Recent posts

#1

Creative Common / Re: Does my Art look big in th...

Last post by Colin YNWA - Today at 03:27:42 PM

Ha! I did something very similar when I think I was 18... but its not as good!

#2

Film & TV / Re: Rogue Trooper News…!

Last post by rogue69 - Today at 03:00:39 PM

Sorry had to do this evil click bait

#3

Film & TV / Re: Rogue Trooper News…!

Last post by Le Fink - Today at 02:55:44 PM

Yikes

Unreal Engine 5 fail!

#4

Creative Common / Re: Does my Art look big in th...

Last post by pauljholden - Today at 02:52:23 PM

Draw by my then 14-15 year old brother. He could draw rings round me, but didn't pursue art.



Obv a copy of the bisley original. Eyeball copied on paper.

#5

Film & TV / Re: Rogue Trooper News…!

Last post by The Legendary Shark - Today at 02:50:32 PM

#6

Announcements / Re: 2000 AD - The Ultimate Col...

Last post by Max Headroom - Today at 01:19:15 PM

Hope is complete in the sense that all that has been published is collected. But the story is not over - the next arc will see our main protagonist and his wife search for their son.

#7

Prog / Re: Prog 2381: A grizzly fate

Last post by Richard - Today at 01:09:20 PM

I'd be quite happy for Rico to take over and go back to using his original name of Dredd, but I think Wagner said in an interview that he wasn't interested in doing that. 

#8

Film & TV / Re: Rogue Trooper News…!

Last post by JayzusB.Christ - Today at 01:06:53 PM

Oh, you fecker. I was looking forward to that.

#9

Books & Comics / Re: Completely Self-absorbed T...

Last post by Fortnight - Today at 12:57:20 PM

And, see, even if we just accept that all the additional surface rendering in the modern version is just How Things Are Done Now™, I've noticed in a lot of these re-colouring jobs, there's a tendency for the colourist to think about light and palette and forget about depth and clarity.

Notice the first panel on the right-hand page. In the new version, I completely lose Swampy's hands because they're coloured identically to the beetle. Wood's original picks them out in a different tone.

I wonder how much of a purist approach there is to this argument. I read a few Amazon reviews of this set before I bought it and the biggest complaint was that the re-colouring was done at all; completely replacing the original. I've never read it in this form, and until today I've never even looked through one of my original issues. So I'm not really biased towards one over the other. I think the new colours look amazing. Especially in volume 1.

There are panels where clarity has been increased, I think. Consider below. In the original it's not clear what's happening - the "double exposure" effect is not clear at all, but clarified in the new colours. There are pros and cons, I guess.



(With apologies to Colin for derailing his thread a bit!)

#10

Books & Comics / Re: Completely Self-absorbed T...

Last post by Jim_Campbell - Today at 12:24:33 PM

Issue #56 is one of only 4 from this era that I actually have in an original copy!

Oh, nice!

And, see, even if we just accept that all the additional surface rendering in the modern version is just How Things Are Done Now™, I've noticed in a lot of these re-colouring jobs, there's a tendency for the colourist to think about light and palette and forget about depth and clarity.

Notice the first panel on the right-hand page. In the new version, I completely lose Swampy's hands because they're coloured identically to the beetle. Wood's original picks them out in a different tone.