Comickers attention please!

SpyroandCynder4EVAH · Aug 29, 2008 2:47 AM

This is fr all who like to draw comics. I need some tips. I am drawing my first comic book and know nothing about drawing them. Any help?

Kazoobie64 · Aug 29, 2008 3:34 AM

What exactly do you need help on? There's a lot of areas for comics that need careful attention. A lot of things are needed in order to tell an effective story through your drawings. My best advice is to just keep at it, practice gives you more experience.

Also if you need general advice on word bubbles and stuff, this place has great tips: http://webcomictriage.blogspot.com/

SpyroandCynder4EVAH · Aug 30, 2008 1:05 AM

Ok. And actully (besides my drawing. That depends in my hand.) I need help on everything.

Kamineko · Aug 30, 2008 1:06 AM

best advice is to read comics. Like comic books, not webcomics or newspaper comics. Those things offer little to no help in terms of layout and page construction. A good ol' superhero comic has a lot of interesting panel layouts.

SpyroandCynder4EVAH · Aug 30, 2008 2:23 AM

Ok. i gots two comics getting another. (plus shipping and handling. Wah! Stupid)

Fletch_Talon · Aug 30, 2008 2:39 AM

Atresac wrote:

best advice is to read comics. Like comic books, not webcomics or newspaper comics. Those things offer little to no help in terms of layout and page construction. A good ol' superhero comic has a lot of interesting panel layouts.

why not webcomics?

im no comic expert but i think the good ones have pretty good layout, and considering some of the better ones (order of the stick for example) go into print anyway surely theyre good examples

A Guy · Aug 30, 2008 2:41 AM

Holy crap, there's another OotS fan here?!

Kazoobie64 · Aug 30, 2008 2:48 AM

Fletch_Talon wrote:

Atresac wrote:
best advice is to read comics. Like comic books, not webcomics or newspaper comics. Those things offer little to no help in terms of layout and page construction. A good ol' superhero comic has a lot of interesting panel layouts.
why not webcomics?
im no comic expert but i think the good ones have pretty good layout, and considering some of the better ones (order of the stick for example) go into print anyway surely theyre good examples

This.

It's perfectly fine to study the examples of KC Green, Josh Lesnick, heck, even Bleedman, (despite how much I despise his stories, his art is quite good.) but don't go by the poor examples of something like Ctrl Alt Del. Honestly, webcomics aren't so different from printed comics as long as people know what they're doing.

Fletch_Talon · Aug 30, 2008 2:52 AM

Kazoobie64 wrote:

Fletch_Talon wrote:
Atresac wrote:
best advice is to read comics. Like comic books, not webcomics or newspaper comics. Those things offer little to no help in terms of layout and page construction. A good ol' superhero comic has a lot of interesting panel layouts.
why not webcomics?
im no comic expert but i think the good ones have pretty good layout, and considering some of the better ones (order of the stick for example) go into print anyway surely theyre good examples
This.
It's perfectly fine to study the examples of KC Green, Josh Lesnick, heck, even Bleedman, (despite how much I despise his stories, his art is quite good.) but don't go by the poor examples of something like Ctrl Alt Del. Honestly, webcomics aren't so different from printed comics as long as people know what they're doing.

lol if you hate CAD youll love Bigger than Cheeses, even if you dont like the comic itself, its done by far the most "CAD abortion storyline" parodies of any webcomic ive seen

also Clevinger (8-Bit theatre) is good too, its not entirely his art since he uses sprites from games but that means he has to arrange things extra well to make up for it, some would disagree but i think he does it well

Kazoobie64 · Aug 30, 2008 3:06 AM

Yeah, who can't love to hate that miscarriage arc? xD

I actually really loved CADsucks.com but it seems to be down, which is a shame. I remember it took a perfectly good Perry Bible Fellowship comic with no words and put unnecessary words in it to explain the obvious punchline, just to show how CAD works for almost every single strip. I laughed for hours despite how simple it was, but it was brilliant.

