Bakuman
-
So ul.
-
That's incredibly subjective, what you consider "soul" I consider a black and white photograph-looking object.
I consider Calvin and Hobbes to be the most "soul"-ful art I have ever laid my eyes on. There's nothing artistically inspiring about the art, nor would I consider Watterson the best artist since Picasso.
Yet, his art has more soul than any manga or comic you could possibly mention.
Knowing how to draw doesn't make you an expert on manga.
To clarify, I consider Robby's experience in the comic industry to be superior to either of ours regarding art and what would sell as a number one manga.
-
Manwha in general does nothing for me. The overmuscled overpainted stuff anyway. Its all so bland looking, despite being so technically accurate. Its so overdetailed that it loses any sense of energy or passion. Its just there.
Yeah. Thats a photorealistic person there. Especially the watercolor stuff. Why do all the characters look so bored? Why are they posed so statically so consistently? How is it that something can have that much time and energy and effort put into it ans still be completely boring to look at? So consistently among so many artists that all draw upon the same techniques? (I know better than to make the claim that the art style of the entire nation looks identical. But…)
Technical skill is important, yes, and it can make for a fantastic standalone image, but it doesn't instantly make storytelling ability, and sometimes makes for bad comic pages. Especially when the coloring is all over the place.
To clarify, I consider Robby's experience in the comic industry to be superior to either of ours regarding art and what would sell as a number one manga.
Good art will sell books and draw attention, no question about that. Same goes for great coloring hiding a bad artist or enhancing a good one. People love detailed art, and a popular artist can sell books on their name alone. But in the long run? A typical american comic book (that isn't indy) will switch artists with regularity and its not usually a huge deal.
Its story and storytelling that will pull the audience back for the next chapter.
-
Photorealistic art can actually work well in a comic when its done well. Case in point: Alex Ross. (though of course the American and Japan markets have different taste)
Just wondering (having read the Nanamine arc). What if someone gathered a couple of guys from here to come up with a story for a manga, what kind of story will be produced?
-
Photorealistic art can actually work well in a comic when its done well. Case in point: Alex Ross. (though of course the American and Japan markets have different taste)
Alex Ross is talented, but he has the luxury of taking all the time in the world to work on whatever he wants. He can do endless layouts and revisions and redoes his pages 5 or 15 times for every page. There's a reason he hasn't actually done a full comic in how many years now? Marvels and Kingdom Come are great and all, but he hasn't really done any other serialized work. He's a painter styled after Norman Rockwell, not a comics artist or storyteller. (And when you can make thousands of dollars off of a single cover image its hard to blame him.)
Shame, cause his pencilled stuff looks great too, and his design work, but… again, thats easy when you can spend as long as you want on an image instead of actually producing.
Granted, his genius lie in applying Norman Rockwell to comic books. But he's over-rated, in that he doesn't actually do anything. Incredibly talented, but he doesn't do anything.
Just wondering (having read the Nanamine arc). What if someone gathered a couple of guys from here to come up with a story for a manga, what kind of story will be produced?
It'd be a mess. Probably One Piece esque. But a mess.
-
@RobbyBevard:
Alex Ross is talented, but he has the luxury of taking all the time in the world to work on whatever he wants. He can do endless layouts and revisions and redoes his pages 5 or 15 times for every page. There's a reason he hasn't actually done a full comic in how many years now? Marvels and Kingdom Come are great and all, but he hasn't really done any other serialized work. He's a painter styled after Norman Rockwell, not a comics artist or storyteller. (And when you can make thousands of dollars off of a single cover image its hard to blame him.)
Shame, cause his pencilled stuff looks great too, and his design work, but… again, thats easy when you can spend as long as you want on an image instead of actually producing.
Granted, his genius lie in applying Norman Rockwell to comic books. But he's over-rated, in that he doesn't actually do anything. Incredibly talented, but he doesn't do anything.
Yeah, I suppose thats where the problem lies: time. Too bad he only works on commissions, if he'd only take the initiative to produce other series (lazy? or is the guy is just real busy?). So in Kingdom Come, Mark Waid did the story right? I've always wondered if Ross himself is a good writer or he was just one damn good artist.
It'd be a mess. Probably One Piece esque. But a mess.
