Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
176
Art and Elfquest / Re: 2010 Fan Calendar Guidelines
« on: January 22, 2010, 11:20:49 AM »
Thanks!
I will definitely link back here, and I will also make a note that a link to the calendar page on EQ.com will go up as soon as we have one...
I will definitely link back here, and I will also make a note that a link to the calendar page on EQ.com will go up as soon as we have one...
177
Art and Elfquest / Re: 2010 Fan Calendar Guidelines
« on: January 21, 2010, 09:26:28 AM »
Just wanted to ask this again:
* First: I know in the past that we've observed a grace period between the debut of the calendar, and when we are allowed to post the artwork in various places (for example, at deviantArt). Are we now free to do that, or should we wait a bit longer?
178
Writers' Gallery / Re: Poetry for the Fan Calendar
« on: January 18, 2010, 07:12:28 PM »
I'm so impressed with what you guys do with the short amount of time you're given to do it! It's always cool to see the words that the pictures inspired in you. I really liked getting to see the multiple entries here, too. Great job by everybody!
179
Art and Elfquest / Re: Is EQFA redundant now?
« on: January 17, 2010, 08:05:53 AM »but I'm personally just no fan of overly used flash functions and I must admit I HATE the sound on the new site! If I was visiting it for the first time, I'd never come back. But that's just me.
No, definitely not just you!
180
Art and Elfquest / Re: Member Gallery icons
« on: January 15, 2010, 12:58:37 PM »
Thanks for looking into this!
I actually don't care whether it goes by first alphabetically, or last alphabetically, so I just picked "first". But either is fine with me. As you say, we can control that, at least.
I actually don't care whether it goes by first alphabetically, or last alphabetically, so I just picked "first". But either is fine with me. As you say, we can control that, at least.
181
Art and Elfquest / Re: 2010 Fan Calendar Guidelines
« on: January 15, 2010, 12:42:42 PM »No way to mark it like you describe, but it should appear under the images in the summary for you as an artist, like so
Hmm, yeah. But I'll have to post it again myself, if I want it to be "collected" in that album, I guess.
182
Art and Elfquest / Re: 2010 Fan Calendar Guidelines
« on: January 15, 2010, 12:02:45 PM »
YAY!!!
Windrider (and/or Foxeye), I have a couple of questions.
* First: I know in the past that we've observed a grace period between the debut of the calendar, and when we are allowed to post the artwork in various places (for example, at deviantArt). Are we now free to do that, or should we wait a bit longer?
* Second: is there any way for us to mark our own calendar image so that it *also* shows up in one of our personal galleries? Or can we only do that by posting it again ourselves into that gallery? (That's what I did with previous calendar entries, but I was wondering if there's a better way to do it than posting it twice.)
Windrider (and/or Foxeye), I have a couple of questions.
* First: I know in the past that we've observed a grace period between the debut of the calendar, and when we are allowed to post the artwork in various places (for example, at deviantArt). Are we now free to do that, or should we wait a bit longer?
* Second: is there any way for us to mark our own calendar image so that it *also* shows up in one of our personal galleries? Or can we only do that by posting it again ourselves into that gallery? (That's what I did with previous calendar entries, but I was wondering if there's a better way to do it than posting it twice.)
183
Art and Elfquest / Re: Challenge - Unforgotten Past
« on: January 15, 2010, 08:07:15 AM »1986
Yeah, that's how old my first stuff is, too. I didn't get introduced to EQ until I started college.
184
Art and Elfquest / Re: Is EQFA redundant now?
« on: January 13, 2010, 01:52:22 PM »
The "can't message anyone whom you haven't friended" thing is... disconcerting. It feels like a step backward, since in this type of forum, you can send a message to any other member. I wonder what the design-reason is behind that? (Maybe it's another of the somewhat Facebooky features, and it's a design that makes sense for a very big Facebook venue?)
The fact that the galleries are in creation-order does bug me, as does the fact that it only displays 8 per page. I wonder if that is something that can be tweaked, if suggested? (I.e. whether it's possible to add a gallery sorting feature, or see more per page.)
As for the whining -- I don't know. I don't even like to see it characterized as such, because that automatically devalues and casts as unreasonable any complaint that anyone might make. I think that in a situation like this, where a lot of big and, let's face it, somewhat confusing changes have been made, that it's only natural that some folks are going to cope by wanting to blow off steam or share their anxieties. That doesn't even mean that the same people won't get used to the site, with time. For some, it's just a coping mechanism.
