So. You want to do some vector lineart on your uploaded sketch in photoshop. All you have to do is draw a vector line on your sketch, set a brush, hit 'stroke path' and you have a satisfying line, right?

WRONG.

Why? Because the resulting line is the same weight all the way through. Even if you use varying widths for different lines, your line doesn't add definition to what it is trying to describe.

Okay then, what about hitting the "simulate pressure" button, you say?

Still wrong. The simulate pressure does taper the ends of the line, but does not add any extra weight to the line where it should be there.

So what is the solution? To take the matter of the lines into your own hands. That is, to, instead of drawing vector lines, to draw vector shapes and fill them in. It takes a longer time to do, but it's more worth it in the end.

Okay, so here is the original sketch that I will be working with.

It's not a sketch that is actually well-suited to vector tracing because it's shaded, not to mention it's low resolution, but I will try anyway.

This is messier than how I usually do it due to the low resolution, but here's an example of what I mean. (with a 25% white filter over the sketch)

As you can see, the paths form the shape of the lines rather than the lines themselves. By doing this, I can completely control the shape of the line.

When you fill in the path, your path should look like this. Also, where subpaths overlap, be sure to be careful of what overlapping mode the path is in. By default it is "exclude overlapping path areas", here I have it set to "add to path area" so that the overlapping areas aren't excluded.

Here's how the lines will look filled in, and the path deleted or unselected. (with a white filter of 50%) Here, you can see that the lines define the shape of the eyebrows (a little too craggly than I wanted but ok), and the mouth. You can't do this with just stroking linear paths.

Not the best vector lineart I've done, but you get the idea.

And no, I'm not finishing it.

Let's Read Billy Budd - Preface, I

Wow, getting to a stable position in which I can write about the book and do homework on it at the same time was very difficult.

I skimmed Preface up to Chapter 11 first to get it done in the amount of time given to me (I am a slow reader) so I already have a general idea of what goes on in the story and what it's about. Then I decided to go back and read Preface to chapter 11 at my own pace to make sure I get the story in full.

I'm writing this Let's Read blindly because I managed to lose my copy of the book. In your hand one second, gone completely missing the next.

Update: I've finished reading the entire book in depth.

But I digress.

Preface.

It's a self-explanatory passage in which Melville analyses the events around the period in which the story takes place. That is, year 1797, during the French Revolution. Writing roughly around 1888, Melville understands the Revolution as a wrongdoer, as bloodshed, only based on a good idea. (Which is a fair assessment. During the revolution, about 16,594 prisoners were sentenced to death for counter-revolutionary activities, and perhaps as many as 40,000 were executed without a fair trial.)

Infused with the Revolutionary Spirit of the age (blame it on the Americans), it is kind of ironic that the Revolution should by damaged by yet another Revolution, the Great Mutiny: a successful overthrow of the abusive commanders and captains of the day, later a successful reform of the British Navy.

Billy Budd is about the events of the Great Mutiny, and how it affects the life of a good-natured, innocent man.

I

A much longer passage, introducing Billy Budd, and how he entered the British Navy's service.

The chapter begins by describing what in the day would have been an ideal sailor: that is, an extremely tanned, tall fellow surrounded by his many shipmates. Our Billy Budd is nothing like this Handsome (so far as they were concerned) Sailor, but he is otherwise remarkable for his skill and ability to keep peace.

Billy was originally crewmember of a merchant ship, and as the Navy used to do freely in those days, he was sort of randomly semi-officially drafted. As in, a lieutenant showed up on the ship, saw Billy, and decided to take him. Of course, Billy has no idea what's going on so he makes no qualms, described effectively in this excellent line:

"To the surprise of the ship's company, though much to the Lieutenant's satisfaction, Billy made no demur. But, indeed, any demur would have been as idle as the protest of a goldfinch popped into a cage." - Herman Melville, Billy Budd.

Come on, you just gotta love the goldfinch part, that is excellent. But again, I digress.

So the name of this new ship on which he is drafted is the HMS Indomitable. An interesting name for a ship. An even more interesting name for a ship is the Rights-of-Man, which is actually the name for the merchant's ship from which Billy was taken. Apparently the captain of this ship was a huge fan of Thomas Paine, so he named it after one of his essays.

