watervole | Fred Gambino's art

I'm not a big fan of SF art - not in the sense of actually going out and buying it, though there is much that I enjoy looking at.

However, I saw this particular picture at Interaction and again at Contemplation and it fascinates me.

It must have been the original that I saw at Interaction as I know the price meant I was safe from the temptation of buying it. At Contemplation, the print was priced at £50 and I was sorely tempted. It was titled "Scorpion Jatz" but looking at it online, I discover it is the cover art for the book "Scorpion Jar".

I'm now wondering whether to read the book. I have my own mental image of the woman in the art, what she's like, what's going through her mind. To me, she is coming back from a fight, she has won, and it's a significant victory. Everyone's cheering, but she doesn't see them. Her mind is still there in the battle - she hasn't yet returned mentally. She's too hyped up and too exhausted to be able to relate yet to anything except the battle.

Would the book tell me more about her, or would it totally destroy my mental image?

Will any relatives club together and get me the print for my next birthday? These, and other questions, remain to be answered!

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

To me it looks more like the men have got rid of the balshy woman and are happy, and she's keeping her chin up but might have a cry when she gets to the car park...

Cool picture though! Hope you are sending non subtle clicky links to said relatives.

I noticed that one too. So the thing outside the window is a mecha. It looks like a digital photomanipulation to me, in which case is there really such a thing as an "original" that the artist can charge more for than a print?

I can understand why you're fascinated.

I'd add that perhaps one reason why her mind is still there in the battle is that for her, there was a significant loss of some sort.

But I suspect the book wouldn't live up to it, simply because it's #13 in a series...

The closest thing to an 'original' would be a good quality print with the agreement that no more will be sold. Which obviously doesn't work with normal artwork since they then sell prints of that but there must be a way of doing things for digital - especially with more and more artists creating art as if it were with paint or chalks or something but doing it on a graphics tablet.

I suppose you could print it to canvas, but it's still not quite the same as having something that can't be reproduced exactly, even by the artist.

This is some of the best sci-fi art I've seen in a while!

It's a beautiful print and the ideas you've got for the background to it sound right. Reading the book probably wouldn't match up to that :-(

I wonder whether those two chaps on her left, with jackets over their shoulders, are the supposed "aces" who couldn't win the fight she was just in. The right-hand one looks rather more envious than happy - perhaps they were originally sent out to take care of things, but she had to be called in when they failed?

She looks a bit like Billie Piper, doesn't she?

It's a gorgeous print but it does look like a photo manip added to artwork.

The cloaks they have on are very classic (original? what is it called?) Battlestar Galactica ...

IMHO, it would fall into the same category as etchings and other prints.

I remember us looking at the original at Interaction and wanting very badly to find out what it was the cover of.

Now I just need to keep telling myself that I do *not* need any more sf art, no matter how gorgeous it is.

This actually caused serious problems with one of the US conventions that had an "originals only/no prints" rule for the art show and someone showed up with their digital art and was told they couldn't display it.

There is no solution to this (it's a bit like "original manuscript" for a book, when it's a laser printed printout, the best you can do is have a letter from the author saying that this was indeed the original and only printout of that version of the book)

I agree that there's no guaranteed solution; the closest is probably a limited print run signed and numbered by the artist (thinking here of the print of Jim Burns cover art for the Interaction souvenir book.

I've just had a thought. You're a Blake's 7 fan. I'm a Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy fan. Have you heard of the annual B7/HHGG water fight in a quarry somewhere in.. where is it... Somerset?

I do like the image too. :)

It's from the Mechwarrior series. There is a complete run of Fred's covers on his web site here (http://www.fredgambino.org.uk/book_cver_thmbs.html). (Along with a lot of his other work. If you like his art you'll like the site).

Oddly enough, a lot of the pictures do nothing for me. But then the mechs themselves are of no interest.

Some of the others are real beauties though.

I see I need to do a post for newcommers to this journal... (I organise the annual fight)

I should have guessed. I'll have to make an effort to come along this year, then!

Hmm. Having looked through the chap's other work, I appear to only really like the stuff without people it. This image looks fine enough, but as soon as people get involved they lose that reality that you can get out of a purely CG image. People make CG look worse, because they stand out as a different style.

Plus a few of the poses look weird. Maybe that part's just me. :)

LOL! I've just finished reading that book! 'Engaging the Enemy' by Elizabeth Moon.

I like his spaceships, but dislike the mechs. I'm very mixed re people. I greatly like a few and care nothing for most of them

I think they're good too - though to me, this picture is "Before", not "After". She looks to me like she's stepping up to the plate, where no-one else would. It's a game face.

Mechs do nowt for me aswell, but that art is pretty spot on :)

Fred Gambino's art

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject