What would happen if cons ban fanart? Options

[MasonEasley]

Are you so blind you truly cannot see the forest for the trees Mason?

Todd McFarlane wasn't always Todd McFarlane.

He was Todd McFarlane when he published Spawn.

He had to work his way up through the rank and file, put in his years on books like Coyote, Infinity Inc, Who's Who, and G.I.Joe after submitting numerous rejected submissions to every publisher at the time to get those jobs.

And he was paid for every single one of those jobs. He never had to spend several months without getting compensation for that work.

Yeah, it's real easy to look at the money earner as he is today; but he fought his way to the position he's in. It wasn't handed to him.

Please show me where I ever said anything was handed to him.

More to the point, what he's saying about not handing over your characters is what's important and what you're missing.

I didn't miss it at all. My point of contention with Mr. McFarlane which YOU seem to be missing is his attitude that every up and coming artist should be gung-ho about going the Image route, a route where you could very well end up not getting any form of compensation for a very long time. This versus the route that he chose which is a much safer. much more lucrative, and pretty much increases your chances of getting into Image, and increases your book's chances to actually sell copies.

He built his name and reputation on Spiderman at Marvel, and along with the other six Image founders spun that out into the success of Spawn and the other Image titles.

Thank you for reiterating my point. What exactly is yours again?

Or he could have sold Spawn to Marvel / DC* when he was trying to break in to get food on the table.

That's the point.

Then your point is ridiculous because you could never break into Marvel or DC that way. Marvel and DC wants submissions of their characters, and their characters only. That has been their standard for decades.

[Greg G.]

If you want to debate abstracts then Mason, we'll never know. I have no insight as to what Todd McFarlane did before getting paychecks from Marvel and DC, however - he worked his way into Marvel and DC to establish his name.

The difference here is he played the game and he established himself.

So what's a more viable plan for long term success?

Getting a job at one of the Big Two, getting your name out there, and becoming a known commodity that can sell his creator owned work.

Or

Complaining nobody wants to buy your creator owned work and getting little bits of money in the fringe with commissions of recognizable characters.

Even if you want to sidestep working for the Big Two (or any other publisher that can cut you a check) you need to have a solid business plan and be able to recognize when something isn't working.

[MasonEasley]

If you want to debate abstracts then Mason, we'll never know. I have no insight as to what Todd McFarlane did before getting paychecks from Marvel and DC, however - he worked his way into Marvel and DC to establish his name.

Before he worked for the big two, he sold fan art to local shops.

Imagine that.

The difference here is he played the game and he established himself.

I think you need to re-read my original post. No one is contesting the fact that he established himself.

So what's a more viable plan for long term success?

Getting a job at one of the Big Two, getting your name out there, and becoming a known commodity that can sell his creator owned work.

I'm pretty sure I said that that was a viable plan for long-term success.

Or

Complaining nobody wants to buy your creator owned work and getting little bits of money in the fringe with commissions of recognizable characters.

I wouldn't consider making hundreds, or even thousands of dollars per con, event, or commission run to be "little bits of money", but that's just me.

Even if you want to sidestep working for the Big Two (or any other publisher that can cut you a check) you need to have a solid business plan and be able to recognize when something isn't working.

Obviously. Which is why so many artists go the fan art route, and supplement that with various other forms of freelance work. The idea that you should be starving for several months while you hope and pray for your Image book to survive the Diamond system is archaic and frankly pretty stupid. Ever stop to think why Joe Madueria, J. Scott Campbell, Arthur Adams, Jimmy Cheung, Greg Land, Jorge Molina, Eric Canete, Adam Hughes, and other big name artists aren't trying to get with Image?

There's a reason for that.

This post has been edited by MasonEasley: Apr 23 2012, 05:18 AM

[ChadStrohl]

Seems this thread devolved into the standard ideological debate of the "us's" versus "them's" - or the nonpolitically correct "guys who can't draw" versus "guys who can draw".

But to answer the topic question...

If cons ban fan art, then cons ban fan art. Not much anybody here can do about that if it happens regardless of any philosophical stance on the matter.

