Here’s how I color line art. There are probably lots of ways, but this is how I do it.
First, I should say that I almost always work in RGB color mode and almost none of the lines I work with have been bitmapped (meaning each pixel isn’t either 100% black or 100% white).
For example, here’s a cover Tom Fowler drew for my Image series Lake of Fire.
Tom works traditionally, with brush and ink on paper, so his lines have a lot of variation from black to grey.
You’d never be able to select just the line work by using the wand tool, but that’s no problem. Just go to your Channels palette*, hold down the Command button and click on the top RGB channel. That’ll load it as a selection and you’ll see all the marching ants parading around the line art.
* (If you’re doing this after you’ve already done some coloring, just turn off the visibility of all layers but the line art layer before opening your channels)
For whatever reason, this loads the negative space not the line art itself, so just Select>Inverse and you’re good.
Now switch back to your Layers Palette and create a new layer:
Now just Add Layer Mask and that’s all she wrote.
It should look like this now:
Just click on that layer (IMPORTANT: click on the checkerboard thumbnail to the left of the link symbol, not the negative art thumbnail to the right of it) and you’ll be able to color away and all of your work will be contained to just the line art. Like so:
Which I guess doesn’t make sense unless you see the colored lines in context of the finished piece:
And that’s it, really. I worked this out about a decade ago, so there’s probably like one button that does this now, but my way only takes literally ten seconds and works great so I don’t really care. ;)
My pal Tom Fowler is doing a book tour of France! Here’s a step-by-step look at our process of creating the poster to promote the signings!
Concept rough
First Tom puts his thinking hat on and doodles out a rough concept thumbnail. This is concept A, which means he hit it out of the park on the first swing, I guess.
Pencil sketch
Next Tom redraws his concept sketch, working out the placement of the various elements of the composition. Not a lot of detail work is done at this stage: it’s all about figuring out where everything goes.
Blue line
Next Tom scans in his pencil sketch and turns it into a blue line guide, which he then prints out on art board for tighter penciling (not pictured, as he doesn’t bother scanning these) and then inking.
Inking
Once Tom finishes inking, he then scans the drawing back into Photoshop.
Cleanup
Tom’s last step before passing the art along to me is to remove the blue lines from the image using Photoshop and, while he’s at it, to fix any smudges or goofs or errors in the inks. When he’s done, he has a clean, bitmapped image (an image where every pixel is either 100% black or 100% white). This is what he hands off to me.
Flatting
Now that the image is in my hands, the first step is to set it up for coloring in Photoshop and then to drop in blocks of flat colors. For a complex image like this, I usually like to approach this in a couple stages. First, I focus on separating the various planes of the drawing:
Once I’m happy that the planes of the image read well and the illusion of depth is being created with these basic blocks of colors, I go back in and break down the rest of the drawing.
Rendering
Now comes the wrist work. I put the headphones on and get into my music and black out for a couple hours, and end up with this:
And here that is again with the line art added back in (I always work with the line art turned on -- I just thought it would be interesting to show the colors without the lines here because it’s something most folks don’t get a chance to see):
Color holds
This last step is also unfortunately one of the most tedious ones. It involves carefully selecting and coloring the line art itself. There are many reasons to do this, but in this image I wanted to enhance the separation of the planes of the image (and especially push back the Eiffel Tower). I also wanted to help sell the layer of slimy pink ooze covering much of the scene.
And that, my friends, is how the sausage is made!
If you’re in France, please come down to any of Tom’s signings and say hi! (Or “bonjour,” I suppose.) Here’s a handy list of where and when he’ll be appearing:
If you want to check out more of Tom’s art -- look him up here on Tumblr at http://tomfowlerstuff.tumblr.com/
If you enjoyed this post, I have more on my Tumblr for you to check out, showcasing my process on books such as Nameless, Multiversity, and Scott Pilgrim. http://nathanfairbairn.tumblr.com/
You can also follow me on Twitter, where I regularly post art and discuss process and comics. https://twitter.com/nathanfairbairn
It’s kind of hard to believe that when Lake of Fire debuts this summer, it will have been three years since my first comics writing work was published. It’s even harder to believe that my very first gig writing comics was a freaking Batman story drawn by John Paul Leon.
The great @JimLee posted his pencils for the cover to DK3 #2 on Facebook, and @ronsalas inked them for fun. He did such a killer job that I just HAD to play along and throw some color at it!