I think so too, but I wonder if anyone really ever tried writing a manga like Nanamine
-
Yeah, I suppose thats where the problem lies: time. Too bad he only works on commissions, if he'd only take the initiative to produce other series (lazy? or is the guy is just real busy?).
Successful. Couple of fantastic artists do what he did. Do a couple of comics, get famous and popular, and then they can make a ton of money on single illustrations and they never have the drive to go back to doing sequentials. Because its a lot harder and a lot less rewarding monetarily. Which sucks.
I think Ross loves comics (he has a whole room of Superman) but he doesn't have the passion to tell stories. Or devote 2 years to painting a 4 issue comic.
A lot of people are talented enough to do what he does given as much time as he takes, and some are talented enough to do super high quality approximations on a weekly basis.
So in Kingdom Come, Mark Waid did the story right? I've always wondered if Ross himself is a good writer or he was just one damn good artist.
He's always had other, very talented writers write for him.
I think so too, but I wonder if anyone really ever tried writing a manga like Nanamine
CLAMP comes to mind. But even there its still a team of women who have worked together for years and its still only 4 - 7 members. Nothing as absurd as getting input from 50 people… not officially.
-
That's incredibly subjective, what you consider "soul" I consider a black and white photograph-looking object.
I consider Calvin and Hobbes to be the most "soul"-ful art I have ever laid my eyes on. There's nothing artistically inspiring about the art, nor would I consider Watterson the best artist since Picasso.
Yet, his art has more soul than any manga or comic you could possibly mention.
Knowing how to draw doesn't make you an expert on manga.
To clarify, I consider Robby's experience in the comic industry to be superior to either of ours regarding art and what would sell as a number one manga.
Obviously you missed what I was talking about.
Soul doesn't just mean soulful art. What's a soulful tale? What is a soul that is matured and sculpted and forged through hardship?
I was obviously more talking about the requirement of the human that's the artist.
Also you definition of soulful art is absolutely baseless.–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@RobbyBevard:
Manwha in general does nothing for me.
Manwha or manhua?
@RobbyBevard:
Its story and storytelling that will pull the audience back for the next chapter.
Which is why Gantz, Naruto and Fairy Tail sell so well, yeah.
You know all too well just because something hooks readers doesn't mean it's of high quality. And just because something is not popular with the majority of casual readers doesn't mean it's not highly acclaimed in critical circle.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---Then again, I won't answer further than "soul" unless I become a great cartoonist myself.
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
By great, of course, I don't mean the kind of Mashima or Oh Great! who are fairly successful but considered shit in critical circles and their names will not last past their era.
However it's just laughable for anyone who has not become great themselves to claim what it takes to become great. -
hey, fuck up, bobby was referring to American comics in that regard
and good job with the lifeless looking pictures you stamped up there
oh, I guess they were soulful and not near images of each other
-
@dirt:
hey, fuck up, bobby was referring to American comics in that regard
and good job with the lifeless looking pictures you stamped up there
oh, I guess they were soulful and not near images of each other
You mean Ikegami's art?
-
don't ask to be banned and say your brother posted those pictures
-
@dirt:
don't ask to be banned and say your brother posted those pictures
You are getting personal. But I couldn't care less.
I stand on my view that Ryoichi Ikegami is a great artist and will defend him to the end. Anyone who say otherwise is welcome to debate.
Not trying to pick fight, but to say Ikegami's art is lifeless is just laughable. -
sure, it's pretty
but they're also pretty plain-faced looking when they're presented without the story behind them
really, what expressions? besides the crying man, none evoke anything from me or interest me in any way
-
@dirt:
sure, it's pretty
but they're also pretty plain-faced looking when they're presented without the story behind them
really, what expressions? besides the crying man, none evoke anything from me or interest me in any way
Are you too used to the emotions that is laid out obviously in One Piece or something? The emotion in Ikegami's art is far more subtle and refined.
The heroes have charisma of hero. Just by looking at them, you can tell "This man is surely an extraordinary man", "this man is capable of doing great thing", and you can tell if these characters are profound or shallow, smart or idiotic, et cetera and et cetera. The expression scream "Here's a hero!". Sorry if you are too culturally unfamiliar with that way of viewing art. -
dirt monkey Al is less diplomatic about it, but I agree, Ikegami's art is soulless, it looks like a badly taken black and white photograph.
