How are you doing, comic-wise?

[robotthepirate]

Sub-Consensus, Episode 1: DONE! I now have till the 3rd of June to register for a CG site and make it look all sparkly. 35 days till launch day.

Ok, that might sound like a stupidly long time to put of releasing a comic but 3rd June is also the date of my final exam for the course that's been swallowing almost all my free time. I'm also planning to start work on finally bringing RTP back, but not this week.

[McDuffies]

Though I agree with the first part, I wouldn't say they are only valuable for beginners. Most rules aren't made arbitrarily, they are used because they are what has, in general, been shown to work best. Comics are a visual medium, after all. When you read them there is an expectation that a good bulk of the story will be told visually.

They are arbitrary in some ways. Like, I think that when it comes to history of comics, I think that action-oriented comics have had a prevailing influence, and sometimes it feels like 90% of comics produced in USA are action-oriented. So I think, for instance, does the old rule about breaking walls of text into small balloons come from the kind of comics where it's required to speed up the tempo, but then people grabbed onto that rule, dragged it out of context and started using it where it's appropriate and where it isn't? I feel that it's very inappropriate for the kind of comics I'm making, and I have other reservations about that rule, that I've told over and over elsewhere. I hate the idea that someone would look at my comic (or any comic for that matter) and judge it based on the rule that someone told him should be followed, which I shouldn't be following in the first place.

To return to the amount of text issue, take for example Rick Geary's wonderful comics. I can imagine some internet critic suggesting that he should "show, don't tell", even though Geary, as a master of medium that he is, decided that this is just the right amount of text that this kind of comics should need. Actually, I don't even think that he was considering some rules and whether he should break them - he just realized his vision of it and it works.
"Comics are a visual medium" is an example of the rule that is repeated often and out of context, because people often forget to mention that comics are also a verbal medium.
Some rules like that may not be arbitrary itself, but it's arbitrarily used where it's appropriate and where it's not. Like I feel that a lot of these rules are taken verbatim from "How to draw comics marvel way" - but what if I hate marvel way and want to do different? I don't think that in that case I should care that writers of that (or any other) book were professionals who were in business for so and so years or whatever the blurb says.
Other often repeated rules are just plain wrong. Like the popular "cliches exist because they work". No they don't. They exist because writers are lazy.
Again others are simplifications. Like, I'm finding how splitting text into frames and balloons can be used to change punctuation and accent of the story, and it's such richness of expression that someone's trying to sum up in few easily quoted sentences.
But most of them are loose guidelines which are, as such, perfectly correct, but it's internet's nature to go to extremes and to overanalyze things, so these guidelines get the status of indisputable rules.

I would say the only thing you really need to worry about is "does the text make the story better or worse?" If less text would work better than more text then cut it down. If not leave it in. If you're concerned that something will seem too wordy, but you can't cut it down, maybe stretch it out over a few panels. You'll have to do more pages, but it will add some breathing room and make it feel less wordy without actually having fewer words.

Yeah, that's what I mean, after some time you should just have instinct to decide whether something works or not without having to be reminded of rules that someone fed you when you were beginning.

[IVstudios]

Well, I don't mean that you need to rigidly adhere to the rules simply becuase they are The Rules, but I don't think you should discount them either. There's an important difference between saying "I'm going to break this rule because it doesn't work for what I need." and "I'm going to break this rule because rules are stupid, man. Don't tell me what to do!"

[RobboAKAscooby]

I should have my new site up and running by the end of May (unless work forces more hours on me).
I've finally decided to limit the artwork to illustrations every few pages instead of trying to tell the story with a mix of art and writing. This way I can concentrate on just having a small amount of good (or my "good" anyway) art than a lot of mediocre stuff.

One other thing I have been looking at is releasing each story arc as a free ibook/ebook sort of thing.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

Pff. Try dealing with dramatic facial expressions with my medium. That involves some brow furrowing.

[djracodex]

Entering an action scene so to help with the pacing I increased the page size by ~20-30% to help not to bog down my pages with just a few panels of Bam-Zip-Pow (Now 20% more action-packed!). Though now I have come to realize that what I thought was going to be a nice stretch to catch up on my buffer, is actually taking me just as long as my smaller, denser pages.