SpyroandCynder4EVAH · Aug 30, 2008 3:14 AM

A Guy wrote:

Holy crap, there's another OotS fan here?!

Huh? Any way. Ok. So far all your tips have helped me alot. But I just can't get Spyro's dang left leg right! ARG! Anyway... Never mind. I'll just try this. take that random characters! I made up some chars but haven't named them yet.

Fletch_Talon · Aug 30, 2008 7:33 AM

A Guy wrote:

Holy crap, there's another OotS fan here?!

well duh, OotS is awesome on a stick in stick form

and i don't mind the erfworld comic they have on the same site, not as funny, but awesome story and concept

Kamineko · Aug 30, 2008 1:08 PM

Fletch_Talon wrote:

Atresac wrote:
best advice is to read comics. Like comic books, not webcomics or newspaper comics. Those things offer little to no help in terms of layout and page construction. A good ol' superhero comic has a lot of interesting panel layouts.
why not webcomics?
im no comic expert but i think the good ones have pretty good layout, and considering some of the better ones (order of the stick for example) go into print anyway surely theyre good examples

Thing is the vast majority of all webcomics on the internet suck.

like seriously 99% of them are total garbage and that number is climbing due to the ever growing influx of people putting their horrible comics online. With no filter of what gets put onto the internet, literally anyone with arms and a pulse can make a webcomic.

So even though, yes, there are a few decent, or even good webcomics out there, the odds of someone using the garbage ones instead is 99%.

Even still, I wouldn't tell anybody to take lessons from even the good webcomics on there. Hell, my favorite webcomic, Sam and Fuzzy, is brilliant in terms of story, dialog, characterization, etc. But the dude can't do an interesting panel layout to save his life. Even Girly pales in comparison to a good ol' fashion comic book.

And I never heard of Order of the Stick until now. I just googled it and found it and.... are you serious? I mean I haven't read any of it yet so it could very well be hilarious but the panel layout is so boring and samey. Divided by horizontal lines that are all parallel to the border of the "page". Also, another reason I wouldn't suggest taking a lesson from this is that it seems to suffer from the CAD syndrome of way too much text per page.

I mean really I do not want to read all of that on every page

SpyroandCynder4EVAH · Aug 30, 2008 1:27 PM

That comic is one of the worst i've ever read. But my comic is:

1. Gonna be hand drawn.

2. horrible cause its my first.

3. Gonna be black and white. i think. I'm not sure.

So be aware i may post it but you may not wanna read it.

Kazoobie64 · Aug 30, 2008 4:00 PM

Atresac wrote:

Even still, I wouldn't tell anybody to take lessons from even the good webcomics on there. Hell, my favorite webcomic, Sam and Fuzzy, is brilliant in terms of story, dialog, characterization, etc. But the dude can't do an interesting panel layout to save his life. Even Girly pales in comparison to a good ol' fashion comic book.

Honestly, the reason why we even have that many crappy webcomics is not because of how poor they might design their panels. Dominic Deegan's annoyingly wavy edges for its panels is the least of the webcomic's problems. There are also webcomics out there that know how to make an effective page layout and still end up being horrible for other reasons. Look at Sarah Zero, and look at, well, Bleedman.

Why is panel layout even all that important when it comes to telling your story effectively? I mean yes, if this user is trying to make an action comic, I would recommend the superhero stuff, but if she starts to rush right away into making something as fancy Teen Titans or something like that, she might make it look overdone. Only people who know what they're doing should start getting creative with their page layout.

Heck, even a lot of great comics in print can tell a good story with simple panels. Look at Watchmen, V for Vendetta... Even Sin City used simple panels most of the time. It's just a matter of planning for your panel dimensions, but what matters in the end is what you put in the panels.

