Comic strips

[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]

Comments

[level-head.livejournal.com]

Certainly I don't subconsciously look for color strips. But the appearance of a color in an otherwise black-and-white strip might trigger someone to expect color.

"Bohemials" was interesting in this regard; jimrob used an approach similar to sepia tones frequently.
http://www.albionfuzz.com/d/20030327.html

"The Makeshift Miracle" also did this:
http://makeshiftmiracle.comics2u.com/d/20010910.html

But black and white works perfectly well. "Freefall", for example, and "Sinfest" do excellent jobs with B&W illustrations.

===|==============/ Level Head

[makovette.livejournal.com]

I have 26 comics listed on my links page of which 10 are color (excluding "Sunday" strips).

Art is secondary to plot and writing, The play's the thing.

CYa!
Mako

Re:

[level-head.livejournal.com]

And of course, the rest of that quote is talking about setting a trap for an unwary audience... ];-)

===|==============/ Level Head

Re:

[rowyn]

Unfortunately, the "no ink" style is much rarer; "Megatokyo" is the only strip I can think of that uses pencil art for the final product. Working with greyscale pencil drawings is a lot faster for me than any form of inking is likely to be, alas. Though I suppose if I got enough practice, I'd be able to do it quickly eventually. Either that, or I'd get sick of it and quit. One of the two. :)

Re:

[rowyn]

"Writing comes first" is definitely the consensus to far. :)

I noticed Badly Drawn Kitties on your comics list. For some reason, I've been hearing that particular title quite a bit lately (in contexts both flattering and not) so I took a look. The art there lives up to its billing. >:>

[jordangreywolf.livejournal.com]

I figured I might as well explain some of my answers.

First off, most of the comics I currently read are black and white. I check out www.comics.com to check out a few titles that I follow daily (Spot the Frog, Get Fuzzy, Luann, For Better or For Worse). One color comic that I've occasionally followed was "Pibgorn", because of the fantasy element, but it seems to read like the artist's barely concealed sex fantasy (He has TWO uber-powerful magical women after him! Just like anime!) so I got tired of it. I occasionally read "Demonology 101", but it goes on hiatus for long periods at a time, and the original theme of demons 'n angels seems to get lost in milquetoast. (i.e., writer gets to like her characters too much, can't really bring herself to clarify just who is the "bad guy" - or at least what the MOTIVATIONS of the bad guys are, other than just "being bad".) I followed "Strings of Fate" for a while, but it has since been suspended, because the artist has a real life, and this cartoon isn't part of it. I read through an English translation of "Hikaru no Go" all the way from beginning to end - and thankfully reached the end before it got licensed in the states and the fan-sub was suddenly no longer available.

There are lots of things I would dislike about webcomics in general. I could start with boring topics, bad art, bad stories, and a whole list of things, but generally, those are the sorts of things that would stop me from even CONSIDERING being a regular reader of the comic in the first place.

I put down "mood break" as a major beef, because it's the sort of thing that can catch me by surprise. I can be reading a more-or-less serious storyline (maybe a little tongue-in-cheek) and then suddenly the artist goes silly. Or, maybe it's a more lighthearted silly story, and the artist has murder and mayhem and nastiness that totally breaks the lighter mood. It seems broken. I don't know what to expect, and it's not a surprise in a good way. It's a surprise as in, "The artist/writer doesn't have a CLUE as to where he wants to go with this."

Of course, the comic suddenly coming to a screeching halt is a major peeve, but as to whether or not I would continue to read the comic - that's kind of a moot point. ;)

As for what I want to see? I figure that the standard answer would be "good storyline", et al. But I'm sure there are some really great stories ... that I wouldn't bother to read. I like fantasy. (My definition here is broad enough to include "sci-fi", but I lean more toward magical themes.) I like reading about something OTHER than just mundane life. (And yet I read "For Better or For Worse" and "Luann"? Sorry, I can't explain that. I'm weird.)

A lot of the true web-comics (not comics.com syndicated strips) that have drawn my attention have had something of a quasi-apocalyptic overtone: modern day, but magic is real (if hidden behind the scenes). I'm not sure that's particularly an INTEREST of mine, or whether it's just been that I've had the luck to run into enough of those to interest me for at least a while.

Re:

[makovette.livejournal.com]

Ahh BDK has a lot of clever quips in it. It's pure adolescent raunch based humor though, which is why I flagged it as Adult Only.

I wouldn't recommend it for your average Sunday School teacher for example (unless she had a copy of Lady Chatterly's Lover stashed in her closet :-)

CYa!
Mako

Re:

[rowyn]

By contrast, I follow a handful of syndicated strips ("9 Chickweed Lane" -- solely for some of the very neat art it has -- "Dilbert", "Doonesbury" and "Non-Sequitor"). One thing I really dislike about most syndicated strips is that they follow the sacred "Nothing May Ever Change" model. In fact, I like both "Doonesbury" and "For Better or for Worse" because the characters get to change.

But most of the comics I follow are web-only, and there's not a lot of rhyme or reason to what makes me pick one up. And once I do start reading, it's rare that I'll drop a strip. There are good strips that I don't read, and bad strips that I do read, and there's no real rhyme or reason to it.

