Archive for May, 2008
May 31, 2008
3 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge etc.]
I’m generally happy with how “Fred 44″ is coming along. It feels like it’s about 75% done, though one never knows. Like an artist friend once told me, “A painting is never finished; it is ended.”
Right now I seem to be drawing a lot. Kinda feeling guilty because there’s a lot of other stuff going on, all to do with Social Objects and The Blue Monster.
People ask me a lot if I ever get bored/lonely/crazy out here in West Texas. To me it’s a funny question– I simply don’t have time to feel any of that. There’s far too much going on…
1 Comment
[Click on image to enlarge etc.]
2 Comments
[Just so you know etc. Click on image to enlarge etc etc.]
16 Comments
[“Moleskine 42″ in a nice wooden frame. Click on image to enlarge etc.]
On May 4th I blogged about “Moleskine 42″:
[Overview: Click on image to enlarge etc.]
[Close-up view]
“Moleskine 42″. A wee sketch I did over the weekend in my Moleskine notebook. Approx 5x7 inches.
It was a single drawing in a brand new Moleskine notebook. Which as you will see from the photo above, I went out and got mounted and framed.
This will look good on somebody’s wall. Yes, it is for sale. We’re talking in the $700 range.
[UPDATE:] Somebody made me an offer for the piece, and I accepted it. Rock on.
18 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge/download/print etc. Licensing terms here etc.]
[From October, 2007:]
My definition of a geek is, “Somebody who socializes via objects.”
When you think about it, we’re all geeks. We’re all enthusiastic about something outside ourselves. For me, it’s marketing and cartooning. For others, it could be cellphones or Scotch Whisky or Apple computers or NASCAR or the Boston Red Sox or Bhuddism. All these act as Social Objects within a social network of people who care passionately about the stuff.
Whatever industry you are in, there’s somebody who is geeked out about your product category. They are using your product [or a competitor’s product] as a Social Object.
If you don’t understand how the geeks are socializing– connecting to other people– via your product, then you don’t actually have a marketing plan. Heck, you probably don’t have a viable business plan.
It’s hard for me to think of marketing, without thinking in terms of Social Objects. It’s hard for me to think of marketing, without thinking how the geeks fit in the equation.
So many people start out trying to market to Mr and Mrs Average. I think they’d have better luck if they thought of the geeks first.
“Think Geek.”
[Afterthought:] Someone in the comments asks, “Doesn’t the product also need to make sense to non-geeks?”
It would depend on the product, it would depend how “specialist” it is, I suppose. Can you show me an interesting, successful product that the geeks hate, but the non-geeks love?
May 29, 2008
6 Comments
[From my Twitter feed. There I go, channeling Seth Godin again…]
May 28, 2008
19 Comments
May 27, 2008
4 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge etc.]
Spent much of the day working on “Fred 44″, an 18x24 inch, ink & pencil on paper.
Right now it’s mostly pencil, but there’s a bit of pen action going on. The latter will increase in the later stages of the drawing.
I have a new Secret Evil Plan as to what to with this drawing, once it’s done. Watch this space. Rock on.
May 23, 2008
7 Comments
“Word of mouth is not created, it is co-created. People will only spread your virus if there’s something in it for them.” — Hugh MacLeod.
Something I said on Twitter recently. Thanks to John Moore of Brand Autopsy fame for picking it up. Rock on.
May 22, 2008
7 Comments
May 21, 2008
7 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge/download etc. Feel free to use badge for your own needs etc.]
Two years ago, Stormhoek sponsored geek dinners. They were a huge success.
We’re ready to get back at it.
This time, however, we’re going to sponsor Tweetups. If you’re one of the people following me on Twitter, are based in the USA and are planning on having a Tweetup in the next wee while, drop me an e-mail, and let’s see if we can’t get some wine sent there for the evening. Rock on.
[For those of you outside the loop, a “Tweetup” is a spontaneous, self-organizing social gathering of fellow Twitter users, usually organized on Twitter itself. Usually food and drink are part of the equation etc.]
2 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge/download/print etc.]
This is a lithograph idea I’m playing around with for Stormhoek. The “Be Passionate” line comes from the Stormhoek back label. Rock on.
3 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge/download/print etc.]