Kamineko · Aug 30, 2008 4:57 PM

Kazoobie64 wrote:

Atresac wrote:
Even still, I wouldn't tell anybody to take lessons from even the good webcomics on there. Hell, my favorite webcomic, Sam and Fuzzy, is brilliant in terms of story, dialog, characterization, etc. But the dude can't do an interesting panel layout to save his life. Even Girly pales in comparison to a good ol' fashion comic book.
Honestly, the reason why we even have that many crappy webcomics is not because of how poor they might design their panels. Dominic Deegan's annoyingly wavy edges for its panels is the least of the webcomic's problems. There are also webcomics out there that know how to make an effective page layout and still end up being horrible for other reasons. Look at Sarah Zero, and look at, well, Bleedman.
Why is panel layout even all that important when it comes to telling your story effectively? I mean yes, if this user is trying to make an action comic, I would recommend the superhero stuff, but if she starts to rush right away into making something as fancy Teen Titans or something like that, she might make it look overdone. Only people who know what they're doing should start getting creative with their page layout.
Heck, even a lot of great comics in print can tell a good story with simple panels. Look at Watchmen, V for Vendetta... Even Sin City used simple panels most of the time. It's just a matter of planning for your panel dimensions, but what matters in the end is what you put in the panels.

I'm just saying the majority of the webcomics out there are crap, which they are. That's pretty much because, like I said, anyone can make one.

As for the rest of your post: panel layout is very important to comics. If you don't give a comic something interesting like that, it's just a watered-down version of other forms of media like cartoons.

You don't need an action comic for creative panel layout. Panel layout is important to convey different things that comics can't. You don't have music, acting, sound, or the ability to move a camera around. That's a whole lot that comics can't convey in their simplest form. However with the magic of creativity of panel layouts, we not only are allowed to show suspense, drama, yes, action, or many other forms of moods, but you are able to make your comic more than just something that says "I want to make a cartoon but I don't have the resources."

There's a reason print comics exist today even though we have cartoons and movies. They are a different medium with different ways of expression. There's also a reason why no one with a sense of humor laughs at the comics you find in the newspaper like Garfield or Stone Soup or Zits.

There's a big difference between being able to draw and being able to make a comic. I've seen some amazing artists who can't write or compose a comic to save their lives, like Dresden Codak. The guy can draw some pretty environments, has a good grasp of anatomy, etc. However, he can't make a comic. Everything is so sluggish and boring in the dialog, and even though he tries making use of interesting panel layouts, he can't because a frequent complaint of his comic is how people can't follow what panel they are meant to read next, another thing that portrays how being able to draw is not the same as being able to make a comic.

Call me stuck-up, but I just believe that if you're going to make something, make full use of the resources of the medium. Movies should have acting, sound, camera work, and everything else it can fit in there meant to blow you away. Cartoons should make use of the fact that you're not dealing with real people and tickle our imaginations with characters of interesting design and exaggerated movements and things movies can't do. And comics should capture the reader's attention with pages that just grab you by the throat and yank you in.

But you know that's just me.

Kazoobie64 · Aug 30, 2008 5:53 PM

You're not looking at the bigger picture though. A lot of emotions can be invoked from a single square panel, if the artist, not the person who knows a lot of techniques, knows how to work with it. (IE. "It'd be a lot more effective if I showed the space around the character, so I'll make a bigger rectangle here.") In the end, the comic artist has to work with whatever he or she has, and still make it effective. (Such as, artists who go straight to print are often restricted on the number of pages they can draw.) You might think Jhonen Vasquez's comics are effective through their use of perspective, tones, word bubble placement, etc. But in the end, most of the time they're just simple square panels, he just knows exactly what to put in them and how to make effective pacing with their placement.

However, I suppose what we are discussing here is that webcomics can't be considered professional, unlike printed ones, which I strongly disagree with. There are poor webcomics, and good ones, from professionals, who have studied their field. Just because a comic goes into print thanks to publishing agreements, doesn't automatically mean it's better. You'd be recommending manga, in that case. Which, let's face it, it might bring in the money, but only contributes to the piles of bland, formulatic garbage we have on the shelves. We also have Archie. And personally, a lot of superhero comics that are out now, despite their pretty art and good page layout, don't do anything to invoke any sense of feeling in me. Of course, the crap that goes into print doesn't just apply to comics, look at some of the books we have published now that, despite everything wrong with them, are increasingly popular.