Although (as a writer), I'm curious how well recieved my fanfic NOVEL of The Amazing Spider-Man will be at the next con.

This post has been edited by ChadStrohl: May 1 2012, 08:48 PM

[Greg G.]

If cons ban fan art, then cons ban fan art. Not much anybody here can do about that if it happens regardless of any philosophical stance on the matter.

Although (as a writer), I'm curious how well recieved my fanfic NOVEL of The Amazing Spider-Man will be at the next con.

I'd be interested to hear how that goes for you. I'm a weirdo when it comes to my media consumption.

Take for example Star Wars. Star Wars fans know Boba Fett lived in the novels that came after the movies. However if it didn't happen in the original three movies it just doesn't exist to me. So Boba Fett got punked by a hole in the ground.

I've never had the urge to read comics sans pictures. It's a visual medium for me.

Why write a Spiderman fanfic novel rather than just dedicate that energy to writing your own novel? Have you tried pitching it to Marvel or putting it out to them as a try out for writing film adaptations, or even sending it to video game companies as they work on licensed games and need writers. Though to what extent a writer's vision is accurately represented in video games is questionable.

[doombug]

I'd be interested to hear how that goes for you. I'm a weirdo when it comes to my media consumption.

Take for example Star Wars. Star Wars fans know Boba Fett lived in the novels that came after the movies. However if it didn't happen in the original three movies it just doesn't exist to me. So Boba Fett got punked by a hole in the ground.

I've never had the urge to read comics sans pictures. It's a visual medium for me.

Why write a Spiderman fanfic novel rather than just dedicate that energy to writing your own novel? Have you tried pitching it to Marvel or putting it out to them as a try out for writing film adaptations, or even sending it to video game companies as they work on licensed games and need writers. Though to what extent a writer's vision is accurately represented in video games is questionable.

[Greg G.]

What's to be confused about?

I am sincerely interested in finding out how a Spiderman fanfic novel sells for Chad, but I think those are calories better burned on his own creations. Especially now that you can publish novels digitally through Amazon or other ereader devices.

I'll just link to Erik Larsen's essay on the matter.

Look what Stan Lee and Jack Kirby contributed to the comic book field. The Hulk, Fantastic Four, the Avengers, X-Men, Thor and a mess of incredible heroes and villains. Jack tossed in Captain America, New Gods, Forever People, Devil Dinosaur, Kamandi, the Eternals, the Demon, the Dingbats of Danger Street, Manhunter and dozens of others on his own. Steve Ditko (aided by others at times, I'll grant you) gave us the modern Blue Beetle, Spider-Man, Dr. Strange, the Creeper, Hawk and Dove, Speedball, Shade the Changing Man, the Question, Mr. A, Static and all of Spider-Man's cool villains. Other creators have brought us Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman--the list goes on and on.

And you've given us-- what?

You've contributed-- what exactly?

A few pretty pictures? Some fill-in issues? A cool cover or two? An impressive run on a title, which you didn't create?

That's it?

That's your legacy?

If you died tomorrow, you'd be fine with that?

That's pathetic.

What have you done, which is really yours? What characters will you leave behind? What can you point to as being something near and dear to your heart? What work are you most proud of?

I recognize the dream of becoming a sensation that's a comic shop name that everybody drops, but it's a dream. You need to cultivate your stock in the market before you're that name people drop in the comic shop and people know who you are.

Or you need to put in the years and dedication like Fred Perry who has been at it for 20 years, isn't exactly a comic shop name, but his book comes out month after month on time. Which is more than a lot of hot shot creators at the Big Two who only carry a small portion of the work load.

He may not be Robert Kirkman (a name people recognize immediately and filthy rich), but he's living the dream (making comics with no end in sight) and has a fan following.

Cashing in on the creations of the Big Two is a way to earn a quick buck, but what do you really have to show the world? Show me that instead. Please.

[doombug]

My confusion is to whether or not Chad's joke went over your head.

[Greg G.]

My confusion is to whether or not Chad's joke went over your head.

Oh, damn it!

[Lexia]

Mmm... Really All I think will happen is the artist ally will be less filled and they will in turn sell that space to other companies. That's about all I can see happening It will not make the con any less fun since most people do not go to cons for fan art.

