|
Interview with Walt Bayless
Featured Artist for August 2002
Interviewed by Patrick McEvoy
Thanks for taking the time to do this, Walt. First, for the people who don't know you, a little background information would be nice - who you are, where you're from, that sort of thing.
Well, let's see... I'm sort of from all over. My Dad was a Navy pilot so I've lived everywhere from Hawaii and Okinawa to New York and Texas. Each place that I've spent some time gave me something though, made me... me. Artistically speaking, a very diverse cultural background afforded me the usual myriad points-of-view and also the habit of looking deeply at my world, the way a new kid has to in order to figure things out and fit in.
So, to tell you about me and do it quickly, I'd have to say that I was always a kid on a quest, and that hasn't changed, except for the quest of course, and even that not much. I can't speak for everyone, but I know that my daughter and 99% of my students create art because they are on that quest also, to make those other worlds just a little more real and this one a bit more bearable in the process. I've had that in my heart throughout all of my endeavors, which is probably the most distinguishing factor about myself, though it is only evident in my quirkiness, lol.
I've never been motivated by power, money, or social acceptance, and I think my vivid "other world" has allowed me to give fewer hostages to the rat-race than most other professionals because it is truly a pleasure to be where I draw and write and paint. If I paint a forest, for example, I often smell waves of pine breeze, and come away from my work as if I've been out for a hike, not in a studio. It's good that I have so trained myself to do that, because my preferences and longings shift and wander like a gypsy. I guess that's why I could never settle on just one genre or style to write or paint in. It's all so fascinating and I fall in love with something new all the time.
Did you know from a young age that you wanted to be an artist?
Absolutely. I was around three when I got so excited about monsters that I just had to put them down on paper, try to make them everywhere, try to make them live. It was a godsend... art I mean. The world on paper and canvas was the only place things could ever be the way I thought they should be. It was necessity that made me an artist. A lot of kids/adults can let go of the magical stories and fantastic adventures and just move on... I couldn't, and I'm very glad.
On a related note, do you remember your earliest artistic influences or inspirations?
Oh, Frazetta touched me deeply. His stuff was thrilling. But just as much were the zillions of masterful artists who did covers, comics, fine art... Jeez! Everywhere you look there is wonderful talent and something to inspire you. Just here at Epilogue, there are tons of amazing and passionate images; so imagine a kid seeing it all in the WORLD. I was too excited to care what their names were. I only wanted to do what they could do. Every artist, every picture that moved me in some way, had a piece of the puzzle for me. Frazetta had a piece, Leffel had another, there's Stan Lee, my Mom, and that guy with no signature on his work; honestly, my inspiration and instruction did and does come from everywhere. I just soak it all up and let whatever sticks, join with the rest.
How did you get started doing professional Fantasy art?
I just began to sell my work out of my dojo. People would come in for one and then for the other. As my reputation grew for one, so did the other. Not in a commercial way though (my art), I just developed a good following over a considerable amount of time. I've done a lot of commercial art: logos, designs, tattoos, furniture art, cartoons, etc, and still do from time to time. That stuff was okay, but not quite my thing. I've always enjoyed painting what I love and then having the right buyer come along in time.
You know, that's what a lot of the older illustrators did in the beginning. Frazetta just did killer paintings and the publishers bought them for their covers. It was only when some "art directors" said, "Hey, can you make that guy holding a fish instead of an axe?" or something absurd like that, that his "lesser" work was done. I'm sure he'd tell you the same thing. They told him what to do for the sake of a product or to justify their position, and so, while it was still stylish and strong, it lacked the magic of self-directed passion. I never wanted that to happen to me, so I took the longer, quiet road.
There are some art directors out there that are secure enough not to get their paws in the middle of a project for some cooked up reason, but they are rare. It's very much like the fight world, there's always some fat, lazy scamster putting his arm around you and saying, "With your brawn and my brain, kid, we're gonna be on toppa the world." There are a lot of insecure people out there, and regarding professional anything, it is important, I think, to just stick to your guns and do what you love. Sooner or later a kindred spirit will come upon your work and then the idiocy of your obstinacy will suddenly be declared as genius.
