Marvel invents webcomics!

[Greg Stephens]

OK, I know this is a little like insisting that Al Gore claims to have invented the internet (he never said that), but doesn't it sound a little like Bill Jemas is saying that Marvel Comics invented web comics in the following quote?

We created a magazine-sized reprint for newsstands and invented dotComics to distribute electronic versions for free.

(Quote from press release found at Newsrama)

I think the key problem I have with that sentence is the word "invented." There were tons and tons of comics online and in many various formats prior to the launch of Marvel's DotComics initiative, so I'm very uncomfortable with the claim that anybody at Marvel actually "invented" anything. Sure, they took some really smart steps here and developed their own approach to the medium, but the actual level of "inventing" seems to me to be minimal, if existant at all.

Again, I realize that this is akin to putting words in Bill Jemas' mouth, but it just struck me a certain way when I read it. Words are tricky devils.

[alschroeder]

Um. No, I don't THINK so...
He's saying "dotcomics"---which are Marvel's name for web-based version of their print comics, offered for free (with much advertising). Some of them actually do work well, especially with the time-released balloons...
In other words, "dotcomics" are a specialized form of webcomics---which reproduce Marvel print comics in a digital medium. They certainly invented
"dotcomics"---since they are, by definition, Marvel comics---but they didn't claim to have invented webcomics. At least, I think that's a permissable reading of his words.---Al

[Greg Stephens]

Yes, I understand the distinction between "dotcomics" and "webcomics." (Hence the Al Gore misquote reference.) What I object to is the term "invent." To my mind, a better- more accurate- word would have been "create."

[alschroeder]

Oh, I see. Well, the balloons coming up in that order, and the ads, took some actual javascript expertise---I know Buzzboy does it too, but I'm not sure who did it first, and they might have done it independently---so some invention as well as creation might be involved.
Maybe.---Al

[InkAddict]

I hope they won't start claiming everything has started with their thing, or they could very well start saying they are the only ones that offer real quality on the net.

Scott's ideas made it possible for smaller players to enter the field, but I don't know if I have to be happy or scared that the bigger players are moving in too; especially if they're going to share stuff for free as promotion of their print comics.

Well, I guess they're only trying to survive too.

[ragtag]

Nothing about who invented what. I just checked out dot.comics....and was not impressed. For one thing they did not buy dotcomics.com (someone should snatch that one up, might increase traffic to your site).

I took a look at the spider man comic, and didn't like it. It's tiny. You need to click on it to zoom in on each panel or a few panels, so you can read them. Why didn't they just have it in that size in the first place. Oh, and the panels that pan by automatically are the worst. It's a comic, I want to decide the tempo I read the panels in. Next, I tried the Electra one and it crashed my browser.....so much for dot.comics.

So if they invented anything, I guess it was a bad interface.

Ragnar

[Greg Stephens]

Hm. OK, I'll grant them that- They invented a poor interface.

[Alexander D.]

I'd have to say, Jemas' comment sounds like intentionally ambiguous wording to me. Is he claiming to have actually invented Webcomics? No. And if anyone puts that question to him, he can honestly deny it.

But his choice of the word "invented" is certainly intended to inflate the perceived importance of Dotcomics. It implies that Dotcomics is somehow the realization of what lesser efforts have been vainly struggling to be. The first real Web comics.

Since a lot of people don't know better, his comment will have the desired effect, and leave people thinking that Marvel really did something revolutionary. But he left himself the out of claiming that he was just talking about the technology when people who DO know better call him on it.

At least, that's my interpretation of his comments.

[sandy carruthers]

I think there is a real danger, when the 'big guys' who get all the hoopla and press anyway, make statements like what Jena said, to repeat:
'We created a magazine-sized reprint for newsstands and invented dotComics to distribute electronic versions for free.'
It may seem innocent on the outset, but claims to fame come fairly easy... in a couple of years are we going to see Marvel and DC do to web comics what they did to print comics? Webcomics are currently a safe haven for creators of varying levels do what they wish at minimal cost, but with the evolution of micro-payments/economics on the web, as well as the substantial decline of print comics... what happens when the big bad bears actually turn around and squeeze webcomics. Am I paranoid? Perhaps. Simply look at the Malibu/Marvel takeover. What original Malibu titles still exist today? None. Marvel cancelled the whole lot 'conveniently'. Will they do the same with webcomics? Think about it. (Hey, I just used an emoticon for the very first time in my life... wow, thanks Greg!)