I do think Inoue is fantastic at drawing expressions however.
Lastly to call my definition of Bill Watterson's art as a pure form of soul-ful art false throws all of your credibility out the window.
-
clearly only exists to make some girls sigh and giggle - no expression whatsoever:
[hide][/hide]
THE EXPRESSION THE PIZZAZ THE … wait, no, this is incredibly boring too, sorry:[hide][/hide]
snarky look with a flashy glasses move - bravo?[hide][/hide]
again, crying men are finedo you know what the general point of art in a comic is, SEA?
to tell a story
besides the crying men, and MAYBE the flashy glasses guy and Mr. Snarky, no real stories are being told me to me through these rather lifeless and soulless images
Ikegami has failed to tell me a story through his art.
Which should be his number one goal.
-
Lastly to call my definition of Bill Watterson's art as a pure form of soul-ful art false throws all of your credibility out the window.
Yeah because through them we see profound human being there.
I don't deny that his work has got some soul, but to say it's more soulful than this picture is quite baseless:
http://i.imgur.com/PBeF4.jpg
[hide]@dirt:clearly only exists to make some girls sigh and giggle - no expression whatsoever:[hide][/hide]
What I see is a charming, suave man who is also strong-willed, sharp and brave. His eyes, calm yet inquiring, look as if he is staring into your mind and see what you are thinking, while hiding what's he is thinking. Around these eyes lurked a vague sadness. This man's heart is a terrific chasm, so dark and fathomless. You know he has got something in his mind, but in no way know what it's, which gives him a charming yet mysterious aura.
THE EXPRESSION THE PIZZAZ THE … wait, no, this is incredibly boring too, sorry:
[hide][/hide]
This man is suggesting the change of the country. "Amend the constitution". He looks totally like a powerful politician, a capable leader. His eyes determined, firm, and full of ideal. While youthful, they tell you this man's belief in his ability and the future of the country is strong. Those eyes are hopeful, but not the excited hope of naive child, it's the firm, restrained yet unyielding hope of a fully mature intellect whom life has forged and honed. They also give an epic historical atmosphere, the expression of a man who is standing at the core of a changing era, and he is the one who will change it.
snarky look with a flashy glasses move - bravo?
[hide][/hide]
That's not just snarky. The main character is expressing a confident, arrogant, playful and challenging attitude, as if he laughs at whatever the other is going throw at him. Along with his line, he come off as a fearless man who looks down upon almost everything.
Ikegami has failed to tell me a story through his art.
Or you just failed to get what he conveys through his art, the great characterization hidden behind subtle and profound expression. Ikegami is not a widely acclaimed artist for nothing. His art totally meet the requirement of the dark, mature, deep stories from renowned authors like Koike and Buronson.
[/hide]
–- Update From New Post Merge ---–- Update From New Post Merge ---
!
-
@THE:
Yeah because through them we see profound human being there.
What I see is a charming, suave man who is also strong-willed, sharp and brave. His eyes, calm yet inquiring, look as if he is staring into your mind and see what you are thinking, while hiding what's he is thinking. Around these eyes lurked a vague sadness. This man's heart is a terrific chasm, so dark and fathomless. You know he has got something in his mind, but in no way know what it's, which gives him a charming yet mysterious aura.
it's a blank fucking face
@THE:This man is suggesting the change of the country. "Amend the constitution". He looks totally like a powerful politician, a capable leader. His eyes determined, firm, and full of ideal. While youthful, they tell you this man's belief in his ability and the future of the country is strong. Those eyes are hopeful, but not the excited hope of naive child, it's the firm, restrained yet unyielding hope of a fully mature intellect whom life has forged and honed. They also give an epic historical atmosphere, the expression of a man who is standing at the core of a changing era, and he is the one who will change it.
he's suggesting the change of a country with a blank face - there's no passion, no apparent need or urgency on his face for said change
he makes me wonder why I should care about any such change in his country
@THE:That's not just snarky. The main character is expressing a confident, arrogant, playful and challenging attitude, as if he laughs at whatever the other is going throw at him.
hey, look, you just described snarky
@THE:Or you just failed to get what he conveys through his art, the great characterization hidden behind subtle and profound expression.
here's another tip for you, sea
the reader never fails - if you don't convey your story to your reader, then you've failed as an artist
your little one shot pretty boy pictures don't show me much of a story - if any at all
for instance since you brought up One Piece, you can't show me a picture of Luffy picking his nose at Enies Lobby, and tell me how fixed he is to save his friend, that there's a quiet determination set in his gaze
because it's a fucking picture of Luffy picking his nose
one panel shot can't tell a story
@THE:!