What sort of formal training did you have?
Everywhere we've lived I've tried to do a little something. So I've got the Art Student's League on down to any local life drawing class under my belt, but only for a goof or to gab with other artists. I've learned absolutely nothing of lasting value from any art school, except to wash your brushes. Not to say that someone couldn't. I just didn't appreciate or need their approach. I just studied what I loved, and worked my butt off (with plenty of cursing, lol) until I liked what I did better than what I was looking at. That was enough to make me draw and draw and draw. I loved the process, and the parts I didn't, I forced myself to love so that I could do it all. I'm still working on it.
There seems to be a lot of "Old Master's" influence in your work - was this something that came about in school?
Yes and no. Yes the old guys are there, and no, nothing came from school. I had an art history class at one time, dropped out of it, but all they teach you in school is what they think one of these guys did, and what he might have thought about it. Hilarious. None of the teachers could do it, so what could they teach you? Their opinion? Not even that. Someone else's opinion, maybe. It's like trying to classify intelligence; a mathematician may puff up over the mechanic fumbling with state tax on a calculator, but Mr. Wizard couldn't fix his car in a million years. I remember standing up and asking my instructor, "Well, who did these guys look at to get so 'wonderful'?" He blustered and rumbled and said nothing that wasn't in his little book.
Basically, the old masters just solved problems without trying to look like someone else, even if their work ended up looking like another. So, when you do that and do it well, there will always be that element in your work that can only be "classified" in terms of another artist with similar eyes and heart. But, in reality, it's just an individual solving a mystery with paint. A lot of the "Old Masters" were just guys who had their work "approved of" by royalty or clergy (not much distinction back then) so it was not destroyed or "lost".
Who would you consider your favorite or most inspirational modern artists - the contemporaries you keep an eye out for?
Hmm. That's a toughie. There are a bunch of talented people out there. Mostly, David Leffel, Gregg Kreutz and Richard Schmid are my favorites. Those aren't fantasy artists, but their work is magical. Most of today's artists (that are popularized anyway) are generally just human photocopiers or merely drown their work in motley, pointless detail, so I can't say that they move me too much. As for who to look out for: I think that you'll see, slowly, impressionism and abstract art making a comeback. The world has been inundated with heartless shiny pictures of apathetic bikini models and computer fruit, barring us from their world with digital or carefully measured perfection. It looks kind of fun, I guess, but soon, and even now, people are beginning to crave substance again, and I think the gritty, organic beauty of real life and the miracle of ordinary people will take center stage once again. And I don't think that excludes fantasy art at all, I just think that strictly beautiful people as heroes or tons of meticulous rendering in place of passion will thankfully die away. As for who these visionaries will be, I think that's still up for grabs.
What "real life" interests outside of art keep you inspired or looking at the world in different ways?
I absolutely love my friends and family, and they keep my heart warm in a cold world, keep me child like, I hope. My martial arts and training are just for me now. I think competing with other people has just lost its point in general. I am told that that is the sign you're headed to enlightenment, but I still have a ton of questions, lol. My family and my animals are really to thank for my growth. Every time I worry about something, I've got a lazy old hound-type dog that licks me and falls asleep. And about the time I think I'm too tired, my daughter bursts in with my crazy collie and I'm eight years old again running through the trees, lol. And there's my wife, with all the wisdom of the ancients there to guide me when I get myself in a knot. Yes, they all inspire me and heal me. My art just fills in the gaps, tries to answer all those heavy questions.
You are a very accomplished oil painter, yet you seem to be crossing more and more into the digital world. Can you talk a bit about the reasons for this, and the differences and similarities you have encountered between these different media?
Funny you should ask that. I am using the digital medium for some of my fantasy work because it is such a forgiving and odorless medium, lol. I still paint in oils constantly, and, if anything, I'm leaning back toward them again. The reason being that there is something tactilely missing from digital art, plus, you can never really get those juicy impastos or splatters just right. But, I'm still doing my graphic novel on my computer because of my sculptural approach to drawing and inking. I have to be able to erase a lot, basically. I guess I'm getting my fill in both places, luckily.
