I commented already on the magnificent things that you achieved with steam-powered computers, Jedakk, but little did I know just how much effort went into it.After 15 years I'd forgotten some of the story behind that picture. Dan (Welsh Webb) and I corresponded often back in 2002 and he hadn't gotten into his crux photography phase then. He drew that picture on a large sheet of drawing paper, maybe 18" x 24", and then had no way to scan such a large format to share it online. Scanners that could handle anything bigger than letter or legal size were scarce back then.
I had already pieced together some scans for him to get some of his smaller drawings into digital form but nothing as large as that. Looking back, it was a hell of a lot of work! Here's the email exchange for "Sunday in the Park":
5/5/2002 - WelshWebb to Jedakk:
I'm still struggling with the tedious detail of the current drawing. It currently contains seventeen figures, nine of which are on crosses, one who is ready to be "crucified" and two undressing. The rest are people just mullein around the park. I still need to draw a couple of police officers (Haven't found a good reference yet) and a couple of city workers, so there is still much to do!
I don't know why I'm wasting my time with this! Oh, it's not that I don't want to draw it, it's just that I really need to be working on my convention art, and I need to knock off an oil painting for the Plymouth Art's Consul, so that I can eat this week! (I can't wait until I start at the bakery...Free bread!!!).
Even so, when I start working on a piece of art, I can't stop. If I do, it never gets done!
I'll send it out as soon as I'm done, and can figure out how to get it scanned properly.
(It's just too damned big! No more large art for a while!).
5/6/2002: WelshWebb to Jedakk:
The large drawing is finally done...Or, at least done enough! I'm too tired to work on it any further!
I've tried to scan it, but the paper is simply too large! I'm getting too many hot spots, and glare off the paper, so I think I'm going to have to take it to a copy-shop, and try printing sections of it. If that works, then I'll send you the copies.
5/6/2002: Jedakk to WelshWebb:
It's strange that you're getting so much glare off of the paper on that scan you're trying to do. That usually only happens if the paper's not completely flat on top of the scanner. Are those the wrinkles you mentioned before? I look forward to seeing it whenever you're done.
5/6/2002 - WelshWebb to Jedakk:
The paper is differently not flat on the scanner. I tried to lay my huge anatomy book over it, but it didn't help. I have one more thing to try before I had down to the copy shop. (I'm really to broke to do that!). So, we'll see. I do want to get this done, and off my mind! Besides, as small as my apartment is, I know the drawing will get damaged if I keep letting it lay around!
5/6/2002 - WelshWebb to Jedakk:
"Say friends? Do like scans that overlap? Not just overlap, but seriously overlap? Well, then, come on down to DAN'S OVERLAPPING AUTORAMMA!!!!"
I don't know how long it's been since you've seen an America local commercial...But they haven't improved much...
In order to overlap the whole picture, I had to do 18 scans! So, you've asked for it!!!
The center sections came out overexposed this time. Very annoying, but not much I can do about it.
My zip-file is being a pain, and I'm going to have to send them to you in smaller files.
As your system is obviously better than mine, I figure you won't have any problems (I hope!).
I'm also certain you'll figure out the titles with no problem (LUC=Left upper corner) and so forth.
Do as you wish with this! I've had it! I'll not do another one this large again! It's back to 11x14 for me!
Thanks!
-Dan
5/7/2002 - WelshWebb to Jedakk:
I hope you like the giant drawing! I loosely based it on our Village Green (which is, in fact, called Kellog Park). Some of the names of the girls are slightly changed from ones I actually know, who probably would choose a few hours of public humiliation over several worth of community service!
5/7/2002 - Jedakk to WelshWebb:
I have got most of your drawing composited but it will be tomorrow sometime before I'll be able to finish it. You might see it in your e-mail early in the morning your time since it's 8 hours later here than where you are. One problem you may have with this is the file size. I expect that it will be pretty large and that will no doubt cause some of the Crux guys to bitch. I'll try making some reduced size versions also and see how that works out for size and quality.
5/9/2002 - Jedakk to WelshWebb:
Dan,
Sorry I haven't gotten your picture put together completely yet. Too much real work to do and not enough time to get all the work done on it. I do have it pieced together but I still have to match the brightness levels across all 18 scans, blend the edges together and create the final composite. Because each of those scans occupies its own layer in Photoshop, the working file is huge, up around 80 megabytes I think. The final JPG I'll send you will be a small fraction of that size, of course.
So did Jess pose for any of these characters in this picture? I remember you said that it was easy to modify her body to get different body types for your pictures. This is an interesting fantasy picture, aside from its crucifixion theme. I've always liked pictures of this type with a variety of actions going on. You have all of these naked girls tied to their crosses, being humiliated for their crimes, and there's a girl reading a book among the crosses, a couple of young boys who appear to not be too sure about what's going on, and the old couple giving the naked criminals disapproving looks as they walk through. This is quite an effort you've done here and very creative. I hope that you get some positive responses from the Crux people but you never know.
