Comments on: The Subjective View of WebComic Art http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/ I'm in your site, touching your stuff. Sun, 01 Aug 2010 00:16:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: James Thomson http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/comment-page-1/#comment-125 James Thomson Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:03:01 +0000 http://frumph.net/?p=226#comment-125 Great subject! I think the art itself has to function as a medium for delivery - if you're trying to convey emotion then you need a high level of skill to convey anything more subtle than 'ANGRY' and happy. If you're drawing a gag comic then it probably doesn't matter if you have two beautifully rendered people talking about the internet, or two stick figures. The follow on question is - can a webcomic ever be 'art' in the classical sense?: http://sketchcountry.com/2009/12/the-post-post-post-modernist/ Great subject! I think the art itself has to function as a medium for delivery – if you’re trying to convey emotion then you need a high level of skill to convey anything more subtle than ‘ANGRY’ and happy. If you’re drawing a gag comic then it probably doesn’t matter if you have two beautifully rendered people talking about the internet, or two stick figures.

The follow on question is – can a webcomic ever be ‘art’ in the classical sense?:
http://sketchcountry.com/2009/12/the-post-post-post-modernist/

]]> By: Cynthia Shelton http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/comment-page-1/#comment-123 Cynthia Shelton Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:34:14 +0000 http://frumph.net/?p=226#comment-123 Oh Frumph, you are into slippery slidey territory when you try to define What Art Is. That's the oldest stupidest question after Does God Exist? Is the art clean? What about scratchy, bloppy, scribbly artwork? Some of which has appeared in venerable New Yorker magazine pages? Regarding depth, perspective and lighting : what about flat 2-d images? emotions and feeling to match the dialogue? therein is the crux of communicating with images. I'll agree with you on this one point. objects and characters proportionate? Irrelevant if your aim is to communicate emotion or story line. *too busy* - you mean like Where's Waldo? Or R. Crumb? or Rube Goldberg? Or even ( my favorite) Winsor McCay? color or black & white blend well and fit together? huh? by what standards? demonstrated effort? Like early Trudeau, or maybe Jules Feiffer spare sketches? How do you judge effort? I suspect you mean a professional finished look? but comics evolve and what starts as quite sketchy may become beautifully rendered when drawn hundreds of times. to judge as good or bad when still in the development period is to condemn a potentially great cartoon. What I don't see in your list is nix of the tired cliche either in text or image, sometimes known as the Garfield Syndrome. Also simply un-funny comics bite. Of course that's subjective too. What about the endless look-alike Manga Manga Manga? That would be Speed Racer Syndrome. In sum, I believe that denoting comics as Good or Bad is folly. The brilliance of ComicPress is that any goofball who wants to draw can find his/her audience. I'm regularly addicted to reading some cartoon and when they get that much of my attention I link them on my ComicPress site. Other cartoonist referrals have led me to some of my favorite artists. And if you want a REAL thrill, here's a True False quiz to find out if you are a Fine Artist or an Illustrator. http://www.cynxing.com/Gallery/PopQuiz.html Oh Frumph, you are into slippery slidey territory when you try to define What Art Is. That’s the oldest stupidest question after Does God Exist?

Is the art clean? What about scratchy, bloppy, scribbly artwork? Some of which has appeared in venerable New Yorker magazine pages?

Regarding depth, perspective and lighting : what about flat 2-d images?

emotions and feeling to match the dialogue? therein is the crux of communicating with images. I’ll agree with you on this one point.

objects and characters proportionate? Irrelevant if your aim is to communicate emotion or story line.

*too busy* – you mean like Where’s Waldo? Or R. Crumb? or Rube Goldberg? Or even ( my favorite) Winsor McCay?

color or black & white blend well and fit together? huh? by what standards?

demonstrated effort? Like early Trudeau, or maybe Jules Feiffer spare sketches? How do you judge effort? I suspect you mean a professional finished look? but comics evolve and what starts as quite sketchy may become beautifully rendered when drawn hundreds of times. to judge as good or bad when still in the development period is to condemn a potentially great cartoon.

What I don’t see in your list is nix of the tired cliche either in text or image, sometimes known as the Garfield Syndrome. Also simply un-funny comics bite. Of course that’s subjective too. What about the endless look-alike Manga Manga Manga? That would be Speed Racer Syndrome.

In sum, I believe that denoting comics as Good or Bad is folly. The brilliance of ComicPress is that any goofball who wants to draw can find his/her audience. I’m regularly addicted to reading some cartoon and when they get that much of my attention I link them on my ComicPress site. Other cartoonist referrals have led me to some of my favorite artists. And if you want a REAL thrill, here’s a True False quiz to find out if you are a Fine Artist or an Illustrator. http://www.cynxing.com/Gallery/PopQuiz.html

]]> By: Hilus Anendorf http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/comment-page-1/#comment-122 Hilus Anendorf Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:40:36 +0000 http://frumph.net/?p=226#comment-122 Remember, comics are not art (meaning paintings, drawings, etc.) and it´s not literature...it´s a combination of both things. Art + Literature= Comics. So, to make a good comic, you must depend on art...and words. Remember, comics are not art (meaning paintings, drawings, etc.) and it´s not literature…it´s a combination of both things. Art + Literature= Comics.

So, to make a good comic, you must depend on art…and words.

]]> By: Frumph http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/comment-page-1/#comment-121 Frumph Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:43:15 +0000 http://frumph.net/?p=226#comment-121 More a nice way of putting I don't like it and can see how it can be interpreted as artistic in a classic sense of the word and not based on the comic arts, dependent on the style of the art for whatever mood the scenes are in, being that its all eclectic now anyways. More a nice way of putting I don’t like it and can see how it can be interpreted as artistic in a classic sense of the word and not based on the comic arts, dependent on the style of the art for whatever mood the scenes are in, being that its all eclectic now anyways.

