Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Brief(s) Musings

In tooling around with my artwork tonight, I got to thinking about the overall diamond pattern. For a BRIEF moment, I thought I had made a mistake in my artwork. I took a moment to re-walk myself through the design process, and fortunately was able to convince myself that I had gotten it right after all.

But for the sake of historical reference, I will document it here.

My pattern is based largely on two things. This photo:

And a scan I made of a belt loop that I had on hand.

The photo above is from the suit that was on display at Toys R Us in New York.

First of all, I am working under the assumption that there were MANY different suits out there, both on tour, screen used, and made for production. I beleive also that there are differences between them. I'm not sure if they are significant, but it's an assumption I have to make based on the variances I have found from one suit to the next.

In the picture above, I photoshopped one of the belt loops so that it aligned with the diamonds on the briefs. What this reveals to me is that the diamonds on the belt loop are different than the diamonds on the briefs.

I'm not sure if this was on purpose and by design, or if the belt they put on THIS suit was made from a different run of fabric where the diamonds were different. There's a million and one reasons that these are different, and I'm not sure which one is correct. What I am sure of is that they are different.

In Adobe Illustrator, I imported my scan of the belt loop that I had on hand, and sized the above drawing so that the diamonds on the belt loop matched. This meant that the diamonds on the briefs were now scaled 1:1 in illustrator, and it was based on that scaled photo that I did my diamond pattern.

For my suit, the diamonds on the belt loops will be the same pattern as the diamonds on the briefs. Even though that is not accurate to the suit pictured above, it's far too much trouble for me to be bothered matching such a minute detail that will simply never be noticed or appreciated by the casual viewer. And seeing as how I'm not even sure that it's screen accurate, it makes sense not to try to duplicate it.

No comments: