|
FunkyAl posted:Man I GUESS, but you posted em up there like they were all the big cheatsheet to writing comics Use your own judgement. I'm not dictating values. You don't have to worry about arguing with me, because I'm not trying to "win."
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 07:11 |
|
|
Okay, so, in an effort to do some actual goddamn discussion and not whatever babytown frolics are going on here, check out: Tips for Properly Crediting Comics Creators While it mostly applies to Big Two books, it's useful general advice for comic journalists reviewing books. I know a lot of casual readers who simply have no idea who draws their favorite books, and very, very few people who could name the inkers or letterers. In the last volume of Toronto Comics, I went out of my way to list artist -> writer in our marketing and credits. It's one of those weird things in comics - at an early career level, it's all about the artists. Any wannabe writer needs an artist to get their totally-sweet idea in the real world, and artists get the lion's share of respect. As a product takes off, the audience often seems to end up respecting the writer more and the artist less.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
sweeperbravo posted:As the "dumb moves in advertising" thread would say- BUT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IT SO IT WORKED or something 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Hello I'm interested in— never mind.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Squidster posted:It's one of those weird things in comics - at an early career level, it's all about the artists. Any wannabe writer needs an artist to get their totally-sweet idea in the real world, and artists get the lion's share of respect. As a product takes off, the audience often seems to end up respecting the writer more and the artist less. I wonder if it's because the writer gets to be seen as attached to a new series, and ride on its continuing brand appeal, whereas swapping out artists in an ongoing original series is more common and not a huge deal? I know the Sandman books had multiple artist swaps over its original run, but Neil Gaiman was always writing it. So, his name was the one getting repeated from issue to issue every single time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
Scribblehatch posted:I'm hearing a names being called. Not a whole lot of extrospection. "Because it's DUMB and you brought up POINTLESS poo poo!" Yes yes yes. Very good. It's been fun watching this thread poo poo itself all day, so what the hell, I'll bite. Re: Those dumb post-its. They're vague and unhelpful. For those confused about the 'false gods' I feel like it could either be referring to actual 'false god' characters, or more likely, a more pretentious way of saying a character who is good at everything, loved by all and has very superficial flaws or even just non-flaws like 'helpful to a fault' or 'too humble'. So, a Mary Sue. If it's the first, that can be written well pretty easily and if it's the second, it's been talked to death and no one cares. As for the rest of the post-its, it's...I don't get why anyone would find it to be a helpful guideline? Was it written by someone I'm supposed to care about in the comics world? Even if it is, having a big comics name behind it doesn't make it any less completely useless. As for the Wally Wood panels and the pixar bible, those pop up in this thread all of the time. They're good references and resources, and I have a copy of the wally woodpanels printed out on my cork board so that I can glance at it while I'm thumbnailing. Which brings me to Re: That's not how discussion works. If you want to talk to people about specific things, post what YOU think about them. Ask specific questions, or ask for specific advice. You can't just paste some imgur code down, hit post with no other context and expect some sort of magically fulfilling conversation to appear. Yeah, the images were comic related, but without telling us what YOU want to get out of this conversation, you're setting the bar for what kind of effort you'll receive from the people who actually respond. Getting snippy because the contextless images you posted didn't start a rousing discussion is weird and confusing. We can't give you what you want if you don't actually tell us what that is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
raaaan posted:Getting snippy
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
it's like talking to a brick wall
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
A little more like tennis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
Scribblehatch posted:You've misread me. You have massive and confusing holes in your communication
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
Scribblehatch posted:A little more like tennis. it's like playing tennis against a brick wall
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
