I found a web site that has a *lot* of Tolkien art, basically by the people Dane recommends. My impressions:

Lee is big on
V
E
R
T
I
C
A
L

Much of his color seems washed out. I love the picture of Tom Bombadil's house. His paintings have a lot of great detail. I don't like his picture of Orthanc (it looks like Peter Jackson's interpretation of it, which I also don't like -- I don't like the whole Lurtz thing, and seeing the inside of Orthanc). I like the picture of Sam and Smeagol. Overall, I love his detail and interpretation, but long for richer color.

John Howe has beautiful color. I love his image of the Company approaching the Misty Mountains. Wow. I like his painting of Frodo at the ford, and the drowning of the Nazgul. I love his Old Man Willow and Sam w/Shelob. This site doesn't collect as many Howe images as Lee images, which is too bad. I'd like to see a greater sampling. I like them.

It has even fewer images from Tim Kirk, which is just as well since Kirk's quality is not up to the level of the previous two artists.

I like Ted Naismith's "At the Court of the Fountain", but his "Gollum's Debate" is not-so-good. Naismith's figures look rigid, wooden. I think his Swan Boat for Galadriel is, well, taken far too literally. I *do* like "The Shores of Valinor", though. Maybe I like it when his work features a lot of white. :)

I also found another site which has art from other artists.

For example, there's Anke-Katrin Eissman, whose art makes me cringe. Her art is so bad that it almost makes me cry. The proportions are terrible, the figures are wooden, the backgrounds are bizarre, the perspective is warped. Yuck.

Roger Garland's work is neither good nor bad. There is nothing that particularly recommends it, but there's nothing that makes it unappealing to me, either. I do like his picture of Hobbition. But I dislike his picture of Gandalf. Garland seems to like profiles. His picture of Shelob pales in comparison to John Howe's.

I like Tolkien's art, believe it or not. Yes, it is thin and wispy and not altogether of the best quality. But it is representative of the art from the era in which he worked, and it does a fine job of capturing the world he put down on paper. Since it is art from the source, it would seem to be the definitive representation of his world. For example, I had never seen his drawing of Orthanc before, but it *much* more closely resembles the Orthanc on paper (and in my head) than any of the other Orthancs I've seen. (You get on my case for judging the films before seeing them -- one of my primary beefs is this whole Saramun/Lurtz/Orthanc thing. It's dumb. The still photos I've seen make it look dumb. The idea is dumb. Why do we need to see more of Saramun? Why do we need another named Orc? Why do we need to see Saramun breeding the Orcs? It's just not necessary and it's going to be Bad.)

I've become more active with Computer Resources after taking a couple of months off following the partnership's dissolution. I'm doing work for two clients, and I'm ready to start work on the web site. Also, I'm ready to finish our web site at Custom Box Service. To those ends, I'm going to teach myself a little Photoshop. I have a poor track record at self-education; like most people, I'm much better at learning in a structured environment, in particular a classroom. However, I think that I can muster enough self-discipline to pace myself through a Photoshop tutorial. And if I do that, I may even be able to get paid for some web work so that I can afford a legal copy of Photoshop!

I've noticed that Slashdot has matured over the past several months. For a long time, nearly eighteen months, it was a gathering spot for teenaged zealots of the geek persuasion. The posts to the various discussion threads were sophomoric and lacked perspective. Lately, however, the discussions have become more thoughtful and more to the point.

I think that a lot of the Linux zealotry has faded and only the strong have survived, so to speak. I'm still into because I've never really been gung-ho about it: I like Linux, and want to use it more, but it requires substantially more effort than using Microsoft products. So, I spend maybe five to ten hours per month adding Linux skills. This is the same pace that I've been adding Linux skills for the past two or three years. I think there was a substantial geek subculture that bought in hard to the Linux/open source idealism, and a large part of that enthusiasm has begun to wane. This mirrors the fortunes of actual Linux-oriented companies in many ways.

I've moved on to The Return of the King, the third part of Tolkien's novel, The Lord of the Rings. Cool beans.

I think I'm going to take my spare graphics card home and install it in my Linux box. I've got a PII-450 w/128mb running Redhat Linux 6.2, but using the on-board video that came with the HP on which the OS resides. If I add this graphics accelerator (that's what it is -- not an actual adapter, but an accelerator), then I may get some improved performance. What I *really* need is a new monitor. I see that Fry's has 17" monitors for $90 after rebates. That is very, very tempting but I just can't afford it right now. If I had a nice monitor on which to work, I might use my Linux box more. I'd sure like to!

Now it's time to go home and do yard work! Mow the lawns, finish pressure washing, weed the Japanese garden. Nice 75 degree weather in which to work today. It's lovely.

On this day at foldedspace.org

2005 — Spring Photographs   I took photos around the yard yesterday, and they seem to show indicate that nature is at least carrying on a charade of vernal splendor.

2004 — Motorcrash   On the drive to work this morning, I was composing an hilarious weblog entry. Then, at the intersection of Lone Elder and Highway 170, I came upon a terrible accident.