Maybe the thing to do would have been to create a "kvetch here" thread where folks could do that, without having to add to Richard's stress by making it seem like everyone is trying to nitpick the new site to death... and then have a different thread dedicated to questions and requests. Ah well, too late for that now.
The fact that the galleries are in creation-order does bug me, as does the fact that it only displays 8 per page. I wonder if that is something that can be tweaked, if suggested? (I.e. whether it's possible to add a gallery sorting feature, or see more per page.)
As for the whining -- I don't know. I don't even like to see it characterized as such, because that automatically devalues and casts as unreasonable any complaint that anyone might make. I think that in a situation like this, where a lot of big and, let's face it, somewhat confusing changes have been made, that it's only natural that some folks are going to cope by wanting to blow off steam or share their anxieties. That doesn't even mean that the same people won't get used to the site, with time. For some, it's just a coping mechanism.
Maybe the thing to do would have been to create a "kvetch here" thread where folks could do that, without having to add to Richard's stress by making it seem like everyone is trying to nitpick the new site to death... and then have a different thread dedicated to questions and requests. Ah well, too late for that now.
185
Art and Elfquest / Re: Is EQFA redundant now?
« on: January 13, 2010, 12:55:07 PM »
Yeah, that's definitely good.
I do wonder if some of the folks who will choose to use the Gallery feature will ever look at the Fanart and Fanfic section of the Forums -- they're two separate entities. But at least that post being there gives people something to point out to people who violate the rule. (I don't know where else it could be posted that would be more prominent, really. Unless there were some way to alter the Gallery upload page to just include a warning about it.)
I do wonder if some of the folks who will choose to use the Gallery feature will ever look at the Fanart and Fanfic section of the Forums -- they're two separate entities. But at least that post being there gives people something to point out to people who violate the rule. (I don't know where else it could be posted that would be more prominent, really. Unless there were some way to alter the Gallery upload page to just include a warning about it.)
186
Art and Elfquest / Re: Is EQFA redundant now?
« on: January 13, 2010, 12:13:04 PM »
I just noticed that too, Foxeye! And I wondered immediately what the deal was... I noticed yesterday that someone was uploading a ton of EQ canon art to an album (Ryan Rhoades is doing it, so did Jay Baldridge), as well as mixing up EQ fan calendar stuff with EQ Wendy art.
It kind of looks to me like one problem with the whole Gallery feature there is... is there any expression of a "community standard"? I don't see anywhere (connected with the Gallery) that tries to communicate rules or best practices, that would tell folks "this isn't your Flickr account where you can upload stuff that you personally like"...
... Or indeed, the discussion hasn't been had, about what the Gallery is *for*. Maybe the consensus will be that it *is* for that. I guess we're assuming that the Gallery there would operate more like the galleries here, or like our personal art-threads in the forum. But that's an assumption.
It kind of looks to me like one problem with the whole Gallery feature there is... is there any expression of a "community standard"? I don't see anywhere (connected with the Gallery) that tries to communicate rules or best practices, that would tell folks "this isn't your Flickr account where you can upload stuff that you personally like"...
... Or indeed, the discussion hasn't been had, about what the Gallery is *for*. Maybe the consensus will be that it *is* for that. I guess we're assuming that the Gallery there would operate more like the galleries here, or like our personal art-threads in the forum. But that's an assumption.
187
Art and Elfquest / Re: Is EQFA redundant now?
« on: January 13, 2010, 08:28:00 AM »
I definitely have to agree with some of your points, Faerydae.
My perception (at the moment) of the progression of the site update is that WaRP realized that the old site was very out-of-date looking, so of course, they wanted something that looks contemporary and professional. Great! But I'm also perceiving the idea that they've decided that the Wave of the Future is places like Facebook and MySpace and Twitter, and they want to capture the attention of users who are attracted to those places... without considering whether the people who already used EQ.com or SoC felt the same way.
Maybe that's just the way of things. After all -- the regular users of SoC are users they already had and whose loyalty could be counted on to a certain extent. It's fairly likely that a good percentage of them will swallow their frustrations and work to adapt to the new format. So what the change in format does is make it possible to attract *new* users whose willingness to check out and become a part of a site really *is* dependent on it being in that New Shiny format.
I also can't really argue with the fact that Facebook is ridiculously popular, and it seems to have some staying power. Just because *I* hate it, that's immaterial. Millions of people use it, and therefore must like it; and by making EQ.com/SoC more like Facebook, I can see how the likelihood is that they'll appeal to that market, and that's what they want, to expand the EQ market.