OHEY
A STORY TO GO ALONG WITH EXPRESSIONS THAT OTHERWISE COULD MEAN THEY'RE ABOUT TO TAKE A DUMP
this last little display is what you should have shown first
Now Urouge would like to tell you and anyone else that wants to continue this conversation to instead open up a thread called THE SEA's Soul Thread and discuss it there.
-
@dirt:
the reader never fails
This sentence makes me realize one thing: I can stop replying to you.
Have a nice day, miss. -
This post is deleted!
-
Great chapter and very nice ending to the arc overall. I'm looking forward to see what Ashirogi is next up to.
Also everyone who thinks that Ryoichi Ikegami's art is bad needs to read more his works.
-
@THE:
This sentence makes me realize one thing: I can stop replying to you.
Have a nice day, miss.have fun failing as a comic artist who can't communicate with his readers
-
@dirt:
have fun failing as a comic artist who can't communicate with his readers
Sorry for being rude earlier. Now I feel angry at myself for getting angry at you. I should have understood that it's cultural difference. And what I posted in no way represent Ikegami's talent as a whole, so there is nothing better than reading his best works like Sanctuary, Heat, Lord, etc… to get a feel of his art.
On the topic of story-telling, to us manga is not just about telling story. It's also about depiction. I think I have said this somewhere else. And like the author of Lone Wolf and Cub pointed out, American comics are often story-centric while manga in general are character-centric, especially in the early period. Artists like Ikegami often draw close up one shots to emphasize the characteristic, charisma, quality of the characters, based on oriental traditional opinions about a person's ability, personality (and fate) with certain features on his face. His special portrayal help carve the iconic image of the character into the reader's mind. And while realistic, Ikegami's manga are easy to read with a smooth flow, as contrast to American comics.Besides, Scott Mccloud kinda nailed it that manga are often more dwelling with more aspect to aspect panel transition, not just to serve the purpose of carrying a story out like American comics, because Japanese (of Ikegami's generation at least) view manga as a form of art and not just business. We often employ this thing called "mu"
! > I told Miyazaki I love the "gratuitous motion" in his films; instead of every movement being dictated by the story, sometimes people will just sit for a moment, or they will sigh, or look in a running stream, or do something extra, not to advance the story but only to give the sense of time and place and who they are.
"We have a word for that in Japanese," he said. "It's called mu. Emptiness. It's there intentionally."
Is that like the “pillow words” that separate phrases in Japanese poetry?“I don’t think it’s like the pillow word.” [Miyazaki] clapped his hands three or four times. “The time in between my clapping is mu. If you just have non-stop action with no breathing space at all, it’s just business, But if you take a moment, then the tension building in the film can grow into a wider dimension.
Happy birthday BTW. -
That was more for comics in the 70s and 80's though. American comics have a LOT more breathing room nowadays than they used to and are generally paced slower, more towards trade format. Still not as slowly as what a weekly manga allows for, but… moreso than they used to be.
The influence of manga is probably a part of that, and changing market and what people want out of their stories is another.
-
This romanticism of art in relation to comics(or telling a story in general) just won't translate well. Has less to do with cultural differences and more to do with the main goal in the medium the author/artist is working in.
-
oyah, huge cultural difference
especially since I got into manga long before I started reading American comics
it's obviously the cultural differences affecting me - and nothing to do with the fact that you showed me one panel shots of characters I know nothing about without any sort of background information and outside of a story
where's the you're a fucking moron smilie
really, all I can say is that the guy can draw pretty
-
@dirt:
really, all I can say is that the guy can draw pretty
That's the problem. Like I said, orientals tell whether someone is a hero based on certain feature on his face. Ikegami grasp this pretty well and did excellently in the portrayal of heroes. A bright minister is a hero, and a chivalrous traveler is also a hero. The two out of 5 you called blank actually make this pretty clear. I am not going to debate further, so the only solution is try reading Sanctuary.