[sandy carruthers]

In connection to 'snatching up dotcomics.com' i visited the site with the domain name, this is what they'e asking for:
dotcomics.com
Asking Price: $20,000

Marvel is going to have to cough up alot of money for something they invented! these things are addictive....

[Murak]

... what happens when the big bad bears actually turn around and squeeze webcomics. Am I paranoid?

I understand your paranoia only too well, Sandy. However, I'm unsure of what Marvel or any other Big Bear could do to push out us little folks. Of course, I AM hoping that in the end it is the freedom of content and ease of distribution of web comics that will keep them viable; maybe if the Goliaths set up a better presence on the web it will draw larger audiences to webcomics as a whole.

I don't know ... I am terribly niave about this kind of thing.

[Scott McCloud]

sandy writes:
Webcomics are currently a safe haven for creators of varying levels do what they wish at minimal cost, but with the evolution of micro-payments/economics on the web, as well as the substantial decline of print comics... what happens when the big bad bears actually turn around and squeeze webcomics. Am I paranoid? Perhaps. Simply look at the Malibu/Marvel takeover.

Shelf space is a limited resource. Whenever a market is grounded in limited resources, control over those resources always accrues to the party with the deepest pockets. Doesn't matter if it's shelf-space or radio frequencies or slots in a cable franchise.

But the IP space is (effectively if not literally) an unlimited resource. Marvel can publish a thousand or ten thousand or a hundred thousand titles online and it will have no effect on your ability to log into <a href="http://nowheregirl.warped.com">Nowhere Girl</a> or <a href="http://www.e-sheep.com">E-Sheep</a> or (more to the point) <a href="http://www.moderntales.com">Modern Tales.</a>

[InkAddict]

But the IP space is (effectively if not literally) an unlimited resource.

I have to argue this one, as we've seen with big franchises like Yahoo, AOL, Altavista or Google. There's a lot of money involved when there's a lo of money to make, and even when the internet surfer theoretically has all options open, I was already lookin4 for webcomics for about a year, (finding next to nothing for a long time, and browsing through a hoard of shitty comics before finding some I still like (Non Sequitur, by Wileytoons, for instance)),... Yahoo didn't give me anything more than amateur stuff (and I mean REALLY amateur stuff).

These search engines are about the only ones that are commonly used, and even the more independent search engines often use the more popular engines as a base...

What I am saying is that although it all seems very democratic, the "viewers' time" will become a major asset in this future e-conomy: Which sites are visited, and where do they lead?

There are plenty of bookstores online, but everybody always ends up at amazon.com. I myself had to know the link "scottmccloud.com" to discover this BBS and all the good online comics that exist. What if these major companies (Marvel and DC included) decide to simply lure the innocent reader with a heap of other free stuff, you couldn't possibly read through? (let's say: all their comics prior to 1990 online would be a huuuuge amount of reading). This would be fun to the general reader audience, but to the quality comic creators, it would mean death. Nowhere girl wouldn't be read but by a few die-hard fans. The other potential readers would simply not know of its existence, as the info to digest simply is too big, or they are constantly redirected to the famous DOTCOMICS, the SELF-DECLARED standardbearer for new comics. They would also have the money to buy such domains as Comicjam.com, ScotMcLoud.com(notice the subtle spelling?),...
...and will probably get full support by companies like Amazon.com or MicroSoft, who is constantly limiting choices by promoting the BIG MSNetwork (MSN messenger, Internet Explorer, Hotmail, Outlook Express,...)

So... yes this could mean the start of online comics popularity, but it could also mean the end of free choice in online comics.

Our main weapons against thes are of course our creativity, and of course the fact that some people in the comics community, will draw for nothing, no money and next to no readers, and will always keep the good material available. Let's hope the "Big Bears" will never monopolise our good taste and will soon be countered by INDEPENDENT online comics. One MAJOR assett is the fact that the indy online comics don't need as much fuss, and will always be there

Beware though and take care!

[johnnystorm]

I created Marvel's dotComics (lowercase d uppercase C)

Hm. OK, I'll grant them that- They invented a poor interface.

What makes you say that?

• dotComics are Flash Based
  the size is dicated by filesize and by browser size, but the pop up window is resizable

[johnnystorm]

But the IP space is (effectively if not literally) an unlimited resource. Marvel can publish a thousand or ten thousand or a hundred thousand titles
online and it will have no effect on your ability to log into Nowhere Girl or E-Sheep or (more to the point) Modern Tales.

It isn't server space that gets you as much as it it bandwidth. We have over 100,000 hits a day for the dotComics, that's a lot of bandwidth.

