Previous: McCloud appearance in Checkerboard Nig...
Next: McCloud's "Superman: Strength" |
Still good? |
Yup! |
|
46% |
[ 7 ] |
Nope! |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
Hmm... partially. |
|
53% |
[ 8 ] |
|
Total Votes : 15 |
|
Author |
Message |
William G Reinvents understanding
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 560 Location: South central...Korea. Word.
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Tim Tylor Consistant Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2003 Posts: 168 Location: Cornwall, Great Britain
|
Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Still seems pretty good to me.
The bit on cross-hatching (no. 3) doesn't stand up too well now - Deadmouse's lovingly-hatched Ballad looks good on a decent modern monitor. As Ballad shows, there can be good artistic reasons for staying with hatching: tone would definitely not have the same feel in that comic. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Jason Alderman Frequent Poster
Joined: 23 Apr 2001 Posts: 80 Location: All over the globe...
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Greg Stephens Forum Founder
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 3861 Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
|
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
A note on crosshatching: I think Scott's points are still dead-on. Remember that the monitor that a reader is using isn't the main issue with being able to properly replicate an image. The real pitfalls are the compression used in the image file, the image file size and (yes, even now) bandwidth. Scott's point was that crosshatching was a solution to an old technical problem (inability to print color and shading in books) and computers easily and inexpensively overcome that problem. Therefore, Scott suggests that before resorting to crosshatching, we think about if it's what we really want to do and if there might be another approach which might be more interesting or appropriate for the artwork in question.
He doesn't say that crosshatching is wrong or bad or inferior on an artistic level. Merely that it should be thought of as an option rather than a necessity. This is similar to what happened with photography when color film was invented. Black and white photography became an artistic choice.
Far from making Scott's ICST column see out of date, I think that Dead Mouse's work reinforces the point: All the carefully drawn linework is clearly an artistic choice which has been made to enhance the mood. It didn't have to be done this way, but it has been, and that's part of what makes it what it is. _________________ Good morning! That's a nice tnetennba. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Haze Regular Poster
Joined: 22 Jun 2003 Posts: 34
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree that cross-hatching really helps in terms of art style. It doesn't seem like it's too much of an issue anymore... artists who want that "feel" to their comic go ahead with the cross-hatching, and those that don't usually end up digitally colouring anyway.
However...
I think it applies very well to SCREEN TONE. It's used a lot in manga, sometimes with amazing effect. Since most manga is required to be printed entirely B&W, it's a great method. However, I've noticed a trend of people trying to imitate the manga "style," and they repeat one very bad mistake -- screen tone looks HORRIBLE in digital images, even worse than cross-hatching! Unless your image is at very high resolution, suitable for printing, those dots will interpolate. And instead of having a nice, fresh screen tone to provide the illusion of shades of grey, it produces a murky splotch of grey and black pixels, which tend to form odd patterns when resized (not sure what the technical term for this is called). If the end result is a horrible mess of grey, so why not just use clean greys to begin with? Or ignoring tone entirely and digitally colouring the art? To me this is just as redundant as trying to imitate the C/M/Y/K dots used in colour printing.
After working with manga scan groups, I easily noticed this problem with resized screen tones. After browsing around on some manga-influenced webcomics sites, I got really irritated that quite a few were making this same mistake. All in the name of trying to appear like "genuine manga." If they want to imitate the art style, that's fine, but they should realize that screen tone is just superficial. You don't need it if you're making comics for the web.
Went on a rant there, sorry. Ahem. Cross-hatching good! Screen-tone bad! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Rip Tanion Reinvents understanding
Joined: 12 Apr 2002 Posts: 635 Location: The Riptania Sky-Palace in da beauuuuuutiful Bronx.
|
Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Haze wrote: | I think it applies very well to SCREEN TONE. It's used a lot in manga, sometimes with amazing effect. Since most manga is required to be printed entirely B&W, it's a great method. However, I've noticed a trend of people trying to imitate the manga "style," and they repeat one very bad mistake -- screen tone looks HORRIBLE in digital images, even worse than cross-hatching! Unless your image is at very high resolution, suitable for printing, those dots will interpolate. And instead of having a nice, fresh screen tone to provide the illusion of shades of grey, it produces a murky splotch of grey and black pixels, which tend to form odd patterns when resized (not sure what the technical term for this is called). If the end result is a horrible mess of grey, so why not just use clean greys to begin with? | The technical term, I believe, is called a moir? pattern.