!
[hide][/hide]you showed me
Sorry about that because I didn't think of any particular audience when I posted those pages.
It's okay if you insist on calling me a moron. I still won't hold anything against you.That was more for comics in the 70s and 80's though.
Yeah, that is why I said especially in the period.
-
@THE:
http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/9262/011bwz.jpg
What I see is a charming, suave man who is also strong-willed, sharp and brave. His eyes, calm yet inquiring, look as if he is staring into your mind and see what you are thinking, while hiding what's he is thinking. Around these eyes lurked a vague sadness. This man's heart is a terrific chasm, so dark and fathomless. You know he has got something in his mind, but in no way know what it's, which gives him a charming yet mysterious aura.I swear, I lol'd so fucking hard
-
Glad you got the reference.
-
Huh? No, I laughed because for me it's just a plain face, too, and it made me laugh out loud that you are over-analyzing it so much. "His eyes, calm yet inquiring, look as if he is staring into your mind and see what you are thinking, while hiding what's he is thinking." - That's hilarious because it's a context- and emotionless face!
-
It all seems subjective to me at the end of the day.
-
Huh? No, I laughed because for me it's just a plain face, too, and it made me laugh out loud that you are over-analyzing it so much. "His eyes, calm yet inquiring, look as if he is staring into your mind and see what you are thinking, while hiding what's he is thinking." - That's hilarious because it's a context- and emotionless face!
It's okay if you don't get it. However, while he doesn't show obvious emotions, his eyes are more focusing than that of a plain face. It's a subtle job. And you can't deny his stare is sharp.
It's hard to tell whether he is even smirking or not. -
Lol Sea, don't you think maybe you're just seeing the characterization you picked up from reading the story? It's an ambiguous face that befits the eye of the beholder. Show it to 10 different people who haven't read the story and you'll get 10 different descriptions if they try to go into such specific detail. This goes for people from any country, yours included. Renaissance art proves that (in which highly talented artists would spend a year on a single character). Then you have art experts who have more credentials than all of us combined who can't agree on a characterization for those paintings. But then if the artist were to provide a story and characterization for us, they'd all go "yes, that fits perfectly, beautiful." Wine would be served and all would be merry.
They're nice drawings, but they're hardly so clear cut without a story to back them.
-
don't you think maybe you're just seeing the characterization you picked up from reading the story?
That certainly affected the way I interpreted it, one way or another, because I know my interpretation is right. And like you said, it fits perfectly. As I reread the manga again and again I have always thought it was a subtle and wonderful depiction that helped emphasize his character. Subtlety is all about being ambiguous, and I held Ikegami in high regard for it. Regardless of emotion, his face still contains characteristics of a hero, a nice touch on the depiction aspect of manga.
I think we can end this discussion here before it get any funnier. Thanks you. -
It all seems subjective to me at the end of the day.
I'm glad I'm not alone in this boat.
-
What Sea is talking about to me are just caricatures. It's just his examples are way more detailed in their specificity and aren't the everyday simple ones most people can catch on their first look.
-
@THE:
On the topic of story-telling, to us manga is not just about telling story. It's also about depiction. I think I have said this somewhere else.
i think you are telling the same thing to me before when we talk about sex scene and art in manga. but i not totally agree with you this time because "depiction" is also part of story telling. from one panel/page of facial expression also can tell so many story depending on how the reader interpreted it. look what you can understand only from i panel of characters face and plus with your understanding of the story. it produce more story right? but sometime different people can come up with different idea of what they seen. and there will be a bigger different between somebody that read the story than somebody that don't.
And like the author of Lone Wolf and Cub pointed out, American comics are often story-centric while manga in general are character-centric, especially in the early period.
Besides, Scott Mccloud kinda nailed it that manga are often more dwelling with more aspect to aspect panel transition, not just to serve the purpose of carrying a story out like American comics, because Japanese (of Ikegami's generation at least) view manga as a form of art and not just business.Naoki Urasawa also said the same thing in one of his interview with NHK(i think) or some other tv channel in Japan.
-
@RobbyBevard:
Eiji's next series will have the fun and combat of Dragonball, the depth of Nausicaa, and the art of Berserk.
Weekly.