Coloring Scott Pilgrim was a unique challenge because it was originally published in black and white and already had a legion of fans with often profound relationships to the work before I ever had a chance to color a single page. It was very important to me to respect that. I knew there would be many fans who'd say that the story didn't need color. Hopefully my work has—if not convinced them otherwise—at least shown them that color, while not absolutely essential, adds depth, mood, and focus to the storytelling and can enhance their enjoyment of it.
With that said, let's walk through my process in coloring a single page of this book.
Here is page 145 of Scott Pilgrim's Finest Hour as Bryan has inked it:
Step One: Flatting
The first step in coloring a page is flat coloring (or "flatting") the page (using Adobe's Photoshop software). This is just what it sounds like: you go in and separate out all the elements of the page, breaking it up into solid blocks of color. Not much different from a child with a coloring book, really. (Pro tip, kids: staying inside the lines is key.)
On some books (such as Seconds) I do almost all of the flatting on my own, and on others I do almost none. On Scott Pilgrim, I flatted the easier pages myself, but for more complex pages I turned to a friend, Michael Scott Parkinson, an Australian illustrator and writer of children's books, to help speed up my workflow (I needed to color around 400 pages of Scott P every year, in addition to working on various other projects, so speed was crucial.)
Here are Michael’s flats:
And here they are again, with the line art dropped back in:
It's important to note here that Michael is not actually color blind or insane. I specifically ask all of my flatters to use hideous clown colors in their work. I don't like to feel that my color choices are influenced by the work of my flatters, so the more random and garish and just plain wrong the flats are, the better, as far as I'm concerned.
Step Two: Flat Colors
Once I get the flats from Michael, I can quickly just drop in my own color scheme in a few minutes using the paint bucket tool. Clicky, click, click.
Step Three: Light & Volume
The next step in coloring is my favorite: throwing light and shadows on the figures and environments to add focus and drama and volume. For the first five volumes, I did this all on my own, but for the original release of Finest Hour, Bryan had hired a wonderful artist named John Kantz (@kantzesque) to do this with grey tones:
Because I wanted the colored editions to be as true to the black and white editions as possible, and because I was such a fan of the work John had already done, it made sense for me to use his lighting whenever possible. On this page, for example, I followed his lighting almost exactly, with a few minor omissions and added touches of my own here and there (I encourage you to resist the impulse to play Spot The Difference at this point).
Step Four: Color Holds
Doing 'color holds' is the industry term for coloring the linework itself. It's not always necessary, but there are times I think you simply can't do without it. The two main reasons to use color holds are to sell special effects and to add depth by breaking up the planes of a drawing. There's a little bit of both going on here.
Step Five: Corrections & Compositing
Once I had finished, I sent my work along to Bryan for his notes and comments. After incorporating those, I uploaded the final pages to ONI, where lettering was added to word balloons and the book was composited for print.
Coloring Scott Pilgrim and working with Bryan these last three years has been an absolute joy and a privilege. I'd like to thank all the fans who've bought these color editions and supported my work with their kind words online and at conventions. It's a little sad to say goodbye to Scott and Ramona after all this time, but it's enormously satisfying to leave knowing I added a little bit to a work that means so much to so many.
Scott Pilgrim’s Finest Hour: Color Edition , which includes a version of this post, arrives in book stores everywhere this Wednesday, April 22.
When I started work on Batman Incorporated with Grant Morrison and Yanick Paquette, it seemed to me that the concept driving it (and, by extension, all of Grant’s Batman work) was that all of Batman’s long, byzantine history was in continuity and that if you just gave Grant a chance he’d show you how all of those pieces fit together. Unfortunately, halfway through this series that was based on the idea that everything is in continuity, word came down that the New 52 would be happening, and that none of it would be in continuity anymore. Batman had never duelled Ra’s al Ghul in the desert. He’d never had his back broken by Bane. He’d never been a prisoner of three worlds with Kathy Kane’s Batwoman. Heck, there was no Kathy Kane anymore. No Stephanie Brown. None of that happened.
Damn.
Fortunately, Mike Marts, the excellent former group editor of the Batbooks at DC, knew that Grant had been working towards something special for a long time, and didn’t want to cheat Grant or his readers out of the conclusion they deserved. So Batman Incorporated would become the only book to survive the sea change that was the new 52.
