|
|
Post by impulse on Nov 5, 2024 12:16:54 GMT -5
I understand it's a complete nonstarter with the mechanics of the industry. But it would be nice!
|
|
|
|
Post by sunofdarkchild on Nov 5, 2024 12:18:58 GMT -5
I strongly, strongly disagree with the notion that the panels highlighted here showed a lack of effort or any form of laziness. In the first pair, the main character has moved and has a new expression and her hair has moved and her shoulder is drawn differently, the monster has moved, the crowd of civilians is falling into the portals, and the blue man is jumping onto the window behind him. The building is even lit differently because of the portal. There's a tremendous attention to detail with the guy on the ground falling backwards with his legs in the air, other characters raising their hands and opening their mouths in shock, and even someone's hair flying up as he falls. In the second pair, both characters have moved and even the shadows are different. Every panel shows character movement and new details except for that 1 thing with 4 specific background characters who don't move. The fact that a static building is a static building and not moving like a living person doesn't change that at all. This is not like those panels of characters making a face before delivering a 1-liner in the next panel with the exact same expression. Pretty much everything that can move does move with the sole exception of those 4 background characters I keep mentioning.
|
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 5, 2024 12:22:34 GMT -5
I understand it's a complete nonstarter with the mechanics of the industry. But it would be nice! I had to remind myself about the bad art under Morrison on X-Men...  Yikes! There were fill in artists in the 70's/80's/90's that I dreaded too, and looking back I wonder how much of that was due to them just being the 'deadline' guys. |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 5, 2024 12:25:39 GMT -5
I strongly, strongly disagree with the notion that the panels highlighted here showed a lack of effort or any form of laziness. In the first pair, the main character has moved and has a new expression and her hair has moved and her shoulder is drawn differently, the monster has moved, the crowd of civilians is falling into the portals, and the blue man is jumping onto the window behind him. The building is even lit differently because of the portal. There's a tremendous attention to detail with the guy on the ground falling backwards with his legs in the air, other characters raising their hands and opening their mouths in shock, and even someone's hair flying up as he falls. In the second pair, both characters have moved and even the shadows are different. Every panel shows character movement and new details except for that 1 thing with 4 specific background characters who don't move. The fact that a static building is a static building and not moving like a living person doesn't change that at all. This is not like those panels of characters making a face before delivering a 1-liner in the next panel with the exact same expression. Pretty much everything that can move does move with the sole exception of those 4 background characters I keep mentioning. Always happy to agree to disagree.  I'm not interested in changing your feelings about that artist. I can see the changes they made, for sure, it's just that I can see the little digital shortcuts they took to get there. |
|
|
|
Post by sunofdarkchild on Nov 5, 2024 12:25:46 GMT -5
 I never saw a problem with the 4 panels that are almost identical here, in one of the most celebrated comics of the 1980s. There's the exact reused background (or no background), static characters, etc. It simply makes sense in the context of what's happening, and if anything looks more lazy than the panels we've been arguing about. |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 5, 2024 12:28:51 GMT -5
I never saw a problem with the 4 panels that are almost identical here, in one of the most celebrated comics of the 1980s. There's the exact reused background (or no background), static characters, etc. It simply makes sense in the context of what's happening, and if anything looks more lazy than the panels we've been arguing about. That serves a specific purpose, and is a cool way to show Superman's speed. Edit: The traced/photostatted parts were also separately inked, which provides variation. Digital inking is also used by some modern artists to avoid the uncanny valley effect. Edit 2: Removed my mistake. |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Nov 5, 2024 12:32:47 GMT -5
We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. IMO, a 1/10 piece of miserable rushed crap is a 1/10 piece of miserable rushed crap. A copy of an 8/10 drawn right the first time still looks good. They may lose the A for effort, but at least they drew it well once. Ugly/unclear art is still ugly/unclear even if hand-drawn.
This is academic for me at this point as I dropped my subs and have all but stopped reading new comics a decade ago. I'm sure it's gotten more pervasive as more and more things move to pure digital.