Yep. I’m back working with Stormhoek again. It’s got new owners, but so far, so good. The good news is, they don’t want me doing anything too differently from what I was doing already.
Now that I’m based in the US, I’m hoping to do a lot more geek dinner stuff. And of course, the lithographs. Rock on.
The above cartoon a “Hugh” version of the Stormhoek back label. “The one with the back label on the front”. You can read the backstory here.
May 20, 2008
10 Comments
[Cartoon inspired by the latest phone news from Apple.]
May 19, 2008
11 Comments
[I’m thinking something like this would make a really good signed, limited-edition lithograph for the mainstream art market…]
Comments Off
[Click on image to enlarge etc.]
Started a new drawing this morning, “Fred 44″. 18x24 inches. Right now it’s just pencil on paper, but I plan adding pen & ink to the mix later on. Watch this space etc.
Comments Off
This is a re-working of a very old cartoon of mine, drawn back in my New York days, which also borrows heavily from another New York-era cartoon. Unlike its predecessors, it’s now available in high-resolution, so if you want, you can download it and print it out, or whatever. Rock on.
May 18, 2008
5 Comments
[A little piece of graffiti, done on a picnic table of my local bar etc.]
12 Comments
When I first started putting up cartoons onto gapingvoid in 2001, they were in a small, 400-pixel-wide format, just like the “Love Letter” cartoon you see above.
Then about 2 years ago, I started posting them in high-resolution, like the “Dinosaur” cartoon below [Click on the image and the high-res version will pop up].
This meant people could actually download the images and start using them for their own stuff. Like I said in my licensing terms,
Hey, if you want to put the work up on your website, blog, or stick it on paper, t-shirts, business cards, stickers, homemade greeting cards, Powerpoint slides, or whatever, as far as I’m concerned, as long as it’s just for your own personal use, as long as you’re not trying to make money off it directly, and you’re giving me due attribution, I’m totally cool with the idea.
As a “Social Object”, a cartoon that one can actually print out and hang on their cube wall, or put on a t-shirt, a business card etc is far more powerful and useful than say, YET ONE MORE IMAGE you can find on the internet and e-mail en masse to your friends.
i.e. The cartoon itself hasn’t changed, but the interaction between it and the “End User” is suddenly far more meaningful.
So of course, the next layman’s question is, “Yes, but… how do you monetize it?”
And of course, the answer is, “Indirectly”.
For example, in October, 2006 I post the Microsoft Blue Monster cartoon. Within a few months Microsoft is somehow paying me a lot of money to do other drawings for them. Without the former, the latter would never have happened. And without the latter, Sun Microsystems would never have approached me. Everything feeds into everything else. Exactly.
In other words, I don’t create the online cartoons as “products” to be sold. I create the cartoons as “Social Objects”, i.e. “Sharing Devices” that help me to build relationships with.
As with all things, the REAL value comes from the human relationships that are built AROUND the social object, not the object in itself.
I’ll quote my friend, Mark Earls one more time. This is from his second book, “Herd”:
“Cova is surely right to suggest that much of modern consumer behaviour is social in nature. We do it not just in a social context (tangible and immediately present or over distances) but for social reasons — that is the object or activity is the means for a group or tribe to form or interact. This also echoes a lot of what Douglas Atkin describes in his study of cult brands — brands which have developed a cult status (like Apple, and Ford’s bestselling pickup) seem to serve an underlying social need within each individual (just as religious cults do): a need to belong. The real draw is probably not the brand but… other people.”
And I’ll also ask my favorite question, one more time: If your product is not a “Social Object”, how on earth do you manage to stay in business?
May 17, 2008
1 Comment
[UPDATE:] Thanks to Microsoft’s Steve Clayton for putting this little gapingvoid cartoon slideshow together. It was done using Popfly, and can be embedded on any webpage. Rock on.
5 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge/download/print etc.]
For those of you who don’t work at Microsoft, I played around with this new “Blue Monster 2.0″ logo. Feel free to print it out or whatever. Rock on.
[P.S. Click on image to get the white background version etc.]
Comments Off
Comments Off
May 16, 2008
9 Comments
So somebody was asking me the other day, “What’s the deal with these large tech companies? As soon as they get to a certain age and/or size, they all seem to go into ‘crisis’ mode…”
My reply was, well, when you think about it, these large companies are in most ways very fortunate. They have lots of money, lots of smart people working for them, lots of combined knowledge, and lots of material capital to build other stuff with.
i.e. The have lots of capital– human, financial, intellectual, technical etc etc.