The ship's captain protests the drafting of Billy, insisting that the kid's very presence keeps order, much "like a Catholic priest striking peace in an Irish shindy." (Since a shindy's supposed to be a sort of Irish dance, Billy sucks the fun out of everything? Don't Melville intended to suggest that. Maybe the captain just doesn't like the Irish.) Apparently he established order with one particularly rude sailor by punching him in the face after he gave Billy an inadequate cut of meat. Don't know how that works, but okay. An interesting note: Billy did much more damage with his punch than he intended. Poor kid doesn't know his own strength.

When Billy makes his good-natured farewell to the merchant ship, he says "And good-bye to you too, old Rights-of-Man." A very interesting farewell, as his boarding the Indomitable will literally mean goodbye to his rights as a man, though he may not know it.

What does an innocent young man do, after having unknowingly walked into a cage? Will he find a way out? Will he learn to recognize his own bars?

The Portrait

Used to be a real person.

Let's Read Billy Budd

Darn, I was hoping I would be able to do my first Let's Read on the Scarlet Letter, but unfortunately I got the idea a little too late. Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a little too long to do a Let's Read on, and the thing I'm supposed to be reading right now is Herman Melville's Billy Budd, so why not.

First off, what is a Let's Read? Kinda like those videos on youtube where people play games and do commentary on the game, except here I'm doing commentary by the chapter.

~*~

Now, on to BIlly Budd: The full title is Billy Budd, Foretopman. It is an obscure unfinished novel by Herman Melville, which I assume takes places after the French Revolution. A "final" version of the novel was published based on studies of Melville's writing process, but I'm reading the original rough, not that one.

Personally I think BIlly Budd is one of the most boring titles I've ever heard. Then again, since I also hate the title "The Wind that Shakes the Barley", I might just have something against the letter B.

Visitor of religions

I had a brief conversation with a friend recently about participating in the observation of religions one doesn't follow. At the time we were sitting in an Indian restaurant, listening to Indian music and looking at Indian tapestries, and I asked her what she would do if she was given the opportunity to worship in a Hindu temple.

She said she wouldn't try to worship as she finds it disrespectful to pretend to worship a god you don't believe in. Me, I can't wrap the concept around my head. Then again, she is an atheist, so she doesn't really know how to believe in a god as she doesn't in the first place.

"Believing" in a god, at least for me, is not the same thing as believing in evolution or believing the earth is a sphere. I believe in the latter notions because there is overwhelming evidence that supports them, while there is no hard evidence at all for or against the physical existence of any god.

And in any case, does it really matter whether or not God physically exists? It seems to be that gods exist as ideas within the minds of people, not as actual people, and that is good enough for me. Since I don't attach any details to the concept of god, it can take different forms. I can worship YHWH, Allah, Shiva, or a pagan goddess and still be worshiping the same basic concept.

I guess this was the idea the prophet Mohammed was touching upon when he created Islam. As in Islam, God is less of a person and more of a concept, with no form except for the ideas in the Qur'an, or idols of any kind. Islam was based on the ideas of Judaism and Christianity, you know.

But does this mean that I am an actively religous person? No, not really, as religon is not what I live for. I just know how to believe in a god, any god.

The Objective Perspective.

Perhaps a clearer attempt at expressing the previous thought.

Humans, being emotional creatures who apply meaning where there are none, are limited in their perspectives. Humans sometimes get so wrapped up with passion inside their own thoughts that they can't see any other way. Humans, when they discuss, are just as quick to hide information against them as they are to exaggerate information in their favor. Not to mention that in the cock fight of ideas, an enraged human may launch an attack on the other trainer instead of his bird (also known as ad hominem. It's stupid. Don't do it.).

And yet, I won't have it any other way. After all, it's these weaknesses in respecting ideas that makes humans human. If anyone suggests that it is a human goal to see through the objective perspective, they are wrong. The objective perspective, while it should be respected and understood, is the opposite of being human. It would be like seeing the world through the eyes of a flea.

The Objective perspective is the perfect, passive, opinionless way of looking at an idea (or rather, a thing) which has not been flawed by the human way of understanding things. From a human perspective, a book is one method of sharing a story or idea, using paper. From an objective perspective, a book is several thin sheets of woodpulp with ink on it, nothing more.