And, thus, here is a moose.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
all contents copyright and trademark John Fountain 2006 all rights reserved
About Me
VISIT THESE SITES! What? Like you've got anything better to do?
- BUY PRINTS OF MY ARTWORK
- FOUNTAINS' PEN PRODUCTS! - Shirts, Hats, Underwear and MORE!
- FOUNTAIN'S PEN COMICS - free entertainment!
- FOUNTAINS PEN PRODUCTIONS - Capitalism in action! Books, comics, paintings and other silly things for sale
- WINE AND DINE SNOB - Leigh's restaurant reviews
- LOUIE DEL CARMEN - the Zen monastery of animation blogs
- HOLLY KIM - hard-hitting ghetto art
- HEATHER CHAVEZ - art that will make you smile
- CRISTINA PAULOS - an artist way ahead of her time
- ANNA WOLTZ - drawings, doodles, books, t-shirts and cool swag
- JEAUX JANOVSKY - freakishly talented artist
- ANNE AWH - freelance animator and pal-o-mine
- KALAMAZOO ANIMATION FESTIVAL INTERNATIONAL - my home town's contribution to the art form
- HOT MEXICAN LOVE COMICS - anthology with a story by me'n'Leigh
- THINKING ANIMATION - Jamie Oliff and Angie Jones explore animation's future
- STEVE RESSEL - The mad Socrates of the animation world
49 comments:
Well, you already know I love it. You're rad.
Maybe marker would be a better medium for you. Your watercolors are very heavy-handed and look muddy and overworked. They lose the flair and the humor your quick sketches have.
Leigh - (thanks, hon)
Rebekka - While I see your point, I already kinda got my fill of markers a long time ago. I still use 'em from time to time, but I'm keen to play with my watercolors for a while.
The problems you point out are the result of neglecting my paints for a really long time.
The style I use in watercolors are part of an experiment to get my painting to have the same looseness that my quick sketches have... but I'll never get there if I don't keep practicing.
Anyway, thanks for your input - it's much appreciated.
It's odd that you would post something you aren't happy with...
I know that my opinion will likely be perceived as biased - but I really like it - the way it is. Maybe it's that I do have a tendency to lean towards stronger lines, bolder colors, etc. that make me like it so much. For me, the humor's there too. I don't really understand the criticism, but I'm not a trained artist - so maybe that's in part why.
I didn't say I was unhappy with it... in fact, I'm thrilled with it. It's one of my favorite paintings I've ever done.
The fact is, no matter what medium I use or no matter how much time and effort I put into something, it's never going to be 'flawless'... so I'm trying to move in a direction that embraces the spontaneous nature of watercolors... this, naturally, creates what some would call 'flaws', but if I had fun with it and if it looks good to me, then it's a success.
For a more long-winded explanation of what I'm talking about, go back to an earlier post of mine called 'Anti-Slick'.
Point being, it doesn't have to be flawless for me to be happy with it.
I love moose! I have a bedroom dedicated to the whole rustic Colorado theme. Are you selling this watercolor? If so, I'd like to buy it, heavyhanded or not! And I'm not biased. If your work sucked, I wouldn't tell you but I'd tell Steve!
It's just the shoulder seems to me popping out a lot more than the head, and as a trained artist I would think you would be unhappy that the head isn't in the foreground. The head looks like a sticker, instead of being attached to the body. The hooves are cute and everything, but to me it seems like you made a mistake with the head coloring, and since it was watercolor couldn't go back in and fix it.
SR - I don't mind critiques... though it did seem a little hostile - I like to give folks the benefit of the doubt that their intentions are constructive until I have a reason to think otherwise.
RS - Nope... didn't bother me in the least.
For my part, as long as you can tell it's a moose, it's done the job.
Again, this was done as a series of 'anti-slick' work... you're entitled to hate it, but the whole idea is to just do it fast, do it fun, have a blast and get it done (OOOH! A RHYME! I JUST MADE THAT UP! YAY ME!)
You're entitled to dislike it... art is subjective.
If I were working in another style, it might bother me... but not in this style.
TMOTH - I'd give it to you, but it's intended for a book Leigh and I are doing. But I'd be happy to send you a nice print of it. Thanks for the compliment, tho!
Why does the moose have a tail in the front and one in the back?
A fair question...
Mooses have a sort of 'waddle' under their chin. I looked up pictures before I drew it.
It's weird-looking, so I like it.
Have you tried playing with TOMBO Brush MARKERS. You can make them look like water colours. I recommend you try using water colour pencils with the watercolours too . You have a great inking style and I think the pencils with give you a nice look with your line work. I don't mine your picture. I think you just need to use more expensive paper to get the most of the water colours. I think you will be suprised with the results! Great Paper can save the day!!!!