The more bandwidth you use the more money you pay.

[Greg Stephens]

I created Marvel's dotComics (lowercase d uppercase C)

Welcome! Glad to have you here and I hope you're not feeling personally attacked, but I'll try to explain some of my reactions-

Hm. OK, I'll grant them that- They invented a poor interface.

What makes you say that?

Well, to be fair, most of my objections may be a personal bias against tricky Flash-gadgets, but there are a couple of things that turn me off from Marvel's dotComics.

Once I get past my overall objection to the format, the interface itself is pretty usable, but I do think that the format itself is fundamentally flawed and in this case the interface is a clear case of function following form.

Now I do realize that this format may be a directive from Marvel to you rather than a design choice of your own, but the attempt to replicate in Flash the structure of a dead-tree comic book looks like a poor choice. Rather than being able to simply read and enjoy the story simply as a comic, we have to read is as a digital representation of a print comic. This means we have to "flip pages" and (most annoyingly) read the advertisements as they appear within the course of the story. Many of the advantages that other "pure" webcomics gain by being presented over the 'net are simply never going to be available within this format- the comics are locked within a box.

I think that it's because of this restrictive format that other problems arise, such as the need to use scrolling animations to display especially wide panels or to translate some of the wilder layout designs that work great on a page, but don't work as well when disassembled in order to be viewed one or two panels at a time. A problem with the animation is that if I want to go back and re-read a panel, I have to view the animation again when all I wanted to do what read one word balloon. Sure it's a minor thing, but it displays a limitation to the interface, which is geared toward reading straight through- front to back- rather than in a more intuitive hypertext-y sort of way.

The ads, which I've already mentioned, can't be skipped- especially when they're on a left-hand page. Most irritating but, I suspect, nothing you can do about those. Do these ads go away with membership? If so, then that's cool, but how does it affect the relationship of pages to each other? If the ad page is simply removed, then users have to flip once, read one page less than they normally get, then flip again. Again- this may be a Marvel corporate directive and not something you can do anything about.

Also, a Flash interface means no bookmarking- To find something again, I have to download the entire thing again and search for it (also using more bandwidth, a concern of your follow-up post).

There are some things that the interface does right- Resizing, as you've already mentioned, is a great feature and I like the way the word balloons are proportionately larger and less intrusive to the art than in the print versions of these comics.

It's not all bad, as I said in the very first post of this topic ("they took some really smart steps here and developed their own approach to the medium"), but the attempt to translate an actual print comic more or less verbatim to the web is, I think, a flawed approach.

[johnnystorm]

Once I get past my overall objection to the format, the interface itself is pretty usable, but I do think that the format itself is fundamentally flawed and in this case the interface is a clear case of function following form.

Now I do realize that this format may be a directive from Marvel to you rather than a design choice of your own, but the attempt to replicate in Flash the structure of a dead-tree comic book looks like a poor choice.

You are correct, the flipping pages is favorable among the powers that be, and at first I didn't like them but to be honest I kind of dig em now.

And yes, the biggest problem I encountered in creating the dotComics is that they were taken directly from the print version. As I have become intimately aware of, things that happen in print don't work well online.

First off the lettering at 100% is unreadable. Proof this is the CrossGen digital comics, where the lettering has to grow large enough to read. We increase the size of the lettering to 130% so that it is more readable. But the nice thing about flash is that the lettering is all vector and remains crisp at 100% or 300%, unlike bitmaps which pixelate as the are enlarged.

Second, the material wasn't really suited for this medium. Two page spreads don't translate well into the dotComic format, cause of the limited size.

The limited size is directly related to filesize, I attempted to keep the filesizes low and still have a good quality graphic.

Rather than being able to simply read and enjoy the story simply as a comic, we have to read is as a digital representation of a print comic. This means we have to "flip pages" and (most annoyingly) read the advertisements as they appear within the course of the story. Many of the advantages that other "pure" webcomics gain by being presented over the 'net are simply never going to be available within this format-the comics are locked within a box.

Yeah, ads are a pain but someone has to pay my salary... currently the dotComics are free, somehow the costs have to be recouped.

I think that it's because of this restrictive format that other problems arise, such as the need to use scrolling animations to display especially wide panels or to translate some of the wilder layout designs that work great on a page, but don't work as well when disassembled in order to be viewed one or two panels at a time.

Again, the problem lies is in the material, the material was developed for print, not for online.

