The new book above by former New York Times Op-Ed art director of 13 years Jerelle Kraus promises to be an interesting look into the thought process, decision making and insider information of the approval (or rejection) of illustration in the Times’ Op-Ed pages. The book’s description states that within you will find:

Episodic essays accompanied by illustrations re-create the battles between art directors and editors that have raged since the Times created the world’s first op-ed page in 1970. The works of famous Times illustrators like Brad Holland and Roland Topor, are enriched by Kraus’s presentation of the controversies associated with their publication or rejection.

In a recent article about the book in the New York Post, the author was quoted as saying:

editors were convinced that illustrators always were trying to put something over on them, sneaking in hidden sexual or political statements.

The article goes on to say caricatures were a subject of particular scrutiny by the editors:

For years, there was a puzzling prohibition on caricatures of famous people, and even the most explosive opinion would be accompanied by a watered-down picture. If the pen was mightier than the sword, editors believed that art was more brutal than the pen.

Very interesting. The Post article contains several samples of rejected illustrations, including caricatures from the likes of Robert Grossman, David Levine, Ward Sutton and Andy Warhol. Many of the rejected images seem to be thought to too closely resemble sexual imagery.

That may seem paranoid, and much of it likely was, but there are plenty of stories of how editors and art directors have been burned and embarrassed by illustrators doing something sneaky like hiding sexual symbols, political agenda, subliminal messages and the like into their artwork, so it’s hard to blame editors for being a little gun shy. Still, most of the rejections I’ve seen that this book cites are ridiculous in the extreme.

One of the more famous “urban legends” of subliminal illustration shenanigans was the story that has circulated for years that one of the spires in the underwater castle depicted in background of the poster for “The Little Mermaid” was in fact a phallus deliberately drawn by a disgruntled Disney artist who was about to be fired (see close up, right). The issue reached national attention thanks to an article in Entertainment Weekly in the mid 90′s, and plenty of rumor and innuendo followed.

The story of the image being done on purpose by an angry soon-to-be ex Disney artist has been reported as false by several sources, including being debunked on Snopes.com, the rumor examining website. According to snopes, which cites several reliable sources, “The plain truth is that the resemblance between the castle spire and a penis was purely accidental, and it was drawn by an artist who was neither disgruntled nor about to be dismissed.” The artist in question was a freelancer who did a lot of promotional art for the film including greeting cards, Happy Meal Boxes, etc. and who claims that is was purely an accidental resemblance. The entire design of the undersea objects are phallic, so I suppose it could have just happened. I have to admit that even at four in the morning, as the artist claims was the time he was working on it, I would be hard pressed not to notice that the above element looked and awful lot like a penis. Hence the persistent rumors.

That one may have been accidental, but there are some that are not. I got into a little hot water once in high school when, as the school paper’s editorial cartoonist, I inserted a subliminal message in the background of a cartoon that went unnoticed by the editors. Only after publication did someone point out to school administration that the letters on the books in the background of a school library scene spelled out a derogatory comment about a kid in school I didn’t get along too well with. That got me tossed off the newspaper staff, and taught me a valuable lesson about abusing trust. Later I was let back on the school paper and one of my cartoons was nominated for a state award… more importantly I’d learned my lesson.

I happen to know that certain artists who have worked for MAD garner(ed) special attention from the editorial staff, who had to pour over the backgrounds of their illustrations to make sure something didn’t get slipped by them. That is sad, IMO. As an illustrator it should go without saying that you are being trusted not to pull that kind of crap and try to sneak in some little inside joke or personal statement that isn’t what your client intends to convey. I can use the poor but still valid excuse that I was a dumb kid of 14 when I drew that cartoon that got me kicked off the school paper. As a professional today I would never think to do that sort of thing. The closest I get is putting the faces of people I know into the work I do, but that is a different animal… I have to draw SOMEBODY as a secondary character in these illustrations… it may as well be a familiar face.

Getting back to the book, it looks like an interesting stocking stuffer for the illustrator who has it all.

Tuesday Apple introduced a refreshed line of notebook computers, with new versions of their 13 inch MacBook and 15 inch MacBook Pro. Alas, the 17 inch MacBook Pro only got a few tweaks and didn’t get the full overhaul it’s smaller counterparts did. Apparently the 17 inch version is coming but it had some final design problems and will not be available until early next year.