But it wouldn’t survived wholly unscathed. The entire second volume was done with, at best, a sideways nod to New 52 continuity. It was a part of the New 52 continuity, for sure, but if you squinted your eyes just right, from a certain angle, in the right light … it really wasn’t.
As far as creative/editorial tightrope walks go, it was pretty impressive. Grant basically had to tell the second volume of Inc. in such a way that it seemed of a piece with the first while simultaneously embracing the challenge of the new 52, which was to abandon the shackles/foundation of hundreds of issues of continuity and to invite new readers with new (or at least rehashed) stories.
For the most part, I think Grant and Mike pulled off the balancing act between old and new, but there were certain things we just couldn’t get around. Some of these things were minor, like the sudden de-aging of Jim Gordon. Others were more major, like Dick Grayson’s sudden and unexplained (in our book, anyway) switch back to being Nightwing, or a flashback of Batman wearing his new 52 costume to rescue Talia from the League of Assassins.
Along with Batman Incorporated’s new challenges presented by the new 52 came the same old challenges of getting a book out on a monthly schedule. Getting a comic book out on the stands on time month after month is an incredible achievement and my hat is completely off to any team that can do it. Seriously, given how much thought and time and effort can go into just coloring a single page, I’m amazed that these things ever come out at all.
On Batman Incorporated, it became necessary towards the end for series artist Chris Burnham to regularly turn on the Bat signal and call for help getting the thing out the door on time. Several artists, but primarily Jason Masters, a great artist and friend of Burnham’s, were enlisted to help out with anywhere from three to six pages of interior art per issue. Jason and the other fill-in artists were working from Burnham’s layouts and thumbnails and producing fantastic work, but, as good as Jason and the others are, they all simply draw differently from Chris, and the stylistic consistency of the book suffered. A lot of readers felt jarred out of the story by the shifting art styles (and let us know it).
And so it was with a good deal of excitement that the creative teamed learned that the series would be getting the Absolute treatment and that there would be time and a budget to revisit the series and for Burnham to redraw every single page that he’d needed help on. Here now is a selection of some of Chris’s redrawn pages, along with his original thumbnails and the originally published pages (all colored by me, natch):
Heck, even Yanick wanted a crack at drawing the two pages he’d needed help on!
I hope people pick up the Absolute edition of Batman Incorporated. I’m glad we were able to make up for some of our struggles and to offer fans of the series a reward for buying this story in yet another format. Like most of Grant’s work, it’s a book that is well served by multiple readings, and you just can’t beat the Absolute series for quality and care of printing. This story will never again look as good as it does here.
Plus, now the flashbacks even make sense!
Absolute Batman Incorporated is available in stores now from DC Comics.
note: this piece was originally published on Comics Alliance.
Give me mud and I will paint the skin of Venus, provided I can paint around her the colors I want. — Eugene Delacroix
Okay, to begin, let’s look at the goddamn thing.
If you want to find out what color something in a photo is, it’s actually pretty simple in Photoshop. Just use the eyedropper tool. Now, on an image as grainy as this, it’ll be tough to get a reading as there’ll be a lot of variation from pixel to pixel. In order to get a better read, you want to select a more or less uniform area of color and run Filter > Blur > Average. You should get something like this:
Let’s just isolate those colors, shall we?
So there you have it! The dress is objectively a light blue (maybe … Wedgewood Blue?) and a dull, grayish brown (Gray Quartz?). Problem solved, right? All we had to do is isolate the colors!
Well, no.
Color perception is weird, but the most important thing to remember is that colors don’t exist in a vacuum.
Colors are all perceived relative to the tone, value and saturation of the colors around them. Contrast is the key.
Simultaneous contrast is the phenomenon whereby surrounding contrasting values can make colors appear lighter or darker in relation.
Simultaneous contrast makes the center strip in the image below appear to shift from dark to light. In fact, it doesn’t change. It remains the same middle value throughout.
Black clothes make the flesh look whiter. Whites, on the other hand, darken its color. — Leonardo da Vinci
In the next image, the two orange circles are the same exact color, though the bottom one seems much brighter due to its darker surroundings.
Even more surprising, the grey squares that the orange circles sit upon are also exactly the same color. Again, they only seem different because of the varying tones of the squares around them.
In addition to simultaneous contrast, there is color contrast, tonal contrast, contrast of range and complementary contrast.
The effect of complementary colors is that when we perceive a color, we simultaneously see its complement.
