What is wrong with comics today?

[Geo (RIP)]

True Narf.  But the main reason for sites like DCM and CB+ are sharing comics that no single person (well, maybe JVJ) could possibly amass without unlimited funds, time and storage space.  Long may our sites reign!

-Yoc

Here here...Yoc.

Geo

[Drusilla lives!]

I'm sorry to have to say this, but judging by the covers (yeah, I know I shouldn't do that), I don't think there's much individuality left in comic book art today.  It almost seems like many of these covers are all done by the same person. 

Or perhaps it's that the artists today are all using the same set of software/production tools?... I dunno.

Don't get me wrong, I like computer art.   And I  can understand that many comic book companies would like to "standardize" the look of their characters for legal reasons... but I think the overuse of computer modeling and production methods to automate and enforce house styles leaves little for actual art, done by real physical artists.  And produces boring, tired looking comic book art that's pretty creepy looking as well imo. 

And when I say it's creepy looking, I don't mean it in a good way either.     

[Roygbiv666]

The Uncanny Valley? http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UncannyValley

Or that some of them looked generated from porn?

I'm sorry to have to say this, but judging by the covers (yeah, I know I shouldn't do that), I don't think there's much individuality left in comic book art today.  It almost seems like many of these covers are all done by the same person. 

Or perhaps it's that the artists today are all using the same set of software/production tools?... I dunno.

Don't get me wrong, I like computer art.   And I  can understand that many comic book companies would like to "standardize" the look of their characters for legal reasons... but I think the overuse of computer modeling and production methods to automate and enforce house styles leaves little for actual art, done by real physical artists.  And produces boring, tired looking comic book art that's pretty creepy looking as well imo. 

And when I say it's creepy looking, I don't mean it in a good way either.     

[Drusilla lives!]

I don't know about the porn reference Roy, but that "Uncanny Valley" thing you point to might be a part of it... but not a big part, at least for me.  

No, what I'm talking about (as that author also notes) is the use of programs like "Poser" to generate the artwork.  Some might make the argument that it's equivalent to using a manikin... and it could be used that way... but it just doesn't seem to be, it's being used for more than that imo.  

Perhaps I'm just an old fuddyduddy, but I sorta liked seeing the "Buscema Hulk" or the "Trimpe Hulk."  Now it seems one day we just might have "The Hulk,"  with folks who just move body parts around that someone else designed... once.  Good for comic book companies, but I'm sorry, to me this just seems wrong in some fundamental way... and I'm certainly not going to support the practice by buying it either.

[John C]

I haven't seen any examples, myself, since I haven't followed comics in a long while.  But it seems like this is just the modern equivalent of shops and ghosts.  If my superstar artist is running behind schedule, I can fire him and piss off his fans, delay the book and piss off its fans, hire help that costs a fair bit of money, or have an intern run some off-the-shelf software that does three quarters of the work.

As a bonus, software would also presumably lower the minimum ability shown in the art, so you don't end up with badly-rendered extremities or pencillers who have never actually seen a woman in person trying to fake it.

Mind you, I'm against computerized lettering and coloring, and probably wouldn't like this, either.  But if I needed to get a product out, quasi-automation makes the product more consistent (which usually leads to more sales--think McDonald's or most network sitcoms) and cheaper (which usually means there's fewer sales needed to keep the book afloat), which makes it an easy decision.

Give it five or ten more years.  I've seen a couple of projects that strongly suggest we'll be seeing automated writing soon, at least for formulaic media and at least for a skeletal plot.  And many comic books are, in fact, pretty formulaic.

[Roygbiv666]

I assumed you were talking about the extensive use of photo reference the kids are into these days, where some of the women looked copied from porn.

I don't know about the porn reference Roy <snip>

[Drusilla lives!]

I haven't seen any examples, myself, since I haven't followed comics in a long while.  But it seems like this is just the modern equivalent of shops and ghosts.  If my superstar artist is running behind schedule, I can fire him and piss off his fans, delay the book and piss off its fans, hire help that costs a fair bit of money, or have an intern run some off-the-shelf software that does three quarters of the work.

As a bonus, software would also presumably lower the minimum ability shown in the art, so you don't end up with badly-rendered extremities or pencillers who have never actually seen a woman in person trying to fake it.

Mind you, I'm against computerized lettering and coloring, and probably wouldn't like this, either.  But if I needed to get a product out, quasi-automation makes the product more consistent (which usually leads to more sales--think McDonald's or most network sitcoms) and cheaper (which usually means there's fewer sales needed to keep the book afloat), which makes it an easy decision.

Give it five or ten more years.  I've seen a couple of projects that strongly suggest we'll be seeing automated writing soon, at least for formulaic media and at least for a skeletal plot.  And many comic books are, in fact, pretty formulaic.

Do I come off as being anti-capitalistic or something?  