[hide]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[imgz]Obscure stuff[imgz]
[/hide]Terrible idea. [inserts clippings of mass knowledge that's not my own]
Someone: Why is this guy always posting manga pages that I'd quickly scroll down on? Why should I care? I should ask him.
"You seem to know your stuff. What makes a good manga/comic?"
Soul
"…."
Soul
"..."
Soul
"..."
I'm joking. Could you tell?
"..."
Me: Is this seriously how this all started?
-
Here is a story, Hiroy. There was this film called Fiza directed by Khalid Mohammed. The guy was an excellent film critic and very good at pointing out mistakes in films. And yet when he himself directed a film, he messed up and the film would be mediocre if not for the excellent acting of Hrithik Roshan.
Similar things happened many times in art industry where good critics make terrible producer. Just because you know what is good and what is bad doesn't mean you can do it, and you can never know enough as a critic, and your list would always lack something. That is why I decided to shut my mouth up whenever someone asked me what'd make a good comic artist or the like because it would be damn embarrassing if I big-mouthed about it here and then produced a terrible comic. You want to know? Why don't you just google "What make a good comic" and see what people think about it? As for me, I will only say soul until I become a good comic artist myself. That is something I want to answer with my experience as well as a basis of success, and as for now I am just a reader who presents my opinion on a comic as a comic reader. Who would you ask that kind of question, a good mangaka or his editor instead? Who in the world would write a "How to make a good comic" book when they haven't made one?I'm joking. Could you tell?
I was serious most of the time. I only inserted a little reference with the lurking sadness that I used once in my thread.
-
Look, Sea. We all gotta live by some kind of ideal to make ourselves seem credible in whatever line of work we choose. That's great. It helps build character. Now here's the problem. I get the impression that you are trying very hard to make people understand you, and I admit that I don't find your intents or motivations very clear. What saddens me more is when people try to understand you when they obviously don't. If that were the case, there would not be much silence or moments in where you'd have to constantly explain/defend yourself.
The atmosphere you create just scares me sometimes and I blame my own bad self esteem for that. I don't know much about comic artists. I don't know much of the manga industry. I surely don't have much experience when it comes to presenting/discussing information about the art as a whole. Well, maybe I do but your stance is a tad bit overwhelming in a way that it makes me and others feel stupid. I'm sure that's not your intent. You ARE a learning man afterall.
Now enough of that. You got a mass amount of things to share with us. That's great. But please. Bending and derailing a topic into your favor does not strike me as good etiquette. Also… Posting multiple manga pages(and saying nothing else) whilst expecting atleast one person to get your point is just playing mindgames. Pictures do tell more than words, but interpretations are far too broad. Well, I said my piece.
-
Aristotle ranked plot as first in importance, followed by the characters portrayed in the plot. Thought (by which Aristotle meant revealing truth or maxims) was third, and diction or acting style was fourth. Song or music is ranked fifth, and the least important factor is spectacle.
This applies to plays, to comics, to movies, radio, novels, pretty much everything. Like I said days ago, art IS its own selling point, a popular artist will bring in fans, but its not singlehandedly what keeps people coming back. The story is.
Sometimes people like terrible stories, but its the stories none-the-less that are the most important.
-
I consider characters no less important than plot/storyline, if not more.
My point of view is that readers will eventually forget the story but the image of the character will remain in their mind. -
but Urasawa and Takehiko said characters are more important(their first focus) to them than the plot..
-
but Urasawa and Takehiko said characters are more important(their first focus) to them than the plot..
And both made great mangas. I'd personally say that a plot is more of an anchor and the characters are the ship. A great character without a solid plot will eventually just drift away. And a solid plot without a good character will just…be an eyesore.
I myself don't know that much about manga, but I do have my own views on what a "perfect" Shonen Manga is.
Manga-wise, there should be action with unique abilities battle, unique and distinct cast of characters (design-wise and personality-wise), solid plot, and a vast, rich world. There's obviously a LOT manga out there thats got those feats, but what makes it the "perfect" one is when it blends perfectly with the franchise/business-wise.
Its got to have longetivity (I'm not even sure thats a word, LOL), but basically it should be able to sustain itself for a long time without that feeling that the author is just forcing it to keep on going. Meaning the license holder can keep milking that cash cow for years and years to come.
