rowyn

I was discussing web comics with a friend, and he mentioned that he had a subconcious bias for strips that were in color. It wasn't that he consciously looked at black and white strips and said "ew!" -- but he found that most of the strips he wound up reading were in color.

I haven't noticed this bias in myself. In fact, one of the comics I read daily -- GPF -- went to color and I didn't even notice. (Happened sometime in 2002 or 2003, I guess). Out of the 21 strips I regularly follow, nine are in color. But most of those were in b&w when I started reading them, so color didn't have an impact on my decision.

Perhaps more interestingly: I only read a handful of strips where I know the creator's sole income is from the strip. Those would be: Megatokyo, PVP, Sluggy Freelance, and User Friendly. None of those run daily color strips (though the last three do Sunday color).

But this has been on my mind, so I thought I'd do a little poll on it and a couple of questions. For variety, I'll fill out my own poll this time. :)

[Poll #245608]

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

kelloggs2066.livejournal.com

To a certain extent, I think it comes down to something as amporphous as "Talent"

A talented artist can carry a strip if the writing is poor.
A Talented writer can carry a strip if the art is poor.

In my discussions, I probably overemphisize artwork.
That's because writing comes easy for me, art does not.

While most of the strips I read are in black and white, I will tend to disdain black and white, perhaps because I'm trying to justify the extra effort I go to to put things in color.

However. I think in all honesty I can say with objectivity that color is like an extra foot in the door. When someone clicks on your site for the first time, you've got ONE STRIP to make a good impression. In that case, color helps. If you make a decent impression, they may look at a second strip. If you've still made a good impression, then a third strip gets checked out. At some point, if you've held their attention, the reader goes and reads through the full archives.

But as far as I can tell, making that first impression is important.

Oh well, it's been a long time since anyone's flamed me for my artwork. Mark Stanley put me down as the "Probably the most improved comic on the web." so I guess I've managed to do something. :)

Oh, yes, discontinuities like suddenly going Chibi style or 4th wall breaks annoy me. But, I'll forgive them a lot faster than characters who are just mean, nasty and vicious for no good reason.

From:

jordangreywolf.livejournal.com

Hmm. Good point on that last bit. Annoyances don't necessarily translate into instant dropping of the series for me. I just hate being annoyed. For instance, I've made it all the way through at least a couple of anime and manga series despite my annoyance at wild takes or "chibi moments". I guess I haven't really paid close attention to what makes or breaks my interest in following a comic, and therefore trying to recount my own preferences won't be a fair indicator of what really works for me.

All the same, I hate wild takes, and I would like these series much better if they didn't resort to them. ;)

But I'm far more likely to quite following a series if there's a really bad, annoying story element - such as a strawman villain who is a villain just because. He's bad because the hero needs someone to have good cause to beat up. He's bad because that's what villains are: bad. Bwa-ha-ha. Eeeeeeeevil. Hurrah.

Another peeve: moral wishy-washiness, where forces of "good" and "evil" are just equated with who wears the white hats and who wears the black hats.

Subset #1: The "roguish hero". There's a particular webcomic I have in mind - in COLOR - from a decent artist, wherein one of the main characters (presumably the eventual hero) is a bandit. He admits to "killing people" during the course of his work, and a lawful type in his group resents this, but he just treats it with wistful grins, and we're expected to just see it as a "colorful" part of this good-lookin' guy's past. Why, doesn't that just make him cool? Other comics, where someone is a "killer", but this just makes him cool. As long as we don't see the killing - as long as it's nobody WE care about - then it's okay, right?

Subset #2: Writer in love with the villain. There are instances (at least one B&W comic I can think of) where the writer just seems to love her "villain" too much. He's pretty, he has a nice costume, he gets the cool sarcastic lines, and maybe the hero is just too bland by comparison. It becomes just too obvious that the writer is overly fond with her villain, and would like to whitewash his transgressions, or perhaps pretend that they never even happened, because he's become the star of her comic. The thing is, sometimes I can symphathize with liking the villain too much, especially when I read stories where the heroes are annoying, and when it's not immediately clear just why I should be rooting for them. But in some webcomics, it becomes so muddled that I wonder just WHY the two sides are fighting, or what they stand for, except for this vague idea that there HAS to be a conflict or there would be no story.

I could name names, but I suppose I should write my own entry to give a more involved critique, rather than filling up Rowyn's comments thread.

From:

kelloggs2066.livejournal.com

}Subset #2: Writer in love with the villain

This happens all too frequently.

Which name is more recognizable?
Luke Skywalker or Darth Vader?

Who got pushed from being the main character,
and who got 3 Prequels built as a vehicle for him?

But, if you want the webcomics world, I submit "Jack" goes completely over the edge in this respect as far as I'm concerned.

Now there's a well written, decently drawn comic that I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot modem.

From:

jordangreywolf.livejournal.com

I'm not familiar with that one - perhaps too short of a name? I did a Google search on "Jack webcomic" and I think I found what you're talking about. My first inclination upon hearing this name, though, was to think about a murderous character called "Jack Salem" that I recall from a fanzine a long time ago. I was half expecting that you were going to reveal that there was a Jack Salem webcomic. I wouldn't be surprised, though I have very low opinions of anything connected to that character. (Ooo. He's so eeeeevil ... and INDESTRUCTIBLE! He's my HEEEE-ro! Not.) And I can't help but wonder whether or not the artist draws much of anything else. (But, hey, I haven't exactly been keeping up on those circles for a while, so I can only claim ignorance.)