The new MacBooks incorporate some of the features of the MacBook Air and some of the look of the desktop iMacs. I like the new look and keyboard format, but it is some of the new features and technology that make these worthy of coveting:

• New glass trackpad- The trackpad below the keyboard is now larger, has a smooth glass surface and no “button” as in previous designs. It incorporates iPhone-like technology that allows the user to “click” the screen with just a tap once they move the cursor to the intended spot. It also recognized the two fingered “pinch and rotate” movements, three fingered “slide” for scrolling (you use two on the current MacBook trackpads) and four fingered Exposé and app switching response. Once you get used to using that I can see it being very efficient… I might even lose the bluetooth mouse I bring with me when I need to do any serious work on the road were I to get one.
• New backlit LED display- The screen looks very much like the latest iMacs, with a black border and a glass surface. According to the specs it’s 30% more energy efficient than the previous MacBook display technlogies, and has an “instant on” feature and brighter, more intense colors.
• Upgraded, more powerful graphics- Apple teamed up with NVIDIA to feature their new NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics processors in the MacBook. The 9400M is an advanced new 3D integrated graphics processor that features 16 parallel processing cores and delivers up to five times the 3D graphics performance as previous MacBooks. The Macbook Pro goes one step further. It has a completely new design in chips with an NVIDIA CPU-supporting chipset and graphics processor on one die… the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M and the NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT. This groundbreaking new technology allows MacBook Pro users to switch between the 5 hour battery rated, 16 core 9400M integrated processor and the 4 hour rated, 32 core 9400M GT discrete processor for more graphics power and performance. Users can switch by logging out and then back in using the other processor. I’m not sure how much real world difference the different processors make but you can never be too rich, too thin or have too much computer processing power.

The new MacBooks are made with a new design incorporating a more rigid, unibody aluminum case that provides more stability and also has pleasing rounded corners and less screws holding it all together. There are other cool features like new mini-DVI ports, side mounted battery charge indicator, the new keyboard design, a magnetic latch instead of the hooks/button design, etc.

One bummer is no blu-ray drive. I guess that doesn’t surprise me, because no mainstream computers right now have blu-ray. I just thought since Apple is part of the group of companies on the Blu-Ray board, they might be the groundbreakers. Definitely not, according to Steve Jobs:

“Blu-ray is a bag of hurt. I don’t mean from the consumer point of view. It’s great to watch movies, but the licensing is so complex. We’re waiting until things settle down, and waiting until Blu-ray takes off before we burden our customers with the cost of licensing.”

Sigh. I guess I’ll have to wait a little longer until I can watch my blu-ray discs when I’m traveling on my laptop.

I’ll also have to wait a little longer before I trade up my 17″ MacBook Pro to one of these new ones. I like the big screen but honestly the size is a pain sometimes, especially when the &%$^& person in the seat in front of me leans all the way back after takeoff and stays that way the entire flight. Still, I’d rather keep with the larger screen, and the “refresh” of the 17″ model is little more than a mid-life revamp. Not enough new there to entice me to trade up until they come out with the fully redesigned 17″ model sometime next year.

The price tag gives me more than a little pause as well.

Overall a good direction and advancement for the MacBook line. I will be interested in seeing if I can test drive one and gauge it’s usability for PhotoShop work.

Currently taking up all my time on the drawing board:

• MAD Project- Movie parody. I don’t want to give it away as it’s top secret so I am afraid I’ll have to keep everyone in The Dark. Night life will be a luxury I cannot afford for a while, however.
• On Line Game Project- Finishing the last of the character avatars this week. Hopefully it will be on-line soon and I can share the URL.
• Scholastic job- Three illustrations for one of the Scholastic publications based on Socrates. Stuck in review right now.
• Workplace poster- Regular job from that client.

Speaking of which, here’s the one I did last month for them. Pencils, revisions, inks, color… click on images for a closer look:

Initial pencil sketch

Revised according to art direction

Minimal inks… black areas going to be added with color

Final color illustration

Q: I really like your work I see overlap, contrasting of simple geometry to give your drawing volume and bite.  I guess the question is this what are you thinking when keeping a sketchpad or, the simple question might be the what is the value of keeping a sketchpad? The impetus for this question is I have friends I see drawing in cafes and it’s like they are going through the motions. It’s like “Dude, what are you trying to achieve?”

A: Your timing with this question is fortuitous as it coincides with a good friend of mine asking a similar question of me (and many other pro artists) about the value of keeping a sketchbook for a book of his sketches he is working on. His book is going to be full of his mind-blowing sketches along with quotes and thoughts from other artists on the practice of… practice. I won’t let the cat out of the bag for him, but his book will be one of the few of that kind I would see a value in having.