Screentones (zippitone, benday patterns, etc) were used in comics for decades until computers came along. And you're right: unless you know how to deftly remove them after scanning, they look horrible and muddy on a computer screen. Back in the day, I was still using Letraset patterns. You had to cut those things with an exacto knife, and then stick them on your artwork; hoping the adhesive didn't dry up, causing the pattern to fall of - or worse, you put the pattern in the wrong place accidently, and then removed it, pulling off ink...or paper.
I realized zippitone and scanners don't mix when I scanned in some of my old artwork in the past couple of years. If you look at the comics I posted up here and here, you'll see what I mean. I was able to minimze the the offending moir? somewhat in Photoshop, but you can see it's still noticable.
Of course, if you realy like the eyecatching effect of zippitone (or duo-shade - that was another can or worms entirely) you CAN reproduce them digitally, and be free of moir?s. I don't know about overseas, but here in the U.S., you're hard pressed to even find zippitone sheets, or duo-shade board (and the chemicals that go with it) anymore. I certainly can't find them by me...and I live in New York, the capitol of commercial art.
I don't know if they do it digitally or not, but the folks who bring you GAAK use the duo-shade effect nicely.
As for cross-hatching: Call me old fashioned, but I prefer, at least for comics, the looks of pen-hatching, and brush feathering, to the smooth gradients produced by Photoshop, Illustrator, etc. But that's an aesthetic preference, I guess.
I also notice that cross-hatching looks a lot better on my new flatscreen monitor, than it did on my old CRT. _________________ "Park the beers, and grab the smiles. It's flight time." - LtCdr. J. Robert "Bobby" Stone, USN (R.I.P.) |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Coydog Forum Member
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 8
|
Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm Monique MacNaughton, the artist half of the aforementioned GAAK and I happen to lurk on this board. I do the "zippitone" effect digitally by laying in simple gradients in Photoshop, then coverting it to bitmap via halftone pattern. I use lines at an angle as opposed to dots for exactly the same technical reasons as have been described here, plus it just fits the style I've worked up for GAAK.
Now, as for my other big project, UNA Frontiers which is now running on Graphic Smash, I use a combination of marker and ballpoint pen. There is a LOT of fine hatchwork here, because that's just the sort of style it evolved into. Ballpoint works beautifully, btw. Recently I went to screen-friendly page proportions in the current chapter of UNAF, but arranged it so that they would create a standard print page when laid out two-up, and made sure each pair, when combined, would read well. It's kind of amusing that until people look at the credits up close, they have no idea that both projects were drawn by the same artist.  _________________ Monique MacNaughton
Coydog Press
UNA Frontiers |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Eric F Myers Understands reinventing
Joined: 03 Oct 2003 Posts: 352 Location: Chicago
|
Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Coydog wrote: | Recently I went to screen-friendly page proportions in the current chapter of UNAF, but arranged it so that they would create a standard print page when laid out two-up, and made sure each pair, when combined, would read well. |
Why does it have to add up to a "standard" page layout? If you are going to print your comic it doesn't have to be a standard size! I work at the second largest book distributor in North America and I've seen books in every shape and size imaginable. Why can't artist design for the web and for print simultaneously using the one layout that fits in a monitor? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Coydog Forum Member
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 8
|
Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I print through POD services primarily. Fitting the standard book formats is the cheapest way to go. _________________ Monique MacNaughton
Coydog Press
UNA Frontiers |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Eric F Myers Understands reinventing
Joined: 03 Oct 2003 Posts: 352 Location: Chicago
|
Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Coydog wrote: | I print through POD services primarily. Fitting the standard book formats is the cheapest way to go. |
I'm don't know what service you are using but I found this statement over at ComiXpress.
comiXpress wrote: | What size comics do you print?
ComiXpress prints two standard sizes: traditional comic size (6.625x10.25?) and minicomic size (5.5x8.5?). We can also print custom sizes up to a maximum of 8.5x11? at no additional charge. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Coydog Forum Member
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 8
|
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm going to put it out using Lulu.com, which Darryl and I are already doing with GAAK. _________________ Monique MacNaughton
Coydog Press
UNA Frontiers |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|