This "comics and comic art is like McDonalds hamburgers" argument you're giving here is really not worth my commenting on, but...

(1) I don't follow modern comics either, but I do occasionally notice them advertised on another (not to be mentioned) website, and yes, I think this is becoming the standard practice.

(2) No, I don't really consider it the modern equivalent of "shops and ghosts."

(3) I don't know too much about these rabid comic "fans" of which you speak, since I was never really one of them... perhaps they should step back and consider whether or not a lot of these works should even be produced in the first place... but I was always attracted to good artwork though.  And that's my problem with comics today... there isn't that much.

(4) Again, I'm not opposed to capitalism.  But I DO like spending my pennies on things of quality, and I think I deserve that as well... especially since those pennies are so hard to come by.  For me, someone using a program like "Poser" on a piece of what is to be considered "finished art" is not something that makes the cut for me.  

[Drusilla lives!]

I assumed you were talking about the extensive use of photo reference the kids are into these days, where some of the women looked copied from porn.

I don't know about the porn reference Roy <snip>

IMO there's nothing wrong with using photo references, artists and illustrators have been using them ever since the camera was developed, it's in the HOW (and how well) that matters.    

But perhaps you've touched on something else as well... that with porn being so prevalent, it just happens that perhaps the art of figure drawing has become archaic... in other words, "people have porn, why would they be interested in a well drawn nude?"  Or ultimately by extension, a well drawn tightly clothed figure.   But I digress.

[John C]

Do I come off as being anti-capitalistic or something?  

I hope I didn't imply that.  I didn't mean to.  My point was that you integrate tools like that to make the work easier/cheaper and more even, just like using an assembly line in a factory.  It's OK to object on artistic terms, but it'll be about as effective (and one day, probably as socially acceptable) as objecting to Ford's use of assembly lines rather than craftsmen to build their cars.

(That was my point about McDonald's.  Everybody pretty much agrees that the food is lousy, but it's popular because it's mostly "good enough" and the customer knows exactly what he's going to get in the greasy bag when he pulls up to the window.)

I'm not defending it, just pointing out that it's going to accelerate because the goal has never been to impress the readers with talent.

[bcholmes]

It's OK to object on artistic terms, but it'll be about as effective (and one day, probably as socially acceptable) as objecting to Ford's use of assembly lines rather than craftsmen to build their cars.

I found this article, about Greg Land's art style, good reading: "Possibly the Most Harmful Art I’ve Seen in a Comic". 

One of the most common complaints I hear about the "porn look" in comics is that the women all have porn face.

BCing you

[Drusilla lives!]

Do I come off as being anti-capitalistic or something?  

I hope I didn't imply that.  I didn't mean to.  My point was that you integrate tools like that to make the work easier/cheaper and more even, just like using an assembly line in a factory.  It's OK to object on artistic terms, but it'll be about as effective (and one day, probably as socially acceptable) as objecting to Ford's use of assembly lines rather than craftsmen to build their cars.

(That was my point about McDonald's.  Everybody pretty much agrees that the food is lousy, but it's popular because it's mostly "good enough" and the customer knows exactly what he's going to get in the greasy bag when he pulls up to the window.)

I'm not defending it, just pointing out that it's going to accelerate because the goal has never been to impress the readers with talent.

Who said the food at McDonalds was lousy?  

I don't go there often, but I've been there (and recently as a matter of fact), and I thought they've made good progress in improving the menu... and the hamburgers aren't too bad.  Better then I've found in some crappola diners I've gone to... hey look, they are what they are... and as far as I know they've always been what they are.  Although perhaps they were even better back when they had meat in them instead of all that soybean stuff.

Getting back to comics though... yeah I'm sorry, but I never found comic book characters THAT compelling that I'd want to pick up a comic and buy it just for the story, for me there was always a strong interest in well crafted artwork as well.

So comics with Poser faux art?  No thanks.  Much like with McDonalds, I know pretty much what I'm getting there as well, and in this case it's just not "good enough."

[paw broon]

Being from a foreign country and culture to the N. Americans among you, in this case left of centre Scotland, I am a bit anti-capitalism, in the sense of wanting a mixed economy.  And I think the food at McDonalds isn't very good and I'm proud to say I haven't given them any money in over a decade.  But that's not a lot to do with comics and what's wrong with them nowadays.  As with Drusilla lives!, it's the art that attracts me, except when I see an obscure masked mystery man comics and I'll read it even when poorly done.  The computer generated art thingy is important and I understand the business reasons for comics companies using it.  Their only reason for existing is to make money for shareholders and a wee bit for staff. It's just that their product is comics as opposed to bricks or swimming pools.  If a comics co. can turn out titles as cheap as possible and have them sell in decent numbers, they are going to do that in the most economical way they can. That's nowadays but in years gone by, long before computers, we had real people drawing by hand, and so we have some amazingly high quality original art - and a lot of not so good stuff.  Things change.
I've been doing some work on an old British anthology title for CB+ and, although I had read some of these titles years ago, I was amazed and entertained all over again by the work of a humour strip artist, Harry Banger (rhymes with danger).  All done with a pen and paper.  But if a comic such as the Japanese title, Case Closed, is done using computer assisted or generated images, then I'm quite happy with that and I would still consider it an entertaining comic if it were.  I suppose it comes down to personal taste but I have to acknowledge that most folk on here start with a knowledge of the background to comics, their creators and how they are produced.  Does any of this affect the younger reader when he pitches up at his lcs and makes his purchases?  If he does do that, instead of spending his dosh on computer games, for example. Although the suggestion of the porn ref. could be a way of bringing in the young male reader.  Pretty cynical if that is what's happening.
Excuse the ramble.

