Geezers vs. Whippersnappers - Round Table

Sharby

Alright it's time to wipe off all the dust that's accumulated and get these balls rolling again....besides the crickets around here are driving me crazy!

Geezers vs. Whippersnappers, and before you start no it's not old people in diapers battling teenagers in spandex with bad acne :backinmyday:

....well not exactly, but more in dealing with the way comics are produced. For example hand painted coloring vs computer coloring, hand inking vs digital inking, hand drawn art vs digital art...stuff like that.

Now I'm not saying one is better than the other (coughgeezers) by any means, but times change, technology changes things either evolve or die.

So which do you like better, is one more warm where the other is colder?, does one have more feeling and emotion? Not in the content of the images but how it is produced....

GhostofMacbeth · Forum Member Joined: Sep 21, 2001 Posts: 619

I like them both. It is normally the art itself that makes it work though. I really liek the new computer coloring rather than the old ladies in a factory putting acetate days but it can definately be taken too far. Most times the coloring is still done over traditional inks so it is harder to to make a geezer vs. whippersnapper judgement there.

When it all boild down to it it is the art that really matters. How it gets to the end process isn't as important to me.

Ratteler · Forum Member Joined: Jun 10, 2002 Posts: 561 Location: NYC

Gezzer Camp.

Digital coloring has resulted in Lazy Pencils. Since the colorist now has much more resposibility for shape, the line get's lost a lot.

I tend to look at alot of modern books as OVER rendered.

On the other hand, I love digital inking in Illustrator. To me, that's the line I was never able to achieve by hand. As long as they don't get crazy with the psuedo ziptones I think it's awsome.

I also think there is a major advantage with using some other modern tools.

For instance, I had to color a page a while back where there was a lot of glass in the scene. I flatted the glass as a single layer, and just made it a transparancy over the regular colors. Saved me hours and it rendered great.

Now as a true geezer I should hike my pants up to my nipples and yell at myself. But bottom line, the page looked better with the effect than it would have drawing by hand.

I just wish 1/10th as much attantion went to the writing as to the art.

ibr_remote · Forum Newbie Joined: Sep 08, 2004 Posts: 2

I personally prefer actual hand-work (as in mouth work or foot work, depending on artists' ability/disability). There is nothing more personalised and directly linked to the creative mind than that. A computer-based program does help achieve a lot of razzmatazz and other very useful if not unique results as well.

I like seeing brushstrokes of thick oil or pastels on a canvas. It's the equivalent of eating someone's cooking which they laboured for you to enjoy. I sure eat a lot of unhealthy processed packaged foods from goodness knows what origin with don't know what additives, and to me, perhaps that's a bit more like seeing computer-aided art. No offense intended.

Having said this, I am making all my art using computers only these days.

rbratche · Forum Newbie Joined: Feb 01, 2003 Posts: 1

Art is art... If it is visually appealing, and you enjoy it... it's art:) I use to do all my comic work by hand, now I love digital and cgi. I think both have their place, and both do well to tell the story:) Comics rock anyway you go:)

Wolfman

MT_Cup · Forum Newbie Joined: Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 1

Both have an appropriate time and place. A lot depends on the effect you want, the story your art is trying to tell. There can be no right or wrong, there can only be art. /shrug An artist may gravitate towards one medium over another due to comfort level, skill level and personal appeal, but it's not wrong... it's just right for the artist.

conte_no1 · Forum Newbie Joined: Jan 30, 2006 Posts: 1

I have been reading "Femme Digitale" by Michael Burns. I am new to digital art, having bought Poser Artist instead of the latest version. The work done by Alceu Baptistao with high end software is truly amazing! I know I cannot achieve the same levels with Poser 4 that other artists have with better tools. I can have fun with it, which is my main purpose.

That said, I am not about to invest thousands of dollars and years learning to do what I can already do with a modeling clay or brushes on canvas. I would rather spend the time and money at the Art Students League in NYC!

I think learning to use Photoshop with good digital scanners, printers and digital projectors is a nice comprimise for traditionally trained artists. Those working in photorealism use photographs and the digital tools are a great advantage.

ynsaen

Both are better than each other.

But they work best when combined.