Have a nice and safe trip man!
-c
Yea the paint on the paper looks...ground in. It has a sloppy quality, but not masterful.
Wow... I guess folks don't dig the moose or my 'anti-slick' style.
That's okay... like I said, this style is a new direction for me. I enjoy it, but who knows where it will take me?
All of your comments are appreciated in the spirit of constructive criticism.
Anti-slick is cool, but yea, you need watercolor paper, or different tools. 'Cause everyone knows you draw cartoons well, and this new direction just looks like 8th grade instead of what you intended.
Why do you post your art, by the way? It seems you are really disturbed by contructive critism. Is it merely to get compliments?
Jack and Cristina -
That's the weird thing... I -do- use watercolor paper. Maybe I need something else.
Like I said, it's all experimental and sometimes ya gotta tear something down in order to rebuild it.
But, again, thanks for your input.
Christine -
At what point do I seem disturbed? Was it when I said "Anyway, thanks for your input - it's much appreciated" to Rebekka's criticism? or " I like to give folks the benefit of the doubt that their intentions are constructive" when I said that Bets' inquiry was "...a fair question..."? Or maybe it was when I said "All of your comments are appreciated in the spirit of constructive criticism."
If my intent was to get compliments, it was most certainly a failure and I would have taken all of the criticisms down.
I'm allowed to like something even if everyone else hates it. I'm allowed to disagree and so is everyone else. I did the painting for fun... if I had fun, it was a success.
And, to answer your question, I generally post artwork as an illustration - I've been in Canada... and so I put up a moose. What's the big deal?
Your hostility baffles me - but oh well... that's your baggage.
"Your hostility baffles me - but oh well... that's your baggage."
That you assume my question is based on hostility, #1.
"You're entitled to dislike it... art is subjective.
If I were working in another style, it might bother me... but not in this style."
"It's weird-looking, so I like it."
"I'm allowed to like something even if everyone else hates it."
No one said they hate it!
Did you go to art school? Maybe you aren't used to group critiques? I didn't read any of the comments here as hostile, so it seems that you are very defensive. That's why I'm thinking you weren't prepared to hear anything negative on this site.
Your comment was the only one I read as hostile... maybe you didn't intend to sound snotty, but you sure came across that way.
C'est la vie... don't worry about it.
I don't normally comment here, but this is just silly. I think that the point everyone seems to be missing is that he has fun doing this. Some people are going to like this style and some aren't. Doesn't that apply to virtually all art? What I don't understand is where anyone's getting the impression that he can't take criticism. He seems to take it just fine. It seems more to me that the wannabe art critics don't like it when he opens the door to a discussion pertaining to the merits of the critique or simply explaining why he chose to do something a certain way instead of in the manner some other random Joe on here suggests. Is that an inability to take critisicm? Uh... no. It's called a discussion and an artist explaining his craft. It seems a few of the people here who have two cents to offer regarding the style of his work just wants him to say Yes! You're totally right.
And Christine, I agree. You do sound a bit hostile.
I still think this piece is perfect the way it is. I'm all for constructive criticism and all - WHEN IT'S CONSTRUCTIVE and not mean-spirited, but either way - I just dig this piece.
Where'd Eddie go?
"WHEN IT'S CONSTRUCTIVE and not mean-spirited, but either way - I just dig this piece"
Pfft. Your comment was that he was "rad." You assume when people have comments it's mean-spirited? Have you been to any art blogs lately?
No one here said, "wow john your art really blows."
Artists comment on methods, tools, design, etc., and it's not meant to be taken any other way unless someone comes right out and says that you suck. I don't understand the touchiness...John is putting it out there, with a comment board..?
No Christine - Yet again you miss the point. Only yours was mean-spirited. Are you completely retarded?
Whoaaahhh... People people people...
Can we all just step back for a moment here?
It's just a painting of a moose f'r cryin' out loud... let's all just calm down.
Couple of things for the record...
- this blog is just a personal online 'diary' of sorts... it's not meant to be a showcase for how great I am (I have a different blog for that).
But it's not an 'art blog' per se...
- I welcome comments and critiques. I may or may not agree with you, but I'd never shy away from another person's perspective (please scroll up and note my response to Rebekka's post) and I don't begrudge anyone who disagrees with me.
- Generally speaking, I'll even leave up the "you suck" comments because they're entertaining. I'll leave any post up that's entertaining or compelling. I only remove the boring or stupid ones.
Clearly there are some people out there with an axe to grind, and if they want to demonstrate to the world how angry and frustrated they are though this forum - so be it... as long as it's amusing.
But let's try not to take all of this so seriously, m'kay?
Really, folks... it's just a blog... it's just a moose...
