Canotila wrote:But when I went to actually upload them, this is what I see:Submission Criteria:
***Uploaded files will not be reviewed if they do not fulfill the following requirements***
standard or going rate for an image
Stephen Stanley wrote:An opinion: I believe it took "so long" for me to win because I always seemed to have at least one weak drawing (I'm not showing those) in each quarterly entry.
Dustin Adams wrote:Anyone have any examples of purely computer generated art winning and/or being published?
Stephen Stanley wrote: If the series didn't place as a semi-finalist (which disqualifies them for reentry), I sometimes submitted one of the stronger illustrations again in another batch.
Canotila wrote:Wait wait wait! You can DO that? My brain just exploded a little. I have the same issue with having one or two strong pieces and then (at least) one that is suckitudinous.
gower21 wrote:I'm working on my third picture right now for the portfolio. My question is: Do you think sticking to one medium type is best? Do you think now that ebooks and enhanced ebooks are going to be the big push that we should try to make at least one entry color? 90% of what I do is black and white, I lean to black and white and I like it better....
what is your opinion?
Martin L. Shoemaker wrote:gower21 wrote:I'm working on my third picture right now for the portfolio. My question is: Do you think sticking to one medium type is best? Do you think now that ebooks and enhanced ebooks are going to be the big push that we should try to make at least one entry color? 90% of what I do is black and white, I lean to black and white and I like it better....
what is your opinion?
While I'm not particularly informed on the Illustrator side, it sure looked to me like all of Pat Steiner's entries were black and white. That's assuming that the pictures they showed in the Awards show were his entries.
soulmirror wrote:I'd suggest they use the term "illustration" very broadly ... not to mean that you have to draw or paint anything ... but that it is any visual imagination of the story prose. Back in the '70's it wasn't all that unusual to see a SCULPTURE "illustrating" a sci-fi or fantasy book cover.
I share your issue about where the line is concerning what's totally "original" art when it comes to a digital or Photoshop-manipulated image. I submitted Photoshop art to IOTF my first time, and got nuthin' ... the second time I tried pen & ink line art. Finalist, with encouraging scores and personal comments from judges ... so I stuck with that. I was a Finalist three times (winning with the last one). BUT ... my enthusiasm now is photo and photoshop. Every photoshop artist I know "borrows" -- if you need a spooky tree you either find a tree and snap it yourself, or use a free-use image of a tree, or buy someone's tree or (shhhhh, honestly?) steal three images of trees, blend them together, and it's arguably your original fusion of a tree etc.
If you go to my portfolio in link above? I'd never send in something with Lincoln in it (public domain or not) ... but this one:
What I didn't snap with my own camera, is changed so much no one can say I didn't snap it myself, imo. I wouldn't hesitate to send it to the contest ... My point is: the judges might not like the art but there's zero doubt in my mind they'd 'disqualify' it.
AS AN ACTUAL ANTHOLOGY ILLUS though? Donald Trump might not like his name there; but he's there on a public sidewalk ten feet outside the Roosevelt Hotel where they put us up in L.A. ... so who knows how safe it is to use my photo?
CGI is still beyond me, but I promise you I could go thru any bookstore and show you dozens of pro-sold "cover art" images made by painting over a photograph, some famous model, this or that angle of the Sphinx ... none of which were actually PAID TO USE etc.
I'm sort of ... riffing beyond YOUR issue, to speak to the general IOTF'er contestant now. MY workshop was full of PAINTERS, painting and drawing still comprise the vast majority of the winning illustrators ... but soon enough the digital folks will be just as common, no doubt. Don't fear the digital. There's at least one POSER-based illustration in recent books, and ... well ... everyone can recognize bad Poser, but there are amazing Poser artists too.
The judges value ORIGINALITY, but imo that includes originality of vision as much as ... medium and technique.
IMO, I sure didn't squeak in a win because of any elegant pen & ink technique (I always told friends: I'll win sometime when there aren't any Eastern Europeans in the quarter -- because you look at 20 years of IOTF and they ROCK pen & ink in Mordor!)
Even the judges called me a 'primitivist'
But I figured being a writer-wannabe gave an alternate angle: Everything I sent in, I tried to make TELL A STORY.
Illustration is about capturing (or summoning) a STORY, where some (a few, but some. Or many) great painters tend to look a little ... portraity or "still-life of unicorn" ???
IOTF'ers might consider that too.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest