Interviews

interviews

The OFFICIAL Website

I was recently interviewed by a fellow called Jags Dhanjal about my views on drawing digitally vs. traditional pen and ink. His questions were variations on ones I've answered thoroughly several times - including in THE ART OF BRIAN BOLLAND and COVER STORY - THE DC COMICS ART OF BRIAN BOLLAND. If you're interested my interview with Jags is reproduced here:

1 - How do you initially prepare for a brief/job?

I'll be talking exclusively about working on covers here, as that's what I mostly do. If it's something new I have to see the story proposal and the interior artist's character designs. If it's something on-going I have back issues I can look at for reference. I need a blank cover layout template so I know the trim size, the bleed and where the bits of text and the UPC box has to go. And if possible I like to have the cover logo so I can give it enough room and arrange the action round it.

2 - Is the way you create art/illustration 100% digital or are you still active in the traditional way? (i.e. do you create backgrounds, textures, brushes etc..)

Completely 100% digitally. Concept sketches, roughs, pencils, inks, colouring. Everything. The only exception is that I have a series of colour washes in various colours and various textures scanned in and saved on the computer. As well as that I've photographed interesting textures, bits of walls, canvas etc. I have all of these saved and in Photoshop, while colouring, I superimpose these washes and textures over the colours in the artwork. Also, I've created brush shapes in Photoshop by scanning real blots of ink wash. They're saved in a "brushes pallet". By selecting one or more of these I can create a messy hand-coloured effect.

3 - What impact has going digital had on the way you work?

I was always bad at painting. I absolutely hated mixing colours, washing out brushes. using an airbrush. My brushes were unreliable and would often refuse to come to a point or draw two lines when I wanted one. The airbrush would clog and spit blobs of ink - while simultaneously coating the inside of my lungs. Then there was all the masking out of the artwork, the washing of the airbrush. After the colour had been painted or sprayed over the ink line the ink line would have lost its blackness (especially when it was painted over with yellow) so I then had the laborious and boring process of going over every ink line a second time to make it black.
If I were to list the advantages in working on a computer I'd have to write a whole book. The only major negative impact is that there's no longer any physical artwork to keep or to sell.

4 - Is the computer used on every illustration you create?

Let me repeat myself. 100% computer. I'd rather not have to look at a pencil or brush again.

5 - What tools are you currently using to create art/illustrations, do you find it gives you the greatest outcome?

I do everything in Adobe Photoshop CS2. I have Manga Studio but I can't be bothered to learn how to use it. I also have Google Sketchup, a 3D architectural building tool and I've used it once.

6 - Technology has moved forward extremely fast over the past 30 years, do you find it difficult keeping up with updates and new software?

I use the computer for many many other things than illustration. In those cases I have to upgrade. For my work I stick with Adobe Photoshop CS2.

7 - A lot of comics seem to have some sort or digital aspect to them. Would you like to see the traditional style make a comeback, or is the industry you're in too reliant on digital advances?

The industry I'm in was always partly hand crafted and partly mechanically generated. The colours, for instance, were created using screens of fine dots printed on four differently coloured printing plates. The thing you held in your hand was a thing made by a machine. Today I personally prefer work that looks as if it was drawn in ink on paper. Most of it is and it'll continue that way for some time. Artists like to have artwork they can sell to collectors. Artists now have a choice as to whether to colour for real or digitally. There'll always be painters like Alex Ross and Glenn Fabry. I can't imagine them colouring on a computer. Artists like Dave McKean use paint, photography and Photoshop in fascinating combinations. To me, as long as it appears a human hand has created the work, I don't care what tool it used.

8 - Have you heard of the Wacom Inling? Please follow the link if you havn’t http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXbBA1DRE84. I have used this and have been blown away by it. It seems like the traditional methods of illustrations are making a comeback, (I’m sure some younger people would call it ‘Retro’) what are your thoughts on this tool and would it benefit you in any way?

I was intrigued when I saw it on Youtube. But then I thought: When I draw I make lots of mistakes. I erase a whole face or a whole drawing, or I want to rotate an arm by a few degrees or make a foot smaller. I also don't want my hand there on the drawing potentially smudging the ink. On the computer I can do my drawing in plain view, not partially obscured by my hand. I can zoom the drawing to make fine details easy to do. Or zoom out. I can lasso a hand or an arm and rotate it or resize it. When I'm drawing a figure I can draw one leg on one layer and another on another layer and move them or resize them independently. If I'm drawing a group scene I can do the same on any number of layers. I can fade these layers to 10% and on a new layer draw a tighter pencil version if I want. If I run out of page at the bottom I can move the whole thing up - or down. Occasionally I'll have something tricky to draw, a hand holding a gun for instance. I can photograph my own hand, slide the photo onto a layer beneath the pencils layer, fade it to about 30% and draw over it. Then delete the photo. When I'm satisfied with the pencils I fade that down to 10%, start a new layer called "INK". I zoom the picture up to 200% of its actual size so that, for instance, a single eye could be 2 inches across and start inking. That way you can only see the small detail you're working on - so to keep things in perspective I have a second window open of the same picture, this time small and showing the whole page. I can't see how any of this could be done with a pen in a notebook.

9 - Do you know of any artists/illustrators that think digital advances are the work of the devil and refuse to 'get on board' and do you think they would benefit from it given the current economic climate?

I don't know a single artist who doesn't use a computer for something. Some use it for their work some don't. Of the ones who don't, many of them would like to learn how to use one but they've been working traditionally for so long it's too late to change. In some cases, because of the speed the work has to be produced they pencil and ink traditionally and then send the work to a colourist to be coloured on a computer.

(in terms of getting work done quicker, better final outcome.)
10 - Traditional or Digital?

My speed hasn't changed. Many of the time consuming things like mixing colour, washing equipment, masking out artwork, has been taken away, but thanks to the almost infinite number of possibilities offered by the computer it means there are now a lot more things you can do and choices you have to make. Also, because you can zoom in, there's a temptation to draw in ever more minute detail. Often details too small to see on the printed page. Providing I maintain the appearance that the picture is hand-drawn (which it is) I'm happier with the results than pre-digital, especially in my use of colour.

11 - Where do you see yourself with your illustration in say 5 to 10 years?

I have a very specific style. It's too late to change now. I throw in some experimental ideas whenever I can. So, in answer to your question: Doing very much the same or dead.

12 – Is there anybody out there that is influencing you at the moment?

I'm impressed by a great many artists. If I could be influenced by them I would be but when I try to draw like them it ends up looking like me. I'm hugely impressed, at the moment, by the work of Tommy Lee Edwards on "Turf".

Entrevista Brian Bolland. An interview for the Spanish edition of Bolland Strips!

Looking at your career we see that your covers and illustrations production exceeds by far your comics production. Do you enjoy better doing covers over interiors or is there another reason for this?

At the moment I seem to enjoy doing interior pages more than covers. When you've drawn a few hundred covers you begin to run out of ideas. Occasionally I have a complete script to work from and there's a perfect image in there that'll make a great cover - and that's always exciting. Sometimes we have to get a cover image ready quickly for solicitation, the script hasn't been finished and I only have a vague idea what's going on in the story. That makes it harder. Also I'm not always as interested in the characters I'm given to draw. I can only do covers on books that are offered to me. There are certain kinds of characters that don't particularly inspire me but I have to draw them anyway because that's the work currently on offer. On the plus side: covers give me the opportunity to experiment (with photo collage etc.) more than interiors - and they pay much better.

Bolland Strips compiles stories where you did not only the art but the writing. Do you consider this works more yours than your cover illustrations and collaborations with other writers? And if so, What where your motivations to take this more personal path?

After working on Alan Moore's Killing Joke I couldn't think of another writer I was keen to work with. There's something about being a comic artist that places you in the position of being a skilled craftsman in the service of other people's visions. Before I became a professional I used the comics medium purely as a means of self expression. In Bolland Strips I was merely returning to that position.

Please tell us about how The Actress & the Bishop and Mr. Mamoulian where born.

Back in 1985 or so I drew a portfolio of prints for French Publisher Editions Deesse. One of them contained my first image of the Actress & the Bishop. Much later Garry Leach and Dave Elliott were putting together an anthology comic, A1. They asked me to contribute 3 pages written and drawn by me. The Actress & the Bishop were there waiting to tell their story.
In about 1986 I'd been looking at some of the quick cartoon strips I'd drawn during my student days. I was getting frustrated at just how long my "proper" work was taking and I wanted to draw something VERY quickly and to hell with what it looked like. Gradually I got more drawn into the world of the characters in Mr. Mamoulian and the possibilities of the form. I was always greatly impressed with the artists who drew super-hero comics but as an adult I'd grown out of reading about super-heroes. Mamoulian was a character who enabled me to speak about things that were more relevant to me.

In the introduction to The Actress & the Bishop you wrote that we are all running in the air like Wyle E. Coyote and that from that image came the dramatic thrust of the stories. This “running in the air” concept may sound a little nihilist but then we discover that you treat your characters with supreme tenderness, so… nihilist?, pessimist?, optimist?, a combination of the three? What kind of author (and human being) do you consider yourself?