As a follow-up to that, are there any mediums you've tried that you haven't liked, and why?
Yikes. Man, if you could see my studio, lol. I love it all! I've got bottles and tubes and boxes of everything, and I often fret violently over which to use because it all calls to me. I actually wish there was a medium that could mix it all together. The closest to that is acrylic. Awesome stuff! And the computer too, but with the aforementioned limitations.
I can only speak for me, but experimenting and working in different media in different ways really helps. It made me see that it's all just stuff, and you can eventually figure out a pleasing way to make it behave if you stick at it with an attitude that you're going to make it happen no matter what.
If you can really draw and paint and sculpt, you can make any medium do something exciting. It's really all the same with just a different look, if that makes a speck of sense.
When you approach a new piece of art, do you have a set process for idea generation, sketching, etc.? In other words, how do you tackle the universal problem of getting your ideas from your brain to the finished artwork?
Okay. That depends on what my goal is. If I'm doing something commercial, oftentimes I have to sketch it out because of certain unyielding requirements. For myself, it is half discovery, half creation. I start with a toned canvas and push some color (burnt umber or sienna) around until I get a neat abstract design and then see what it becomes. Other times, I do have a concept, but I let it come out as a sculpture, pushing gobs of paint about to see what feels best. Sargent would have pulled his groin over it, but Rembrandt would have cheered.
How long do you generally take from beginning to end on a completed illustration?
Well, the answer I give my customers is two days and thirty years. Sometimes, my alla prima stuff is done a few hours. It really varies though I can say I like to paint quickly as I rapidly grow tired of an image. If I can find a way to do it in a day, I will. If I can't, I may take the 100-hour plunge (which means 5 days for me) or I might just dump it off to the back burner. Painting a single moment in time for three weeks seems absurd, unless you're trying to do a really big photo of a something. I mean, a great many of my colleagues seem to have forgotten that there are actually cameras out there if every brick or blade of grass is what they truly wish to share. It's easy to do something very grand and meticulous and ornate, just time consuming. It is, on the other hand, quite difficult, to truly capture a living moment. Those are my goals when I paint. It is not the only way to paint, clearly, but it is my way.
Are there any subjects that you have ever had a particularly hard time rendering or drawing?
Yes, the ones I didn't want to. If I don't feel a passion for something, it comes out flat or off or just plain awful.
So, I try to avoid painting stuff I don't love, or at least take time to endear myself to something before I try to render it.
On the flip side of that, are there any subjects that are really EASY to render. Sometimes I'll try to avoid the subjects I gravitate to, just to keep from stagnating - does this ever happen to you?
Well, I guess easy is a relative term. Easy for me usually means a subject that I'm willing to put the time and energy in to. I think, with solid art skills, a person could draw or paint pretty much anything. It's the things I like that I end up doing well because I'll take the time. I figure my life is short anyway, so I might as well fill it with things that I love. If there's a scene that inspires me in my head, and it just happens to include a hammock, then I'll feel excited about that hammock and do it well. Usually though, I try to paint best what I want the viewer to focus on. That's the way we see. So, unless my picture is about a photographic hammock, or an ad for a hammock, I'll just suggest the darn thing in some way that assists the read of the whole painting. That may mean a little or a lot of detail.
As far as digital media go, PhotoShop seems to be your favorite.
Well, Photoshop is the king for me right now; I just had to take the time to get used to it. My first experience in the digital realm was Painter, and it really is a great program in a lot of ways. However, if you don't like waking up and finding that your file has suddenly disappeared for no reason, then Photoshop is the way to go. You can't really manipulate the color very well in Painter either. The new 7.O version of Photoshop has some pretty neat little improvements for the digital artist too, custom brushes, brush tips, etc. If Painter ever gets it together or if Photoshop can put a little more into the art side of things, I think we'll be in techno heaven.
When you work digitally, do you still sketch on paper first, or have you moved to sketching on the computer? If you do sketch on paper, do you scan in your drawing and paint over it?
