the sculptures/temples as well as to dye their clothes, too.

#my art #ancient greek #greek mythology #near eastern mythology #aphrodite #venus #adonis #dumuzi and inanna #hades and persephone #pluto and proserpina #the charites #the three graces

298 notes · View notes

art-that-fucks-you-up-tournament · 8 months

Text

SET EIGHT - ROUND TWO - MATCH TWO

"Susanna and the Elders, Restored - X-Ray" (1998 - Kathleen Gilje) / "Moby Dick" (? - Gérard DuBois)

SUSANNA AND THE ELDERS, RESTORED - X-RAY: The piece by artemisia gentileschi I would like to humbly submit is actually a little unique, as it is both by artemesia and by another artist. You see the original painting is called "Susanna and the Elders", and it represents the story of Susanna being spied on, naked, by town elders and then they try to blackmail her into having sex with them. When she refuses, they try and put her on trial for sexual immorality (claiming she slept with them). Her name is eventually cleared. It was typical, in the era that artemisia gentileschi was painting, to depict the story of Susanna as that of a sexy lady bathing sexily and coquettishly, aware and flirty with the elders spying on her. artemisia was having fucking none of it. Her final painting is a departure from this style of depiction showing Susanna visibly uncomfortable with the lecherous elders. BUT THIS ISN'T THE VERSION I'M SUBMITTING. You see, artemisia gentileschi had (supposedly) made an earlier version of this painting, and been asked to paint it over as it was "too disturbing". Although that version is lost to the ages, Kathleen Gilje created a version of that image, underpainted using lead and visible by xray, inspired by artemisia's own life. Without going into disrespectful detail, artemisia gentileschi was sexually assaulted in her life. And she poured some of her rage about it into this painting, before (apocraphally) being forced to sanitize it (into something still radically different than the mainstream depiction). The rage and horror that bleeds through the x-ray version of Susanna and the Elders? Makes me feel like my bones are being liquefied. I feel holy righteous rage and solidarity and love for a woman nearly 4 centuries removed. I feel things too embarrassingly personal to put in a poll.Artemisia Gentileschi based the bodies of both Judith in the first painting and Susanna in the second on her own. Perhaps because of this, perhaps simply because of her immense skill as an artist, the women (and situations) in these paintings feel real. I feel like I could reach out and touch. Gilje's depiction of anguish and the connection made to artemisia's life is palpable. (@sepulchral-pulchritude)

MOBY DICK: This is Gerard Dubois' cover illustration for a recent French language edition of the classic novel. It's a stunning work, visually and thematically. Captain Ahab: you know the type. Rashly self-confident, indifferent to any consideration beyond his own schemes, not a scrap of wisdom. His response to losing a limb is to double down. Captain Ahab as tech bro is befitting, Nantucket whalers being the high tech of their day. How easy it is to picture Ahab swapping grievances with Elon or Zuck over cocktails on a superyacht. The Whale seems only curious about this wierd little man, but what does Ahab spy with his little Eye? Could it be his own Shadow: insecurity, inadequacy, and insignificance? And amusement: who are you laughing at? Those are insults worth sacrificing all hands to erase. [Was the crew of the Pequod all-in? Or did they just need the work?] Hubris is as old as humanity itself. (@welcome-to-the-night-gallery)

("Susanna and the Elders, Restored" is a painting by American artist and art restorer Kathleen Gilje based on "Susanna and the Elders" by Artemisia Gentileschi. Gilje painted a more violent interpretation of the scene in lead paint, then painted a copy of the original Susanna and the Elders over top. This x-ray of the painting was then done to reveal the dual picture. It is not an x-ray of the original painting by Gentileschi.

"Moby Dick" is an illustration by French artist Gérard DuBois.)