From:

kelloggs2066.livejournal.com

"Jack"

The main character is the sin Wrath, and the angel of death,
taking the souls of the dead to judgement. I gather in life he was some sort of serial killer/rapist, and his punishment is to be the angel of Death. (Oh! But he's so *sensitive!*) It is well written, at times emotionally moving, and passably drawn. Despite that, please note that I do *not* recommend it.
It involves more psychological "issues", far beyond villian worship, than I can comfortably shake a stick at.

I only mention it because it is so popular among furry audiences.

I seem to recall *something* about Jack Salem. It's been a long time though, and I never read anything about him. I think he was supposed to be some sort of Furry Feline Nazi Mass Murderer or other?

What I have heard of the character did not interest me to pursue it further.

From:

jordangreywolf.livejournal.com

Well, I read some of the reviews, and nothing - criticism or praise - inspired me to look at it further. Particularly since it seems that some of the highest praise for "Jack's" artist was his attention to genitalia. (As if that's not a bad enough sign....)

As for Jack Salem, I believe he was some sort of weasel or sable or some other mustelid. In the original context that I saw him, it was some distant future where genetically engineered anthropomorphs were all over, with no real reason other than "Well, we could make them, so we did." And he basically went around gleefully killing and eating people. As I heard from others, there were characters who tried to stop them, but ultimately died in the attempt. Eventually, he died ... but, as I was told, he was such a popular character amongst friends of the artist that he was resurrected from the dead, elevated to immortal status (ala "Jason" of the Halloween movies?), and every now and then I see some art of him looking nasty and tough, usually in a scene that suggests that he's about to eviscerate and devour some "helpless furry girl". (One such picture was posted to the Yerf archive recently. I didn't feel any particular sympathy for an archetypical "furry bimbo", but I don't exactly get kicks out of omnipotent murdering characters, either.) I don't think Nazis ever entered into it, but I'm hardly an expert. Who knows?

From:

kelloggs2066.livejournal.com

}Eventually, he died ... but, as I was told, he was such a
}popular character amongst friends of the artist that he was
}resurrected from the dead, elevated to immortal status

Ooo! Malicious, Vicious Murdering Characters and Deus Ex Machina Ressurections! Oh boy! Oh Boy! Two great things that go great together! This stuff must be just terrific!

Yuck. :(

The only thing I saw of the character, I believe he was pictured wearing an SS Uniform. Oh, yeah, I just dig those Snazzy Stormtrooper Uniforms, don't you?

Gah. Phooey.

Scott

From:

kelloggs2066.livejournal.com

Oh! One other Pet Peeve on my list:

Deus Ex Machina endings in a serious setting.

If the main character suddenly wakes up and it was all a dream, it's bad.

Similarly, if the captain shouting an order in technobabble suddenly makes The Borg go away, it's bad.

If the romantic triangle is solved by suddenly finding out that
one of the guys is her twin brother separated at birth, it's bad.

There are so many variations to this it's rediculous.

The only people I've ever seen do something good with a Deus Ex Machina ending were Gilbert & Sullivan. But, you can't take Gilbert & Sullivan seriously anyway, so I can deal with that. :)

From:

jordangreywolf.livejournal.com

Amen to the above. Heaven help me if I fall to such resolutions as that! =P

Hmm. So easy to come up with a big long list of specific things that are BAD about webcomics. Much harder to come up with specifics about what's good, it seems. =/

From:

kelloggs2066.livejournal.com

Well, to be fair, the above criticisms on writing are hardly restricted to webcomics. Actually, none of the above come from webcomics, but from Star Trek and Star Wars.

There are plenty of poorly written webcomics, but there are good ones as well.

The main thing about web comics is that the Artist has no editor or anything hanging over his or her head, saying "No, you can't do that."

But, that means the freedom to do intelligent things, and the freedom to be stupid.

So, you get well written stuff that's high above the lowest common denominator, and you get puerile sexual fantasies and scatological humor.

Given freedom, some will stretch it up to the stars and some will bury it in the filth. But, it's a mistake to say that it's all filth.

Scott

From:

jordangreywolf.livejournal.com

By the way, this only shows my incredible ignorance, but I take it from the context of your comment, and other references on Rowyn's LJ that you must do a webcomic of some sort. If so ... what is it? I'm curious now.

From:

kelloggs2066.livejournal.com

Hardly ignorance.
There are millions of strips out there.
Nobody knows 'em all.

Mine is:
21st Century Fox
http://techfox.keenspace.com/

or the high res version of the site at:
http://www.hirezfox.com/21cf/index.html

From:

rowyn

A talented artist can carry a strip if the writing is poor.
A Talented writer can carry a strip if the art is poor.

I actually think the former is a lot rarer than the latter. I've read many strips and comic books where the best that could be said for the art was "consistent". (And sometimes, not even that.) I can only think of one or two examples where artwork impressed me so much I overlooked indifferent writing.

While most of the strips I read are in black and white, I will tend to disdain black and white, perhaps because I'm trying to justify the extra effort I go to to put things in color.

I think what's really at work isn't so much a subconcious bias towards color as a subconcious bias towards attractive art. In your case, you put a lot of effort into using color effectively, and it makes your strip more attractive.

But a strip with well-done black & white art can be just as visually appealing, I think. I'd say that's why color isn't an issue for Freefall or Sluggy Freelance or Megatokyo. The artwork is clean, sharp, and attractive/ Color doesn't (or wouldn't) add a whole lot to it. It's just an application of fill tools. Big deal. ;)

But if you use color to provide special effects, shading, or other elements that your art wouldn't or didn't capture in black & white, then it's a real enhancement to the strip's visual appeal. And that's important to getting your foot in the door with a new reader, just as you say. At a glance, anyone can tell if your art is good or bad. The quality of the writing and the story takes a lot longer to judge. So you don't want that first impression to be a bad one. Makes plenty of sense to me.