Probably should have seen that coming

[LibertyCabbage]

I can see both sides of the rules issue. On one hand, as McDuffies pointed out, there are creators with great cartooning instincts who'd be making a mistake by ignoring their impulse in favor of a cautious, conventional approach. But on the other hand, most amateur creators are still struggling with the basics, and following their undeveloped instincts is more likely to result in a Lightbringer-esque comic that makes you wanna smack them in the head with a rolled-up newspaper. So, I'd say that it isn't necessary to follow the rules, but it is necessary to at least be familiar with them.

At the heart of the issue, though, is an anxiety about failure. Failure can't be seen as purely bad; instead, it has to be seen as a part of healthy development. It's certainly easier to "follow the rules," take a conventional approach, and make a comic that's "okay" but bland. A riskier, more intuitive approach, on the other hand, is more likely to go towards one of the two extremes (and inspire a more passionate response from the audience). The latter's the better choice because it helps condition the creator to make intuitive, rules-breaking comics, even if the immediate results might lag behind those of the more conventional creators. This is, of course, assuming a conducive mental environment, because there's nothing worse than a stubborn rules-breaker.

On the topic of lengthy dialogues, one strategy to consider might be placing objects in the scene for the characters to interact with. That way, they're doing something besides just standing there.

Pff. Try dealing with dramatic facial expressions with my medium. That involves some brow furrowing.

I imagine it involves cursing while digging through a massive pile of Legos in the wee hours of the morning looking for that one piece that you're absolutely 100 percent sure you have.

Ok, that might sound like a stupidly long time to put of releasing a comic

Not really. If anything, it shows readers that you're serious enough about your project to do it right. When a webcomic's launch is rushed, it really shows. I'm kinda reminded of some advice I heard on The Webcomic Relief last night.

If you go the extra mile for your comic, the reader will feel it, and also feel your passion through it, making the comic more enjoyable to read.

I've finally decided to limit the artwork to illustrations every few pages instead of trying to tell the story with a mix of art and writing. This way I can concentrate on just having a small amount of good (or my "good" anyway) art than a lot of mediocre stuff.

I'm sure there's potential there. The prevailing idea's that illustrated novels are for younger audiences while text-only novels are for adults, but that has more to do with cultural perceptions than the inherent characteristics of the medium.

Entering an action scene so to help with the pacing I increased the page size by ~20-30%

Well, I wouldn't really recommend doing that. I think you just have to suck it up and either give the scene the amount of pages it needs, or cut unnecessary parts out. Action scenes are just a pain in the ass, but if you're gonna do one, you might as well do it right. I would also keep in mind how interested you are in potentially printing your comic at some point, because I imagine having larger pages would be a problem in that situation.

Oh, yeah, and I watched an unusual webcomic review on YouTube last night. This guy behaves really awkwardly and wears a ridiculous costume that hides his face. It's obviously bad, but I'd put it in the "so bad, it's good" category.

edit: I also saw this comic today. It looks like my comic would if I could draw better, and the title starts and ends with the same letters. Weird!

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

edit: I also saw this comic today. It looks like my comic would if I could draw better, and the title starts and ends with the same letters. Weird!

Heh, did you get that off of the Webcomic Overlook shill? I took a look at that one too, I like the style and the humor seems alright so far although I don't share the values the creator has.

I found quite a few good new followables on there. Absolutely adored Boozle, I'm really looking forward to seeing more of that comic.

(It's sad though, whenever I find a cool but young comic to read, I'm always paranoid it'll get abandoned shortly after I've started following it. I have 54 favorited comics on SmackJeeves, which sounds like a lot, but in reality only 23 have updated since 2012, and of those only 16 have updated in the last 2 weeks. A lot of them update sporadically, like they'll update solidly for a week or two and then there's a multi-month gap, which makes it hard to tell whether the creator's unannouncedly given up or whether they're just busy. Kind of like how it's hard to know if you're pregnant if you normally miss periods anyway. In this analogy, peeing on a stick is equivalent to asking the creator if they're coming back.)