Stare at the red circle for 60 seconds then let your eyes drift up to the white space:
Did you see a complementary green afterimage ghosted in the white space?
The complement of yellow is blue. Stare at this image for 30 seconds.
(I sampled this yellow from the background of the dress photo)
The neutral grey square took on a blue tinge, right? Now repeat with the yellow’s complementary blue.
Was the effect reversed? Did the grey square take on a yellow cast?
The grey square is the same color in both images. Your perception is what changes.
For painters, the most practical effect of complementary contrast is that you can make a color seem brighter than it is in isolation by juxtaposing it with its complement. (E.g.: If you want the yellow of that taxi you painted to pop, put a bright blue delivery van behind it.)
So, knowing all of that, let’s move on.
It’s safe to assume that there is no one out there arguing that the dress is light blue and grayish brown, even though those are the actual colors it is. Why is that? What are we really talking about when we ask “what color is the dress really?”
The color of an object is determined by the following: its local color; its tonal color; reflected color; and the color of the intervening atmosphere.
What does that mean? Well, let’s define our terms:
"Local color" is the actual color of an object in clear sunlight. Red apples, green grass, etc. THIS is what we all want to find out here. We’re all dying to know what the dress’s local color is.
(In other words, if the dress had been photographed in clear sunlight, we wouldn’t be having this converstaion.)
"Tonal color" is just a darker or lighter tone of the local color, depending on how much light it reflects. As the planes of an object turn away from and recede from a light source, it gets darker in tone.
Tonal color is very strongly influenced by “reflected color”, which is the ambient or secondary light that bounces around us at all times.
Consider the following example:
Is this lemon yellow or green? Does the strong blue reflected color make the lemon a lime?
For the picture of the dress, I assume the camera is very close, so we don’t need to worry about the effects of intervening atmosphere. (However, the study and observation of atmospheric perspective is certainly interesting and rewarding. If nothing else, I promise you’ll never be able to drive through the mountains again without seeing everything differently after.)
The last thing to remember (something I had ignored until my initial hypothesis was shown to be incorrect by someone posting a better photo of the dress) is that when the color of light changes, so does the color of an object. If you shine a blue light on a white object, the object appears blue. If you go into a darkroom and turn on the red light, everything is red.
SO. Here’s what I think is happening with this dress photo and why there is such confusion:
Hypothesis #1
We have a white and gold dress that is in shadow in the foreground.
Its darker tonal color is being strongly affected by a good deal of reflected or direct blue light from somewhere out of frame.
Meanwhile the bright background—because of simultaneous contrast—is tricking the eye into seeing the dress as darker than it is (BLACK).
The yellows in the background are augmenting the perception of yellow’s complement, BLUE (which already exists due to the blue light that is hitting it).
Hypothesis #2:
We have a black and blue dress that is being hit by strong orange incandescent lighting (and horribly exposed / white balanced)
The rich blues have gotten washed out and are reading as much lighter and more desaturated because of the strength of the yellow light hitting them.
The blacks have been pushed toward grey by overexposure and the lighter tonal color of those blacks is being strongly affected and pushed towards brown by the quality of the light.
Conclusion:
So which is it? (keeping in mind that I used exactly the same colors on the brightly lit blue dress as I used to color the shadowed white dress)
The goddamn dress turns out to be blue and black, but it’s completely understandable, given our knowledge of color and the way we perceive it, that many (including myself) thought it was white and gold.
What I find even more fascinating than the chance to apply years of study of color theory is what this whole episode says about how we humans perceive reality and the cognitive biases we use to interpret it. This is the wrong post for that, but here’s a pretty great take on that aspect: http://www.poynter.org/how-tos/advice/323629/the-lesson-from-the-dress-color-debate-that-every-journalist-needs-to-know/
Acknowledgements:
I’ve read at least a dozen books on color theory, but the one I come back to and reread at least once a year is The Book of Color, by José Parramón. It’s sadly out of print now but you can still find it from used book sellers. It was re-edited and shortened and is still in print as, simply, Color Theory. I pinched the photo of the lemon from the former, and pretty much all the knowledge and quotations, as well.