]]> By: Bearman http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/comment-page-1/#comment-120 Bearman Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:10:49 +0000 http://frumph.net/?p=226#comment-120 "Are objects and characters proportionate?" Thus why I refer to my work as Hack..haha “Are objects and characters proportionate?”

Thus why I refer to my work as Hack..haha

]]> By: Taversia http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/comment-page-1/#comment-119 Taversia Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:59:21 +0000 http://frumph.net/?p=226#comment-119 I hear that... I LOVE Yu+Me, but I have a lot of trouble following it beyond the dream sequence, waaayyy back when the comic first started. =[ All the experimentalism makes my head spin. I mean, it's awesome n' all, but I think it detracts attention from the actual story a wee bit. At least for me. ^^;; I hear that… I LOVE Yu+Me, but I have a lot of trouble following it beyond the dream sequence, waaayyy back when the comic first started. =[ All the experimentalism makes my head spin. I mean, it’s awesome n’ all, but I think it detracts attention from the actual story a wee bit. At least for me. ^^;;

]]> By: Michael http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/comment-page-1/#comment-118 Michael Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:32:23 +0000 http://frumph.net/?p=226#comment-118 On the other hand you get something like Yu+Me which deliberately changes art styles to fit the different settings it moves into. On the other hand you get something like Yu+Me which deliberately changes art styles to fit the different settings it moves into.

]]> By: Ping http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/comment-page-1/#comment-117 Ping Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:44:15 +0000 http://frumph.net/?p=226#comment-117 I read a lot of differently created webcomics online, even those that are just crude pencil sketches (like mine), but more often it's the stick figures like Cyanide and Happiness that draw me in. The simplicity. I love goofy characters and anthro characters too, like Housepets! There's also giving voice to pets only in their world, like Mows does. But seeing as how I slack off on my art form about 90% of the time (that 10% is usually a moment of artistic clarity as a fluke), I tend not to be too judgmental about other people's art. Sure the "pros" have an excellent presentation and vision, and I admire that much. But, I don't do this as my source of income and therefore don't work too hard on it. That, and I can't draw. I don't try to survive on the art alone. I survive on me being odd. I read a lot of differently created webcomics online, even those that are just crude pencil sketches (like mine), but more often it’s the stick figures like Cyanide and Happiness that draw me in. The simplicity. I love goofy characters and anthro characters too, like Housepets! There’s also giving voice to pets only in their world, like Mows does.

But seeing as how I slack off on my art form about 90% of the time (that 10% is usually a moment of artistic clarity as a fluke), I tend not to be too judgmental about other people’s art. Sure the “pros” have an excellent presentation and vision, and I admire that much. But, I don’t do this as my source of income and therefore don’t work too hard on it. That, and I can’t draw.

I don’t try to survive on the art alone. I survive on me being odd.

]]> By: Frumph http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/comment-page-1/#comment-114 Frumph Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:15:49 +0000 http://frumph.net/?p=226#comment-114 I personally like kukuburi, shadowgirls and xylia where the colors are solid, the lineart is clean and the colors blend smooth. But I really [appreciate] the work and effort that some art like red moon rising does where it's taken with the true emphasis of classical interpretation of what art is. I personally like kukuburi, shadowgirls and xylia where the colors are solid, the lineart is clean and the colors blend smooth. But I really [appreciate] the work and effort that some art like red moon rising does where it’s taken with the true emphasis of classical interpretation of what art is.

]]> By: D. Long http://frumph.net/blog/random-thoughts/the-subjective-view-of-webcomic-art/comment-page-1/#comment-116 D. Long Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:21:35 +0000 http://frumph.net/?p=226#comment-116 I think that art is subjective, but it is very apparent when it's too busy, cut & pasted, disproportionate (not stylistically), etc., and most opinions would be similar on what is and isn't good art based on things like these. My main concern when considering art in webcomics is whether or not the art *fits* the comic. I think a comic like Cyanide and Happiness, though they are just stick figures, has an art style that fits the subject matter and humor, much more than "comic-book characters" drawn exceptionally well would. Similarly, I think a comic like Shadowgirls wouldn't work well at all with stick figures. So, the art in Cyanide and Happiness isn't *better* than the art in Shadowgirls, but it is more appropriate for their comic. Same can be said for many comics where the art isn't fine-tuned and polished. I always use the example of The Far Side, by Gary Larson. Pretty much any art style other than his pudgy, doofus-looking line-drawn characters would only take away from the comic. I think there are several (if not a lot of) webcomics that try to survive on art alone, and while they're pretty to look at, I don't keep an interest much in those. That's just me, though. I like the whole package. I think that art is subjective, but it is very apparent when it’s too busy, cut & pasted, disproportionate (not stylistically), etc., and most opinions would be similar on what is and isn’t good art based on things like these.

My main concern when considering art in webcomics is whether or not the art *fits* the comic. I think a comic like Cyanide and Happiness, though they are just stick figures, has an art style that fits the subject matter and humor, much more than “comic-book characters” drawn exceptionally well would. Similarly, I think a comic like Shadowgirls wouldn’t work well at all with stick figures. So, the art in Cyanide and Happiness isn’t *better* than the art in Shadowgirls, but it is more appropriate for their comic. Same can be said for many comics where the art isn’t fine-tuned and polished. I always use the example of The Far Side, by Gary Larson. Pretty much any art style other than his pudgy, doofus-looking line-drawn characters would only take away from the comic.

I think there are several (if not a lot of) webcomics that try to survive on art alone, and while they’re pretty to look at, I don’t keep an interest much in those. That’s just me, though. I like the whole package.

]]>