With reference to one of Richard's latest posts in the discussion about the new site... I really do have to wonder how many users of SoC truly wanted it to become MORE like Facebook. The fact that "some" people said that they wanted more Facebook-like features doesn't mean that's what the user-base overall wanted. There wasn't really any wide survey of SoC users on that point, was there? I don't recall getting to weigh in on it.
Or, as you say, on anything. It was all kept very hush-hush. And the other disadvantage of doing a site redesign that way, as we're seeing now, is that any complaints that any users have about new features is met with some defensiveness. Which is only natural! They put a LOT of work into the redesign, and obviously, they chose things for it that they wanted. It's hard to unveil something like that, and have your users grumble about it. I would also acknowledge that it's true that you can't please everyone. Even if the process had been open, and there'd been a bunch of surveys of users of the old site/forum, they'd still wind up disappointing some people.
But still... I get the feeling that in some ways, it may not help them "hear" what are valid user complaints, because the attitude now seems to be "you just dislike it because it's new, come back in 6 months after you're used to it and tell us then what you like/dislike". (Or, "suck it up" -- such as the latest post about the non-turn-off-able sounds. Really? The answer is "we think it's cute, and why do you need to use the page those sounds are on, anyway, if you don't like them"? That's the answer? Oh dear.)
Maybe it seemed like too chaotic an idea to survey the user-base beforehand. But, as you point out, once the whole redesign is DONE, there's a lot more reluctance to listen to user opinions or to change some things that aren't easily changeable.
I have no doubt that they're listening to some degree, trying to fix some things, and that they're flexible on some things. But we're already seeing that in other fundamental matters, they're not.
My perception (at the moment) of the progression of the site update is that WaRP realized that the old site was very out-of-date looking, so of course, they wanted something that looks contemporary and professional. Great! But I'm also perceiving the idea that they've decided that the Wave of the Future is places like Facebook and MySpace and Twitter, and they want to capture the attention of users who are attracted to those places... without considering whether the people who already used EQ.com or SoC felt the same way.
Maybe that's just the way of things. After all -- the regular users of SoC are users they already had and whose loyalty could be counted on to a certain extent. It's fairly likely that a good percentage of them will swallow their frustrations and work to adapt to the new format. So what the change in format does is make it possible to attract *new* users whose willingness to check out and become a part of a site really *is* dependent on it being in that New Shiny format.
I also can't really argue with the fact that Facebook is ridiculously popular, and it seems to have some staying power. Just because *I* hate it, that's immaterial. Millions of people use it, and therefore must like it; and by making EQ.com/SoC more like Facebook, I can see how the likelihood is that they'll appeal to that market, and that's what they want, to expand the EQ market.
With reference to one of Richard's latest posts in the discussion about the new site... I really do have to wonder how many users of SoC truly wanted it to become MORE like Facebook. The fact that "some" people said that they wanted more Facebook-like features doesn't mean that's what the user-base overall wanted. There wasn't really any wide survey of SoC users on that point, was there? I don't recall getting to weigh in on it.
Or, as you say, on anything. It was all kept very hush-hush. And the other disadvantage of doing a site redesign that way, as we're seeing now, is that any complaints that any users have about new features is met with some defensiveness. Which is only natural! They put a LOT of work into the redesign, and obviously, they chose things for it that they wanted. It's hard to unveil something like that, and have your users grumble about it. I would also acknowledge that it's true that you can't please everyone. Even if the process had been open, and there'd been a bunch of surveys of users of the old site/forum, they'd still wind up disappointing some people.
But still... I get the feeling that in some ways, it may not help them "hear" what are valid user complaints, because the attitude now seems to be "you just dislike it because it's new, come back in 6 months after you're used to it and tell us then what you like/dislike". (Or, "suck it up" -- such as the latest post about the non-turn-off-able sounds. Really? The answer is "we think it's cute, and why do you need to use the page those sounds are on, anyway, if you don't like them"? That's the answer? Oh dear.)
Maybe it seemed like too chaotic an idea to survey the user-base beforehand. But, as you point out, once the whole redesign is DONE, there's a lot more reluctance to listen to user opinions or to change some things that aren't easily changeable.
I have no doubt that they're listening to some degree, trying to fix some things, and that they're flexible on some things. But we're already seeing that in other fundamental matters, they're not.
188
Art and Elfquest / Re: Is EQFA redundant now?