A problem with the animation is that if I want to go back and re-read a panel, I have to view the animation again when all I wanted to do what read one word balloon. Sure it's a minor thing, but it displays a limitation to the interface, which is geared toward reading straight through- front to back- rather than in a more intuitive hypertext-y sort of way.

Actually if you click the "POP" button at the top right of the screen you can turn that auto-popping off... it still pops up the first panel or the ad... but after that you are good.

The ads, which I've already mentioned, can't be skipped- especially when they're on a left-hand page. Most irritating but, I suspect, nothing you can do about those. Do these ads go away with membership?

Again... costs have to be covered... I am working on making the ads less annoying.

Also, a Flash interface means no bookmarking- To find something again, I have to download the entire thing again and search for it (also using more bandwidth, a concern of your follow-up post).

Hmmm... what exactly do you want to bookmark?

There are some things that the interface does right- Resizing, as you've already mentioned, is a great feature and I like the way the word balloons are proportionately larger and less intrusive to the art than in the print versions of these comics.

Thanks

It's not all bad, as I said in the very first post of this topic ("they took some really smart steps here and developed their own approach to the medium"), but the attempt to translate an actual print comic more or less verbatim to the web is, I think, a flawed approach.

I have to agree... but since no standard existed... I had to develop one... I am curious to see how this format develops and I would gladly collaborate with a committee to develop a standard.[/quote]

[rcar]

Hi Jonnystorm. I am glad you are here and trying to explain yourself. That shows a good attitude. I just checked out the dotComics. It?s not so bad. I found it a little tricky at first but it didn?t take me too long to figure out the interface. I would suggest however that when the panels pop up to read that you make the background black instead of the panels over the whole page. It takes a little away from the look. Especially on singe panel pop up it get a little distracting from the panel I am suppose to be reading. I use flash for my comics which was inspired from the first marvel flash comics from about a year and a half ago. Good luck. I will be interested in how it evolves.

[alschroeder]

Actually, I kind of LIKE the dotcomics, they are readable and the ads are not too annoying, and I like the way parts of the page come out at you---but then, I'm prejudiced, I'm cheap and the more free comics I can read, the better.--Al

[johnnystorm]

I would suggest however that when the panels pop up to read that you make the background black instead of the panels over the whole page.

Yeah, we realize this is a problem and have done it on certain titles but not all... working on getting that across the board.

[Greg Stephens]

Hmmm... what exactly do you want to bookmark?

A specific page of a given comic, maybe? Something to reference in the future or as a way to leave off reading and return to the same point quickly (hey! Just like real-world bookmarks!). Perhaps even more usefully, to be able to link directly to a specific page in discussions such as this one.

I realize Flash doesn't do this (yet) and those are the trade-offs you make when you choose one tool over another. I don't think it's too much for people to expect that any site on the web will behave in at least some respects like other sites and being able to "deep-link" like this is pretty fundamental to web structure. Curse Macromedia! Curse them!

[johnnystorm]

Curse Macromedia! Curse them!

Well... if it weren't for Macromedia I'd be a QuarkXPress monkey

And Macromedia did add some sort of anchoring system in Flash MX, I still haven't looked at it much lately but I think they took the bookmark complaint to heart.

If you are at all curious, i've been redeveloping the dotComics in Flash MX, you can take a peek here:

http://dotcomics.marvel.com/ultissue1.htm

There's no detection going on so if you don't have the Flash 6 plugin don't expect it to work.

[InkAddict]

I think it's great you showed up to defend yourself, Johnnystorm

It's actually the thing the industry of online comics needs: cross-culture contact between what's happening at both ends of the economic scale:

The "Big Bears" (am still calling them Big Bears), as much as the smaller indy companies, and even the amateurs, could work together to make this medium something really swell! (I do keep some apprehension as to the fact that too big of a standard can be dangerous, if only one company plays the tune to which every reader dances ...but a standard could be great for a lot of less HTML-snappy creators; maybe something like a customizable infinite canvas with standard click-to-flip-page functions has a future!?)

...and hey, we're still glad you're able to get a sense of relief from your job the way you said "QuarkXPress monkey" must mean you'd really hated that!

[Randy]

Have you considered cutting the panels apart and stringing them along in a single direction? When an ad would normally appear in the comic the last panel could say "click to continue" and when the user clicks, it goes to an ad page which has a "click to continue" link that leads back to the story. The user wouldn't be able to get around the ads (i.e. you still get paid) and the reader has a better experience. Animating the panels starts to make it more like an animation than a comic.

Later,
Randy