Thats about it it seems for me anyway... I can be wrong after all my powers of seeing into things that not many seem to care about have been faulty lately

[Mark Ellis]

As far as I'm concerned, this whole "Artists Alley" fixation (which really didn't get kicking until the mid to late 90s) needs to be re-examined.

I'm sure it's a solid source of revenue for the con, but when fan artists can buy a table to sell their pinups of Wolverine and Rogue playing volleyball at the beach, then it seems like organizers can't differentiate between credentialed professionals and the wannabes (or neverwases)...the table fees are the great levelers.

But then, without the Artist Alleys, how would the Rob Grantbos ever get noticed and sell their wares?


Personally, I'm really tired of con organizers sending me their price lists for tables and so forth. I'm a professional creator...not a vendor, not a retailer looking to dump backstock, and I don't do sketches.

I'm not about to pay for the privilege of attending a con. I frequently receive invitations from writer's conferences to be a be a speaker, teach a workshop or sit on a panel. Price lists for tables are never attached.

If the comic con organizers can send me the price lists, they can also send me an invitation to be a guest, even if it's just to be a panelist.

I most likely won't be able to attend, but I would appreciate and remember the professional courtesy.

[Lexia]

Sad thing is they want you to pay to attend to try and get money from you and so they can use your name to get more people in.. But the whole con thing really have to be redone on many levels it has grown and the ideas and plans for the cons have not changed they need to update

[Tim Tilley]

I know I will have a lot of people upset at me for saying this, but--I am all for the banning of selling fan art. Unless you own the rights to the character, or have permission from the owner, then you shouldn't be selling art for profit using said characters. I think that by banning it would allow artists to create their own characters or become a bit more imaginative with their art. Can't sell Superman art, why not make SuperDuperMan instead? No Wolverine? Why not HoneyBadger instead?
Just because there are rules, that doesn't mean that it's game over, you just need to follow the rules without breaking them.

[Anthony Hochrein]

I know I will have a lot of people upset at me for saying this, but--I am all for the banning of selling fan art. Unless you own the rights to the character, or have permission from the owner, then you shouldn't be selling art for profit using said characters. I think that by banning it would allow artists to create their own characters or become a bit more imaginative with their art. Can't sell Superman art, why not make SuperDuperMan instead? No Wolverine? Why not HoneyBadger instead?
Just because there are rules, that doesn't mean that it's game over, you just need to follow the rules without breaking them.

SuperDuperMan was created by Wally Wood for Mad Magazine many years ago. That's why.

And Honey Badger?

Hmmmm... I have a couple of ideas for NEW PERSONAL SKETCH CARDS!!

This post has been edited by Anthony Hochrein: May 4 2012, 10:02 PM

[Greg G.]

I know I will have a lot of people upset at me for saying this, but--I am all for the banning of selling fan art. Unless you own the rights to the character, or have permission from the owner, then you shouldn't be selling art for profit using said characters. I think that by banning it would allow artists to create their own characters or become a bit more imaginative with their art. Can't sell Superman art, why not make SuperDuperMan instead? No Wolverine? Why not HoneyBadger instead?
Just because there are rules, that doesn't mean that it's game over, you just need to follow the rules without breaking them.

I agree, but it's a perfect storm of two dominant publishers ruling the roost in distribution and mindshare; and the ego of the artist.

Maybe the reason your new comic isn't selling is because it's not all that hot.

That's not to say you can't come up with something better, but perhaps the lukewarm response to your current offering is indicative of the quality of it.

To quote Henry Rollins:

please let me see the faults that my ego denies me
don't let me grow so tall that I forget the ground beneath me
don't let me forget that satisfaction has no friends
that glory's only fleeting, already gone

I've wasted so much time
I've wasted so much time

[Tim Tilley]

True, the two big companies do get the lion's share of distribution, but that's our fault for making them the giants that they are. Yet, at the same time had they not become the giants that they are, would there still be a comic book industry to begin with? One way or another a shift is going to happen with time, I just wonder what will come of this.

[Greg G.]