Wow! A lot of deep philosophical questions and so little space to answer them! Firstly: If I explained precisely what I meant in the Actress & the Bishop there would be nothing left for the reader to discover. The "walking on air" metaphor is really there for the reader to ponder for themselves. Okay. Let me flesh it out. Much of the way we humans perceive the world has been taught to us by our elders. Up until the Enlightenment that understanding has been predicated on the idea of there being a god. Now that science and reason has seriously eroded that idea, and is more likely to be an anathema to the idea of a god, the firm ground which once supported those of a religious disposition has now been whipped away. And yet the religiously minded, indeed our civilizations as a whole, are running along in the firm belief that that nonexsistant ground is still there supporting us. As with Wyle E. Coyote, it's not for some time that reality (unpleasant reality) sets in and he realizes that there's nothing holding him up - and he falls. The metaphor then lets me down because the fall suggests a terrible disaster. To me it suggests a moment of clear understand. A moment of coming to terms with the truth.
In "The Thing in the Shed" we have (my attempt at) a set of interlocking assumptions - a set of mutually supporting beliefs, if you like - based on and revolving round the assumption of the existence of an entity that you neither see nor hear and doesn't intervene in any way - all of which are, in the end, revealed to be intrue. I'll leave that one for you to work out.
I've just looked up the word "nihilist" in the dictionary. The definition I get is "One who rejects all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless". To begin with: many people would find that definition to be nonsense on the grounds that religion and morality have very little to do with each other. Religion is the belief in a supernatural god along with its accompanying lesser gods and the unswerving loyalty to its tenets and traditions. Morality is about behaving decently to your fellow human beings and (one would argue) to other species and to the environment you live in. You could go on debating the details of that endlessly. In fact religion and morality are woefully at odds with each other. Finally: to say that life is "meaningless" would first require you to define the "meaning" of life. Do you mean "What is life for?" You could fill a whole book full of this discussion! The concept of a deity, the concept of morality and the concept of meaningfullness are all separate issues and have only been (erroneously) lumped together by tradition.
What kind of author do I consider myself to be? Well, firstly, I'm not to be taken too seriously. The way I draw and the way I choose to write does not lend itself to very serious content. I would never write and draw anything about the Holocaust or about the 9/11 attacks because my style and mode would trivialize it. That's not to say I don't have serious views on those things. If I alluded to those things it would probably be hidden behind layers of allegorical fun and games.
WHAT KIND OF HUMAN BEING AM I? Yikes! Well, I'm just this dull, forgettable, little man (although I'm really quite tall) who, nonetheless, has to grapple with all the big questions we all have to grapple with, equipped with only a mediocre brain to do so. Meanwhile I have to balance a degree of self expression with the need to earn a living as a comic artist.

Speaking about running in the air, Mr. Mamoulian is an expert in doing so, with the addition that he seems very aware of his “aerial runner” condition. Do you think that awareness is the cause of him being and outcast, “some sort of huge rodent” in the eyes of world?

I was going through quite a lonely time in my life. Like Mr. Mamoulian I spent a lot of time sitting in London cafés observing people and feeling like an outsider. A few of the interactions he had happened to me. Particularly the one where the two American girls do a drawing of him. Exactly that happened to me on a plane flying to the US. The "huge rodent" thing was really because Mamoulian looks more like a hedgehog than a man. He's a projection of my own subjective body image as I declined into middle age.

You not only created Mr. Mamoulian but you also created his creator, Mr. Alban Skandabeg. What can you tells us about this mysterious Albanian artist and the relationship you both enjoy? (And, above all, why did he stop sending you pages for the space of six long years?)

I started drawing Mr. Mamoulian in the 1980s. Just before Gorbachev and Glasnost. Some time before the sudden end to communism in Eastern Europe. Hence the "Scorpions" story. Back in those days I used to listen the the English language service or Radio Moscow (with Joe Adamov) and the wonderfully weird Radio Tyranna coming from Albania. In fact, at the time, Albania was the remotest and most paranoid of the Communist states with its despotic leader Enver Hoxha (we'd better check spelling). Even weirder: there was a little shop in a back street of London's Covent Garden called the Albanian Shop. In it you could buy busts of Enver Hoxha, books of his writings, Albanian felt hats, badges. That kinda thing. I found the place fascinating. Albania has a folk hero called Skandabeg. They have statues of him on horseback. I've long since forgotten exactly who he was. I just stole the name as the name of a struggling artist who was passing his work off as my own. A few years ago I went to Zagreb (Croatia) and Belgrade (Serbia). Both trips were fascinating. There are some talented comic artists and writers there. I was asked about the Albanian element in Mr. Mamoulian. Serbia and Albania have a bitter dispute over Kosovo. I realized that in fleshing out Skandabeg's back story I was trampling over sensitive political issues with insufficient understanding of them. I could talk to you about my adventures in the Balkans and the things I learned there. But there isn't room here.

Are we going to see more of the lives of the Actress, the Bishop and Mr. Mamoulian in the future (or any other character written and drawn by Mr. Brian Bolland)?

I have other Actress & Bishop stories bubbling away waiting for somewhere for them to be published. Negative Burn is using more Mamoulian, including a full color cover story - but I'm not sure whether the comic exists at the moment. There are other projects too, but who knows whether I'll ever do them.

The works compiled in Bolland Strips are going to be published for the first time in Spain. How do you think your fans here –who don’t know this “other Bolland”- will react at your stripping?

I understand that people in Spain know me for Camelot 3000 more than Judge Dredd. I don't know what they'll make of Bolland Strips! Some of Mamoulian may be baffling but there may be moments universal enough to strike a funny chord. I can't imagine how any of it will translate! Making fun of people in ecclesiastical positions has a certain appeal, especially in Catholic countries, I would imagine. People will either find it amusing, incomprehensible or I'll be burned at the stake!