« on: January 12, 2010, 05:42:54 PM »
*headdesk* Okay, wow... I've logged in, but... aargh.
I don't really want to bitch about the new site in any official venue, because... well, I'm sure there's still plenty of things to streamline and all, and some of it may just be a matter of getting used to a new thing, but, may I just say...
* automatically-playing sounds? are the TOOL OF THE DEVIL for websites. AARGH. (Look, the wolf howl --- that I can't apparently turn off any faster than I can hit the "skip intro" button -- is nice the first time, but every time I visit the site? The fluttery noise and giggle that Petalwing makes on the main page is only slightly less obnoxious.) It's a bad idea overall, IMO, for EQ.com to now be a site that I can't send people to without warning them "caution! plays sounds that you can't turn off!"
* the flash viewer for the online comics? AARGH. Why? Because you CAN'T SKIP PAGES. Skipping pages in the old version of the site wasn't easy, either -- but at least you could go up to the URL address bar and manually type in "20" if you wanted to skip to page 20. Now, you can't even do that. Want to peek at the middle or end of any issue of the comics? You've got to hit the "forward" button a jillion times. This only gets worse in some of the collected storylines -- Dreamtime in color, for example, which puts all of the DT issues into a single file. Want to peek at something in the sixth issue of that storyline? Prepare to have your clicking finger fall off...
* am bummed that the avatar pic in the SoC threads displays so frickin' TINY. I pretty much can't use the avatar I've been using all along, because it doesn't read at that size. (Maybe this is something that can be fixed if people ask for it? Just like in the old version of SoC, the avatar display size in the threads was eventually set larger?)
* oh dear... well, my art thread in the Fanart and Fanfic section of the Forum appears to be pretty messed up... that's disheartening. A lot of the images I originally posted are now broken and look like they'd have to be redone manually. Other images are only displayed partially and I don't even know how to try to fix that. And at 22 pages' worth of thread... the desire to go through it and fix everything manually is practically nonexistent.
* boy, you guys aren't kidding. That gallery set-up is terrible. I think I could change my vote above to "Yes, I will still use EQFA!" because ugh, I see very little about that gallery set-up that appeals to me...
Man.
I was really looking forward to the big EQ redesign, too! And now... honestly, it's not just things that are different that I'd have to get used to, it's that there's a bunch of stuff that's either "broken", or in fact worse than the old site (for me, in terms of ease of use). That's really bumming me out.
I don't really want to bitch about the new site in any official venue, because... well, I'm sure there's still plenty of things to streamline and all, and some of it may just be a matter of getting used to a new thing, but, may I just say...
* automatically-playing sounds? are the TOOL OF THE DEVIL for websites. AARGH. (Look, the wolf howl --- that I can't apparently turn off any faster than I can hit the "skip intro" button -- is nice the first time, but every time I visit the site? The fluttery noise and giggle that Petalwing makes on the main page is only slightly less obnoxious.) It's a bad idea overall, IMO, for EQ.com to now be a site that I can't send people to without warning them "caution! plays sounds that you can't turn off!"
* the flash viewer for the online comics? AARGH. Why? Because you CAN'T SKIP PAGES. Skipping pages in the old version of the site wasn't easy, either -- but at least you could go up to the URL address bar and manually type in "20" if you wanted to skip to page 20. Now, you can't even do that. Want to peek at the middle or end of any issue of the comics? You've got to hit the "forward" button a jillion times. This only gets worse in some of the collected storylines -- Dreamtime in color, for example, which puts all of the DT issues into a single file. Want to peek at something in the sixth issue of that storyline? Prepare to have your clicking finger fall off...
* am bummed that the avatar pic in the SoC threads displays so frickin' TINY. I pretty much can't use the avatar I've been using all along, because it doesn't read at that size. (Maybe this is something that can be fixed if people ask for it? Just like in the old version of SoC, the avatar display size in the threads was eventually set larger?)
* oh dear... well, my art thread in the Fanart and Fanfic section of the Forum appears to be pretty messed up... that's disheartening. A lot of the images I originally posted are now broken and look like they'd have to be redone manually. Other images are only displayed partially and I don't even know how to try to fix that. And at 22 pages' worth of thread... the desire to go through it and fix everything manually is practically nonexistent.
* boy, you guys aren't kidding. That gallery set-up is terrible. I think I could change my vote above to "Yes, I will still use EQFA!" because ugh, I see very little about that gallery set-up that appeals to me...
Man.