I haven't noticed the "mood break" problem you describe, but there are two common tactics that I don't like:

(1) Breaking the fourth wall: this is usually a cheap gag at the expense of the story's credibility -- a poor trade, if you ask me. Having the characters make remarks to the audience doesn't bother me as much as having them discuss the audience, or the fact that they're characters, etc. (I'm sometimes tempted to make "remarks to the audience" in real life, so I can't entirely blame 'em for that one. :> )

(2) Inconsistencies: you've got a world that's "just like ours" except that it features talking slime molds, sentient dust balls, switchblade-carrying rabbits, etc. I'd like to see a character in a comic strip decide to take up magic and have it NOT WORK for a change. :> I read a lot of strips with implausible settings, so obviously this doesn't bother me too much, but it still kinda annoys me. Especially the "cute little critter" that's obviously there solely for merchandizing. The Bill-the-Cat-style "little critter that we brought in for merchandizing but it's not cute so it won't work, *wink-wink*, except we know that ultimately it will sell t-shirts anyway" is so overdone that it's just as bad.

Unreliability also annoys me, but it's hard for me to get righteously indignant over not receiving a service that I'm not paying for, anyway. :)

Re:

[jordangreywolf.livejournal.com]

Maybe #1 and #2 don't really fit my usual definition of "mood break", but I tend to lump those in there and treat them the same way. Well, "breaking the fourth wall" is definitely something I think of as a type of "mood break" if it happens in a story that was heretofore self-consistent.

I hate "wild takes" in anime, by the way. I really hate them. (Translation: standard anime, with at least pretenses of a "serious" plot, but then suddenly any time there's an argument, people fall to the ground, people suddenly turn into short little "SD" characters and grow really large mouths, or a girl pulls out a giant hammer and slugs some guy with it when he says something thoughtless ... and then, back to our regular story, with or without any acknowledgement of this strange break in the otherwise prevailing laws of the universe. I realize it's a style thing - sort of like "toon logic" - but it just doesn't work for me, if the story is making pretenses of a "serious" storyline. I just can't get drawn in with distractions like that. It's one reason why I'll never really be a "fan" of anything done by CLAMP, even though they have some nice elements in some of their series.)

But we were talking about comics! Me and my tangents.

I also DESPISE the "nothing may ever change" model. I don't have the time to bother with daily gag strips. I want story. And things that reset to zero all the time don't really count as "story" to me. I guess that's probably a reason why I follow "For Better or For Worse", too.

"Calvin and Hobbes" would be one of my favorite comic strips of all time. Possibly THE favorite. It's just hard to say, since it's been so long. It DIDN'T have an ongoing story, which goes against my usual preferences ... but it didn't make any pretenses at it. "Calvin and Hobbes" appealed to me because of its consistent wit, and the artwork. (This guy can DRAW! And he's doing 'toons? But he does them so WELL!) So, I may have my preferences and tendencies and expectations of what I think I like, but there is always room for a noteworthy exception. =)

Re:

[jordangreywolf.livejournal.com]

I think that if (dare I say WHEN?) I finally tackle the idea of doing a short-run web-comic, I'll probably do it in pencils. I'm not particularly good at making full use of them, but I just can't see myself being able to keep up the pace, if I'm tied down in the need to polish up every panel and make it sharp and inked and all that. Far more likely, I would pencil things in, adjust the curves a bit for clarity, and maybe do some touch-up on the computer, but that's it. That's the approach I've taken with the sketches I've been using for my "treasure cards" for D&D, and it's made a world of difference: I would have given up a long time ago if I had to ink them all - let alone COLOR them. (Or, there'd be a whole lot less treasure!)

Re:

[jordangreywolf.livejournal.com]

Well, I generally argue that "the writing comes first", but of the strips that I follow, there's at least SOME visual appeal. "Spot the Frog" is very cartoony, but it's stylish and Spot is adorable. "Get Fuzzy" is probably the most homely of the comics I regularly read, insofar as the characters' look ... but there's a lot of detail in there. It doesn't look ugly because the artist is lazy or incompetent, but rather because he deliberately makes everyone look frazzled and less-than-perfect. "For Better or For Worse" wouldn't strike me as "great art", but it's good art. The artist can do "pretty" and "cute" and "plain" and "comical", without going into gross exaggerations.

"Calvin and Hobbes" ... I loved the wit ... but, goodness, I so adored the art!

So, while I still voted toward the "writing" side ... if all I cared about was writing, then I should just read a book. Whenever comics are involved, the art has to add something to the experience. It needn't be "photorealistic" or astounding, but I don't want it to be painful to look at, either. (It's just that, where web-comics are concerned, when the art is especially painful to look upon, often the writing is painful, too.)

Re: Art and Writing

[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.

Re: Art and Writing

[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.

Re: Art and Writing

[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.

Re: Art and Writing

[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.

Re: Art and Writing

[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

Re: Art and Writing

[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. :)

Re: Art and Writing

[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.)

Re: Art and Writing

[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. =/

Villian Worship

[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.

Re: Villian Worship

[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?

Re: Villian Worship

[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

Re: Art and Writing

[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

Re:

[rowyn]

Somehow, I thought that inking things WAS quick for you. Your inkwork is so neat and clean when I see it, that I've had this idea you had it down to a science and it didn't take you that long. Shows what I know. :)

Re: Art and Writing

[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.