5/11/2002 - Jedakk to WelshWebb:
Dan,
Attached is the picture I composited from the scans you sent. This one is reduced to 8"x12" and enhanced to darken the linework. I also did a little work on some of the smudges to clean them up some. I have a full-size 24"x36" version also but it's a pretty big file, over a megabyte so I'll send it in a separate e-mail and see if it goes ok.
You know it's interesting to me that I looked at all of the pieces of this individually for some time so I was very familiar with each part of the picture, but when I finally had it all together, background levels all matched and the edges blended and looked at the whole thing at once it was a very different effect. I like it, this is an interesting picture with lots of detail.
Well, I hope you get some feedback from the Crux people when you post this, it's certainly unique and very well done!
Jedakk
5/12/2002 - WelshWebb to Jedakk:
Yes, all the girls (except the old lady and the girl reading) are Jess. The wonderful thing about using her as a model is that I can draw here directly from life, and her natural beauty jumps on to the page, or with just a few adjustments of the pencil, can make her look completely different! I'm still waiting for our crap Michigan weather to improve so that I can see about getting her back outside for a little photography!
5/13/2002 - WelshWebb to Jedakk:
Jedakk!5/13/2002 - Jedakk to WelshWebb:
Master of computers! I thank you! Hell, this looks better than the original!
I'll see about posting it on the sight soon, but the computer demons still linger! I'm now starting to think that it may be my computer after all, and not AOL as I believed.
Also, I'm very busy getting ready for this weekend's convention, and juggling my new job at the same time!
I was very relieved when Jess told me how much she liked the drawings I did, and that she can't wait to see this one. She has also told me that she's more than happy to keep posing for me! What a relief! Good models are hard to find! Especially in Michigan! Now if we can just get some warm weather!!!!
Dan,
I'm sure that picture doesn't look better than the original but I think it's a little improvement over the scanned images. Hope you can get that damned computer fixed, they really will drive you crazy.
Jedakk
5/14/2002 - WelshWebb to Jedakk:
Your piecing together of the drawing does look better for one reason...It's darker! I didn't have time to shade, and really detail the original, so yours was a definite improvement! I did not get the larger attachment to your (first?) e-mail, however, so I don't know how that came out.
I figure on posting the smaller jpg to the group, and the larger one into the files section, (although I don't know how to do that yet). Hopefully, it will be well received.
5/15/2002 - Jedakk to WelshWebb:
Dan,
I sent the larger version of the picture again but I suspect that it may be too big of an attachment for AOL to allow you to receive it. If that doesn't work I'll figure out another way to get it to you.
The manipulation I did to get that picture darker like that involved working with the picture's histogram, which is kind of a bar chart that shows the distribution of the shades of gray. For example, the "white" areas of the scans you sent actually weren't precisely white, they had a little gray in them. Some of that was from light smudging and some was just the color of the paper itself, and then some of it was due to the scanner's default settings for brightness and contrast.
When I got all of the 18 scans matched together so they fit, I had them on 18 separate layers in Photoshop. There were obvious difference in the backgrounds of each of them, so I went to each layer individually and set the "white point" on its histogram - the highest value - to be what I judged should be the lightest area of that particular piece. After I'd done that the white areas of the pieces all looked the same to my eye, so I then went through and blended all the edges of the scans out and created flat JPG files in two different sizes from the master Photoshop file.
Now in the JPG files, where everything was on a single layer, I once again opened the picture's histogram. This time I shifted the 50% gray point - literally the point that should be halfway between white and black - upwards toward the white end of the scale. That told Photoshop that any grays that had been on the lighter side of that point and now were on the darker side of it should be somewhere between "halfway black" and black. Again this is all an eyeball thing, no higher math involved.
There are ways to get a similar result by using only the brightness/contrast controls but I tend to shy away from that because those operations actually delete some detail from the picture. Not such a big deal with a pencil drawing but with continuous-tone photographs it can be a major consideration. There is also another way to convert the entire picture to only black and white with no shades of gray by setting a threshhold point. Anything above the threshhold is white and below it becomes black. Theoretically it ought to turn the picture into something like a pen-and-ink drawing but in reality it's very hard not to completely delete little details here and there.
Anyway, let me know if you get that last picture or not.
Jedakk
So again, that damned picture was a hell of a lot of work, both for Dan and for me. But here we are fifteen years later and people are still enjoying it. And look at all of the interesting things about how it was created:
- All of the girls in the picture are based on a single model who Dan was using at the time.
- The park in the picture is based on a real park in Michigan.
- It took 18 overlapping scans on a letter-size scanner to capture the image.
- We were fighting the limitations of Yahoo, AOL and being halfway around the world from each other.
Just for completeness, here's the larger version of "Sunday in the Park" from 2002:
Jedakk
Amazing story!
