How much CGI is too much?... for comics Options

[BaneBrookStudios]

I just saw the preview for Epic Kill from Image comics...
So another book that is 90% rendered by a 3D program hits the market. This dude is not a "digital artist", he traces 3D models, in my book he's no better than Greg Land. If that's how he is gonna do it, then he should credit himself as a 3d artist, but of course he won't do that because he wouldn't sell as many books. Why? Because as comic fans we love seeing amazing art and knowing that a regular dude, like you and me, actually sat down and drew it. I'm not talking about using photoshop to draw a comic on your Wacom tablet, I'm not even talking about using a 3D model as reference, this is all okay in my book (i prefer to use manga studio). I'm talking about using fully rendered models in fully rendered clothes and placed in fully rendered backgrounds then tossing a few lines on them to try to hide the fact that they are not drawings.

He doesn't deny that he uses a 3D program to make the comic (actually, he doesn't respond to the question at all). So I guess he's technically not lying about it or anything but I think it's damn misleading and it makes me laugh when people complement him on his art.

Anyways, I really want to hear from the CR community on the topic of using 3d models. How much is too much?

[Gonzogoose]

Having had a chance to read this thread in its entirety, I don't feel the need to keep this thread closed any longer.

However, there were some personal insults or jabs thrown here at fellow community members, and that's just not how we do things here. Keep the conversation civil. Consider this a warning.

As for the complaint in question, let me just say that sharing one's opinion on an art practice or even a particular artist's style, work, tools, etc. is fine. Whether it benefits one to do so is another debate started already in another thread. This thread hasn't crossed the line yet, so don't cross it now.

Continue...

[cougar18]

I think the main problem with the project is that yes, he is using 3d models, which can be great reference, as can action figures, as long as the artist knows what they are doing. The disney guys did rotoscope quite a bit for certain projects, and but they never followed the actors like a tracing book. They still added something to it. Also, even Ralph Bakshi, the tracer du jour, never traced the work meticulously, instead preferring to use it as a reference, and giving notes on how to change it.

Artists such as Stuart Immonen, and Joe Quesada, and David Finch, all use 3d in their work as reference. Joe Q, however, hires someone else to create the work, and then traces it off. Immonen and Finch don't trace the work, and Immonen prefers to create it himself. Personally, and maybe ethically, I think what Joe Q is doing is wrong. Totally. He is taking credit for someone elses work. Like Land and his tracing, or Larocca and his tracing. Just cannot stand it.

Alex Maleev is, like Greg Land, a cautionary tale. Here was a guy rich in talent, who instead turned to fumetti. He does not draw much anymore, instead opting to 'fumetti' photographs he takes, and alter them to his needs. Everything, from backgrounds, to characters, are all fumetti. He may trace over an image to alter it to his needs, but that is the little amount of drawing he does. Now, I am not adverse to the odd photograph mixed with traditional work, like Kirby and others have done, as the technology evolved, but give me a Skottie Young or Ed McGuinness image any day of the week, where the work is drawn, not traced, and I will be a happy camper. I just picked those two as folks who clearly draw everything, and hide the reference incredibly well.

It is often noted that when reference is used as a crutch, the image loses life. Just look at any Land image, and compare it to a throwdown from people like McGuinness, Steve Skroce, George Perez or Alan Davis. Yes, they may use reference, but the energy they bring to the table is undeniable.

I guess what I am trying to say is that when someone creates the images in a 3de app, like John Byrne did for a while, and incorporates them into their work, I have no problems with that. But when they pay someone else to do it, or buy it online, and use it...well to me, that is questionable.

Btw, If you have not seen it yet, this comic uses CG and hand drawings to get the desired effect, and it really works. But then this was all done by one individual.

Mystery Manga comic

This post has been edited by cougar18: Mar 1 2012, 08:59 AM

[Greg G.]

I think the main problem with the project is that yes, he is using 3d models, which can be great reference, as can action figures, as long as the artist knows what they are doing. The disney guys did rotoscope quite a bit for certain projects, and but they never followed the actors like a tracing book. They still added something to it. Also, even Ralph Bakshi, the tracer du jour, never traced the work meticulously, instead preferring to use it as a reference, and giving notes on how to change it.

Artists such as Stuart Immonen, and Joe Quesada, and David Finch, all use 3d in their work as reference. Joe Q, however, hires someone else to create the work, and then traces it off.

But when they pay someone else to do it, or buy it online, and use it...well to me, that is questionable.

Pardon my editing, but I wanted to focus on this aspect of your discussion.

Emphasizing the part where Joe Q. hires someone and where someone else is getting paid as an assistant.

Where's the problem in this?

Personal and studio assistants are not a new thing, and down the road these assistants become the next generation of creators in the industry.

Why is it viewed as a problem, especially if they're being compensated for their time?

This is a pet peeve of mine, and I think it's how certain segments of society have ended up in massive debt. In the past we would have apprentices and studio hands to do menial work. All the while gaining valuable work experience and building a work ethic. Now we pay schools exorbitant fees for education in fields that may not return on that investment any time in the immediate future. All it does is create more debt, and honestly - I've seen more than my fair share of art school grads that come out with "comic book art degrees" critiquing working artists, while their sequential work is laughable. However their meager talent (read: ego) is held aloft by the financial investment they've made, not raw skill.

Sorry, a bit of a tangent; but so long as the assistant is being paid I don't see a problem with Joe Q. paying somebody. It's creating a job, and it may be a skill set Joe Q. hasn't the time to develop on his own.

I'll point out Erik Larsen, who delivered Savage Dragon for years on a monthly basis until he took over running Image a few years back. Suddenly Dragon was missing deadlines and the book fell behind, because Larsen wanted to handle every aspect of his book; but also had to run Image Comics. This is where assistants and apprentices would have come in back in the old days.