GreatJob posted:I wonder if it's because the writer gets to be seen as attached to a new series, and ride on its continuing brand appeal, whereas swapping out artists in an ongoing original series is more common and not a huge deal? I know the Sandman books had multiple artist swaps over its original run, but Neil Gaiman was always writing it. So, his name was the one getting repeated from issue to issue every single time. That's probably It. It's generally not a thing that you see in webcomics as much because people who make them tend to wear both hats or work with the same writer for every project, but it IS an issue that I see spill over on a lot of creator forums and facebook groups in where I constantly see writers looking for artists while at the same time telling prospective artists that they are replaceable so don't expect much/any money. It's actually really entertaining to watch 'writers' who want to pitch their books to Image or Oni foam at the mouth when an artist asks to see samples of the writer's work in advance of accepting a project, which makes it really easy to pick out who is an actual writer and who is an 'idea guy'. Scribblehatch posted:You've misread me. Have I? If those two words were all you took away from my post, I'm not sure I did. I see you are really taking my 'contribute to a discussion in a way that is proportionate to the amount of response you would like' advice to heart with your 3.5 word reply--there were so many other things you could have responded to about that post, so I'm just going to assume you don't actually want to participate in a discussion. No big deal, just really weird of you tbh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
Troposphere posted:it's like talking to a brick wall Or an alien that doesn't quite get how human interaction works. Oh, hey, what a neat idea for a comic. And what if the alien was a busty chick who's naked all the time because she doesn't understand our silly hooman concept of shame?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Constructive Criticism Time! The band on Elsa's stocking doesn't fully wrap around her ankle and this completely breaks the picture for me. Please paint it again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
GreatJob posted:
e: Oh you don't have PMs, my comic is dead in the water
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
One of the primary reasons I don't read mainstream American comics is because of the constant artist changes. Like, I wonder why TV shows don't completely change visual directions every episode. Oh right, because it would be terrible in like 90% of cases.Scribblehatch posted:You've misread me. tbh every time I see a back and forth with you, it feels like you are snippy. Maybe there's a point where people aren't misreading you, but you are conveying yourself poorly 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Hey you know while people are actually here, I haven't asked this thread for a critique in a really long time (like a good 2 years or so) and I know this is a vague request but if anyone's got any feedback I'd love to hear it. It's always been really helpful. http://www.bsfantasy-comic.com/ to be precise I think the last time I asked this thread for a crit was here: http://www.bsfantasy-comic.com/2013/12/26/page-319/ so yeah basically two entire years ago. I think backgrounds are my biggest problem. Or they were last time, at least, and they have been pointed out to me as an issue for way longer than that. Lately I've been trying to keep them compositionally interesting if not elaborate. Since I tend to do a lot of tight, close-up shots (maybe too many??) this tends to be the case quite often. However I've really been trying to pull the camera back and show more interesting background stuff, but I'm not sure they're really quite there yet. It's hard to get invested in making elaborate backgrounds when all I want to do is convey action. I don't mean that's all I want to do, I just mean it's hard to keep the background train going WHEN I want to convey a lot of action. When people are standing around or I'm setting up a scene, that's prime background time, but I've also been accused of having a really noticeable pattern of leading a lot of pages with a wide (usually overhead) establishing shot. I've been trying to do it less but I'm afraid I still rely on it a lot. I also quit MangaStudio's brush line correction cold turkey a while back. I don't know if that has been to my detriment or not; it's hard to tell when I'm so up-close and personal with the linework all the time. I see all the microscopic jitters and stuff and I just don't know. Also, I alluded to this earlier upthread but some people are having a tough time following the story; if any of you decide to read it, can you tell me if it is, in fact, hard to follow? That's a lot to ask I guess but I think most people in this thread would have some good comic-reading chops and would be able to tell me if the pacing is good. I honestly just don't know anymore; I obsess over it as I write and work really hard on it, and I think that the problem people are having is reading serially rather than archivally. I guess that is a lot of feedback to ask for, but it doesn't even have to be about the stuff I just said. I just love feedback and knowing what I can work on. So if anyone has any I would really appreciate it!