For artists looking for a more practical guide to applying the lessons of color theory, I also highly recommend James Gurney’s Color and Light. It’s indispensable.
edit** The dress illustration originally used in this post was drawn by Claire Hummel and was used without permission. It has been replaced with a rendering of the dress I did myself. My sincere apologies to Claire, whose work you can follow at:
One of the first things you learn when you take up coloring comics is the difference between RGB and CMYK color space. In a very basic nutshell, RGB is what you can see on a screen and CMYK is what you can print on a page. There is a wide range of colors that look amazing in RGB that are out of the CMYK gamut. They simply won't print.
I always figured that was a shame, but there was no point worrying about it. Comics are a print medium, so I worked in CMYK and tried to ignore all those delightful hot pinks and neon blues and iridescent greens lurking just outside my reach. Sometimes, I barely noticed their absence; other times (particularly when coloring nutso cosmic superhero action like I did on Guardians of the Galaxy) it was pretty darn tempting to tweak those CMYK files juuuust a smidge into the electric hotness of RGB space, like so:
But no. No. It wouldn't print like that anyway, so no one would even see it but me, right?
So I kept working in CMYK and trying to find ways to push the levels of brightness and color and saturation on the printed page as far as they could possibly go. Nevertheless, every time a writer would hand in a script calling for neon signs or a scene rendered through night vision goggles, I'd groan a little at the impossibility of the task.
(The human eye is most sensitive to light wavelengths of around 555 nanometers—i.e. green—which is why that color is used in night vision goggles, but there is shockingly little range of green that will actually show up in print. Here's a lovely Paul Smith commission I found online ages ago and that I've quickly colored up for this post to show what I'm talking about:)
Again, it's a shame to lose so much color, but what are you going to do. Comics are a print medium, right?
And then came Comixology, and the rise of folks reading comics on beautiful, glowing retina displays.
At last, comics could make use of all that lovely wasted RGB real estate! Or so I thought. Comixology has been around for years now, however, and I've yet to see a book really take advantage of the wider range of colors. I've yet to be asked by Marvel or DC to submit an RGB and a CMYK file of my work.
I've often wondered about that. Maybe they never considered it. Maybe they just don't want to pay us for doing the extra work. Still, it always seemed like a wasted opportunity. Shouldn't we be fully embracing this new technology?
So it probably won't surprise you to hear that when Grant Morrison and Chris Burnham asked me to join them on their new Image series, Nameless, and I realized the book would require some very trippy visuals, the very first thought that entered my mind was "Okay. Here we go. Creator-owned comics. I'm my own boss and editor now. I'm doing this sucker in RGB and CMYK, dammit."
So that's what I did.
On some pages of issue #1 of Nameless (in stores today, right now, February 04 2015, so go get it, right now, etc), like the one above, I actually colored large portions of the page twice: once in RGB for the digital edition and once in CMYK for print.
On others, like the one below, I colored the page in RGB and, after converting to CMYK and losing all of those lovely out-of-gamut colors, I messed around with a few elements until I was happy with the print version.
And still other times, I didn't think the difference was enough to warrant any extra work on my part. It's close enough, and if you don't see the RGB version, you'll never know what you're missing in print:
And sometimes (most of the time, really) there's practically no difference at all.
I'm not sure what I think of all this, to be honest. I don't know if it makes much difference to anyone but me. I think it's interesting, certainly, but I don't really know if anyone else will. I like that I tried to add value to and take advantage of the digital medium, but I sure wouldn't advise anyone to buy the book in digital format who had already bought it in print. It's not that different, and, personally, I'd still rather read the comic in print, despite its limitations. I love print. I love the books lining my shelves and filling my spinner rack. But digital comics are here to stay. Might as well try to take advantage of the things they can offer that the printed page simply cannot, no?
I'm very curious to hear what people think of this (even if all they think is "I don't care" it's still something I'd like to know) so I'd much appreciate any comments you'd like to share with me here on Tumblr or over on Twitter.
Thanks for reading!
(And please buy my book. In stores now. And on Comixology, as I believe I may have already mentioned.)
My last process post on Grant Morrison and Frank Quitely's Pax Americana went over pretty well, so let's try that again, shall we?
For the cover to the first issue of Nameless, the new Image comic by Grant, Chris Burnham, and me, the concept was to reference the iconic scene of astronauts striding purposefully forward from The Right Stuff and to subvert that with our own spin. In our story, the 'astronauts' are covered in ancient glyphs and sigils to ward off evil, and they are not exploring the depths of space, but the depths of fear itself.
Step One: thumbnails/design
The last design is quite strong, but it was unanimously agreed that the first was the real winner.