But they will also have a lot of baggage. Lots and lots of different entrenched positions to defend. Thousands of them.
So they way I see it, their problem isn’t “material”. Their problem is CULTURAL.
It’s not the sum of their parts that is the problem; it’s the way human beings relate with each other, interact with each other, that is causing the problem.
i.e. Often with tech companies, we wrongly blame the problems on the tech itself. As with all things commercial, it’s the people that matter.
[UPDATE:] One of my favorite marketing writers, my friend, Mark Earls left a comment below:
Great post, mate. And spot on.
I find it striking that all the different kinds of managers I meet in all kinds of different sectors still prefer to describe and draw their businesses as if they were a machine or some technical thing at least; how they prefer technical sounding strategies and definitions of their challenges (“the business planning process” etc) to the honest acceptance that the reason why all businesses are tricky beasts is that they’re built on, with and by humans.
Of course, it’d be easier if businesses were more like machines but they’re not. And if strategies were like mechanical (i.e. human-lite) things — borne of a robo-mind and implemented by an army of replicants, maybe.
The sad truth remains that everything in business is about people, their interactions with each other and the ideas and assumptions that shape those interactions.
I’m not sure it’s just the tech business that suffer this way: finance, manufacturing, airlines and — god bless, em — government agencies are just as delusional about this stuff.
Go get ‘em!
May 12, 2008
31 Comments
When I’m talking with clients about marketing, it’s very hard for me to go more than a few minutes without mentioning the term, “Purpose-Idea”.
The “P.I.” is not a term I coined myself. That credit goes to my friend, marketing hero and frequent podcast partner, Mark Earls. He wrote about the P.I. in his seminal marketing book, “Welcome To The Creative Age”.
Marks begins his thesis by saying that actually, when you think about it, talking about “The Brand” is pretty meaningless. Imagine lots of meetings crammed full of suits yakking on about “Core Brand Values”, “Living The Brand” and all that marketing waffle, and you kinda get the idea. I’ve been in those meetings and they suck.
What’s far more interesting, Mark says, is the reason we all get out of bed in the morning. The thing that drives us as individuals, as a company. Ask yourself, what is our company for? Is all our professional life about just selling aluminum widgets for 16.7% margin, or is there some sort of higher meaning involved? What are we trying to change? To improve upon? To disrupt?
Why are we here?
Mark then goes on to say how much more fun, interesting and profitable it is for a company when what it does has a sense of shared purpose, an idea it can believe in. This is the “P.I.”
The Blue Monster i.e. “Change The World Or Go Home” is a P.I., the Microsoft tagline, “Your Potential, Our Passion” is not.
Why not? Because that’s not how people talk in real life. Sure, the word, “passion” may be in the line, but it burns with about as much passion as a wet Kleenex. Which is why it comes off being contrived and phony at worse, boring and uninspired at best.
I’m not trying to go after Microsoft, here. They’re still buddies of mine, I continue to like, admire and respect them. But there’s so much real, genuine passion under the hood of that car, I just WISH they could do a better job of letting the rest of us see it more often. I find their tagline a sorely missed opportunity.
I would guess that the cheapest and easiest way to better articulate this passion, My Friends in Redmond, is to spend more time thinking about what your Purpose-Idea ACTUALLY IS, as opposed to what you think people outside the company might want to hear. I’d recommend any Microsoft employee who knows me, to go read Mark’s book. Rock on.
[Disclosure: I consider myself a friend of Microsoft. They’ve been clients of mine in the past, they’ll hopefully be clients of mine in the future, they are not not clients of mine at the moment. It’s all good.]
2 Comments
Rabbi Pinny, Johnnie, Euan Semple and myself recorded a new podcast a couple of weeks ago. Johnnie wrote the show notes and originally posted them over on his blog. It was a lot of fun.
Download the Podcast
Podcast RSS feed for Hugh and the Rabbi podcasts
SHOW NOTES:
0.00 Intros, Hugh forgets who “the Scottish guy is” and isn’t sure what Euan does but settles for rock star.
1.00 Hugh sets up the idea of love, recalling a talk about this by Euan at Reboot.
1.45 Euan talks about the L word, and people’s reactions to it. It’s about people’s basic desire to connect to each other, caring about things, getting passionate about things. So much of the business world sanitises passion out of things.