Merchandising is also very important, and the cast of characters should support that. The possibility of games are also indispensable, the manga should be flexible enough to be made into various genre: adventure, battle, RPG, Trading cards, simulation based, etc.And of all the current manga we have, only OP can accomplish that well. Naruto and Bleach tried too hard in the franchising, and the result is the current catastrophy we have now. And out of the current ones I've read, Toriko has got the potential, Beelzebub remains to be seen, and Bakuman isn't that promising franchise-wise
-
Sea, when I first started drawing I was also like you. But you just love one style of drawing, you adore it and try to find too much in it. Don't try to read a characters face and write about it for 5 minutes. These are faces, you draw for your readers. IF you ever do draw a comic and find a publisher, you'll quickly forget about drawing soul and other things. You have a deadline. They want to see art and story. It has to be great or even better. Reader's first want to read the whole comic and will only look a little longer at art in some bigger spreads (and some won't even stop to look at them). They will go back to looking at your drawings much later on, when they'll know the story already and can finally look at art. And yes, they want their characters to sound believable. But why are some comic/manga artists more known than others or their art is more liked? You see, you draw for food. If you don't, then stop. You need food and some other things to draw and if drawing is your point in life, you want it to bring some money into your pocket. After you know you draw for food you have to know who gives you money. It's the publisher, who gets it from the readers. And readers pay for things only when they really like them. Most of your readers are people who want their brains to eat some popcorn after a hard day at school or work. And 90% of comic books are this popcorn. Look at renowed comic artist, you'll see than although they do draw some deep stories sometimes, but they always have something for everyone somewhere, so that they can still eat while drawing poetical and majestical things.
If you want a nice metaphor of comic artists, think of this as knighthood. Old knights knew how much they didn't know when they started, knew that this is a shitty and hard job and you will never know about it unless you became a knight yourself and lived to understand that. And then we had young knights, who only heard about the stories of the big knights, who did things, are poetical, they read books about them and learned their stories. And they think they too will become such guys. But only few of them will live, and from these few maybe 1 and maybe none will become one of the big ones. And he still will think that it's a shitty and hard job and they do it because it's not about liking it or not, it's just a way of living that you want to do, no matter what. Comic guys are like this. The guy who draws the comic you love so much? He laughs, shits, gets angry at his comic and overall can even be pissed at the story he has to tell. Bakuman never shows this, but sometimes you get a decision from your publisher to do something you don't really want to. And you will do it, to get food and after that keep on drawing other thin gs that you love, or you will start being poetical and think that this stick figures created with a pencil are living things and you don't want to do something bad to them. And you won't get food. Simple.Sorry for this guys. I'm just getting upset when I see such topics. ;)
-
@Aru:
[hide]I appreciate your comment, which also gave me a smile because I was eating while reading it.
But I digest. I never expect drawing comic would be a romantic work.
I am influenced by countless artists and Ikegami is just one of them, so no, I don't limit my influence. My style most resembles Tsukasa Hojo and Inoue Takehiko if anything.
And I do very bad bad things to my characters. Such as putting them in frog suits. I don't look down upon popcorn series.
It's time to get food.
p/s: I feel a little uncomfortable when people talk about me in a thread not about me though. So next time I hope we can take it to pm. I tremendously appreciate such gesture.[/hide]
On the topic of character vs plot, now take a look at My little ponies. What do you love it for? Fascinating story or incredibly lovable characters? Pretty obvious that characters are its selling point. You don't love a comic unless you are in love with its characters. Biggest fans associate themselves with certain characters. It's inevitable that you will mess up a bit here and there in the plots/stories, but readers will forgive, as long as you don't mistreat the characters whom they love. One Piece has up and down many times with its arcs, but its characters have established a cult status in Japan to the point people made graves for Whitebeard and Ace. To quote Kazuo Koike :"Comics are carried by characters. If the characters are well created, the comic becomes a hit".
So yes, I personally think characters are more important than stories/plot, as far as commercial comics go. I would like to elaborate more on several other aspects in a more professional manner, but now is not the time for it.
I was not surprised that Robby would consider plot/stories as most important, as stated before, American comics in general are more story-centric while manga are more character-centric. It's totally fine if he keeps that point of view. -
There is a distinction that I cannot explain in terms of manga, because manga don't change authors and artists between characters and story that you seem to be crossing.