I was really looking forward to the big EQ redesign, too! And now... honestly, it's not just things that are different that I'd have to get used to, it's that there's a bunch of stuff that's either "broken", or in fact worse than the old site (for me, in terms of ease of use). That's really bumming me out.
189
Art and Elfquest / Re: Is EQFA redundant now?
« on: January 12, 2010, 12:45:36 PM »
To be honest, Windrider -- when I got that email that seemed to suggest EQ.com was going to become *more* like Facebook? I shuddered. I don't use Facebook. I don't like it. EQ becoming *more* like that will, frankly, make me want to use it less.
Yeah, yeah, pass me a rocking chair and a cane that I can shake in a vigorous and disapproving manner.
Yeah, yeah, pass me a rocking chair and a cane that I can shake in a vigorous and disapproving manner.
190
Art and Elfquest / Re: Is EQFA redundant now?
« on: January 12, 2010, 11:02:13 AM »
I also feel kind of "wait and see" about this. It's going to take a bit to figure out how the new EQ site is going to work, and see whether its new features replace other old ways of doing things.
191
Dead Thread Archive / Re: Adding Galleries and Images
« on: January 01, 2010, 08:53:41 AM »
Oh! Well, actually, that makes sense, as I made a newer album but didn't set an icon for it, so it has the little folder thing too. I wonder if I can change what the "top level" album is, and thereby fix it? Hmm.
192
Dead Thread Archive / Re: Adding Galleries and Images
« on: December 31, 2009, 10:00:42 PM »
Ah, so there isn't actually a way to SET it? (Or, say, change it once it's set? Which is the thing I find surprising, I guess.)
193
Art and Elfquest / Re: 2010 Fan Calendar Guidelines
« on: December 31, 2009, 10:25:31 AM »
Windrider -- it may not help you this year (don't know if it's too much work), but I ran into a similar issue when offering desktops for our group's calendar this year.
One person had a suggestion for widescreens which wouldn't interfere with the artwork, and that is -- use the "leftover" space to one side or the other to put a small calendar grid in (just a smallish square with the days/dates). She was saying that she likes having such a small calendar available at-a-glance, and it would be small enough that it wouldn't overwhelm such a big desktop. She sent me an example, which got my brain working; I can pass it on to you if you like. It's one way, at least, to almost make it look like that extra space at the side has a purpose (even though it's just filler to make the image wide enough for the screen).
One person had a suggestion for widescreens which wouldn't interfere with the artwork, and that is -- use the "leftover" space to one side or the other to put a small calendar grid in (just a smallish square with the days/dates). She was saying that she likes having such a small calendar available at-a-glance, and it would be small enough that it wouldn't overwhelm such a big desktop. She sent me an example, which got my brain working; I can pass it on to you if you like. It's one way, at least, to almost make it look like that extra space at the side has a purpose (even though it's just filler to make the image wide enough for the screen).
194
Dead Thread Archive / Re: Adding Galleries and Images
« on: December 30, 2009, 08:44:36 PM »
I'm stumped! How do you set an icon for your top-level folder in the Members Galleries? I used to have an icon set for that, but I think it got lost when the whole place was upgraded. (The two icons I use for the subfolders are still visible.) I see others have managed it, but for the life of me, I can't figure out where to do it...
195
Holts / Re: River Twine Holt
« on: December 29, 2009, 08:40:19 AM »Just as a general note: characters may become adoptable again if their owners leave the group. But also, next summer, we will have some new child characters becoming available (the group will be doing a time-jump next summer, which will bring several of our now-being-born kids up to adoptable age).
If you are ever interested in the possibility of adopting in the future at RTH, but no available character appeals to you, you might consider joining as a Reader Member. RMs get more access to the site and messageboard, and whenever a character becomes adoptable, they are given first crack at them. (The only requirement for being an RM is to leave 1 comment on a story or piece of art per quarter, so we can keep track of who's still around.)
196
Holts / Re: River Twine Holt
« on: December 24, 2009, 07:56:18 AM »
Once again, RiverTwine has done a calendar for the group for 2010! It can be found here:
http://www.rivertwine.com/RTH_2010_Calendar.php
http://www.rivertwine.com/RTH_2010_Calendar.php
197
Art and Elfquest / Re: Art markers - Letraset vs Prismacolor vs Copics
« on: December 14, 2009, 10:05:18 AM »I keep wanting to play with markers, but .... the thing I hated as a kid was the l.ines that would show up when you went over previously colored areas - I HATE that.
Do the art markers REALLY not do that? I just have a hard time believing it enough to shell out any cash for a set. LOL.