Either way, I don't recommend for this first-timer comic artist to start with something that big. Simple square panels are fine for beginners. When you begin to get used to it, you can begin experimenting with your panels. That's one of the more effective ways to learn, from my experience.

Kamineko · Aug 30, 2008 8:55 PM

Kazoobie64 wrote:

You're not looking at the bigger picture though. A lot of emotions can be invoked from a single square panel, if the artist, not the person who knows a lot of techniques, knows how to work with it. (IE. "It'd be a lot more effective if I showed the space around the character, so I'll make a bigger rectangle here.") In the end, the comic artist has to work with whatever he or she has, and still make it effective. (Such as, artists who go straight to print are often restricted on the number of pages they can draw.) You might think Jhonen Vasquez's comics are effective through their use of perspective, tones, word bubble placement, etc. But in the end, most of the time they're just simple square panels, he just knows exactly what to put in them and how to make effective pacing with their placement.
However, I suppose what we are discussing here is that webcomics can't be considered professional, unlike printed ones, which I strongly disagree with. There are poor webcomics, and good ones, from professionals, who have studied their field. Just because a comic goes into print thanks to publishing agreements, doesn't automatically mean it's better. You'd be recommending manga, in that case. Which, let's face it, it might bring in the money, but only contributes to the piles of bland, formulatic garbage we have on the shelves. We also have Archie. And personally, a lot of superhero comics that are out now, despite their pretty art and good page layout, don't do anything to invoke any sense of feeling in me. Of course, the crap that goes into print doesn't just apply to comics, look at some of the books we have published now that, despite everything wrong with them, are increasingly popular.
Either way, I don't recommend for this first-timer comic artist to start with something that big. Simple square panels are fine for beginners. When you begin to get used to it, you can begin experimenting with your panels. That's one of the more effective ways to learn, from my experience.

Yes, the artist needs to work with what they have. And when you have a medium that can't express everything you may want it to as easily as others, yes, every stroke of the pencil, every word bubble, and every border counts.

You act as if panel layout is some kind of optional thing. But if someone wants to make a comic that makes full use of everything at their disposal, it's not optional. Everything in a comic has to play its role. Things such as the placement of the characters, the size or shape of word balloons, the flow of it all so every panel and balloon goes in an order that we read naturally, and yes, panel layout plays a role too. A huge one.

You undermine one of the biggest methods for capturing attention in the comic world. Think of a movie where the camera stays in one place the whole time. It's pretty boring. Same thing applies here. And using Jhonen Vasquez as an example isn't a very good move, I'd say, considering he is one of the biggest hacks in the business. But that's a matter of opinion.

I never once said webcomics can't be considered professional. If you read what I've said time and time again, you'd realize the reason I DON'T suggest looking at the world of webcomics for influence is because since ANYONE, and I mean ANYONE can make a webcomic, we get the vast majority of webcomics you will find on the internet are pure, unadulterated *bleep*. This is known as a hypothetical extent of Sturgeons Law. It's not to say that you can't find crap in the published world. You can, I openly admit that. However publishers will basically only hire people who know what they are doing. People who can draw, ink, color, write, etc. well enough to have their names on a comic in the store. However, the internet doesn't have this. So anyone on drunkduck, comicgenesis, or hell, even someone willing to pay for a URL can make a comic, no matter how horrible it is (as mentioned earlier, CTRL+ALT+DEL is an example of this).

I don't have anything against webcomics other than the fact that the majority of them are horrible. Professionals can make them, but so can people who have a very tenuous grasp of anatomy, color, layout, dialog, characterization, storytelling, etc.

So yes, I would not suggest looking at webcomics on the sole fact that at least 99% of them are awful and would not offer any good inspiration.