I am a very sculptural painter, so I start and finish the same way that I do on canvas. If I'm working digitally, I just do the whole enchilada on my tablet. I'm very curious though about trying scanned oil, acrylic, whatever in conjunction with digital. I've seen some fantastic work done just that way and I'd love to try it.
Word is that you're working on a Graphic Novel! Can you say anything about it yet?
Yes. It's the most exciting thing I've done in a while. Obviously giving me the opportunity to combine my literary passions with my art. I know we've mostly talked about art here, but writing is very similar to me. There are, of course, a million rules about what is right and wrong in literature, and most people work very hard to see them as separate things. But, whether you are painting with words or pigment, how well you do depends entirely on how well you see and feel your world. I'm working on revamping my web site to display the first couple of chapters and then people can take a peek if they'd like. I'm still about two to three months out from finishing this one though.
Sequential art is quite different from single-picture illustration. Has it been a challenge to tackle that unique form of storytelling?
Oh no. That's home for me. In fact, I've so rehashed the creation process that I've discovered what is most important to me, and that is, to tell a story. Color becomes arbitrary, even annoying, like senseless detail, so that pen and ink becomes enough to say anything powerfully. That's enough for me. Plus, I've always drawn from my imagination, from a zillion angles. I guess there's always a movie going on in my head anyway, so I'm just excited I get to let it out more than one image at a time. It is definitely, in my opinion, the most challenging form of art, but that's my opinion. Having to come up with a ton of fresh angles and poses from memory and give the right "something" to the gestures and expressions, and have it all work together and make sense is by far more difficult than a single painting.
Have you done any comics work before?
Yes. I self-published a four part series called "Dometrius Kuir". It was a lot of fun, a long time ago, and things are a lot easier for me now. Plus there have been endless cartoons for various clients. I did a lot of sequential art for a DISC program (that's a psychology deal that tries to classify people, but it was fun to draw the stories). But I couldn't imagine having to crank out some shallow superhero every day for a few bucks.
Do you read much Fantasy or S.F.? What are some of your favorites?
I'm just now discovering The Wheel of Time series. It's a blast, but I'm a very slow reader because I like to really soak up a story. It'll be a long while before I finish it, so don't ask me what happens? There are others, too, but they are mostly some older titles. Ever read Armor? Dune was great. There's an oldie called The Alien, also. I love Ray Bradbury as well. Of course there's Miller and Moore. But, to be honest, I'm one of those authors that writes a lot more than he reads. I think movies are a little easier to digest after a day of writing and drawing, but that's just me. I certainly do wish there were more quality, diverse graphic novels out there... they are my favorite.
A lot of young artists could use some general words of wisdom from seasoned pros like you. Maybe you could share a few words about some general areas. For instance, what about work habits?
Okay, it all depends on what you expect out of your work. If you want to make a living, you should probably be able to put in at least six or eight hours of focused work five or six days a week. Not the eight hours a grumpy telemarketer puts in, but eight hours of fresh, vibrant effort. That takes time. Endurance for that comes from many years of practice and whether or not you can sustain a fervent effort will determine whether or not you have what it takes, much more so than your quality of work-that can always be improved, thank God! If it is your calling, then the effort is very little in your eyes. You know, a person can really do amazing things when they're excited, go well beyond their usual limits. Just look at a honeymoon for example! And, just like a honeymoon, those eight hours don't have to be all in a row, lol!
How about the subject of "professionalism"?
Hmm. Again, that depends on what you want. If you have to hustle your own work, professionalism is a biggie. Your clients will view your work with exactly the same eyes that you view and present your own. Just look at some of the hokey abstract exhibits in New York! My goodness! They are there because somebody presented themselves as having the greatest body of art ever, and you've got to feel that way. In a way it's true. No one can do anything more unique than you. Pretty cool. How it really looks is a matter of work, how it is perceived is a matter of attitude. I think we've all seen younger artists gaggling over a cheesy piece of 3d art because that is what was "hot" at the moment. Good luck explaining the facts to them; they'll just kick you in the shins and love the art more. That's most clients. If you defend your art, they think there must be something wrong with it. If you just let yourself have a bit of arrogance about your work, you'll be much better off.