An artist takes the tools they have at hand and does the best they can with them, striving to achieve the result that they seek.

Depending on the artist involved, the same image may be created using different tools, but still have the same end result.

It's not the tool. Never has been. For some projects, Oils and canvas might work better. For others, a good slate and acrylic wash beneath watercolors might even work better.

Same applies in the four color world -- a really good colorist is going to use the lines provided as they color and allow them to accentuate their work as much as their work accentuates the lines.

Doesn't matter how the lines or the coloring is done -- it's the skill of the artist with whatever tool they choose to use that determines it.

OFten, in the interst of keeping up with changes in technology, we get caught up in the excitement of the cool new toy

But for all the coolness, usually those toys seek to duplicate a skill some already have, and pass it on to others, allowing them to learn it faster, easier, and potentially more skillfully.

All that said, I prefer to hand draw (and, well, given my skill with peeps, that would mean tracing) and ink, then scan, then touchup my inking, and then digitally color from my own pallete (created, oddly enough, from hand colored squares done with my favorite mediums of colored pencil, chalk, and watercolor), sometimes using the texture of the source sample, and sometimes not.

I feel it gives me the best control and the greatest ease.

Now, if only it gave me the best skill and talent, I'd be thrilled!

(this from someone who loves what MT_Cup does)

ynsaen

GlitchGirl · Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 10:44 pm Post subject:

I guess I fall into the "whatever works for 'em" category too.

Thanks to modern printing, we can have comics made from anything from oil painting and water color to straight digital media, but as already stated, it's what's done with the tools that make the difference. Look at the following Alex Ross has, and his methods go back farther than four color comics.

Though I will give you that digital can forgive a lot more mistakes with slick coloring and clean presentation (though no amount of digital coloring can salvage a Liefeld if you know what I mean). Good art tends to shine through in the end. Well most of the time (WHY does this guy continue to get work? I mean... whoah, starting to rant, let's move on)

I do think that film and half tone separation and the very basic 4 color seps and that style has mostly died off. You may see it simulated occasionally now to emulate a certain style, but it's basically gone. Am I sorry? I'm not sure, but I don't think so. I much prefer the ability to shade and hilight on a subtle scale, but there is something to be said for those who worked in the limitations and made something look cool.

So I guess I'm pro "Best tools for the job" too.
_________________
"Flash, quit heckling the supervillain!" - Green Lantern
The Ether Forge: http://www.stkp.com/POSER/

jed49 · Forum Newbie Joined: Oct 07, 2004 Posts: 1

I`ve been drawing, inking, coloring, and painting for 43 of my 51 years, and I love it, but, I also love working with poser and creating images. So which is best?? Both are equaly enjoyable.
All you young wippersnappers don`t know what your missing by puttin pencil to paper. As a note. I sketch out and or storyboard all my images and stories. Just my humble opinion.

itisitex · Forum Member Joined: Sep 01, 2002 Posts: 186 Location: Tx

I am currently working on a degree in in graphic arts and believe it or not there are more classes that deal with old school stuff like drawing using charcoal, water color, oil painting, print making,and less dealing with computer tools. Granted there are computer classes dealing with creating art but for the most part those are used for lay out purposes.
I do like the computer better but that is because that is what i first started with. I know each has there place but i say give me CGI any day.

GlitchGirl · Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 6:59 pm Post subject:

Well you really need the foundations no matter what. Before I got Poser I drew a lot and I took art and film courses (plus acting and dance, both of which help with understanding movement, line, and conveying emotion) My drawings were never quite satisfying as I just could not get good enough to be consistant - I couldn't draw one character more than once and have it look like the same character facially. When I started doing computer art, it "clicked" more, and that's what I'm sticking with though I still get out the pencil for conceptualizing and just doodling.
_________________
"Flash, quit heckling the supervillain!" - Green Lantern
The Ether Forge: http://www.stkp.com/POSER/

Stumil · Forum Newbie Joined: Mar 07, 2005 Posts: 1

Hand drawn (when done professionally) has tons more emotion.
See early Disney.
CGI is great but only at the very top end
i.e Lord of the Rings, King Kong etc.

hathor21000 · Forum Member Joined: Aug 07, 2002 Posts: 35