tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18907156.post6613190837057410190..comments2024-03-18T14:05:31.316-04:00Comments on Today's Inspiration: An "Avant-garde" Holidayleifpenghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07232334860061949895noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18907156.post-64933664618214532432008-02-23T18:50:00.000-05:002008-02-23T18:50:00.000-05:00That shot of the crusaders done like a mosaic is j...That shot of the crusaders done like a mosaic is just wonderful.Ron Fortierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13309149554499286208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18907156.post-77400150528340121262008-02-21T15:26:00.000-05:002008-02-21T15:26:00.000-05:00As a layman and design fan,I *love* this style, it...As a layman and design fan,I *love* this style, it is my favorite era in commercial illustration. It just resonates with me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18907156.post-76733442506144889462008-02-21T14:30:00.000-05:002008-02-21T14:30:00.000-05:00Tom, it may well be the case that the originals ar...Tom, it may well be the case that the originals are more vibrant than the repros. Perhaps it was the ad people or the younger art directors that consciously aimed at the visual impressions made by colour photography. (B&W rotogravure is another case; see the magnificent work done with it in Henry Luce' *Fortune* before the war)I have to say, tho, that the old inks (and pressmen) could make even the most delicate values sing. (so long as the paper was coated!)But I take your point; Dr. Martin's may have been forbidden fruit, but who could resist!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18907156.post-4860303260464751642008-02-21T13:48:00.000-05:002008-02-21T13:48:00.000-05:00In reference to Bob's comments, I have seen origin...In reference to Bob's comments, I have seen originals by some of these illustrators posted today, and their colors are richer and more intense than these reproductions show. In the early 60's, 4 color separations and magazine print production were not much better than the 50's. Darker tones tended to go a little muddy, partially because the paper stock was not very high quality... to keep production expenses down. Those illustrators knew color, but the print market (particularly magazines) had not caught up with, and adapted to experimental illustration techniques and color. Also, some quality is lost in the scanning for posting on TI. By the 1980's, I was using Dr. Martin's dyes on my illustrations, and it drove printers nuts... trying to duplicate the intensity. They even tried florescent inks, but we were never completely satisfied when comparing it to my original illustration. Clients generally won't spend extra money to satisfy the illustrator's self inflicted high standards.<BR/><BR/>Tom WatsonTomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13237565169344311948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18907156.post-20953819343982464782008-02-21T12:39:00.000-05:002008-02-21T12:39:00.000-05:00I wonder if one of the characteristics of this gen...I wonder if one of the characteristics of this genre is the routine use of black as the deep shadow colour; perhaps it's a concession to photography. But as one who grew up during the "illustrator years", I find many of these images muddy by comparison; in this sense, a falling away from a high standard.<BR/>Bob BolliniAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com