Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> 1. This is speeded up 600 times?

  Now you don't even know your percentages. 600% is not the same thing
as 600 times.

> [I was actually toying with the idea of making a web comic of my own. 

  The hardest part of making a web comic is to get good ideas.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:25:25 -0500, Warp wrote:

>> [I was actually toying with the idea of making a web comic of my own.
> 
>   The hardest part of making a web comic is to get good ideas.

Actually, the hardest part of making a comic (web or not) is to get good 
ideas.  I don't imagine that the medium makes it any easier or harder.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> 1. Where the hell did he get a computer screen you can draw on??
>>
>>   There are graphics tablets which can show the image.
> 
> Advanced. So, like, it's as expensive as a high-end tablet *and* a 
> high-end monitor? Must cost a fortune! o_O

You can get a tablet PC that's got a touchscreen (wacom graphics tablet) 
built into the screen. I have one. It's very nice.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

>>>> 1. This is speeded up 600 times? And it still takes, like, 20 
>>>> minutes for him to draw the whole thing? Wow, that's a long time! 
>>>> (And the finished image looks so easy...)
>>>
>>> 200 hours? That doesn't seem right. 60x speed-up would be 20 hours 
>>> worth...
>>
>> Yeah, I think you might be right. 600x would be a freakin' BLUR... I 
>> must be mis-remembering this stuff. ;-)
>>
> I think it was 6x


Yep, 600% was what he said ... I've been watching the video.

After watching the first video, I noticed a few things

* This is actually pretty bare-bones photoshop usage. He uses all 
brushes, layers, and an occasional scale operation, nothing too fancy.

* The swatches file is a very nice trick :)

* It amazes me how he seems to get it right the first time.

Post a reply to this message

Michael Raiford wrote:

> Yep, 600% was what he said ... I've been watching the video.
> 
> After watching the first video, I noticed a few things
> 
> * This is actually pretty bare-bones photoshop usage. He uses all 
> brushes, layers, and an occasional scale operation, nothing too fancy.
> 
> * The swatches file is a very nice trick :)
> 
> * It amazes me how he seems to get it right the first time.

After the second video:

* Another neat trick, having a file with various facial features at the 
ready.

* Aagain, pretty basic photoshopping.. Setting the text, and using the 
layer blending attributes... The thing I didn't know you could do was 
warp the text like that ... I'll have to play, now. :D

Post a reply to this message

Michael Raiford <mra### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Michael Raiford wrote:
> > * This is actually pretty bare-bones photoshop usage. He uses all
> > brushes, layers, and an occasional scale operation, nothing too fancy.

yes, indeed.  The only real source of amazement here is his fancy input toy...

> * Another neat trick, having a file with various facial features at the
> ready.

I thought only He-man animators in the past used such cheap trick! ;)

> The thing I didn't know you could do was
> warp the text like that...

even the open-source inkscape warps the text.  Speaking of which, this was done
with no fancy input other than the mouse... inkscape's caligraphic drawing tool
is getting better by the day... much better than GIMP's... :)

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'face.png' (136 KB)

Preview of image 'face.png'

Warp wrote:

>   The hardest part of making a web comic is to get good ideas.

Indeed. And given how much I suck at having ideas, I think I should just 
forget the whole thing right now...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> You can get a tablet PC that's got a touchscreen

  I think that the difference between a tablet PC with touchscreen and
a graphics tablet with an LCD is that the latter is much more accurate
and has extra properties (such as detecting pressing strength and tilting).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> You can get a tablet PC that's got a touchscreen
> 
>   I think that the difference between a tablet PC with touchscreen and
> a graphics tablet with an LCD is that the latter is much more accurate
> and has extra properties (such as detecting pressing strength and tilting).

If the tabletpc has a wacom digitizer (and most do), it has pressure 
sensitivity.  Not as much as the Cintiq; 256 vs. 1024...and if one had 
tilt sensing I would be all *sha-wing!* and buy it.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.digitalartsuk.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook wrote:
> If the tabletpc has a wacom digitizer (and most do), 

Mine does, not that I do enough artwork for it to make a difference. The 
protective glass is thick enough that I'd expect it would be an effort 
to get used to doing it for art. It's almost difficult to pick out 
letters on the on-screen keyboard reliably. You have to watch the cursor.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message