#art that fucks you up tournament #polls #atfyu polls #id in alt text #cw nudity #cw rape #cw eye contact #this one has a cut because both commentaries are so long and yet we couldn't think of how to shorten them

63 notes · View notes

mlchaelwheeler · 1 year

Text

Mike, presents, and the painting: analyzing the van scene

There has been so many analysis posts written about the van scene and Mike's feelings, but I just wanted to write my own interpretation of how we see Mike's feelings develop through the end of S3 and into S4, using the painting as the main proof. In this analysis, I'll be mainly talking about the van scene, but also a few other scenes in which Mike's feelings for Will are clearly illustrated.

In my opinion, the goodbye scene between Mike and El in 3x08 is the first scene where the audience can clearly see that something is off between the two of them (if they hadn't caught on to that fact already). Mike's been struggling all season with letting El be her own person, realizing she's more than just her superpowers, and finally being able to express his feelings for her. During their goodbye however, none of these plot lines get wrapped up. Instead, Mike tells El he "knows her powers will come back," doesn't kiss her back, and stands there with a confused look on his face afterwards. Those are all overt signs that mlvn is not where the narrative is headed in S4. That's all old news. Instead, let's look at the more subtle clues that hint towards Mike's real feelings.

Before Mike and El kiss, Mike tells her that her and the Byers should come back to Hawkins for Christmas. It's clear Mike is excited to open presents, and even mentions talking about presents makes him "sound like a 7 year old." (It's fair to mention here that 7 is a number associated with Will and byler, but I'm just going to leave that here and not analyze that). Mike clearly loves receiving presents! There's even a track from the OST that plays during this scene that mentions presents.

Why is the line about presents so important? At the time, it felt like a throwaway line-- a random bit of dialogue added to give Mike and El something to talk about before their awkward goodbye kiss. However, that line was actually perfect foreshadowing to the painting plot in S4.

S4 opens with El's letter (full of lies), in which she mentions that Will is painting a gift for a girl he likes. Now, it's clear that this is a gift Will has spent a lot of time and effort on, and it's for someone special to him. I'm sure Mike heard about this and was immediately saddened, since he's usually the recipient of Will's art-- just look at his binder full of drawings or the walls of his basement and bedroom!

So when Mike arrives at the airport and sees the painting, he lets himself hope. He wants that painting to be for him. He's figured out by now that he loves Will. He desperately wants for Will to love him back, but internalized homophobia's a bitch. Mike is constantly guessing as to what Will's feelings are, so when Will says the painting's "nothing," Mike crushes his hopes that it could be a gift for him.

It's important to note that Mike is fixated on the painting. It's also right after Mike gives El a present (the flowers), so perhaps he's thinking the painting is actually a present for him. Why else would Will bring it to the airport? But when Will assures him it's "nothing," Mike goes overboard with sticking to El, trying to ignore his disappointment the painting seemingly isn't for him.

Later on in the van, Mike is shocked to see Will still has the painting with him. I'm sure he assumed Will had already given it to whichever girl it was for, so when Will hands it to him, he has to check it's actually for him.

And the thing is, yes, Will spills his own feelings using El as a cover. But I think Mike understood. He desperately wanted to believe those were Will's feelings. That's what he's wanted for so long now. Will loves him! The painting-- a present for Mike-- was Will's way of telling Mike he loves him. Even after Will finishes talking about "El's" feelings for Mike, it's obvious (at least to me) that Mike knows Will's talking about himself.

After confirming these feelings are real ("Yeah?" "Yeah."), Mike looks back down at the painting. A depiction of the party, Mike with a heart on this shield. To Will, he's the heart. It's clear that painting is all Will. Mike knows El doesn't know anything about dnd. There's no way she could've commissioned it. I think Mike knows exactly who the painting is from, and what it means. Or at least he's desperately hoping he knows. And then he looks back up! At Will! Not out the window (perhaps thinking of El), or at the painting for a longer amount of time, but back at Will seconds later. Will isn't looking back at him, but the way Mike is looking at Will... that boy is in love. And for the moment, he believes it's requited.