Kazoobie64 · Aug 30, 2008 10:42 PM

Atresac wrote:

You act as if panel layout is some kind of optional thing. But if someone wants to make a comic that makes full use of everything at their disposal, it's not optional. Everything in a comic has to play its role. Things such as the placement of the characters, the size or shape of word balloons, the flow of it all so every panel and balloon goes in an order that we read naturally, and yes, panel layout plays a role too. A huge one.

Well of course if you're aiming for a perfect comic you need a good panel layout. My argument is that you don't necessarily need an amazing panel layout for it to be a good comic. It just depends on the situation. A good comic artist puts this into thought: "If my drawings alone can't send out the message, what else can I do?"

We have a little thing called abstraction, and we also have a strangely effective thing called simplicity. This is why we have simple font logos for famous companies instead of colorful graffiti ones, this is why we have several animators that decide to sacrifice over-detailing in order to make more frames and smooth movement, and so on. If the comic artist, after a careful review, decides to make his or her comic simple by eliminating unnecessary panel structure, I don't see what's the problem.

You undermine one of the biggest methods for capturing attention in the comic world. Think of a movie where the camera stays in one place the whole time. It's pretty boring. Same thing applies here.

Not really. The movie depends on the literal camera in order to change the environment, but a comic doesn't need the help of panels to change its environments. I think the proper example is if a movie would be constantly chopping its scene clips into a different shape to bring out a mood, which hardly any movie does, because we're always watching them on a quadrilateral screen.

And using Jhonen Vasquez as an example isn't a very good move, I'd say, considering he is one of the biggest hacks in the business. But that's a matter of opinion.

Whether he's a hack or not, he knows his stuff. I don't care much for his serious stories and I haven't seen his more recent work, if he has any, but he knows how to work his art into a panel effectively.

I never once said webcomics can't be considered professional. If you read what I've said time and time again, you'd realize the reason I DON'T suggest looking at the world of webcomics for influence is because since ANYONE, and I mean ANYONE can make a webcomic, we get the vast majority of webcomics you will find on the internet are pure, unadulterated *bleep*.

My apologies, I thought that when you said "webcomics offer little to no help in terms of layout and page construction," you were restricting that skill to only artists who get their comic printed. In this case, I'd be happy to point out webcomics that know what they're doing, because yes, I realize it's hard to search for a good webcomic without drowning in the masses of crap we have out there. I found most of the ones I read through recommendations by my friends and classmates.

However publishers will basically only hire people who know what they are doing. People who can draw, ink, color, write, etc. well enough to have their names on a comic in the store. However, the internet doesn't have this. So anyone on drunkduck, comicgenesis, or hell, even someone willing to pay for a URL can make a comic, no matter how horrible it is (as mentioned earlier, CTRL+ALT+DEL is an example of this).

This is not the whole truth. Publishers will also agree to publish what they know will make money, even if to the professional eye, the comic is crap. If I mention some of the horrors that have gotten published, I will be probably be beaten mercilessly by the fans on this board. (And I know there's some.) Girly managed to release printed comics because it was a popular webcomic and got attention. If hardly anyone had read it, I doubt Lesnick would have decided to print it.

I don't have anything against webcomics other than the fact that the majority of them are horrible. Professionals can make them, but so can people who have a very tenuous grasp of anatomy, color, layout, dialog, characterization, storytelling, etc.

That's something I can agree with.

So yes, I would not suggest looking at webcomics on the sole fact that at least 99% of them are awful and would not offer any good inspiration.

That's not. I don't understand why we can't learn from the good webcomics out there, just because there's so many bad ones? I'm just pointing out the flaw in your suggestion to "look at printed comics, but not webcomics." It's kind of generalizing what you read. I hate most manga, but I have actually seen some good ones. (I can't think of any names right now, but I know I have, haha.) Webcomic artists can have as much knowledge and take just as much criticism as any other comic artist. Ever heard of Fanboys? It was an awful comic back in the day, but that artist received lots of critique, some from great webcomic artists themselves, upon releasing his webcomic. He actually listened to it, and made amazing improvement within less than two years.