True, the two big companies do get the lion's share of distribution, but that's our fault for making them the giants that they are. Yet, at the same time had they not become the giants that they are, would there still be a comic book industry to begin with? One way or another a shift is going to happen with time, I just wonder what will come of this.

I'm more inclined to blame Wertham for forcing the comic industry to begin self regulation, limiting subject matter, material, and growth by pigeonholing comics as an entertainment medium exclusively for children. It's only in North America where the medium is so limited in subject matter and genre.

Additionally the direct market and the aging fanbase don't help. The direct market survives on Marvel and DC, and "comic fans" (in quotations because they love Spiderman, not the medium) refuse to take a chance on unproven concepts. So we have Spiderman, Ultimate Spiderman, Black Ultimate Spiderman, White Ultimate Spiderman in the cartoons, Indian Spiderman, Mexican Spiderman.

Spiderman.
Spiderman.
Spiderman.

What flavor of Spiderman would you like? Because it's what we own the copyright and trademark on, and we're not going to treat creators well; so here's another flavor of Spiderman.

You can replace Spiderman with any Marvel/DC character really.

See also the hilarity of Nick Fury, Black Nick Fury, and now Black Nick Fury Jr. in mainstream continuity.

Please don't construe this as an attack against the race of fictional characters. It's an attack on the obvious lack of creativity and willingness to treat creators fairly so that new ideas could thrive.

You could say Dragonball is Yu Yu Hakusho, is Naruto, is Bleach, is Toriko in the Japanese market. The difference between our market and the Japanese is each generation has their version of that story, not their version of those characters. Granted Japanese companies do polish off old characters like Mazinger or Astro Boy, but generally those re-imaginings aren't as successful as the original, and newer content that speaks to the current generation thrives.

Honestly, I love comics. I would love to work in comics, but the conditions in this country and market are such that it's not feasible. Risk becoming an independent contractor with zero health coverage and no retirement plan? No thanks.

This could be why we see more creativity out of Europe, Japan, and other markets. When you don't need to worry about being bankrupted by an unforeseen ailment or injury, you can enjoy life more fully.

Sorry, that got a little political there; but this is all the stuff I consider quite regularly.

When all you have is Spiderman, all your problems start to look like Doc Ock.

[Tim Tilley]

The decline of originality and quality with Marvel was my main reason for jumping ship to DC prior to my loss of employment but even then I had jumped that ship in favor of smaller indy companies for the same reason. The excessive spider-man's, x-books, and Avengers (boy did the jump the gun on that one a few years ago), is problematic, but they still own the rights to the characters and because of that they can do what they want with it. Oh and yes, I also agree about the late Fredric Wertham causing problems.

[MasonEasley]

Seems this thread devolved into the standard ideological debate of the "us's" versus "them's" - or the nonpolitically correct "guys who can't draw" versus "guys who can draw".

That usually occurs because the artist experience is different than the writer's experience in this industry. If you're walking out of a con with a couple grand in your pocket after a weekend of selling Spiderman and Batman sketches and prints, it's pretty hard to want the gravy train to end. The other part of it is the fan reaction to the work you do. Frankly, people love fan art. I've actually seen people be DISAPPOINTED when fan art isn't available at a table. I've been to cons where entire sections are avoided because "that's the indie section", and ravenous fanfolk look for an artist's interpretation of their favorite comic, anime, or cartoon character. In that type of environment, its either go with the flow or get slammed into the coral reef. If you're not an artist, that simply isn't your experience, and I fully understand why you'd want fan art to go away.

If there's a set amount of money to be made at cons, you don't want to see your potential money being sucked into someone buying prints of established comic characters. You want people invested into your own creation. This is especially true if your spent time and money getting a creative team together to make your indy project work.

However, it's important to keep in mind that what drives fan art isn't artists doing fan art, it's the public demanding artists to do fan art. If there was no market for it, no artists would waste their time doing it.

Another wrinkle in all of this is that The Avengers movie just broke a box office record. This is going to have some far reaching effects for the entire entertainment industry moving forward.

On a smaller level, I know what's going to be on my table this summer at the cons I attend.

This post has been edited by MasonEasley: May 6 2012, 06:45 PM