For the rest of 4x08, Mike believes Will loves him. And that's why, during their reunion with El, we get shots like this:

Obviously, Mike is overjoyed to reunite with El. He cares about her so deeply, and even though he doesn't love her romantically (platonic with a capital P), that doesn't make him any less happy to have her back, knowing she's safe once again. However, the clear framing choice of Will's silhouette between mlvn, as well as Mike's reaction after he hugs El (they don't kiss, which is interesting) further prove the fact that Mike's romantic feelings are towards Will. He's still thinking about the painting. Will's feelings for him. The fact that his own feelings might actually be returned.

Mike goes into the monologue scene still believing that Will loves him. So as El's visibly dying on the table, and Will tells Mike again ("You're the heart") feelings he thought were Will's, Mike is confused. Maybe they really were El's feelings? Maybe Mike was too in his own head and misinterpreted everything? Maybe Will doesn't actually love him and never has?

You can see the confusion written clearly on his face. His eyebrows draw down, his mouth tightens, and he rethinks every interaction he had with Will earlier that day. If Will doesn't love him, then he was completely wrong. His feelings are unrequited. He's completely alone. El is dying in front of him, so he does what he can. He forces himself to say "that thing."

He lies his ass off, but what else is he going to do? Will doesn't love him but apparently El does. He cares for El so much. He obviously doesn't want her to die! So he bottles up his own feelings and tells her exactly what he thinks she wants to hear. He makes up lie after lie, but at that point, he's saying anything that might help. His face right before he says he loves her is heartbreaking. That is not the face of a boy professing his love to his girlfriend. That is the face of a boy forced to lie to save a life. Forced to push aside his own feelings after apparently misinterpreting everything. That is a face of despair.

Two days later, it's clear Mike's lies didn't help anyone. El is more distant than ever. Max is comatose. Will is ignoring him. No matter what he does, Mike can never seem to get it right. Yet he does know one thing: he loves Will. So even in his mind, even though he now believes Will doesn't actually love him, Mike keeps hoping. He resigns himself to the fact that he'll just keep being Will's best friend, because that's how he can stick by his side. It's clear he's still contemplating this on the drive back to Hawkins.

And it's even more clear that he loves Will in the scenes in Hopper's cabin. Mike and El have barely spoken two words to each other after his grand confession of love-- despite the fact they were sitting inches apart for 48 hours. Yet who does Mike gravitate towards, as he always does? Will. We get a beautiful parallel to S2, in which Mike would've moved heaven and hell to keep Will by his side.

If one thing's for certain in Mike's mind, it's that he loves Will. He's not losing him again. Despite finding out that the malicious presence that's been out for Will for years is now back, Mike is resolute. Vecna is not touching Will ever again, not if Mike has any say in the matter. They'll figure this out together-- as best friends, as a team, as something more. Because even if Mike believes that Will doesn't love him, Mike does love Will. He always has and always will. And he's not losing him ever again.

#okkk here it is! (only like 4 days after i promised it lol)#i understand mike. I KNOW THE TRUTH #no offense but if you disagree argue with a wall bc. i know mikes thoughts. i'm sure of it #byler #mike wheeler #byler analysis #sarah.txt

269 notes · View notes

sophieinwonderland · 8 months

Note

Oh hey! Another note about the highly clinical language thing:

So we have a really hard time explaining our symptoms to doctors. But we sometimes come across descriptions that match up perfectly with our experiences. So we start to use those descriptions to give an explanation. And often enough, we will forget the specifics of what led us to find that explanation so good. So we will rely more on the clinical description.

For example, executive dysfunction. We have really bad times where we just can't get up and do something. Some sort of mental block or feeling exhausted without lacking energy. But when we simply try to describe this to a doc in our own words, they just hear depression.

Which, is like the point of clinical language right? To be precise? Especially with how it take folks an average of 6 years to get diagnosed, I imagine a lot of folks using clinical language do so because they've had a lot of time to refine their words for their symptoms and struggles into that precise language.

-Faye

Yeah, I totally get that. I imagine a lot of people use clinical language for that reason.