Here are the thoughts I sent to him on the subject:

Learning to draw and developing your ability to draw is like learning a language. Constant use is what makes it feel natural and become second nature to you. Continuous drawing in sketchbooks of anything and everything develops your visual “vocabulary”. Just as learning a new word and using it develops your language skills, learning how to draw a chair or a table or an airplane, etc. expands not only your understanding of those specific objects but also your ability to capture form and describe it convincingly in your drawings. Keeping a sketchbook is also important in that is gives the professional artist a place to take risks and make mistakes… to push their boundaries without the limitations a client places on a given job.

Keeping a sketchbook and working in it regularly will never hurt you as an artist. I’m a firm believer in the development of “sight” as well as the physical skill of drawing. You draw with your brain… your hands and eyes are only the tools it uses. However getting your brain and hands and eyes all working together with those synapses firing nice and strong is something that takes practice and development. You also train your brain in the understanding of form, light and movement by practice in observation and in depicting your observations… i.e drawing. Keeping a sketchbook is a good way to do that.

All that said I am not one of those artists that cannot stand to NOT be drawing. My buddy Stephen Silver is like that… he cannot see a blank piece of paper without having the overwhelming desire to draw something on it consume him. I admire him for it as he does it from a pure love of drawing and from a burning desire to improve his already ridiculously prodigious skills. There is no other hidden agenda with him. He draws for the sake of drawing (and he is NOT the guy publishing that sketchbook, BTW). Perhaps I have settled into a point in my life and career where the art I do is as much a job as it is a labor of love. Therefore I like to get away from it and see a baseball game, pump some iron or read a book on the beach, or what-have-you. Believe me, it is not because I feel I have mastered my art and have nowhere else to go. Far from it. I see glaring weaknesses in my work at all times, and I do work hard at improving by critiquing my work and pushing myself to do better. I also do work in sketchbooks and do occasionally draw just for the sheer joy of it, but not to fulfill an all-consuming need.

You bring up an interesting observation about working in cafes or other public places, and what the point of it is. That depends on the artist, who may do it for very different reasons. I know a lot of artists like Steve who truly keep sketchbooks as a tool for their improvement and development, and work from life to that end. I also know a few artists who publicly sketch mainly to get attention and somehow seek validation. You often can’t tell the difference unless you know the person, and then it’s easy to tell. Drawing from life is the best way to improve your figure drawing skills, and in order to do that you need live people to draw, so artists with different agendas will do the same thing but for different reasons. Cafes and coffee houses are typical places for artists to gather and draw. I know one artist who draws on NYC subways. There is no substitution for working from life, so figuring out a way to do it is worthwhile.

I just cannot see the appeal of public drawing. Personally I hate drawing or sketching in public because it inevitably draws people over to you to see what you are doing, and I feel like an ass showing them my sketchbook… it feels like I am trying to show off or am fishing for praise. Besides, who cares what Joe Coffee things of my drawing skills?? If I could do it with the guarantee no one would be able to see or bother me, I would probably do it a lot. It doesn’t work that way, though. That might seem funny considering I have been doing live caricatures for over 20 years, but that is different. That is a performance mindset and the purpose of it all is interaction with both the model and the onlookers. Sketchbooks are private things and while I am happy to hand mine over to another artist if they happen to be in my studio or we are at a drawing workshop or something, it isn’t something I walk around with taped to my back with a big “LOOKY HERE” sign on it. Does any of that make sense??

I much prefer working at an artist’s co-op from a live model, or just working from whatever in my studio. But that is just me. Many other artists rave about working in their local coffee shop or similar public place, and many are very good at the “stealth” drawing so they avoid the curious and occasionally uncooperative “subject”. To each their own.

Thanks to Michael Garisek for the question. If you have a question you want answered for the mailbag about cartooning, illustration, MAD Magazine, caricature or similar, e-mail me and I’ll try and answer it here!

Detail of a “line and Color” illustration for MAD

Detail of a painted illustration I did for a recent magazine cover

Recently I got into a debate with a fellow illustrator about the wisdom of having more than one “style” of artwork that one would actively peddle to possible clients. This fellow was adamant that it was the smartest way to get greater amounts of work and also to appeal to a broader audience of potential clients. I disagreed. I’ve blogged about this subject before, where I told the story of meeting cartoonist George Karn, who also was a multiple-style advocate.

He was quick to point out I actually did have two styles I marketed… one a “line and color” and one a painted style. I again disagreed. I believe there is a difference between offering multiple different styles and offering the same style in different mediums.

