|First||Previous||Next||Last|
Sometimes in artwork what isn't said can be just as important (or even more important!) than what *is* said. Choosing to omit something becomes a statement about that thing in and of itself. For instance, if I drew a self-portrait but chose to leave out the eyes while finishing everything else, the viewer would begin to wonder what I'm saying with my lack-of-eyes.
In the same way, the way we choose to display our art feeds into the statement that the art is making. If you have a Rembrandt-esque painting but you choose to display it without a frame or matte, you've suddenly spoken to your audience about the lack of a frame. We often don't realize how important the presentation of a piece of artwork is until we see it done - or do it wrong - ourselves.
In my drawing classes we would talk extensively about how to display our artwork. My teachers always made it clear that when you are professionally displaying your artwork you need to make sure that the frame, matte, or border doesn't distract or detract from the statements made in the artwork. So if I had a low-key, low-contrast drawing using a lot of neutral tones (browns, blacks, and grays) it would be a poor choice to frame it in a bright purple matte; or if I had a drawing with a bunch of high-key, high-contrast colors I still wouldn't want to use that bright purple matte because suddenly the purple in the matte is interacting with the colors in the drawing and pushing or shifting them in different directions than I had planned.
The rule-of-thumb that I learned throughout all of my courses - drawing, sculpting, color theory, and photography - is that "when in doubt, white or black." White and black are the least "interactive" of all the colors, and you're least likely to upset the color and tone balance of a picture when you frame it in black or white.
Of course, there's always exceptions to the rules, which is why I did a little experiment with today's page. Thanks to a conversation with Grescon on DA, I realized that some of my viewers were reading the white borders of my comic as being blank and unfinished. Grescon was so kind as to make a background texture for my comic to see if using anything other than a white border would help bring it all together. Thanks again, Grescon!!!
This is the "traditional" version of my page; white borders.
And I tell ya what, I'm still on the fence with the whole thing. While I can understand how a white border would read as "blank", when I look at the version with Grescon's border the colors begin to shift toward the darker end of the spectrum and the purples and blues I use for shading begin to pop a lot more than I had originally intended. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the border, or with my art - it's just colors being colors and eyeballs and brains being eyeballs and brains. I'm also still uncertain if I would continue to use any sort of colored border because I like having the choice of being able to fade from white to black when the mood of the pages change.
So I'm going to have to see how things pan out with the next few pages!
What do you guys think? Here is the version of the page with the border by Grescon
Sometimes in artwork what isn't said can be just as important (or even more important!) than what *is* said. Choosing to omit something becomes a statement about that thing in and of itself. For instance, if I drew a self-portrait but chose to leave out the eyes while finishing everything else, the viewer would begin to wonder what I'm saying with my lack-of-eyes.
In the same way, the way we choose to display our art feeds into the statement that the art is making. If you have a Rembrandt-esque painting but you choose to display it without a frame or matte, you've suddenly spoken to your audience about the lack of a frame. We often don't realize how important the presentation of a piece of artwork is until we see it done - or do it wrong - ourselves.
In my drawing classes we would talk extensively about how to display our artwork. My teachers always made it clear that when you are professionally displaying your artwork you need to make sure that the frame, matte, or border doesn't distract or detract from the statements made in the artwork. So if I had a low-key, low-contrast drawing using a lot of neutral tones (browns, blacks, and grays) it would be a poor choice to frame it in a bright purple matte; or if I had a drawing with a bunch of high-key, high-contrast colors I still wouldn't want to use that bright purple matte because suddenly the purple in the matte is interacting with the colors in the drawing and pushing or shifting them in different directions than I had planned.
The rule-of-thumb that I learned throughout all of my courses - drawing, sculpting, color theory, and photography - is that "when in doubt, white or black." White and black are the least "interactive" of all the colors, and you're least likely to upset the color and tone balance of a picture when you frame it in black or white.
Of course, there's always exceptions to the rules, which is why I did a little experiment with today's page. Thanks to a conversation with Grescon on DA, I realized that some of my viewers were reading the white borders of my comic as being blank and unfinished. Grescon was so kind as to make a background texture for my comic to see if using anything other than a white border would help bring it all together. Thanks again, Grescon!!!
This is the "traditional" version of my page; white borders.
And I tell ya what, I'm still on the fence with the whole thing. While I can understand how a white border would read as "blank", when I look at the version with Grescon's border the colors begin to shift toward the darker end of the spectrum and the purples and blues I use for shading begin to pop a lot more than I had originally intended. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the border, or with my art - it's just colors being colors and eyeballs and brains being eyeballs and brains. I'm also still uncertain if I would continue to use any sort of colored border because I like having the choice of being able to fade from white to black when the mood of the pages change.
So I'm going to have to see how things pan out with the next few pages!