[RobboAKAscooby]

I've finally decided to limit the artwork to illustrations every few pages instead of trying to tell the story with a mix of art and writing. This way I can concentrate on just having a small amount of good (or my "good" anyway) art than a lot of mediocre stuff.

I'm sure there's potential there. The prevailing idea's that illustrated novels are for younger audiences while text-only novels are for adults, but that has more to do with cultural perceptions than the inherent characteristics of the medium.

Yeah, but I'm not much for societal norms anyway.

[LibertyCabbage]

Heh, did you get that off of the Webcomic Overlook shill? I took a look at that one too, I like the style and the humor seems alright so far although I don't share the values the creator has.

Yeah, I did. Although, Perry Bible Fellowship has characters that look like mine, too, so it's not the first time this has happened. And I don't care for the writing either, although it's not like religious/preachy comics have a great track record in the first place.

I found quite a few good new followables on there. Absolutely adored Boozle, I'm really looking forward to seeing more of that comic.

It's cute. I generally like comics that don't have dialogue, and I was able to breeze through it, which is nice.

Speaking of "good new followables," I'd like to use this opportunity to give a shout-out to Moth, which is a very good comic I haven't seen anyone else mention yet.

(It's sad though, whenever I find a cool but young comic to read, I'm always paranoid it'll get abandoned shortly after I've started following it. I have 54 favorited comics on SmackJeeves, which sounds like a lot, but in reality only 23 have updated since 2012, and of those only 16 have updated in the last 2 weeks. A lot of them update sporadically, like they'll update solidly for a week or two and then there's a multi-month gap, which makes it hard to tell whether the creator's unannouncedly given up or whether they're just busy. Kind of like how it's hard to know if you're pregnant if you normally miss periods anyway. In this analogy, peeing on a stick is equivalent to asking the creator if they're coming back.)

You're not alone. It's not a coincidence that the most popular webcomics update A) a lot, B) consistently, and C) for a long period of time. It's shitty for a reader when a comic they really like either goes on hiatus or is late with updates all the time, so they naturally gravitate towards those that seem the most stable. A particular example that stands out to me is CG's The End of Things. The haphazard update schedule killed my interest in the webcomic even though I liked the art and writing. Reading comics should be fun, and visiting a site week after week and seeing the same page isn't fun.

Yeah, but I'm not much for societal norms anyway.

Right. I'm just giving a theory for why illustrated novels for adults aren't more common. In any case, there's always room for pioneers. I mean, graphic novels haven't even been around for that long, relatively speaking.

[RobboAKAscooby]

Right. I'm just giving a theory for why illustrated novels for adults aren't more common. In any case, there's always room for pioneers. I mean, graphic novels haven't even been around for that long, relatively speaking.

Exactly. I mean realistically, right now I don't have much of an audience so I can either try and conform to what's popular right now or I can try something different that satisfies me and hope that others take notice.

I'm always reminded of Jackie Chan's famous response to being asked if he wanted to be the next Bruce Lee, "I don't want to be the next anybody, I want to be the first me."

[JSConner800]

To answer the original question, I'm doing great...for now. We just re-launched our comic a few weeks ago with a buffer of 9 pages, but I'm worried that the buffer won't last and we'll end up as another one of those nasty sporadic updaters that everyone hates. Our graphic designer has a lot on his plate, what with the inking, shading, dialogue, and website to deal with (and to top it off he's still in college), so our speed is pretty much dependent on how fast he can work, but that's what he gets for being a talented bastard.

We've also been commissioned to do a comic for a music video, which is great for our wallets, but it sucks for Steel Salvation, because that's really going to eat up our buffer. So, for now...great. In about 5 weeks...

[robotthepirate]

edit: I also saw this comic today. It looks like my comic would if I could draw better, and the title starts and ends with the same letters. Weird!

Heh, did you get that off of the Webcomic Overlook shill? I took a look at that one too, I like the style and the humor seems alright so far although I don't share the values the creator has.

