Vue Weekly project, legal in Canada

A couple weeks ago, Canada legalized recreational use of cannabis. I eagerly awaited the cover of the alternative weekly in town, 'cause they seem to have a bit of a cannabis fixation. I was pretty sure they'd commemorate the event somehow. Vue Weekly did not disappoint.

While I think the headline is funny, I don't think the illustration delivers on the joke. I think the illo is fine and it would work with another headline, but this headline needs a different kind of treatment.

Here's my version. I almost think it would work better without the leaf in the background, but hey -- you gotta give the readers something to hold on to.

Do not dismantle

Random Edmonton street furniture. Letting people know about an upcoming event. A major event.

And I noticed a little sticker in the bottom right corner of the sign.

I may need some "Do Not Dismantle" stickers.

Stickers in real life

A possible Line app sticker set.

I wanted to make a sticker set for the Line app. Seemed easy enough. So I did the artwork using my computer-drawing style. I then tried to do the paperwork to make them actually available on the app. And I wasn't able to navigate the system. International business rules apply somehow. But I still have the artwork.

And now I'm thinking I'll make an Apple Messenger sticker set. Still working on the logistics for that.

In the meantime, I used the facilities at SNAP Printshop to make a physical sticker set.

Work in progress. Blue, then red, and finally, black.

Three-color silkscreen on sticker-back paper.

Here they are, all trimmed out and ready to stick.

And a close-up view.

The joy of screen printing!

Vue project 1176

I've cut back on my Vue Weekly obsession -- at least I've cut back on blogging about it. But every once in a while, a cover comes along that I have to dig into. Not to disparage the original, but to challenge myself to see if I can come up with my own spin on it.

This cover caught my eye because the designer actually changed the logo to match the concept of the art. I thought that was pretty cool.

And then the rest of the type is also in "computer" type. A worthy effort. But I felt the illustrations really let down the concept. If you are going to go with big pixels, I say embrace the big pixels. I was particularly disappointed with the keyboard illustration which looks more like generic clip art than pixel art. I like the little faces and the guitars -- because they seem to be close to the same size of pixel-ratio. The drum set is too complex for this pixel size.

So … I redid the cover using all the same pixel size. (Except for the secondary type, which I just did in type.) That meant simplifying the people into just faces and dropping the instruments altogether -- because the pixel size of the type wouldn't allow that much detail. I plopped in the notes to suggest music and left it at that.

I concentrated mostly on the pixel type. That was fun.

Beg button

I use the beg button on this corner daily, crossing 124 Street along the north side of 102 Avenue. And … I hate it.

For two reasons.

The first reason is that it's a busy enough corner for an automatic "Walk" signal, so the button is an unnecessary annoyance.

Second reason, the beg button is hidden out of sight, so a person waiting for the light to change would miss even the presence of the button.

I guess it bothered someone else. This sign was stuck on the lightpole where the beg button should have been placed. The sign was removed after two days.

The possible good news is that this is a temporary setup because of some heavy construction on one of the corners. A tall apartment building is being built. Perhaps after the building is done, the signal lights will be reconfigured.

Note: Here's what the sign says.

"This walk light button is on the other side of the post behind you next to the bike path!

"(It needs to be pushed to activate the walk light.)

"If you think it should be moved closer to the actual cross walk, you should contact the City of Edmonton.

"The more people who call them the better chance of having something done."

Stock photo availability

Let's say I want to use a famous photo on my Facebook page or blog, and I am Google-looking randomly on the internet to see what's out there that I can use for "free."

The image search will certainly turn up some Getty images. Go to the link and the Getty Images page that looks kinda like this.

And covering part of the picture is always the Getty Tag.

It doesn't usually ruin the picture. Just gives obvious credit to where the picture came from. Who really owns it. Ownership on the Internet is a slippery thing.

Anyway, I was Googling myself the other day. Pause for silent shaming. And I turned up some art I did for the St. Paul Pioneer Press newspaper earlier in this century. And the images had Getty Tags!

Kinda made me feel special. My work costs as much to use as a photo of Marilyn Monroe!

Backstory: The Pioneer Press art department was encouraged to send copies of completed artwork to our owners (first Knight-Ridder, and then McClatchy) for the owners to put on their commercial sales sites. Occasionally, I would hear from friends and relatives around the country that one of my illustrations turned up in a far-flung newspaper. Apparently, whoever owned that batch of Pioneer Press illustrations has now sold them to Getty Images.

Note: The "Brain Child" illustration has some strange stuff on the bottom that looks like it doesn't belong in the illustration -- because it doesn't! I would often include extra bits for use in other places in the newspaper. For teaser graphics or for pull quotes. I would just toss them in for page designers to use if they wanted to. And so I included them in submissions to our owners. But they look kinda out of place here. Hopefully any person buying this illo knows how to cut apart the images.