Spider-man is immensely popular because he is Peter Parker, this is a classic case of character before story, however a number of shitty writers have changed Peter's personality and decision making over the years, resulting in a very different character, inferior to the original product.
The Simpsons are also carried by the characters that Groening created, throughout the years, the story has been a secondary factor to seeing them interact with each other, but for the past decade or so, people are unsatisfied with them. The stories have gotten so terrible, that slowly but surely the characters began to change for the worse as well.
J. Michael Straczynski is the ultimate "take a shitty character and write a grandiose story that will make him into the most interesting character imaginable." Through his story, he redefines the importance and sympathy we feel for the character.
Different mediums focus on different forms of storytelling, some put a lot of weight on story, some on characters for example in sitcom situations.
I can give you examples of artists from this very forum even:
http://apforums.net/showthread.php?t=33306 Avenger Stefan, a newer addition, the art is cartoony, even Sunday morning newspaper strip cartoony, but there is a lot of "soul" in the art. I think this is a mix of characters and story.
http://apforums.net/showthread.php?t=7261 eECa adventures, mischievous, fun and incredibly creative, is the type of "soul" I get from this art. I believe this is a case of story above characters.
http://apforums.net/showthread.php?t=5846 Taboo's art, there is something dark there and something alive in it as well, definitely has "soul." I think this is characters above story.Reason: Rock Lee, Raikage, Killer Bee, Erza…
And you're really going to use Naruto and Fairy Tail as examples of quality manga as a result of excellent characters? Really?
-
I can give you examples of artists from this very forum even:
http://apforums.net/showthread.php?t=33306 Avenger Stefan, a newer addition, the art is cartoony, even Sunday morning newspaper strip cartoony, but there is a lot of "soul" in the art. I think this is a mix of characters and story.
http://apforums.net/showthread.php?t=7261 eECa adventures, mischievous, fun and incredibly creative, is the type of "soul" I get from this art. I believe this is a case of story above characters.
http://apforums.net/showthread.php?t=5846 Taboo's art, there is something dark there and something alive in it as well, definitely has "soul." I think this is characters above story.They are pretty much character-driven comedies.
And you're really going to use Naruto and Fairy Tail as examples of quality manga as a result of excellent characters? Really?
No, I am using them as example of shitty series that people still read only for several characters they like. The fact that those characters are secondary proves it.
-
Book Shonen didn't create those characters, he borrows Oda's characters and drives the story with sardonic story elements, there is no exposition to get familiar with Stefan aside from his wacky ironic circumstances.
eECa is a collection of artists that borrow each other's characters and create wacky skits they participate in, you could argue because these characters repeat in multiple comics that we have gotten to know them, but they could easily be replaced with their human counterparts (who have slightly different features) or with each other in many cases where the fighting sequences steal the show.
Eneru's adventures on the moon was far more character driven, where the story sometime dragged, but you could do no wrong with Ener, Darth Vader and the rabbit from DBZ.If these examples don't appeal to you, maybe someone else can give better ones, I still feel like this is a subjective issue more so than an objective character study.
Now where's the new chapter of Bakuman?
-
Stefan has no character other than that Book Shonen gave him. Oda designed him, but Book Shonen gave him characterization. It's easy to tell that originally he wanted to create a comic revolving around this Stefan character to build him up.
[hide]The Character-Driven Novel Begins with the Character
The author of the character-driven novel begins with a character. The character may be someone the writer imagined. Alternatively, the character may be based on a person observed or overheard at the grocery store, a coffee shop or on the subway. With this character in mind, the writer begins drafting a series of character sketches devoid of setting or conflict.If you think of a story first, then fill in the characters and define said characters later, it'd be called story-driven, in which the characters are dictated by the story and the main focuses are events. That's part of it. Sometime it'd be more complicated with a whole lot of factors to differentiate those things.
Nausicaa is character-driven. So is Lone Wolf and Cub, Fist of North Star, Vagabond (and Ashina). Akira is story-driven.
A series can change direction mid-way and can have mix-up here and there.
American superhero comics are a huge mess where you can come up with a general plot then throw in superheroes from many series in.[/hide]Now where's the new chapter of Bakuman?
Still too early.