3.15 Pinny wonders about how companies show love. References Lovemarks. In relationships, if you don’t go to the nth degree, everything else doesn’t count. Talks about how mistakes by Facebook and Apple get pounced on by the blogosphere.
4.40 Lovemarks proves a red rag to Johnnie’s bull. Love means different things to different people. Johnnie wary of the fanatical idea of love, the pursuit of perfection. It’s more about being human, fallible.
5.50 Euan chimes in against fixation on the romantic idea of love. Instead favours “the passion that grows out of day-to-day stuff”.
6.45 Hugh asks Euan about his World Service experience at the BBC.
7.30 Euan: Roughly 47 different language services in the same building. Lots of characters, different cultures. “If you were climbing ladders, they were all against different walls.” — so less ego and tribalism than in the rest of the BBC. You had to get on quickly with people, the ability to engage and connect, and move ideas round the building was a formative experience.
9.00 Product of World Service is ideas but also the kind of intimacy you can create on radio.
9.50 Hugh talks about the purpose idea — what are we here for, why are we doing this. Trying to get a sense of purpose going.
10.30 Euan: purpose is good, so is obliqueness. Says what he likes about podcasts is that they are not like broadcasts. Meandering semi-conversations that get under skin in a different way than stuff projected at you in broadcasts. Conventional radio output sounds increasingly patronising.
12.20 Euan on how he pays each month to support Leo Laporte’s podcasts, more than half he pays in the BBC licence fee. “That’s me doing that to an individual because I really don’t want him to stop podcasting.” People will pay for stuff that’s passionate and accessible.
13.00 Hugh contrasts Euan’s story with a UK show, Newsnight Review and its affiliation with the Notting Hill cultural elite. New media is a threat, not so much to cash as to old media privilege.
14.30 Euan recalls David Weinberger saying conversations can only take place between equals.
15.00 Hugh on fanboys.
15.20 Hugh asks Pinny a question “as the only guy here with a real job”: does this podcast affect your business.
16.10 Pinny: it’s not affecting the business… what it affected is how people view him. Discusses impact on his employees with Hugh.
18.45 Hugh on podcasts as disruptors. Euan says disruption is a word with all sorts of baggage but we get involved in this stuff because it makes a difference. How can governance cope with these changes? It’s going to change power dynamics and who is successful and why.
21.10 Pinny returns to the theme of love, inspired by his nephew’s wedding where a Rabbi talked about what happens when you aren’t in love with love, but with the other. Companies need to own up to mistakes.
23.00 Hugh: gosh, act like a human being, not a robot. Johnnie: intimacy an important word in Euan’s story. There’s something about “ordinary smallness”, the ability to have a real conversation; how meetings that strive to be effective often fail. The need to feel each other as human beings.
24.30 Hugh on how small town, West Texas experience has affected him. How it’s safe to have a guy walking round with a ten inch knife, because everyone knows who he is and what the knife is for. Euan reminisces about Glasgow and Pinny, Israel.
27.20 Euan: the danger of homogenisation of success. Quote Doc Searls about things being valuable without being important.
28.00 Johnnie on spending Sunday morning with the papers and someone else, where you don’t talk but there’s a feeling of companionship. You can’t put that on a spreadsheet.
29.15 Johnnie on a twitter-related experience of finding work in a very accidental way. If fell out of a conversation where he wasn’t trying to make something happen.
30.30 Pinny: the unplanned as the eureka moments of our lives. Getting beyond ego.
32.10 Pinny on the online course Oprah is doing with Eckhart Tolle. This is why the web was created: to spread goodwill.
33.00 Hugh: a lot of people are trying to use the web to do business the way it’s usually been done, which misses the point.
34.00 Euan wonders about how these changes connect to our spirituality. Hugh recalls a Catholic priest who influenced him. God as a metaphor rather than a bearded sky fairy.
35.40 Pinny the web is teaching religion to say it’s about human beings, not about God. It’s teaching companies it’s about what the customer wants to pull, not what the company wants to push. Strip away the disease of entitlement and learn humility. Connects to the rise of Barack Obama.