I do kind of see the perspective of the psychiatrists on this too though. I think it's reasonable to want people to describe their experiences themselves instead of relying entirely on the jargon.

I was doing a write-up on another Imitated DID article. Overall, the paper has a lot of misinformation, a lot of bad practices for determining who is or isn't a system. And is really only better than its predecessor in the way that it wasn't actively sexist in shaming its subjects, or trying to paint patients as monsters out to slap malpractice suits on innocent therapists. 🙄

There were some nuggets of wisdom hidden in there though...

I think this is actually valid, even if I have other problems with the above lines.

While patients shouldn't be dismissed for using clinical jargon, if I were a psychiatrist, I think I would want to make sure that they were using that jargon correctly.

Heck, I'm not a psychiatrist, but still think it's important when talking to people and explaining different experiences that we're on the same page on what different words mean. Especially when those words are complicated and meanings change based on context.

Way too many psychiatrists will take this too far and decide to completely dismiss someone for using clinical language, which is gross and actually ableist.

But you also want to make sure that when someone is identifying with PTSD and describes having "flashbacks" that they're using the word the same way you do, and aren't referring, for instance, to pleasant memories.

...

Okay, now I'm going to comment on the quoted lines, and how I think it's indicative of the psychiatrists failing in the reverse way.

Because I can't simply post the screenshots without calling that out.

In the case of someone using clinical jargon, they expect elaboration because they understand that someone may not understand how jargon is used by clinicians.

But with Mary who clearly describes people in her head talking to her... they dismiss her because she denies hearing voices.

To me, it sounds like Mary simply didn't realize that voice hearing in psychiatry could include mindvoices.

So while Mary is dismissed in one instance for not using the clinical jargon correctly (flashbacks) they also dismiss her described experiences in another when she likely simply misunderstood their jargon. (Voice hearing.)

...

And so I think currently there's a huge problem where if you describe experiences without knowing the clinical jargon to accurately illustrate them, you'll be dismissed or misdiagnosed. (As with your own problem with doctors interpreting your executive dysfunction as depression or Mary's voice hearing being dismissed because she didn't call it voice hearing.)

But then knowing too much makes doctors think you're faking and just reading your symptoms off of the internet.

It makes this ridiculous paradox where you need to jump through hoops just to get doctors to believe you.

There's no way to win. At least not reliably. And it all sucks.

46 notes · View notes

jewellery-box · 1 year

Text

Fancy Dress Costume, 1910s, The John Bright Historical Society.

Mesh over cotton, trimmed with corn and artificial fruit, flowers and foliage. Sickle of painted board.

The enthusiasm for fancy dress balls, parties and other entertainments that grew throughout the 19th Century continued well into the following century. Aristocratic guests at the grand society costume balls held during this period often favoured outfits based on historical, mythological or literary characters, having access to images in family portraits, paintings, and illustrated books that they were able to have professionally interpreted by their tailors and court dressmakers. Many middle class women, for whom the making of fancy dress was a domestic pastime, took an enthusiastic creative approach, considerably aided by the publication of catalogues that offered dressmaking patterns for amusing abstract themed costumes, along with those of more conventional characters. This two-piece dress, made from gold mesh over broad bands of terracotta and golden yellow cotton possibly suggesting furrowed fields of stubble, represents Harvest. It is profusely decorated with bunches of grapes, berries, ears of corn, poppies and autumnal foliage. It was probably an ambitious, but inexpensive home-made project. Unused trimmings and remnants of cotton (one printed at the selvedge with the brand name ‘Silvasheen’, a low-priced sateen lining fabric widely available in 50 colours) survive with it. Although fairly roughly constructed by hand and machine, each band of colour has been painstakingly cut and seamed together, possibly with the guidance of a dressmaking pattern. The accompanying sickle is made of board, crudely painted in silver to imitate metal.

Additional Images also illustrate an earlier design for a Harvest or Gleaner outfit in Mrs Leach’s Fancy Ball Costumes catalogue, published in the 1880s.