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
Anoia posted:Or an alien that doesn't quite get how human interaction works. Starfire
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
raaaan posted:That's probably It. It's generally not a thing that you see in webcomics as much because people who make them tend to wear both hats or work with the same writer for every project, but it IS an issue that I see spill over on a lot of creator forums and facebook groups in where I constantly see writers looking for artists while at the same time telling prospective artists that they are replaceable so don't expect much/any money. It's actually really entertaining to watch 'writers' who want to pitch their books to Image or Oni foam at the mouth when an artist asks to see samples of the writer's work in advance of accepting a project, which makes it really easy to pick out who is an actual writer and who is an 'idea guy'. That said, there are some folks who simply will not see the flaws in their work, and are happy to blame the artist if something doesn't work out. We had one writer who had a great pitch and a mediocre script, and every artist I showed it to rejected it. The writer kept insisting that the script was great, and the artists just didn't understand their vision. Unfortunately for them, the happiness of the artist pool is infinitely more important than the writer's.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
raaaan posted:That's probably It. It's generally not a thing that you see in webcomics as much because people who make them tend to wear both hats or work with the same writer for every project, but it IS an issue that I see spill over on a lot of creator forums and facebook groups in where I constantly see writers looking for artists while at the same time telling prospective artists that they are replaceable so don't expect much/any money. It's actually really entertaining to watch 'writers' who want to pitch their books to Image or Oni foam at the mouth when an artist asks to see samples of the writer's work in advance of accepting a project, which makes it really easy to pick out who is an actual writer and who is an 'idea guy'. Yup, these are people who mistake a brand's identity to the 'importance' of someone's role on a creative team. They probably just know their comic is better than anything those lowly fools at conventions put out, it's just that they can't draw. ...(or write). There are some non-writing artists who have brand identities, but outside of types like Jean Giraud they tend to be really infamous and attract a lot of bashing. It's easy to hide bad writing but it's not easy to hide bad art. Avshalom posted:e: Oh you don't have PMs, my comic is dead in the water BUMMER DUDE!
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Fortis posted:I guess that is a lot of feedback to ask for, but it doesn't even have to be about the stuff I just said. I just love feedback and knowing what I can work on. So if anyone has any I would really appreciate it! I'll just throw out there that the first thing I noticed is that all of your shadows are hard shadows and it makes everything look kind of flat and harsh. Remember, as soft objects rotate away from a light source the shadow forms gradually and just using a soft brush would help your art feel more grounded.  Also you might look into changing some of your saturation and contrast to help separate the characters from the backgrounds and lead the readers eye where you want it to go, as currently your backgrounds contain as much contrast as your characters. The eye is naturally drawn to the point of highest contrast and if you don't control where that is the eye has no place to focus on. Just my two cents. Keep on keeping on! The fact that you've kept your comic going regularly for 400+ pages is a huge testament to your dedication and you can easily see your skills have improved steadily!
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
raaaan posted:Have I? I must refer back to the first post of this page. The Bruce Lee quote. Honestly I'm taken aback by the attitude these forums have. A friend recommended I get an account here and I thought "Sure." But I keep running into heated inquisition, when I'm just bantering. In PMs I told someone this sorta thing only happens on Something Awful. They assured me that wasn't true. Well, what can you really say to that? thousandcranes posted:tbh every time I see a back and forth with you, it feels like you are snippy. Maybe there's a point where people aren't misreading you, but you are conveying yourself poorly Scribblehatch fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
Squidster posted:It's one of those weird things in comics - at an early career level, it's all about the artists. Any wannabe writer needs an artist to get their totally-sweet idea in the real world, and artists get the lion's share of respect. As a product takes off, the audience often seems to end up respecting the writer more and the artist less. I don't think it's just comics really. Film and TV are touched by hundreds of hands but when there's something to talk about (good or bad) people tend to refer to the director or showrunner ("gently caress you Joss/Bay/Weiss&Benioff/Moffat)" but that's because those names are at the top of a list and are supposedly/arguably the more driving force behind the thing. Re characters post-its: As someone more at home in the fiction writing thread I find this very odd. I mean, sure, they don't have to be likable, relatable, or sympathetic - they might be the antagonist or an antihero and those qualities aren't exactly wanted in huge doses. But all compelling and interesting characters, just like everyone in reality, wants something and is chasing something. They have goals, needs, and wants. Mary sue, flawed hero, antihero or villain; if there's soemthing they really loving want, that instantly makes them somewhat relatable and sympathetic, and maybe even admirable. And I kinda wish people didn't dogpile Scribblehatch because a) the poo poo you're talking about isn't even in the comic, and b) you are aware that nudism is a real thing that exists that real people do who would give you an earful for thinking their lifestyle choice was sexual or something to be ashamed of? And if he goes in that direction anyway and it clearly isn't cheesecake or pornographic (which I find rich considering the self-pub thread is nothing but) then who gives a poo poo? He's never the one mentioning it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
Szmitten I've been meaning to ask you if you had an email for awhile now. Surely there's other ways to talk to you!