[Drusilla lives!]

It's OK to object on artistic terms, but it'll be about as effective (and one day, probably as socially acceptable) as objecting to Ford's use of assembly lines rather than craftsmen to build their cars.

I found this article, about Greg Land's art style, good reading: "Possibly the Most Harmful Art I’ve Seen in a Comic".  

One of the most common complaints I hear about the "porn look" in comics is that the women all have porn face.

BCing you

So what's the real problem with Land's work?  

That he copies photos?  That his (female) characters all have "porn face?"  Or is it that he's having a hard time putting it all together... in other words, plotting?  

I was reading the readers comments that follow the article and they're all over the place.  I took a quick glance at those example pages and it seems more of the latter imo.  I'm not an expert, but I think his biggest problem is getting the page flowing in a less jarring manner.  Those page wide panels... eh, not so much dude.  And would it kill you to add something in the background, like some faux machinery or gizmo's?  

Which points out another facet of the problem of relying on something like Poser... you might be generating characters with standardized bodies (i.e. the one and only Hulk), but you still might not have the flair for arranging them in a compelling and esthetically pleasing manner.  Not only in one panel, but on the whole page and throughout the comic book.  

[John C]

McDonald's - probably palatable but it's presumably the worst/cheapest farming, ingredients, and labor.  I'm not taking a stand against it, and it's going to be better than many boutique places, and that's actually my point.  The consistency and reliability that you can get exactly the same meal in almost any part of the world without much risk is a much better selling point to a mass audience than "only the best ingredients, cooked with care by expert chefs," which could be amazing or a disaster.

Capitalism - I'm not against it, but I think thhe capitalism/communism debate is getting played out in the next few years, with distributed manufacture, automation, and so forth.  Both philiosophies are predicated on the idea that you can only run a newspaper by investing millions of dollars in equipment and labor.  When you can launch a blog for ten bucks (or even free), both ideas start to fall apart, if you look too closely at them.  For example, on the capitalist side, you get companies that make nothing except a profit (banking, insurance), which any sensible person would ignore, and people with jobs that produce nothing.

Porn-Tracing - I find it pretty demeaning, to start with.  There's also the art aspect of...well, if he traced over a Kirby-drawn figure, he'd be run out on a rail, but gets away with this and may open the companies up to copyright infringement suits, by the way, to the glee of the ghost of Dr. Wertham.  And then there's the craft aspect that a story can only be told if it can be told through women posed like in porn, which strikes me as far more limiting than early science-fiction TV shows, where most aliens look human and most planets better look like whatever's on the back lot.

Harry Banger - Please tell me he hangs out with a Willy Mash, pronounced "Moss."

Characters - I'm pretty sure that, these days, comics are mostly focus group data for studios to mine for their next movies.  If the art brings a few readers in, that's great, but I'd bet it's mostly staking out trademarks and pitching to the aforementioned studios.  There's no way Marvel or DC could support themselves, the way they're run, and their best hopes would be to publish as wide a variety of books as possible as cheaply as possible.

[paw broon]

Good points about capitalism/communism but I don't want you getting the idea we're all commies here.  More socialist inclined.  Illustrated by the fact that there is only 1 Tory M.P. elected from Scotland and the only reason there are some Tories in the Scottish parliament is because we have a different electoral sytem than the one used for Westminster.  Gives other parties a bit more chance to be represented.  Democracy, I suppose, as we have a 4 party system here with a lot of other small parties.  Sorry, off-topic again.

"Harry Banger - Please tell me he hangs out with a Willy Mash, pronounced "Moss.""
I wish that were true. But if you fancy a look at his stuff, here's a page:-
http://www.illustrationartgallery.com/acatalog/info_BangerCute.html

I tried a copy of #1 of Miss Fury as I've always enjoyed the original but I was really scunnered with some of the poses and suggestive text.  It makes me worried what Dynamite will do with King's Watch - a Narda "sans culottes"?  I'm not going to try because they made a mess of their version of The Phantom.  Yet another thing to add to what's wrong with comics today.