It’s always been my belief that it is best to establish a solid, recognizable identity as an illustrator… that way art directors understand what you do and what they are getting when they hire you. Some people take that as meaning you do the same thing over and over again. That is not what I mean. I mean that you create an identity as an artist, and whatever medium your artwork is created in does not change that identity. Many artists work in more than one medium and have more than one “style” of finished art, yet maintain a consistant identity beneath those different approaches. It’s mostly about drawing and presenting your view of the world to the viewer. A Jack Davis inked panel is as instantly recognizable as a Davis as one of his rich, sumptuous watercolor paintings. Same vision, different mediums. Al Hirschfeld also did a lot of painted, color work which is just as “Hirschfeld” as his line art was. Working in different mediums can accomplish the goal of appealing to different clients without changing who you are and how you draw.

For years I’ve been trying to develop a fully painted style of caricature illustration to compliment my “line and color” style, and for the same reasons my friend recommended multiple styles… to get work from clients who did not like the line and color look. The line and color technique, or as I call it my “MAD” style since I developed it for MAD, does not appeal to a wide number of art directors. It was a comic book/cartoon feel to it, and comic book style art is not very well recieved in the illustration world outside of very specific projects that call for it. Large entertainment magazines like “Entertainment Weekly”, “People” or similar prefer either very graphic caricatures like David Cowles, artsy, avant-garde ones like Steve Brodner or fully painted ones like C.F. Payne or Roberto Parada. A few artists like John Kascht walk the razor’s edge between paintings and cartoons, but their styles move far enough away from a cartoon look to have a different appeal. If I want to be considered for work in those or other mainstream magazines, I’ll need to do more painterly work and try to lose the lines.

I recognized very early I was not ever going to be a Sebastian Krüger. I’m just not wired that way. I think and draw in line and need to develop a Kascht-like solution to create a more painted look while still maintaining my natural drawing style. I’ve had limited success with a few jobs over the years. I still look with awe at the painted work of caricature illustrators like Joe Bluhm and Court Jones (see blogroll links on right). I’m still working at it, but I’d like to think that even though I’m approaching the final art differently I’m staying true to my style of drawing. The lines are not entirely gone, but they are softer and less prevelant. It’s a balancing act.

Anyway the point is that there is nothing wrong with constantly exploring new mediums and applications for your work, but you need not compromise yourself as an artist by trying to be someone else. Be yourself.

Here are some more examples of a few more painterly pieces I have done in the last few years:

For New England Journal of Medicine

Magazine cover done in PhotoShop…

Detail of a painted piece I did for MAD…

Another MAD painted piece…

Full image of that cover partially posted above…

Cover for MAD Kids from a year or two back…

Painting I posted very recently for Supercapers job

Every once and awhile a freelancer finds themselves working on a project that is a long way out of their usual type of work. This year that project for me has been working on “Super Capers“, a super-hero comedy by writer/director Ray Griggs. The great thing about working “outside the box” is that it is challenging and fresh. This job has certainly been that.

What would a cartoonist have to do with a motion picture production? Good question. That’s exactly what I wondered. Ray had his own ideas, and he wanted some comic book/MAD Magazine cartoon imagery to go along with his live action film. So he hired me to create images that would be incorporated into the opening credits of the film, complete with some gags we collaborated on, as well as doing several images for a “flashback” scene early in the movie. There is even a full sized comic book possibly in the works as part of the film’s marketing. I’d write more but the images for said flashback scene are due tomorrow and I’m hard up against it to get them done. Ray’s “released” many of the images, so here’s a couple of the ones I did for the credits:

Ray just revised the Super Capers website with a flash interactive “Comic Book” that uses a few of the images I did for the credits, so you can check that out. There are a number of “pages” in the comic, so keep clicking the corners to see it all. They also have a two part “Behind the Scenes” film (see links below) that gives some insight into the film and what it’s all about, and also shows a few of the images I did as well. It’s got a great cast, a funny script and looks to be a good movie! I’m glad to be a part of it. I’ll share more info as we get closer to the movie’s release.

Since I sort of already did a sketch for this week of Edward Norton for yesterday’s review of “The Incredible Hulk“, I’m going to kill two birds with one stone today by posting the pencil sketches of actor Michael Rooker for those movie set digital paintings I shared earlier this week. I say “kill two birds…” because they will serve not only as this week’s sketch(es) but also demonstrate the earlier stages of those paintings which I was privately asked about by several readers:

Click image for a closer look…

Click image for a closer look…

And again, here are the paintings done from the the above sketches.

Click image for a closer look…

Click image for a closer look…

Q: Whenever work gets slow, I always think about trying to get an artist’s rep to circulate my work around. Have you ever used one, and if so, what do you think of them?