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Scribblehatch please stop trying to browbeat everyone. You have a very prominent trend in posting here and literally everyone is aware of it, so when you post vague poo poo people know from the context of remembering history what angle it's coming from. The hoighty "well NOW I'm just mediating discussion" shaming poo poo is not doing anyone any favors. Shop Talk: have you worked on cutting out the dead space from your comic panels? It was the biggest technical issue you needed to address and I haven't seen if it's been tightened up lately.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
Reiley posted:Scribblehatch please stop trying to browbeat everyone. You have a very prominent trend in posting here and literally everyone is aware of it, so when you post vague poo poo people know from the context of remembering history what angle it's coming from. The hoighty "well NOW I'm just mediating discussion" shaming poo poo is not doing anyone any favors.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
Szmitten posted:And I kinda wish people didn't dogpile Scribblehatch because a) the poo poo you're talking about isn't even in the comic, and b) you are aware that nudism is a real thing that exists that real people do who would give you an earful for thinking their lifestyle choice was sexual or something to be ashamed of? And if he goes in that direction anyway and it clearly isn't cheesecake or pornographic (which I find rich considering the self-pub thread is nothing but) then who gives a poo poo? He's never the one mentioning it. if his art wasn't cheesecakey in the first place I wouldn't have said anything and he has been incredibly stubborn about it and only replies selectively so it's impossible to have an actual conversation with him
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
I think Reiley means that you are acting as though it's everyone else's problem for not automatically knowing what you mean or what your intentions are rather than an issue of you not making it clear in the first place. Idk, when I see actual discussions happening (here, in other threads, in other fora) I rarely see anyone have to ask the OP why they've brought something up. There's something about the way you post those kinds of things that makes it seem like there's some implicit topic you want to address but are beating about the bush over. I'm afraid I can't explain it better than that. It's just one of those things where if it seems like everyone around you has a problem, that might be a sign that it's actually your problem. In this case, being clear in terms of tone and meaning. And yes, subtle wit/banter tends not to be conveyed easily in a text-based medium (ie these forums), which is part of why emoticons became so popular.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
I'm used to people's indifference, when they don't understand something. Apathy. No response. Generally, I think that works better. Something totally out of nowhere, will also go nowhere. Edit: I feel queasy when I use emoticons. I don't like it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Scribblehatch posted:I'm used to people's indifference, when they don't understand something. Apathy. No response. Generally, I think that works better. Something totally out of nowhere, will also go nowhere. then what's the point of posting it??
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
Ok, that's fine then, but just be aware that tone is really difficult to convey through text, and you can't blame your intended audience for not magically knowing you weren't trying to be pretentious/a jackass/bitter/aggressive* because this is the internet and sometimes people are actually those things. *I'm genuinely not using these words to describe your posting here, just picking adjectives to make the point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
Troposphere posted:then what's the point of posting it??
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Fortis posted:I guess that is a lot of feedback to ask for, but it doesn't even have to be about the stuff I just said. I just love feedback and knowing what I can work on. So if anyone has any I would really appreciate it! I am ~way behind~ on BSF but from the looks of it: I am hella enjoying what you're doing with your panel layouts! The latest page is SUPER dynamic and readable + you're doing good things with color. I actually disagree with part of what radicalwall is saying, I think the harsh shadows actually work really well tonally, at least for this latest sequence. I DO agree with their point AB atmospheric perspective, which is tricky when you're doing flats but if you manage to get that good n readable then that's like the whole Next Level of color. WITH REGARDS to your staging/blocking/background problems, I do think you're leaning a little heavy on close-ups, but it's also not as big a problem as it could be because you're working to keep them interesting within the composition of the whole page. I think what could help is less trying to conceptualize the background as a solid setting they're in and more as a way to conceptualize visual information, of that makes sense. Like this page http://www.bsfantasy-comic.com/2015/06/30/page-460/ seems a little flat because the blocking isn't really implying anything about these guy's relationship. Even something as simple as tilting the camera up and down on them would help. And with action sequences, try to think about the characters' relationship to the conflict at hand and try to block it that way. Like, for example, if the slime king gets big and fights someone again, where can you place him to make his scale really FEEL large? How would shots of differ between him being in the foreground/being in the backround? If he's fighting an enemy in the background, and like, seb, was fighting one in the foreground, and you lined them up, what does that say about the conflict at hand? How would you block him when you're thinking about him (or anything else really) as a character vs. a "force?" Is there a difference? You're definitely headed in the right direction tho and I'm gonna go catch up