Kamineko · Aug 30, 2008 11:18 PM

Kazoobie64 wrote:

Atresac wrote:
You act as if panel layout is some kind of optional thing. But if someone wants to make a comic that makes full use of everything at their disposal, it's not optional. Everything in a comic has to play its role. Things such as the placement of the characters, the size or shape of word balloons, the flow of it all so every panel and balloon goes in an order that we read naturally, and yes, panel layout plays a role too. A huge one.
Well of course if you're aiming for a perfect comic you need a good panel layout. My argument is that you don't necessarily need an amazing panel layout for it to be a good comic. It just depends on the situation. A good comic artist puts this into thought: "If my drawings alone can't send out the message, what else can I do?"
We have a little thing called abstraction, and we also have a strangely effective thing called simplicity. This is why we have simple font logos for famous companies instead of colorful graffiti ones, this is why we have several animators that decide to sacrifice over-detailing in order to make more frames and smooth movement, and so on. If the comic artist, after a careful review, decides to make his or her comic simple by eliminating unnecessary panel structure, I don't see what's the problem.
You undermine one of the biggest methods for capturing attention in the comic world. Think of a movie where the camera stays in one place the whole time. It's pretty boring. Same thing applies here.

Not really. The movie depends on the literal camera in order to change the environment, but a comic doesn't need the help of panels to change its environments. I think the proper example is if a movie would be constantly chopping its scene clips into a different shape to bring out a mood, which hardly any movie does, because we're always watching them on a quadrilateral screen.
And using Jhonen Vasquez as an example isn't a very good move, I'd say, considering he is one of the biggest hacks in the business. But that's a matter of opinion.
Whether he's a hack or not, he knows his stuff. I don't care much for his serious stories and I haven't seen his more recent work, if he has any, but he knows how to work his art into a panel effectively.
I never once said webcomics can't be considered professional. If you read what I've said time and time again, you'd realize the reason I DON'T suggest looking at the world of webcomics for influence is because since ANYONE, and I mean ANYONE can make a webcomic, we get the vast majority of webcomics you will find on the internet are pure, unadulterated *bleep*.

My apologies, I thought that when you said "webcomics offer little to no help in terms of layout and page construction," you were restricting that skill to only artists who get their comic printed. In this case, I'd be happy to point out webcomics that know what they're doing, because yes, I realize it's hard to search for a good webcomic without drowning in the masses of crap we have out there. I found most of the ones I read through recommendations by my friends and classmates.
However publishers will basically only hire people who know what they are doing. People who can draw, ink, color, write, etc. well enough to have their names on a comic in the store. However, the internet doesn't have this. So anyone on drunkduck, comicgenesis, or hell, even someone willing to pay for a URL can make a comic, no matter how horrible it is (as mentioned earlier, CTRL+ALT+DEL is an example of this).
This is not the whole truth. Publishers will also agree to publish what they know will make money, even if to the professional eye, the comic is crap. If I mention some of the horrors that have gotten published, I will be probably be beaten mercilessly by the fans on this board. (And I know there's some.) Girly managed to release printed comics because it was a popular webcomic and got attention. If hardly anyone had read it, I doubt Lesnick would have decided to print it.
I don't have anything against webcomics other than the fact that the majority of them are horrible. Professionals can make them, but so can people who have a very tenuous grasp of anatomy, color, layout, dialog, characterization, storytelling, etc.
That's something I can agree with.
So yes, I would not suggest looking at webcomics on the sole fact that at least 99% of them are awful and would not offer any good inspiration.
That's not. I don't understand why we can't learn from the good webcomics out there, just because there's so many bad ones? I'm just pointing out the flaw in your suggestion to "look at printed comics, but not webcomics." It's kind of generalizing what you read. I hate most manga, but I have actually seen some good ones. (I can't think of any names right now, but I know I have, haha.) Webcomic artists can have as much knowledge and take just as much criticism as any other comic artist. Ever heard of Fanboys? It was an awful comic back in the day, but that artist received lots of critique, some from great webcomic artists themselves, upon releasing his webcomic. He actually listened to it, and made amazing improvement within less than two years.