Humble is for a people who fear that pride prevents learning or is somehow evil (misery loves company). On the contrary!!! If you see yourself as a world-class artist, then you'll do the things that a world-class artist must do! Forget about the goofy exceptions to that statement, and just think about it. No Olympian went home with the gold because he or she was so humble that they were only grateful to compete. Now then! Competition isn't everything either! In fact, it sucks after a while. If you just want to be your own person, paint what you want and that's all, no commercial stuff, then you must be arrogant too. Some people will cry and say, NO! you mean confident not arrogant. Nope, kid, I mean arrogant, not obnoxious or pigheaded, but arrogant.
If you are selling a Rolls Royce, you've got a much different demeanor than a used Chevy guy. The Rolls guy won't bother with people who want to argue about gas mileage or anything else. You either see the Rolls, or you need to go get yourself an AMC Pacer. That's arrogant. Argue if you like, then take a trip to your local Rolls dealer. You know your stuff is the best even if it isn't perfect yet. Big money deals will depend on that. It's an investment, and a calm arrogance says "this is a damn good place to put your twenty grand". The humble crap "It's just my very bestest expression of heaven's love. I only hope that it pleases you." will get you a phony smile and a disconnected phone number. The fact is, that a person who is that sold on themselves will endure, and most likely, have the stuff to become a good investment, just like any other business.
We've been taught to fear and hate or at least stunt (people say temper, but they mean stunt) our self-esteem, and that is horrible. The world will provide all the negative bashing and reality checks that you could ever need. You don't need to dish out any for yourself. I've been, have trained, and engulfed myself in world champions. Some are cheesy, some are okay, and a few are wonderful people, but they are all arrogant, regardless of the humble pie speech they give the cameras.
What sort of advice do you have for the beginner who is considering art school?
Tough to say. Some people really thrive in art school. I guess it depends on how much knowledge you have at the onset, and how self-motivated you are. There is a plethora of great books out there that can really help the self-starter to get over the top. Remember the old Woody Allen thing "Those who can't do, teach. And those who can't teach, teach gym." LOL! Well, that may not be totally true, but usually the guy or gal that is producing the stuff that you love, world-class stuff, is too busy to give hints on how to mix a nice green! The basics you can get anywhere. The real fine stuff comes from DOING. You can kill yourself with academics. Besides, look how much art schools charge you. Jeezo Peezo! I could redo the Sistine Chapel for sixty grand! Well, at least the men's room. And the pressure of that loan will cause most artists, rather, it will force most artist to take up work that they don't like, often for the rest of their lives. Who needs that? If you want to teach art in a public school, then it's a must. But I don't think that's what we're talking about here. Mark Twain said, "There is nothing wrong with College, so long as it doesn't get in the way of your education."
What can you say about inspiration or creativity - getting ideas and staying fresh?
Wow! Very important question, Patrick! Music really helps me. I think that and taking adequate breaks helps too. As you really get solid with your art, your endurance skyrockets because things are easier, but at the same time your intensity soars too. So, you can really fry yourself in a very short time if you are a passionate artist. You need something to fall in love with, to be amazed at, or to be in awe of. It can be religion for some folks, or their spouse/companion, kids, but it's gotta be love! Man, that's great stuff to fall in love! I don't mean just Romeo love, I mean obsessive infatuation too (no, not stalking). You know how you can get on a new kick for a sport, or game, or place, whatever, and you go nuts learning about it. There's the stuff.
Finally, this question is an Epilogue Interview tradition, so I'd be remiss if I didn't ask: What cartoons did you watch as a kid?
Well I just got done watching a fine episode of Courage the Cowardly Dog, lol. But I loved Speed Racer, Tarzan, the Super Friends and Clutch Cargo. But most of all it was Godzilla that got me up and moving, or kept me up 'til midnight. I guess that's a good question to ask, now that I think about it, 'cause I think those things are all still there, making me draw and write and paint.
|
