Welcome to TVPaint Community forums !

A drawing done out of boredom, carrying some influences I picked up at my internship. Done in TVpaint.

I like it! I especially likethe dots for shading!

Too ornamental. I like your avatar better. Boredom, like doodling so often leads to ornamentation, doesn't it?

Paul, all in all I agree, but ornamentation has also its entitlement in native art. Actually it may be something between art, handicraft, rite. But this ornamentic is always authentic having deeper meanings (for the better original results).
Beyond doodling in comic if you take it serious the question can be: how does it connect native ornamentic style, dragon and Boomslang ?

Maybe it's the materials that is used, such as in your example, or pottery, cloth etc. It serves a purpose to turn ordinary utensils into more interesting and pleasing to look at ones. Since decorating an empty computer screen out of boredom serves almost no purpose, it's shallowness comes through because it serves little public purpose. That's why I compared it to doodling. It pleasantly preoccupies its maker for a few minutes, which is useful for him but not for anyone else, or perhaps people in his immediate surroundings who know him.

I must say that this is of course my own, very personal opinion which I wouldn't normally bother with announcing publicly, but since it was offered for comments, I did -- maybe out of my own fleeting moment of boredom, so it has lived a purposeful life for a fleeting moment -- unless this turns into a tiresome debate.

But also, what made me make my comment was that Boomslang noted that he was influenced by some work he had done for hire and there it occurred to me that this decorative style of cartooning is quite common and, again personally bugs me.

Just as I finished my doodling comments I came upon this slide show in the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2008/1 ... =permalink
I think it says pretty much the same as I had said.

Paul Fierlinger wrote:decorating an empty computer screen out of boredom serves almost no purpose.

I agree on this. and it's a good point to bring up. I often wondered what exactly unattracts me in ornamented digital drawings, and I guess this is the crux of it - the ornaments. Even if not made out of boredom, it serves the purpose of surface, and in the absence of surface it serves digital air.

I suspect that designer/animators of such curlicues are in search for a distinct style, because let's face it, a lot of cartoons look very much alike with their the big noses, thin limbs etc. I used to tell my students to avoid thinking of style as a trick of the line. A unique style should flow from your current attitude; your frame of mind and your position towards the character. Novelists often speak of character development in their novels as being at first stiff, unconvincing imitations of real people, but that at some point, during the writing process, these stiffs begin to come to life on their own and the writers will just allow themselves to follow the flow.

So if this connection with the spirit of the character comes through as true on one project. on the next and entirely different story it might easily fail and I would consider that a good sign. Sticking to just one style is therefore unnecessary and actually nonsensical .

Style is an extension of our own character and when I see ornaments covering a character I know that I am looking at a dead thing. This is probably why decorative characters usually fail to become attractive because they are never convincingly real. They were likely designed before there was ever a story for them to play in.

Paul Fierlinger wrote:Style is an extension of our own character and when I see ornaments covering a character I know that I am looking at a dead thing. This is probably why decorative characters usually fail to become attractive because they are never convincingly real. They were likely designed before there was ever a story for them to play in.

Most likely in such cases the story comes as a stage to the character. It's about selling trend, style, something that is as temporary as a fashion model. An honest writer (creator) knows he/she can only create a meaningful character if that character is derived from his/hers own true world and being. No masterpiece fails to show it. A story and character are not separate from each other. One derives from the other, and the order by which either materializes first is a matter of personal approach only.

In the same spirit, I really dislike the tendency in the animation world to concentrate so much on character design, walk cycles and most other methods of presenting a character as if it's a stand-alone, separate from the rest that should happen in the creative process. Showreels of animators are crammed with character animation (mostly in the 3d world) and, to my grief, this is what gets them the jobs usually.

I really like the drawing, and the style. I'm wondering however which blow took out the dragon ....the spear to the heart or the kick in the groin.

Mandalaholic wrote:I really like the drawing, and the style. I'm wondering however which blow took out the dragon ....the spear to the heart or the kick in the groin.

the foot kick first to make the dragon bending double his huge body
and so to bring down his heart within reach,
then the fatal cut with the spear, ... will it be fatal ...? because not very deep,
and the bragon'blood looks more like lettuce's rot, or pus than real blood !

Happy 2009 !