37.20 Johnnie on the difference between Clinton and Obama. Clinton’s positioning as the leader, Obama’s emphasis on us.
38.20 Euan: authority used to mean authority as conferred; now it means having a compelling argument or idea.
39.00 Johnnie on authority as being the authors of our own experience. You don’t take authority from the BBC any more, you participate.
40.00 Hugh wraps by asking what advice we’d give corporate man in light of all this. Euan: be brave. Pinny: don’t be stupid (“Be brave but have a day job”) Empty your mid once a day for opportunity to happen. Hugh: be compassionate to those above you. Johnnie: you already know what to do.
44.35 Ends
May 10, 2008
9 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge etc.]
Like they say, when you fall off your horse, the first thing to do is get right back on it.
After Fred 42 died earlier today, I got right back to work. Behold “Fred 43″. Ink & pencil on paper. 23 x 30 inches. It’s been a busy morning, to say the least.
I’m already liking this one. We’ll see where it goes…
By the way, to answer a frequently-asked question. I consider these large pieces “cartoons”, I do not consider them “fine art”. I consider myself a cartoonist, not an “artist”.
So there!
11 Comments
I’m sad to report the premature death of my good friend, “Fred 42″.
This happened earlier today, when my pen exploded.
It happens.
All is not lost. I already have a New Evil Plan. Hurrah! I’ll let you see it when it’s ready.
I spent about twenty minutes being really bummed, then said, “To Hell with it. “Fred 43″ will be EVEN BETTER.”
It’s all good…
May 9, 2008
2 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge etc.]
Cranked out this one quickly today. “Cut The Art Crap”, May, 2008. 24x24 inches, pencil on wooden Ampersand Gessobord, varnished with spray acrylic. I might sell this one… thinking it would go well in somebody’s New York apartment. We’ll see what happens etc.
2 Comments
[Close-up of “Fred 42″. Click on image to enlarge etc.]
Yesterday [Day Five] I hardly touched Fred 42. Maybe ten minutes, tops. My brain was all wrapped up with all the Blue Monster stuff.
Like I told somebody the other day, if I just tried to be a full-time cartoonist, I would fail. If I just tried to be a full-time marketer, I would fail.
Somehow it’s managing to balance BOTH spheres that keeps it interesting for me… and ipso facto, interesting for the people that pay my bills. And all this, of course, feeds back into The Sex & Cash Theory, from Chapter Seven of “How To Be Creative”:
“The creative person basically has two kinds of jobs: One is the sexy, creative kind. Second is the kind that pays the bills. Sometimes the task in hand covers both bases, but not often. This tense duality will always play center stage. It will never be transcended.”
Today I don’t want to think about marketing. I’m just going to draw…
May 8, 2008
11 Comments
I haven’t talked about The Blue Monster for a while.
The Blue Monster, as you will remember, is a cartoon-based “Social Object” that me and my Microsoft buddy, Steve Clayton, unleashed on the good but unsuspecting folk at Microsoft. For those unfamiliar with it, you can find the backstory here on Google.
One of the reasons I haven’t talked about it much lately, is simply because there is no longer the need. To paraphrase Steve, “It’s already out there, it’s already working its magic. It has a life of its own and it no longer needs us.”
Exactly. And as my friend, Tara Hunt so rightly pointed out, to push it too hard, especially with Microsoft management giving it a big thumbs-up, would somehow defeat the purpose. If overused, “Subversion as a marketing tool” can be counterproductive, especially if it comes from above.
In 2007, the conversation was all about “THE” Blue Monster. But in 2008, a new conversation seems to be emerging: “A” Blue Monster.
Let me explain:
I’ve been talking to some companies recently, talking about doing some new business with them. Without any doubt, the question I get asked the most is, “Can you make a Blue Monster for us?”
Obviously, when they’re talking about “A” Blue Monster, they’re not talking about a wee blue cartoon character with pointy horns, that hails from Redmond, Washington.
What they’re talking about, of course, is a “Social Object”, not necessarily a cartoon, designed to create what I loosely describe as “Marketing Disruption”.
It’s not unlike when you’re talking about Seth Godin. When you say, “THE” Purple Cow, you’re talking about his wonderful and seminal marketing book from a few years ago. But when you talk about “A” Purple Cow, you’re just talking a about a product, any product, which from a marketing standpoint has been designed so well, it does not need any traditional marketing per se. It’s so “remarkable” for what it is, people can’t help but talk about it. And so the word spreads, almost by magic. Seth actually gives a really good example of exactly that here.
