JC Richard - Art of, Discussion, Releases and Appreciation.

[Timbrh2001]

Saw this print in the gallery, you can't tell from the digital pic, but the actual print is grainy as hell. The characters faces look really distorted up close.

Is that your first time seeing a JC Richard print in person?

[pugsly]

Saw this print in the gallery, you can't tell from the digital pic, but the actual print is grainy as hell. The characters faces look really distorted up close.

Im sorry but that's complete BS- I'm looking at my copy right now and it honestly looks great, faces aren't distorted at all. I'll post some pics ASAP.
Maybe he got a bad registration copy, but my figures look fine, vibrant colors etc.. the only 'grain' I can see is in the clouds, which is similar to the style used in a few other prints. FWIW, he has a different style than most mondo artists and the images are designed to have a rougher drawing/painting look than the more usual cartoonish looking screenprint with hard edges, keylines etc

[bryndavies]

not mine, but i saw this recently. 111296218422

[Brian2013]

Saw this print in the gallery, you can't tell from the digital pic, but the actual print is grainy as hell. The characters faces look really distorted up close.

Im sorry but that's complete BS- I'm looking at my copy right now and it honestly looks great, faces aren't distorted at all. I'll post some pics ASAP.
Maybe he got a bad registration copy, but my figures look fine, vibrant colors etc.. the only 'grain' I can see is in the clouds, which is similar to the style used in a few other prints. FWIW, he has a different style than most mondo artists and the images are designed to have a rougher drawing/painting look than the more usual cartoonish looking screenprint with hard edges, keylines etc

Have to disagree. I am talking about the one hanging in the wall at the Gallery. I never even bought the print because Peter Pan, Wendy, and the kids faces get horribly blurry the closer you get to their image. It looks fine from afar, the closer you get to the image.. it is not sharp at all.

[Timbrh2001]

Saw this print in the gallery, you can't tell from the digital pic, but the actual print is grainy as hell. The characters faces look really distorted up close.

Im sorry but that's complete BS- I'm looking at my copy right now and it honestly looks great, faces aren't distorted at all. I'll post some pics ASAP.
Maybe he got a bad registration copy, but my figures look fine, vibrant colors etc.. the only 'grain' I can see is in the clouds, which is similar to the style used in a few other prints. FWIW, he has a different style than most mondo artists and the images are designed to have a rougher drawing/painting look than the more usual cartoonish looking screenprint with hard edges, keylines etc

Have to disagree. I am talking about the one hanging in the wall at the Gallery. I never even bought the print because Peter Pan, Wendy, and the kids faces get horribly blurry the closer you get to their image. It looks fine from afar, the closer you get to the image.. it is not sharp at all.

Is it your first time seeing a JC Richard print in person?

[Brian2013]

Saw this print in the gallery, you can't tell from the digital pic, but the actual print is grainy as hell. The characters faces look really distorted up close.

Im sorry but that's complete BS- I'm looking at my copy right now and it honestly looks great, faces aren't distorted at all. I'll post some pics ASAP.
Maybe he got a bad registration copy, but my figures look fine, vibrant colors etc.. the only 'grain' I can see is in the clouds, which is similar to the style used in a few other prints. FWIW, he has a different style than most mondo artists and the images are designed to have a rougher drawing/painting look than the more usual cartoonish looking screenprint with hard edges, keylines etc

Have to disagree. I am talking about the one hanging in the wall at the Gallery. I never even bought the print because Peter Pan, Wendy, and the kids faces get horribly blurry the closer you get to their image. It looks fine from afar, the closer you get to the image.. it is not sharp at all.

Is it your first time seeing a JC Richard print in person?

Nope:)

[pugsly]

Saw this print in the gallery, you can't tell from the digital pic, but the actual print is grainy as hell. The characters faces look really distorted up close.

Im sorry but that's complete BS- I'm looking at my copy right now and it honestly looks great, faces aren't distorted at all. I'll post some pics ASAP.
Maybe he got a bad registration copy, but my figures look fine, vibrant colors etc.. the only 'grain' I can see is in the clouds, which is similar to the style used in a few other prints. FWIW, he has a different style than most mondo artists and the images are designed to have a rougher drawing/painting look than the more usual cartoonish looking screenprint with hard edges, keylines etc

Have to disagree. I am talking about the one hanging in the wall at the Gallery. I never even bought the print because Peter Pan, Wendy, and the kids faces get horribly blurry the closer you get to their image. It looks fine from afar, the closer you get to the image.. it is not sharp at all.

You can keep posting the same thing over and over in multiple threads but I'll keep countering how wrong you are. I'm looking at it right now, and there's nothing blurry or distorted about it.
Either you're using the wrong adjectives or you're just confused.

[jimbobiii]

yup. It's a gorgeous print, and JC Richard's usual style

[Timbrh2001]

yup. It's a gorgeous print, and JC Richard's usual style

That's kinda what I figured. Can't trust those damn '13ers

[Brian2013]

Saw this print in the gallery, you can't tell from the digital pic, but the actual print is grainy as hell. The characters faces look really distorted up close.

Im sorry but that's complete BS- I'm looking at my copy right now and it honestly looks great, faces aren't distorted at all. I'll post some pics ASAP.
Maybe he got a bad registration copy, but my figures look fine, vibrant colors etc.. the only 'grain' I can see is in the clouds, which is similar to the style used in a few other prints. FWIW, he has a different style than most mondo artists and the images are designed to have a rougher drawing/painting look than the more usual cartoonish looking screenprint with hard edges, keylines etc

Have to disagree. I am talking about the one hanging in the wall at the Gallery. I never even bought the print because Peter Pan, Wendy, and the kids faces get horribly blurry the closer you get to their image. It looks fine from afar, the closer you get to the image.. it is not sharp at all.