A: Reps are great if you can get a good one. I’ve heard horror stories about bad ones, so you need to be careful. I’ve never had a real rep, although I am a part of Cagle Cartoons’ small stable of custom illustrators, and have gotten a few jobs from them over the years.

For those who may not know what a “rep” is, the term is short for “representative” and they are like an agent for an actor. They go out and find jobs for their artists. Most reps also handle the negotiations with these clients for the fees, do the invoicing, handle past due accounts and in general act as the buffer between the money and the client, allowing the illustrator to focus solely on the work and the creative side of things. For this they take a percentage of the fee, usually in the 15% range.

Artists are creative beings that are very often business-challenged and find it hard to deal with analytical things like marketing, money, negotiations or all that those kinds of things entail. Many just want to sit in their studios and draw or paint. Reps provide a solution to the business end of things, and in some severe cases an artist couldn’t make a living without someone doing that kind of thing for them. Personally I have always been very good with the business side of things, so that aspect of a rep doesn’t much interest me. For some artists it would be a very good thing to consider.

The main allure for a rep is the generation of work. Good reps have a large network of art directors and contacts that they routinely work to solicit jobs for their artists. Most reps have a “stable” of artists working in various styles that they try and sell and pair with new clients. In theory, a rep’s main job is to seek out and find work for their artists, so it’s like having a full time marketer doing the leg work for you. That part sounds very enticing. Reps are often located in the big markets like New York or L.A. as well, which makes it easier to be an illustrator living in Podunk, Idaho and still get work in the big leagues.

Like anything, however, there are good and bad ones.

A good rep works hard to find their artists work. They actively pursue clients, follow up with completed jobs, constantly try and make new contacts and expand their network, strengthen their relationships with current clients and art directors, etc. In the old days, they did actual “leg work” by schlepping their artist’s physical portfolios around to the publishers or big ad agencies and meeting in person with art directors in pursuit of work. These days it’s more about the direct mail and sourcebook/on-line marketing than anything. A good rep also watches out for their artists and works to get them bigger and better jobs. The artist’s success is their success.

A bad rep can be a real pain. Generally you sign a contract with a rep for exclusivity. Some reps will then try and tell you they now should get 15% of all your work, whether they got it for you or not. I understand they want to do the billing and such now for all your work, but I could never figure out how any rep could figure they deserve 15% of your pay for jobs you are doing for longtime clients they had nothing to do with getting. New clients, whether they came by your rep or not… that’s debatable. In principal I would say you should refer new clients to your rep if you have now got one regardless (especially if your rep is good at negotiating top dollar for your work). Another sign of a bad rep is if they load you up with lousy jobs. Some reps insist you work non-stop and may expect you to take jobs you’d never have accepted in order to keep you working. Bad paying jobs illustrating menus for some corner deli? I’d prefer to have a little time off instead. The opposite may sometimes be true, where the rep decides your work isn’t “selling itself” enough and they stop working to sell you and concentrate on some other artist in their group who’s style happens to be hot. Then you have little work but a rep who insists on 15% of any outside jobs you get even though he/she isn’t working hard for you. Finally a bad rep is one who places ads in sourcebooks (which they only pay 15% of , BTW. Typically a rep will put together marketing materials but the artist pays the lion’s share of the costs), puts up a website and then sits back and waits for the phone to ring. That isn’t any more effective than any artist could do on their own.

Good reps are hard to find and often are booked with artists already. I’d love to have a good rep on one of the coasts getting me higher profile jobs for magazines and ads, but I have never really pursued any reps and none have pursued me, so I do my own marketing and promotion. I’m usually busy so I don’t miss it much, but there are aspects to having one that I wouldn’t mind having.

Thanks to Bill White for the question. If you have a question you want answered for the mailbag about cartooning, illustration, MAD Magazine, caricature or similar, e-mail me???????? and I’ll try and answer it here.

Lots of big projects all coming to a head at once right now…

• MAD Movie parody- Working hard on that right now. Pencil rough stages.
• Super Capers- Titling images nearing the final stages, movie scene image next and then wrapping up the “turnarounds”. This job is much more involved than I originally expected it to be.
• Website Gaming Images- Still in the concept stages on this one, but progressing.
• Workplace Poster job- My usual assignment.

I also did a couple of very quick and simple illustrations in the last week or two for other clients that I can probably now share here, as they are either in print or nearing production:

This is an illustration that will be incorporated into a logo for a moving company.

A small spot illustration for Scholastic.

These last two demonstrate how some jobs are just very simple and quick projects to suit a client’s specific needs. I do a fair amount of these kinds of jobs, fitting them in when I am waiting for reviews or approvals on other, more involved projects.