I on the other hand bookmarked it instantly. Cheers LC!

Ok, that might sound like a stupidly long time to put of releasing a comic

Not really. If anything, it shows readers that you're serious enough about your project to do it right. When a webcomic's launch is rushed, it really shows. I'm kinda reminded of some advice I heard on The Webcomic Relief last night.

If you go the extra mile for your comic, the reader will feel it, and also feel your passion through it, making the comic more enjoyable to read.

I wish it was that (that I am going the extra mile). Actually I just have too many commitments as it is.

[LibertyCabbage]

To answer the original question, I'm doing great...for now. We just re-launched our comic a few weeks ago with a buffer of 9 pages, but I'm worried that the buffer won't last and we'll end up as another one of those nasty sporadic updaters that everyone hates. Our graphic designer has a lot on his plate, what with the inking, shading, dialogue, and website to deal with (and to top it off he's still in college), so our speed is pretty much dependent on how fast he can work, but that's what he gets for being a talented bastard.

My idea right now's to take, like, a two- or three-month break once I finish drawing my first chapter so I can start buffering the second one and do some miscellaneous drawings. It isn't an ideal situation, but I think it'll make the project more viable in the long run.

I on the other hand bookmarked it instantly. Cheers LC!

I'll probably keep up with it just 'cause it's neat seeing a more competent artist do a similar style. But, yeah, uh, "Gee, I guess I don't pray enough" doesn't really do it for me.

I wish it was that (that I am going the extra mile). Actually I just have too many commitments as it is.

I just think you're doing the right thing by taking your time instead of trying to rush things.

[Sortelli]

Man, I tell you I think the biggest mistake I made when setting up my new site was installing Google Analytics for page tracking this early on. :E

[Komiyan]

Haha, you're only like, 8 pages deep, and not only that but analytics is legendary for lowballing stats.

[Sortelli]

Heh I dunno, I am pretty sure all 9 visitors I had on Monday were me, uniques be darned. I just should have known better than to look, it's way too early for that.

[Komiyan]

Make more pages, then make a commotion about it, it looks like a neat comic!

[McDuffies]

I can see both sides of the rules issue. On one hand, as McDuffies pointed out, there are creators with great cartooning instincts who'd be making a mistake by ignoring their impulse in favor of a cautious, conventional approach. But on the other hand, most amateur creators are still struggling with the basics, and following their undeveloped instincts is more likely to result in a Lightbringer-esque comic that makes you wanna smack them in the head with a rolled-up newspaper. So, I'd say that it isn't necessary to follow the rules, but it is necessary to at least be familiar with them.

To be frank, I don't think that adhering to conventional rules would have helped Lightbringer become a significantly better comic.

At the heart of the issue, though, is an anxiety about failure. Failure can't be seen as purely bad; instead, it has to be seen as a part of healthy development. It's certainly easier to "follow the rules," take a conventional approach, and make a comic that's "okay" but bland. A riskier, more intuitive approach, on the other hand, is more likely to go towards one of the two extremes (and inspire a more passionate response from the audience). The latter's the better choice because it helps condition the creator to make intuitive, rules-breaking comics, even if the immediate results might lag behind those of the more conventional creators. This is, of course, assuming a conducive mental environment, because there's nothing worse than a stubborn rules-breaker.

I think it's about the need to categorize things. People like to have nice and neat formula to help them understand things.
Take internet critics. I always thought that art criticism is not supposed to answer to a question "Is this good?" but rather to a question "Why is this good?" That is, it's an attempt to understand what is it in art you like that makes them so great, rather than to find a set of rules that help you categorize a comic. Now, internet critics, in my opinion, often do fall into trap of doing the later, which isn't surprising considering the obsessive-compulsive inclinations of average internet inhabitant. Instead of analyzing art, they're practically synthesizing it. Then artists follow suit because, I guess, they've read same rules on many places or because people told them to (sometimes it's justified, but other times you can see folks just going through the motions of repeating the same conventional wisdom), because, as you said, they take those rules as something of a guarantee that they'll make their comics at least ok, which, I think, isn't the case because because those rules hit only the most obvious problems, the ones that are easily summed.