(Oh, yeah, the original working title for the story was Xibalba, the Mayan underworld, or roughly translated, 'place of fear'.)
Step Two: pencils
These are kind of rough, but Burnham inks his own work, and he likes to do a fair amount of drawing and detail work right in the inking phase. I think it keeps him more interested and engaged while inking and keeps a certain amount of energy and vitality in his finished work.
Or maybe he's just a sloppy penciller and this is the best he can do.
Step Three: inks
There we go. That's the stuff, Burnham.
As you can see, Burnham has inked the piece with a dead line (a line that has no variation in its thickness). He hasn't indicated lighting and shading with hatching or spotted blacks or anything like that. It's basically just a contour drawing. In comics, this is often referred to as ligne claire ("clear line" in French). I don't know if he actually coined the phrase himself, but Hergé, the Belgian cartoonist of Tintin fame, is considered by most to be a pioneer of this style of drawing/cartooning/inking. More on this in a minute.
Burnham also inked the glyphs and sigils on a separate layer.
Step Four: pick a style
To a colorist, working with a ligne claire drawing is both exciting and daunting. There's almost no limit to what you can do. It can be a piece of cake or a total nightmare, depending on your tastes and ambition. You can go for simple, bold, flat colors, as Hergé did ('flat' in this context meaning without any lighting, shading, or modelling of forms done with color); you can do a cel-shaded style, like in classic 2D animation, where you have a base color and a highlight color; or you can spend an entire work day painting the sweet loving Christ out of the thing.
Guess which one I chose.
Step Five: cast shadows.
If I had drawn this thing, I'd know where the light source is (you'd hope). But I didn't, so I had to extrapolate its location from the shadows that Burnham had cast on the ground. (I guess I could have just asked him, but I'm an idiot. So.) First I had to find the vanishing point of the shadows like so:
Then I had to rough (and I mean rough) in the rest of the cast shadows so I could triangulate the location of the light source.
Most colorists probably wouldn't have bothered with that. It's probably enough to just eyeball the thing and understand that the light source is behind the figures, but I'm obsessive enough to need to know where behind.
Anyway, once I had a good idea of where the light was coming from, I could quickly rough in where the light (I imagined it being a focused, intense beam) would directly strike the figures.
Something like that, anyway. I manfully resisted the patently insane impulse to sketch out the thing from the side to double check that my lighting was right.
I mean, that would have been insane, right? Who would do something like that? NOT ME, THAT'S FOR SURE! NOPE. HAHA!
Anyway, enough thinking. Time to start coloring already.
Step Six: paint the background
Just some fuzzy, crunchy smoke with a hot spot where I want the eye focused and some nice vignetting at the edges. I just threw this down in a minute or two to inform my overall palette, but ended up leaving it mostly unchanged in the final image.
Hot Tip: never paint your foreground figures before setting your background first. Seriously, just don't do it, friends. I could explain why, but this thing is already starting to drag on.
Step Seven: flat color the figures
If you examine the line art closely you'll see that the middle guy has a different suit from the other two figures, which made me happy since I wanted the central guy to have a different color suit for the sake of symmetry and focus.
Hergé might call this done at this point, but I say, "Pipe down, Frenchie: I'm just getting warmed up here."
Step, Like … Eight? : paint the figures
This is where having figured out where the light source is paid off and I could more or less confidently hit them with a strong rim light. With all the mist and haze going on, there's also a lot of grey/blue/green ambient light scattering around and hitting the figures. (If you're paying attention, you'll notice this is also where I ditched the line indicating the cast shadows for good.)
Step, um … : glows
Here's where I added a glow to the rim light to intensify it and to add some separation between the central figure and the other two horrornauts. I painted it right on top of the line work itself, thus obscuring some of those pretty lines. Some inkers hate this like fire, but Burnham's cool. He knows what's up.
Step I Don't Even Know: MOAR SMOAK
MOAR SMOAK.
Step Whatever: You Forgot the Sigils, Dumbass
Oh, right.
And here's what the final color work looks like with the line art removed completely, if you're curious:
Step THIS IS THE LAST STEP: Put A Bird Logo On It
Rian Hughes came up with this logo and it is the fucking business. That guy is good at his job. http://rianhughes.tumblr.com/
And that's it!
If you're interested in reading more about Nameless, here's a link to a preview of issue #1. It's in stores now!
follow me on twitter @nathanfairbairn thaaaaaanksguys