My experience with the Copics, certainly, (and I think that the other brands are the same), is that this still happens -- but, you can come up with techniques to overcome the problem.
I'd be interested to hear other people comment regarding their experiences with this.
What I've found is that, in the first place, it depends on the type of paper used. I use a coated heavyweight paper, and yes, when I'm first laying down color, I can see the issue you're talking about. My workaround has been that I obliterate the lines by saturating the area with that color.
What this also means, for me, is that I have developed my style to create a lot of smaller areas that can be more easily filled and saturated so as to avoid areas of too-inconsistent color. Obviously, once you start doing shading in those areas, that breaks things up too. I simply never do a very-large area of a single color with the markers; that's what Photoshop is for! (I use that pretty often for a cloudless sky, for example.) But any other area of any piece I'm coloring is usually being colored in such a way that it's a lot of little areas of color variation (shading and so forth), so slight inconsistencies in color coverage don't matter.
Another factor is that I believe some of the art-markers offer "blender" options. Maybe someone else here can speak to those; I haven't really used the technique. I get the impression from others that it only works on certain types of paper.
Quote
And refillable? Really? ::perkperkperk::
Well, the Copics are. I don't know about any of the other brands, although I'm pretty sure that the Prismacolors aren't. (I recall that from when I was comparison shopping before making the big investment.)
198
Art and Elfquest / Re: Art markers - Letraset vs Prismacolor vs Copics
« on: December 10, 2009, 07:17:28 AM »
Yeah. I don't disbelieve about the quality scale! (I was just curious to hear more.) But for me, the two biggest things are... the BRUSH TIP (which AFAIK the other marker brands just don't offer), and the ability to refill.
Meanwhile, how the inks age doesn't really matter to me at all... every piece of art I do gets scanned (and often retouched in various ways) anyway! Not that I've gone back to look at what my Copic pieces from 2 years ago look like, but I'm also not sure why I'd care. (Okay... no, I would care if for some reason all of my scanned art disappeared, and the hard copy was my only backup. Sure. But then I could always use the hardcopy backup to recreate and recolor the art if the original was that degraded.) But then, after all, I'm not someone who sells original art pieces, nor am I the sort of artist who anyone is going to care to buy a 20-year-old original from me.
(I'll tell you what irks me a bit about the Copics -- trying to tell from color swatches what color the ink is. This is just a pain when ordering, though, added to by the fact that I don't live somewhere with a full range of Copics in a store, where I could test them. I have to guess and hope that what I'm ordering is what I'm aiming for; sometimes, it hasn't been. Every time I go into an art store, the gigantic display of Prismacolors taunts me. ;-) But they don't have the brush tip, so... )
Meanwhile, how the inks age doesn't really matter to me at all... every piece of art I do gets scanned (and often retouched in various ways) anyway! Not that I've gone back to look at what my Copic pieces from 2 years ago look like, but I'm also not sure why I'd care. (Okay... no, I would care if for some reason all of my scanned art disappeared, and the hard copy was my only backup. Sure. But then I could always use the hardcopy backup to recreate and recolor the art if the original was that degraded.) But then, after all, I'm not someone who sells original art pieces, nor am I the sort of artist who anyone is going to care to buy a 20-year-old original from me.
(I'll tell you what irks me a bit about the Copics -- trying to tell from color swatches what color the ink is. This is just a pain when ordering, though, added to by the fact that I don't live somewhere with a full range of Copics in a store, where I could test them. I have to guess and hope that what I'm ordering is what I'm aiming for; sometimes, it hasn't been. Every time I go into an art store, the gigantic display of Prismacolors taunts me. ;-) But they don't have the brush tip, so... )
199
Art and Elfquest / Re: Art markers - Letraset vs Prismacolor vs Copics
« on: December 09, 2009, 01:42:47 PM »Copics are on the low end of the quality scale for markers. I prefer Pantone and Prismacolors, but stick with whatever works best for you.
Can you elaborate on that a bit? When you talk about the quality scale, what do you mean? Color fidelity? etc.?
200
Art and Elfquest / Re: 2010 Fan Calendar Guidelines
« on: November 29, 2009, 04:38:52 PM »
I'm done. 
I've got to add my signature, and I'm kind of taking the evening to stare at it to see if I want to make any more tweaks. But I will have it in on time. Yay!
I've got to add my signature, and I'm kind of taking the evening to stare at it to see if I want to make any more tweaks. But I will have it in on time. Yay!