So what’s the difference between a Purple Cow and a Blue Monster? Well, we could split hairs on that one forever, but for me, the main difference is Purple Cows have their “remarkability” baked into the product. Blue Monsters are more about the “Social”, the interesting bit is the interactions that happen AROUND the product. That’s what gave our little wine company the edge when marketing Stormhoek. The VAST majority of our conversation was not about the wine in the bottle. The conversation WAS ALL ABOUT the people drinking it. As we were fond of saying, “Wine is the ultimate social object. It’s only interesting AFTER the cork is pulled.”
So in conclusion, yes, something has recently evolved in my thinking. Though my relationship with Microsoft remains as strong as ever, “Blue Monster” now means something far bigger to me than just cartoons, gapingvoid, Microsoft, Redmond etc. The Blue Monster is all about the Social Object.
I have often said, I believe Social Objects are the future of marketing.
Let me modify that slightly: I believe the Blue Monster is the future of marketing.
[UPDATE:] Steve Clayton sent me the following message on Twitter:
I replied back:
[Afterthought:] Understanding the Blue Monster means understanding the need to be “bigger than yourself”. Exactly.
May 7, 2008
6 Comments
[“Fred 42″. Click on image to enlarge etc.]
[Close-up shot.]
Yesterday I wrote, “When I do large pieces, I rarely do the long, 18-hour obsessive stints that so many artists are known for. I prefer to whittle away at it in brief spurts over time– a little bit there, a little bit there, that kind of thing.”
Hmmm… That does not explain the 8 – 10 hours I put into the drawing yesterday. What the hell, I guess I was on a roll.
In the last decade or so, I always had a job to hold down, or a business to run. I always had a thousand different things to do BESIDES making drawings. My drawing time was always “stolen” from the other stuff going on.
But now here in uber-laid-back West Texas, suddenly I have more time on my hands.
Or so it felt, yesterday.
9 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge etc.]
Yesterday (Day 2) I hardly touched the drawing. I was busy doing other things.
Today I fooled around with it for a couple of hours in the morning. Quite pleased with the results, so far.
When I do large pieces, I rarely do the long, 18-hour obsessive stints that so many artists are known for. I prefer to whittle away at it in brief spurts over time– a little bit there, a little bit there, that kind of thing.
I’m guessing “Fred 42″ will be done by month’s end, if all goes well. Rock on.
May 5, 2008
8 Comments
[Click on image to enlarge etc.]
[Close-up: Click on image to enlarge etc.]
Today, once I had finished with work for the day, I decided to start on a a new drawing. 18 x 24 inches. Pencil and pen & ink on paper. Working Title: “Fred 42″ [I’ll explain the title at a later date].
So far I’m having a blast. We’ll see where this all takes me. I have no idea how long it’ll take me to complete, but I’ll let you know when it happens. Rock on.
3 Comments
[UPDATE: You can watch the video here– See Chapter One.]
[UPDATE: You can see photos from the event here.]
[More photos here.]
[Click on images to enlarge etc.]
Last week I was in Austin. One of the reasons I was there was to help design some slides for Ian Murdock’s keynote, “Innovate. Collaborate. Integrate”, which he gave today.
Above are the slides. They start off as a giant, black, haystack-shaped software monolith, then evolved outwards into “Open Source”, and finally, to the Sun logo. The sixth cartoon is just a humorous drawing projected behind the other panel members who were sharing the stage with Ian.
I’m told the screen was fifty feet wide, so I’m guesing they would’ve looked rather spiffy. These were all drawn in pencil on 3.5-inch card [Business-card size, obviously]. The actual drawings didn’t take that long to execute; though getting them to work cohesively and conceptually took a long time, a lot of collaboration was involved.
It was a cool gig; I hope to do more like it. Thanks to the very groovy Sarah Dornsife for making it happen. Rock on.
May 4, 2008
4 Comments
[Another one from the notebook. 5x7 inches approx.]
2 Comments
[Overview: Click on image to enlarge etc.]
[Close-up view]
“Moleskine 42″. A wee sketch I did over the weekend in my Moleskine notebook. Approx 5x7 inches.