1) Amazing panel layout? No. But just boring boxes lined up over more boxes is... well... boring. You can use panels withing panels, overlapping panels, a character from one panel stretching out into the next panel, etc. If someone/thing is falling, a page of long vertical panels is a good way to portray the fall. There are many things that, while they CAN be portrayed without use of creative panel layout, can be done so much better by simply going "hey instead of just another box... maybe this should overlap this one". Yeah, it's not *necessary* but just the same, half-way decent acting isn't *necessary* to make a movie.

I mentioned Sam and Fuzzy earlier. Even though I love it, the dude can't really do any interesting layouts. However, there are a few gems in his Memory Lapse storyline:

Notice how throughout this one, he creates the illusion of the "camera" rotating around the characters and zooming out at the same time.

Or here, how panel 9 is 3 panels in one

And here, panel 5 cuts off to panel 6, with only the character's face as the border

2) Ok, you took my example way to literally here. I don't see how you can even take that seriously. The camera lens changing shape? What I'm saying is movies rely on camera angles for a number of reasons. To show emotion, size, speed, etc. Panel layouts can do all this and bring life to a comic in the way a simple [ ][ ][ ][ ] layout can't.

3) He can fit his art into a panel all well and good, but that's not really hard when all of his characters are stick figures. This more of an opinionated issue, so I won't say anything past that when I say "hack" I mean "he's not really good at any aspect of making a comic other than the drawing part".

4) Webcomics can be good, again, but the vast majority suck. I wouldn't take music lessons from a band that's horrible because they have 1 or 2 good songs. I'd much prefer to listen to someone who has a steady stream of at least competence, even if they've had 1 or 2 bombs.

5) If they know something is going to make money, you can bet your *bleep* they're going to hire someone who knows how to make a comic before putting it out there. Just because an idea is good, doesn't mean they can just hand it off to anybody and have it make money. That's where getting people who can draw, ink, and construct comes in. You're not going to find a published comic like White Ninja (even if it is brilliant in its own little way).

6) Excellent.

7) I'm not saying you can't, I'm just saying it's not wise to try your luck at taking influence from webcomics because there are so many awful ones. I mean assuming the person in question is smart enough to ignore drunkduck, and they decide to look at the webcomics that are successful. What would they find? CTRL+ALT+DEL, Penny Arcade, Dresdan Codak, Domonic Deegan, etc. I honestly would not suggest anyone take advice from any of those comics. Now yeah, every once in a while there is a Girly in there, but the risk of getting deceived by a turd in sheep's clothing is just too high, so is the risk of running into some terrible sprite comic. If you just go out and buy a comic book, that some publisher is willing to spend money on, you can be certain that at the very least you'll find competence in just about every page.

Fletch_Talon · Aug 30, 2008 11:23 PM

Atresac wrote:

Also, another reason I wouldn't suggest taking a lesson from this is that it seems to suffer from the CAD syndrome of way too much text per page.
I mean really I do not want to read all of that on every page

the difference is that OotS uses supposed "excess text" not to tell a joke but to tell a story, OotS isn't meant to be read as a one off strip like CAD, PA, Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal (which is pretty *bleep* funny if you ask me)

now i personally dont care if a webcomic has more text than is usual for comics, i dont read them because i dont have the attention span to read books
quite the opposite, i read them because when done correctly it can have as good a story as any book but you get to pace yourself in your reading of it, and it often comes with more humour

as for interesting panel compostion... good lord you sound like an art critic, i dont know if OotS ever does use special looking panels, but i do know that if they used it as frequently as you seem to think they should (since i doubt youve read every comic in the archives) then it would get old quickly anyway

Kamineko · Aug 30, 2008 11:34 PM

Fletch_Talon wrote:

Atresac wrote:
Also, another reason I wouldn't suggest taking a lesson from this is that it seems to suffer from the CAD syndrome of way too much text per page.
I mean really I do not want to read all of that on every page
the difference is that OotS uses supposed "excess text" not to tell a joke but to tell a story, OotS isn't meant to be read as a one off strip like CAD, PA, Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal (which is pretty *bleep* funny if you ask me)
now i personally dont care if a webcomic has more text than is usual for comics, i dont read them because i dont have the attention span to read books
quite the opposite, i read them because when done correctly it can have as good a story as any book but you get to pace yourself in your reading of it, and it often comes with more humour
as for interesting panel compostion... good lord you sound like an art critic, i dont know if OotS ever does use special looking panels, but i do know that if they used it as frequently as you seem to think they should (since i doubt youve read every comic in the archives) then it would get old quickly anyway

It's very possible to tell a story without giant text dumps. That's part of good storytelling. I hate to sound like some kind of cheerleader, but again, Sam and Fuzzy has a quite interesting story and there aren't any giant walls of text because Mr. Logan knows how to tell a story without explaining every little detail.

And for me sounding like an art critic: all I think is that when you're making something, you should make an effort to do it to the best of your ability. If you don't, all you do is waste your own time and the time of everyone who is reading your work.

And if you do something that gets boring quickly, you're not doing it right. Things as simple as panel layout and camera placement may sound boring on paper, but when an artist incorporates these things correctly, they're seamless but at the same time capture your attention.

Also, that panel-in-a-panel at the bottom is one of the few things I'm talking about (but if the smaller one were shifted to the left side instead and the bigger picture shifted more to the right it would look a lot nicer).

A Guy · Aug 30, 2008 11:36 PM

Personally, I do not go looking in comics going "Wow, such amazing panel layout, this comic owns more than all the others that actually have a better story to tell", and my comic reading experience is not improved by different panel layouts-I only need to know what direction I am supposed to read when reading the comic.

Kamineko · Aug 30, 2008 11:39 PM

A Guy wrote:

Personally, I do not go looking in comics going "Wow, such amazing panel layout, this comic owns more than all the others that actually have a better story to tell", and my comic reading experience is not improved by different panel layouts-I only need to know what direction I am supposed to read when reading the comic.

Note that I never implied that creative use of the comic medium makes up for things like crappy story, crappy dialog, crappy characterization, etc.

And wow, such boring tastes. That's like "I don't need this meal to taste good, I just need it to go into my stomach and provide my body with nourishment to survive. Things like flavor are for tossers".

A Guy · Aug 30, 2008 11:44 PM

Technically, the story is the meal, and the panel layout is the plate on which it is served. Of course, if the meal is served on a dirty plate, it would make the meal unappetizing, however, the main purpose of the plate is to allow the meal to be served.

#1 Aug 29, 2008 2:47 AM

Comickers attention please!

#2 Aug 29, 2008 3:34 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#3 Aug 30, 2008 1:05 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#4 Aug 30, 2008 1:06 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#5 Aug 30, 2008 2:23 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#6 Aug 30, 2008 2:39 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#7 Aug 30, 2008 2:41 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#8 Aug 30, 2008 2:48 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#9 Aug 30, 2008 2:52 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#10 Aug 30, 2008 3:06 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#11 Aug 30, 2008 3:14 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#12 Aug 30, 2008 7:33 AM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#13 Aug 30, 2008 1:08 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#14 Aug 30, 2008 1:27 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#15 Aug 30, 2008 4:00 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#16 Aug 30, 2008 4:57 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#17 Aug 30, 2008 5:53 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#18 Aug 30, 2008 8:55 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#19 Aug 30, 2008 10:42 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#20 Aug 30, 2008 11:18 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#21 Aug 30, 2008 11:23 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#22 Aug 30, 2008 11:34 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#23 Aug 30, 2008 11:36 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#24 Aug 30, 2008 11:39 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

#25 Aug 30, 2008 11:44 PM

Re: Comickers attention please!

Board footer