You can keep posting the same thing over and over in multiple threads but I'll keep countering how wrong you are. I'm looking at it right now, and there's nothing blurry or distorted about it.
Either you're using the wrong adjectives or you're just confused.

Sorry you are blind as a bat. Wendy's face becomes half visible and the boys you can barely see any facial features. Like I said the print is fine from a distance, up close it's pixelated and looks like someone expanded from a low res image. That is my personal opinion on this particular print. I actually enjoy JC Richards work. Having an opinion on this specific print on why I don't like it is just as valid as you liking your copy. I wanted this print when I saw the digital version released but when I finally saw it in the gallery, the quality on the characters turned me off.

[pugsly]

You can keep posting the same thing over and over in multiple threads but I'll keep countering how wrong you are. I'm looking at it right now, and there's nothing blurry or distorted about it.
Either you're using the wrong adjectives or you're just confused.

Sorry you are blind as a bat. Wendy's face becomes half visible and the boys you can barely see any facial features. Like I said the print is fine from a distance, up close it's pixelated and looks like someone expanded from a low res image. That is my personal opinion on this particular print. I actually enjoy JC Richards work. Having an opinion on this specific print on why I don't like it is just as valid as you liking your copy. I wanted this print when I saw the digital version released but when I finally saw it in the gallery, the quality on the characters turned me off.

Let me get this straight.. you're 'remembering' what it looks like at the gallery, and I'm actually looking right at it and am supposed to take your opinion seriously? I'm in my home under good lighting, seeing it's not pixelated, it's not distorted. It's a particluar style of illustration, and you're obviously not into it. I (and others) have stated we don't agree with your impressions and think it looks great. Why you keep harping on something you obviously don't care personally for is beyond me. Seems so much healthier to move on to what you DO like, and let people enjoy what they like- cheers.

[RambosRemodeler]

It's just his style. I've seen a few dozen of his prints in person and they all look like that.

[DidYouSeeMeEscaping]

You can keep posting the same thing over and over in multiple threads but I'll keep countering how wrong you are. I'm looking at it right now, and there's nothing blurry or distorted about it.
Either you're using the wrong adjectives or you're just confused.

Sorry you are blind as a bat. Wendy's face becomes half visible and the boys you can barely see any facial features. Like I said the print is fine from a distance, up close it's pixelated and looks like someone expanded from a low res image. That is my personal opinion on this particular print. I actually enjoy JC Richards work. Having an opinion on this specific print on why I don't like it is just as valid as you liking your copy. I wanted this print when I saw the digital version released but when I finally saw it in the gallery, the quality on the characters turned me off.

I thought the exact opposite. I saw it in person at the gallery and was actually surprised how solid the definition on Michaels face given how small it was and JCs style.

[Brian2013]

You can keep posting the same thing over and over in multiple threads but I'll keep countering how wrong you are. I'm looking at it right now, and there's nothing blurry or distorted about it.
Either you're using the wrong adjectives or you're just confused.

Sorry you are blind as a bat. Wendy's face becomes half visible and the boys you can barely see any facial features. Like I said the print is fine from a distance, up close it's pixelated and looks like someone expanded from a low res image. That is my personal opinion on this particular print. I actually enjoy JC Richards work. Having an opinion on this specific print on why I don't like it is just as valid as you liking your copy. I wanted this print when I saw the digital version released but when I finally saw it in the gallery, the quality on the characters turned me off.

Let me get this straight.. you're 'remembering' what it looks like at the gallery, and I'm actually looking right at it and am supposed to take your opinion seriously? I'm in my home under good lighting, seeing it's not pixelated, it's not distorted. It's a particluar style of illustration, and you're obviously not into it. I (and others) have stated we don't agree with your impressions and think it looks great. Why you keep harping on something you obviously don't care personally for is beyond me. Seems so much healthier to move on to what you DO like, and let people enjoy what they like- cheers.

Lol I love JC Richards art style, He is one of my favorites. You are under the impression I have a problem with his art style I don't, I had a problem with this particular print due too the character image quality on their face and body. He has done other prints that have rendered much more clearly even with the gritty paint theme. That was my only point. I love the look and background theme, the ship in the moon, and the back city feel. Yes I can remember clearly this print, I've been to the gallery twice already and have spent quite a bit of time observing this piece. This was particularly one of the first prints I looked at when I went into the gallery opening night. You trying to find some type of fault in my personal opinion on this print is ridiculous when I am just stating what I examined up close with my face 12 inches from the print. Pretty sure this thread states discussion in the thread. Or am I mistaken and opinions don't matter as long as they don't agree with yours?

[Lightagami]

It has been mentioned before.
http://forum.expressobeans.com/viewtopi ... &start=630
The issue has been discussed for a couple pages after.
And yes I do agree with you Brian. JC's actual prints look a bit different than the JPEGs. It is JC's style. Although I have not seen the Peter Pan but this is true with his other prints. I have seen the Jaws he did for HCG and I think it looks great. The JPEG can mislead what you might expect from the actual print but I think it works well overall. I was a bit disappointed when I first saw his work but had learned to appreciate and loved it overtime.
I do not think that your opinion was a personal attack on JC. I think we all can voice our own opinion and can respect one another's as well. Remember art is subjective.