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
Scribblehatch posted:... What? For what it's worth man, I like your work and you've been getting more of the brunt of hate than I'm used to seeing but you have to know by now that when you make these defensive or antagonistic posts you're only singling yourself out as a target for further hate. If you're writing a single sentence post to respond to something mean someone said it's exactly the wrong kind of post for these forums and only further derails these threads from their purpose. Sometimes you just have to let things die.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
Scribblehatch posted:Yar. I think the lack of hugbox and occasional grilling to push you to do better and/or post better is the price you have to be willing to pay to also not get mobbed by weird DA types (the kind that are pedophiles, the furries, and the kind that witch hunt at the drop of a hat) and creeps; hugboxes aren't known for pushing people to do better art
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:39
|
|
|
'Hugbox' gets thrown around a little too loosely.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
Szmitten posted:And I kinda wish people didn't dogpile Scribblehatch because a) the poo poo you're talking about isn't even in the comic, and b) you are aware that nudism is a real thing that exists that real people do who would give you an earful for thinking their lifestyle choice was sexual or something to be ashamed of? And if he goes in that direction anyway and it clearly isn't cheesecake or pornographic (which I find rich considering the self-pub thread is nothing but) then who gives a poo poo? He's never the one mentioning it. Which poo poo isn't in what comic? What are you talking about? I'm not 'dogpiling' on Scribblhatch for the sake of being a dick--I absolutely love discussing comics and making comics and helping other people with making comics, but the issue with how he posts here is pretty straightforward in that none of us are mind readers and can't have conversations with someone who starts off with something vague and immediately checks out and has nothing to add to the conversation that they, themselves, were trying to start. Scribblehatch posted:I'm used to people's indifference, when they don't understand something. Apathy. No response. Generally, I think that works better. Something totally out of nowhere, will also go nowhere. Stop for a second and entertain the idea that the issue might not be that other people routinely don't understand you and instead consider that the way YOU communicate is insufficient and that the people around you who respond indifferently or apathetically when 'they' don't 'understand something' are actually just aware of how you react to being asked to elaborate or participate and don't feel like having the conversation that we are having with you right now because they've tried in the past and it clearly doesn't work. I'm not trying to be mean! I'd love to talk shop with you, but you absolutely make conversation more difficult than it should ever have to be and that's enough to make any topic that I could conceivably talk about with you massively unenjoyable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
Szmitten posted:And I kinda wish people didn't dogpile Scribblehatch because a) the poo poo you're talking about isn't even in the comic, and b) you are aware that nudism is a real thing that exists that real people do who would give you an earful for thinking their lifestyle choice was sexual or something to be ashamed of? And if he goes in that direction anyway and it clearly isn't cheesecake or pornographic (which I find rich considering the self-pub thread is nothing but) then who gives a poo poo? He's never the one mentioning it. Do the depictions of naked people he's posted in this/other cc threads really line up with what you think of as a naturist lifestyle I'm not really excited to bring this up again because the shitfest it started before wasn't really interesting or funny but it is baffling to me that anyone can look at the things he's posted here and think it was a succeessful portrayal of a nudist lifestyle and not trying to pass off porny stuff as casual and mature nudity
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
Squidster posted:Okay, so, in an effort to do some actual goddamn discussion and not whatever babytown frolics are going on here, check out: I'd say at the very least if you don't put as much information as Diamond does in their listings (which is literally one line under the title) then you need to go back and edit your article/review/whatever. The writer, pencil/inks/colors, and whoever drew the cover you're displaying. Sorry letterer, you guys always get shafted.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 07:11 |
|
|
Hey Fortis, I'm a fan of your work but I'm also not caught up because I was waiting for chapters to end and then I literally do not understand your archive. Actually that's probably something you want to look at. I click on the chapter title and it shows me the pages in the chapter in reverse order? Why??? I like your use of colors for the artwork, but I tend to have fairly mixed feelings on the word balloons and gutters. Sometimes the colors work, sometimes I really dislike them. I think it would work better for me if those elements were way desaturated. I'm not really sure what the word balloon colors are supposed to be adding (other than indicating who's speaking??) anyway. Your facial proportions get pretty wonky sometimes. Sometimes people's eyes are too close together or their mouth and nose seem to slide around. You have a charming style but it just feels like there's no anatomical backing sometimes. Also I don't care about nudity and I have entirely separate reasons for not reading Chaos in the Tropics but  if you think it's not cheesecakey
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 00:38
|
|