Thanks to
![:iconvioleta960:]( "Violeta960")
's
journal, I learned about John Kricfalusi's
blog.
Looking through his entries(search mostly for his techniques on trees), I found myself a little at question on his terms and such. Somethings he wrote made me understand what exploits a weakness from him while others just made me a little frustrated that he can't fight over weaknesses since he's stuck in a niche of his own. Not the same kind of niche as
![:iconthemrock:]( "Themrock")
since that man has a variety of ways to draw and doesn't seem weak at all.
To point out what I mean:
This one he feels insecure and says that artists can't fully control a perfectly balanced body and only a few artists can achieve that. Basically, he considers Frank Franzetta a god and doesn't believe people can achieve. Perhaps it's due to me opening to the outside world and had a variety of "inspirational" teachers to get to the craft I have today, Deviantart and everywhere else.
I can go off the top of my head of artists that prove of drawing the female anatomy wonderfully while keeping balanced:
Todd Schorr
Eric Powell
Brom
Michelangelo
Norman Rockwell
Joseph Christian Leyendecker
Next, we have his viewpoints on
"Weak Artists". His views state:
"
Weaker cartoonists are timid and conservative. They don't like strong contrasts and think they are in bad taste. In my opinion that makes their statements less forceful, less entertaining and less committed to their own ideas."
Interesting... He's considering artists that are subtle in design instead of active and loud. That seems pretty closed minded in my opinion since I love editorial cartoons and learn from the artist's technique in the juxtaposition of story and imagery going hand in hand. Many artists tends to be subtle in the editorial field, but that doesn't prove their point weak or non-committing. The ones that
are weakest have to be the ones that seem to copy the stylings of "SeltzerBerger"'s writing of pointing out to the viewers that their morons. The most significant and powerful ones are the most ambiguous type, leaving the viewer to think, giving power to the viewer and creator of that cartoon.
Though, today, I'm referring to Kricfalusi's
problem. This problem is one of my favorite designs of head poses: The 3/4th head shot.
I love that pose since it defines the view of what the viewer is deemed to look at. Just like the layout of panels are to flow the viewers way of reading. Unfortunately, John and his commentators feel the same about it. Calling it hard to master. This is what I meant in my paragraph about him "having trouble with making the female anatomy" look natural.
Let me state it: He's
whining. He says he's constantly "slowly and painstakingly" work on his craft. Why is he complaining on this when he could try to study every day on anatomy rather than doing caricatures of stupid pop-stars? Caricaturing, classic cartoons, and comics shouldn't be the only thing he could be studying at the moment. With me, I go for all the tutorial books, fine art, art magazines, Deviant art pieces, manga, comics, and etc. to get where I am today. I waste my money to be inspired, and I will never stop trying to get some recognition.
In the words of Scott McCloud of Understanding Comics Chapter 7: "
My art has no practical value whatsoever... But it's Important!".
Looking upon what the entries of his blog said, it made me think of the sketches...
Commssion information.