It's just a personal preference of mine. Clearly it's well enough tolerated or publishers would have forbidden it. I think it was Mr. Miracle where two panels were duplicated 3 or 4 times each on a single page, where it really annoyed me, and now I can't not see it when it happens even once. A great book, otherwise really well drawn, just with a "quirk" that bugs me. It's now unusual to see a modern comic that doesn't use that crutch- unless I'm just unlucky with the books I've read! (Like I said, I've also not read a great deal published in the past 20 years, and certainly not much digital art.) Also, for those of us who collect the original art, a digitally duplicated panel often leaves a big white space on the physical page of art, diminishing its appeal substantially. I enjoyed Clay Mann's work on "Heroes in Crisis" but passed on buying a page which was all about facial expressions, when some of the panels were just blank. A long talky sequence shouldn't be an excuse to just cut and paste the art, either digitally or with a stat. Here are some Ultimate X-Men Raney/Hanna pages with Charles and Lilandra at dinner, and their expressions change with the conversation, as they should.    European pages in particular can go on and on for pages with people standing around talking. But the artists take the time to vary the angles, body language, and expressions from panel to panel specifically so that it doesn't make for a stale viewing experience.   |
|
|
|
Post by sunofdarkchild on Nov 5, 2024 12:33:32 GMT -5
I never saw a problem with the 4 panels that are almost identical here, in one of the most celebrated comics of the 1980s. There's the exact reused background (or no background), static characters, etc. It simply makes sense in the context of what's happening, and if anything looks more lazy than the panels we've been arguing about. That serves a specific purpose, and is a cool way to show Superman's speed. You're comparing apples and oranges, I'm afraid. And the panels from the preview also serve a specific purpose, showing how quickly Magik is reacting in saving the civilians and the blue man. It's the comic way of doing the slow-mo scenes from the old Spider-Man movies like when he dodges the car in Spider-Man 2 or saves the civilians from getting electrocuted in The Amazing Spider-Man 2. They both make perfect sense in the context of the book and what they are trying to do. |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 5, 2024 12:40:24 GMT -5
Thanks, rberman for the lovely examples! I've always cared about the art in comics rather a lot, and scrutinised it more than most. I remain fascinated with the storytelling, and feel that duplication is selling the reader short. Sequences without action can be beautiful if they convey body language, expressions and emotion while being novel and interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by sunofdarkchild on Nov 5, 2024 12:42:00 GMT -5
The more I look at those panels, the more differences I see, like the shape of the portals changing, the addition of light bubbles above the portals, the monster's tongue being drawn differently what that could have been easily copy-pasted, the head as a whole being different. Panels in which 8 characters are moving and which have many differences between them in addition are not lazy.
I do agree that pages like that Miraxle Man page come across as lazy and are unappealing. But I think that's the apples to oranges comparison with an action scene that successfully conveys this much motion and character.
|
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 5, 2024 12:49:15 GMT -5
That serves a specific purpose, and is a cool way to show Superman's speed. You're comparing apples and oranges, I'm afraid. And the panels from the preview also serve a specific purpose, showing how quickly Magik is reacting in saving the civilians and the blue man. It's the comic way of doing the slow-mo scenes from the old Spider-Man movies like when he dodges the car in Spider-Man 2 or saves the civilians from getting electrocuted in The Amazing Spider-Man 2. They both make perfect sense in the context of the book and what they are trying to do. Ah, in this panel I didn't follow the storytelling without knowing who that character was or that she was super fast! The difference in energy between the first two panels and the next two was so great that I assumed they were not the same scene.  |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 5, 2024 12:57:33 GMT -5
Knowing now she's supposed to be super fast, I see what the artist is doing. Repetition of backgrounds at the same distance in multiple occasions across just a few pages gave me a bad impression. Hopefully the artist doesn't always use the same device across multiple issues every time the main character is involved in any action. Thanks for pointing out the super speed thing, sunofdarkchild- my bad for missing it I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by sunofdarkchild on Nov 5, 2024 13:09:54 GMT -5
And the panels from the preview also serve a specific purpose, showing how quickly Magik is reacting in saving the civilians and the blue man. It's the comic way of doing the slow-mo scenes from the old Spider-Man movies like when he dodges the car in Spider-Man 2 or saves the civilians from getting electrocuted in The Amazing Spider-Man 2. They both make perfect sense in the context of the book and what they are trying to do. Ah, in this panel I didn't follow the storytelling without knowing who that character was or that she was super fast! The difference in energy between the first two panels and the next two was so great that I assumed they were not the same scene. Her speed isn't always consistent, but she has been shown to be bullet-time with her portals and able to dodge a child version of the Monica Rambeau Captain Marvel, who is supposed to move at light-speed, as well as dodge Thor's hammer when he throws it.  ![]() |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 5, 2024 13:16:18 GMT -5
I'd somehow forgotten absolutely everything I knew about Magik in the 3 decades since I last read the comics she first became known in. Looking at the art on her Wiki page I can see why I've not read about her modern comics. Sexy AI elf:  Sexy swords and sorcery devil:  Generic girl in old fashioned X-Men costume:  |
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Nov 5, 2024 18:51:43 GMT -5
Peter Allen David’s 00s X-Force book was largely excellent, and he mostly did his own thing. It was jarring when he was mandated to include the annual big X-Line crossover plot into what he was doing. He did it well enough, but it often obviously disrupted what he had going on. The book would have been better if he didn’t have to pay the crossover tax for just one example. I think he ran into similar problem when he was manning X-Factor in the 90's too. It's still frustrating that creators have to play to the whims of mandated events when they just detract from the overall story (see the recent "Knight Terrors" storyline from DC) |
|
I'm not interested in changing your feelings about that artist. I can see the changes they made, for sure, it's just that I can see the little digital shortcuts they took to get there. 