Boy... I sure am glad I didn't post that painting of Santa Claus stabbing the Easter Bunny in the face with an ice pick...
Hehehe
See, folks? Note how Eddie Kline keeps his sense of humor about it all...
...we could all learn a lesson from Eddie Kline.
Umm, funny how lee says I'm mean- spirited and she uses the word "retarded."
Where was I mean spirited?
Look - I'm willing to be the adult here (for a minute anyway), and say to you Christine that there's a chance that we all misinterpreted your tone. And you're right - calling you retarded is in fact mean-spirited, but it started to sound as if you had a bone to pick and so I was intentionally being mean-spirited. I'm no saint. Anyway, I am sure all of us can relate to the occasional misinterpretation of tone. Who knows whether or not that's really the case here considering you're a complete stranger - but let's let bygones be bygones and start anew. As of right now Christine, not only are you not retarded, but I've decided to like you. You don't even have to like me back.
hehehehehe...
"Assy"
<3
"...I've decided to like you. You don't even have to like me back."
More flies with honey, for sure.
I'm in the business of doing critiques so it's a normal, everyday occurance to me. I suppose real world working stiffs aren't used to it. I will try cushion any further comments.
And quite frankly Fountain, I'd rather see this:
"Boy... I sure am glad I didn't post that painting of Santa Claus stabbing the Easter Bunny in the face with an ice pick..." anyday.
I think I'd think twice about listening to anyone who looks like this:
http://www.annieawards.org/p3.jpg
Sometimes you can judge a book by it's cover.
Oh, and that's Mr. North Dakota himslef, not Fountain.
http://www.annieawards.org/p3.jpg
Yeah - you write for that sensational gossip blog, D-Listed! It's so witty and unique. There's really nothing else like it. Really, nothing! Oh yeah - except The Superficial, which is like oh... a gazillion times better.
Nice job honey. We're all real impressed.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh MAN! Could it GET any better, folks? I swear...
For someone who considers herself a masterful critique-ist, I have yet to hear anything from Christina - about art or anything else - that could ACTUALLY qualify as a "critique." Sure, you make pithy little comments and then screech when someone disagrees with you - but that's not a critique.
So you needn't cushion any comments... you may just try to have a POINT from now on. It makes the intent of your writing much more clear.
And MADDOX! Thank goodness you're back! Everything Maddox ever posts just bemoans a sad, angry, jealous, bitter little outcast with nothing going on... I'd feel bad for him if it weren't for the fact that - yes - he KEEPS DOING IT TO HIMSELF! Just when you think he's become aware of the hole he's dug himself into he posts another piss-filled gripe.
I love ya, Maddox... never change!
What's even more astonishing is that both of these characters (I hesitate to call them 'people' since they seem content to exist as online avatars) have invested so much of their time and effort into unintentionally conveying their dissatisfaction with their lives by commenting (repeatedly and with disproportionate vehemence) on some stranger's blog.
I mean... it's my blog... I have an excuse... but these two? What could their motivation possibly be? It's just positively hilarious.
Has this been fun or what?
Has it occured to you that I'm throwing down random links and I don't work for dlisted? Has it also occured to you that I could be half the people writing on here?
Of course it has...for like a nanosecond - because I ultimately couldn't care less one way or the other as long as you're entertaining...
...but I've generally considered that possibility too good to be true - for that would be more hilariously pitiful than I could have hoped for.
Fountain,
you are correct, this discussion has been ridiculous and entertaining. The perfect way for me to enjoy my post B.M. morning, which by the way, was artistic in itself.
Has yours ever come out green?
You mean it's supposed to be a color OTHER than green???
Whoever you are, you're obviously a loser. What else could possibly explain why you're spending so much time here saying really retarded shit? I can only imagine that the most insecure reject would spend so much time on here posting a combination of bullshit under either one or many aliases that include taking the most shallow digs at various individuals' looks. You're so clever, we can't take it! No really... it's overwhelming.
Get a life motherfucker.
are you refering to me, Leigh?
...cause I like the moose.
Hehehehehe
I think it's pretty safe to say, Leigh was referring to Maddox.
No Mad Thinker. The previous comment most certainly does not apply to you.
For people who don't care you sure jump at a reply everytime I post something. I am amused.
holy god what madness have I lept into!
I just popped in to say "HI"
but hey, ILL TALK ABOUT THE MOOSE TOO.
I hate watercolour paper forever because when I use it it always like...breaks apart on me. BUT THATS OKAY because I'm a dumb whore who never uses media like i'm supposed to and i've found stinky old animation paper to be really great for watercolors, inks, markers and chewing on.
Hey John,
Stopped by again and am aghast at the attacks, and that it must be someone we know in common!
Well, I, for one, am in your corner.
Laura R
Post a Comment