I'm sure there's potential there. The prevailing idea's that illustrated novels are for younger audiences while text-only novels are for adults, but that has more to do with cultural perceptions than the inherent characteristics of the medium.

Some people say that about comics too.

Heh, did you get that off of the Webcomic Overlook shill? I took a look at that one too, I like the style and the humor seems alright so far although I don't share the values the creator has.

Really? I thought it was absolutely terrible.

When a comic is built on strongly expressed values and those values are wrong, that is not something like a puzzle where one piece is wrong. It is more like a house with the wrong foundation.

The best I can say about execution is that it's slick. It's like a coldly-professional, radio-friendly production applied to a very bad song.
The marriage between stick-figure-like designs and more realistic faces is awkward. It's like author wants to follow the trend that PBF and Cyanide and Happiness started, but builds on it with a "more is more" approach that says "stick figures are good, right? then stick figures rendered in a really detailed style are even better!" No. What he got is just a comic where characters are unexplicably bold, naked and lacking ears.
Does someone think that Gurewitz of PBF draws his character's faces simple because he can't do better? Hell, no, he is a master of craft. He draws his characters that way because they're avatars, icons, placeholders that are likely to be mutilated the next scene. They're less characters and more a fodder for the next violent gag. That's why it's essential to have stick-figures, to make them less expressive, and to make them overall less relatable and more symbolic. Similar goes for Cyanide and Happiness, another genre-defining comic. Author of this comic seems to try to follow suit without understanding why those comics are drawn that way and what effect that has. There is no real reason why characters in this comic should be stylized the way they are, so it just ends up being gimmicky and distracting.

Next issue: Is there ever a christian comic or film that isn't overly dramatic? Is there no place of subtlety in there? In christian comics and film, there are no mild annoyances - there are only indicators of incoming apocalypse; There aren't people we dislike - there are only satan's pawns; Every little thing is a cause for hysteria and paranoiac attack. So it's not just the values that I can't swallow. It's also the vein-popping execution that is bad.
And on a personal note, I won't except a christian comic where omission of ritual repeating of half-earnest words at the end of the day is considered a cardinal sin, and yet passing judgment onto the others is a statement of purpose.

I should be feeling a bit guilty about a comic that has only a few pages, but I feel the need to point it as an example that a level of artistic skill, and even a sense of humor, can actually be a disadvantage if you don't understand the medium, if you don't step back and consider whether something is appropriate or not. If it turns out that this comic is actually a stealthy satire of fundamental christianity that I didn't catch, my face will be awfully red. But the way I see it right now, I don't see how this will ever be a good comic.

Well, I don't mean that you need to rigidly adhere to the rules simply becuase they are The Rules, but I don't think you should discount them either. There's an important difference between saying "I'm going to break this rule because it doesn't work for what I need." and "I'm going to break this rule because rules are stupid, man. Don't tell me what to do!"

Don't you think that a lot of arguements lately are ending with person A telling person B what person B really 'meant' when he said this or that? It's like, when we reach the point where we agree, someone still has to throw in the last "ok, but you were still wrong and I was still right". Like if folks see arguement as a competition and, unsatisfied with tie, they still try for the last attempt to win after the race is over, using no less than a, gasp, semantic arguement.
I don't feel like I'm supposed to write with such precision of language that my post can be dissected ten posts later in attempt to find what I was "really" saying, nor can that post take being separated from posts that preceded it, being that it is a product of flow of thoughts that those posts represent.

[IVstudios]

Next issue: Is there ever a christian comic or film that isn't overly dramatic? Is there no place of subtlety in there?

The Bishop's Wife comes to mind. Very obvious christian themes, but doesn't cram anything down your throat. The atheist Prof. is portrayed as being very jovial and intelligent and no one tries to convert him. The Bishop and the Greedy Old Lady are both given very relatable and understandable motivations for their actions. The angel is even portrayed as being kind of a jerk and a bully. And it's a very "small" story. No fire and brimstone, just a man who's let his work take over too much of his life.