#20th century #fashion history #historical fashion #costume #historical costume #historical costuming #fancy dress

142 notes · View notes

aukanemin · 2 years

Text

~Commissions are open!~

It would be absolutely delightful if you distribute this post or even want to support my projects and order something special for yourself;зз In addition, I recently changed prices so this information may be useful even to those who already saw previous price list;*** Below I have described in detail almost all the necessary information, but please do not hesitate to write and ask me for any reason in a private message or ask - it will be my pleasure to tell or show you more, and I am always glad to have pleasant acquaintances***

What can I do for you:

Design and illustration of your original character (based on references or text description)

Your portrait, a portrait of your loved one, a celebrity or a person you like (including historical figures)

A portrait of any artistic character - from any fandom, and although my work is closer to gothic fantasy, it is a great pleasure for me to work with new themes and develop myself. The fandoms I'm most familiar with are listed in tags;з

I like to design clothes on my own, interpret the appearance and style of characters, but I am always very attentive to the interests and desires of other people** I do portraits in three formats - bust, waist-length and full-length, and with three different stages of completion - line art, flat color and full shadow work. They can be completely different in style, and you should pay close attention to the difference in the execution of these formats - the busts are always more detailed in the character's features, the atmosphere is more consistent in waist-length paintings, and full-length drawings are well suited to demonstrate clothing design or depict a scene. On average, I complete the work within three to four days, but in case of various circumstances I leave myself up to a week, the lion's share of the time (usually the first day) is occupied by sketch and line art, as well as the background - depending on the complexity and its cost , and the duration of the work can vary greatly, but on average I do them in a day or two. I can make completely different backgrounds for you - for bust or chest-high portraits, graphics or bokeh with some elements of the environment are more suitable, for full-length portraits, you can perform both art nouveau design and full surroundings with a landscape or interior design.

What can I do and approximate prices:

- Bust of one character up to the chest.

Sketch: $ 40

Flat color: $ 45

Shadows & Color Treatment: $ 50

- Portrait of one or more characters up to the waist.

Sketch: $ 55

Flat color: $ 60

Shadows & Color Treatment: $ 65

For background + 5 $ minimum. For each new character + 10 $ - Character (or several) in full growth.

Sketch: $ 70

Flat color: $ 75

Shadows & Color Treatment: $ 80

For background + 10 $ minimum. For each new character + 15 $ I also accept tips - most often they are included in the cost of the background, which is done at the end, after the main character design. Whoa !! You’ve read almost everything! Thank you very much! Here, under the cut, I describe the whole process of work and how we pay. This is very useful information about most of the questions that you may have, if you want to purchase my work, I advise you to take a look too;)

How do we work on an order?

Please feel free to contact me via Tumblr or mail for any questions you may have! ~ If you have an interest in my work, and you want me to create something special for you - share this with me in a message, we can discuss all the details and cost of your painting**

After I discuss the content of the painting with the client and receive additional materials from him (a photo of the person I am drawing, or references that are close to what is expected of me), I start creating the first sketch.

In accordance with the request, I make a sketch of the future painting, which will contain all its important elements and an approximate color scheme (if any) that I will use. At this stage, you can freely make your amendments, and when the content suits you, I will ask you for an advance payment of half the cost of the work without price of background (through Paypal).

After that, work on the portrait will begin. Its duration varies on several factors - to a greater extent on the volume and complexity of the work itself, as well as on my own workload with other orders. I will contact you at various stages of the work readiness to show its progress and make the necessary corrections.

After completing the portrait, I will send you its version in low quality- you familiarize yourself with it, and after you pay the rest of the amount, you will receive the final result of our work! ~

#the arcana game #dragon age #tes #tarot #nadia satrivana #asra alnazar #julian devorak #silco #portrait #oc #original character #comissions #comission info #dagoth ur #castlevania #arcane #artist from ukraine

433 notes · View notes