What do you guys think? Here is the version of the page with the border by Grescon
Category Artwork (Traditional) / Comics
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 786 x 1000px
File Size 909.9 kB
the darker BG does make a lot of difference in the moodset. the overall page becomes darker. but I think some readers think the white panel borders being "blank" because you omit the traditional black outline for each panel. that way the white becomes part of the panel itself.
or maybe some are too used to US mainstream comics with often crowded pages, panels-inside-panels, narrow gutters, and hectic cuts like a music video clip.
or maybe I'm too conservative.
page Bgs can make a huge difference.
in the 80's I belive DC Vertigo collected the various series of batman comics and put them into trade paperbacks. a german publisher translated them for here. the series started with "The Dark Knight Returns". one of the later issues was named something like "Day of the Fools" or something; Batman visited the various villains he had end up in Arkham Asylum. the comic artist cut out each panel and placed it on dishcloth, rags, potato bag scraps, table tops, and many other surfaces; or just onto black. it all helped set the scenery of an ancient building turned home for the mentally ill in a creepy, claustrophobic way. to me it's oen of the better Batman comics, partially for the unique visual tricks.
or maybe some are too used to US mainstream comics with often crowded pages, panels-inside-panels, narrow gutters, and hectic cuts like a music video clip.
or maybe I'm too conservative.
page Bgs can make a huge difference.
in the 80's I belive DC Vertigo collected the various series of batman comics and put them into trade paperbacks. a german publisher translated them for here. the series started with "The Dark Knight Returns". one of the later issues was named something like "Day of the Fools" or something; Batman visited the various villains he had end up in Arkham Asylum. the comic artist cut out each panel and placed it on dishcloth, rags, potato bag scraps, table tops, and many other surfaces; or just onto black. it all helped set the scenery of an ancient building turned home for the mentally ill in a creepy, claustrophobic way. to me it's oen of the better Batman comics, partially for the unique visual tricks.
You know, you're right about the white background with the black border around each panel I think; especially since I used black panel-borders on a white background in my first few pages it looks like these last ten or so are "unfinished". The white right on top of each panel does make it more a "part" of each panel....
And you've just hit the nail on the head behind my distaste for most main-stream comics nowadays ;) I find it difficult to pick up modern comics because there's so much going on in each page that it's difficult for me to follow the action. This is probably due to cinema's (and Hollywood's in particular) influence on art and media. Having digital artists that can instantly resize things, reorient them, and work them over instantly in Photoshop also probably helps a lot in making comics feel "claustrophobic". I don't have that advantage, so the way things end up on my page is the way they'll show up in the comic; in all honesty the borders of each panel (unless they are directly adjacent to each other) are so vague when I get done coloring that the white borders are really just there to clean everything up. (Maybe next week I'll post a "non-border" version of the page so people can see how messy I can get XD)
But hmmmmmm..... that Batman comic you describe gives me some more ideas.....
I still can't decide whether it's a benefit or a hindrance that I don't read comics often, at all. Oh, I'll pick up a good graphic novel every once in a while like The Watchmen, or Stardust, but comics in general (especially of the superhero variety) I find so played out that they have to hide how boring the stories actually are behind cheap visual jumble. I far prefer finding the rare glorious indie gem online created by one dedicated artist who has a story to tell, like Digger.
And you've just hit the nail on the head behind my distaste for most main-stream comics nowadays ;) I find it difficult to pick up modern comics because there's so much going on in each page that it's difficult for me to follow the action. This is probably due to cinema's (and Hollywood's in particular) influence on art and media. Having digital artists that can instantly resize things, reorient them, and work them over instantly in Photoshop also probably helps a lot in making comics feel "claustrophobic". I don't have that advantage, so the way things end up on my page is the way they'll show up in the comic; in all honesty the borders of each panel (unless they are directly adjacent to each other) are so vague when I get done coloring that the white borders are really just there to clean everything up. (Maybe next week I'll post a "non-border" version of the page so people can see how messy I can get XD)
But hmmmmmm..... that Batman comic you describe gives me some more ideas.....
I still can't decide whether it's a benefit or a hindrance that I don't read comics often, at all. Oh, I'll pick up a good graphic novel every once in a while like The Watchmen, or Stardust, but comics in general (especially of the superhero variety) I find so played out that they have to hide how boring the stories actually are behind cheap visual jumble. I far prefer finding the rare glorious indie gem online created by one dedicated artist who has a story to tell, like Digger.
those are details that never occur to one until someone puts a finger on it, I think. :) many timey I go by instinct, and later I find out there is a theory behind it.
the modern computer-work doesn't do a lot of good to mainstream comics. it halved the crowd working on it simultaneously, though. do you remember the dozen workers on each crappily made comic book? peciller, inker, colourist, letterer, panel borderer, speech bubble executive, and if we're lucky, a writer...
if I recall right artists used to draw on A3 format and had it scaled down later to have it easier to draw details. computer made that unnecessary. :)
I used to read a lot of comics, but the european market is chock-full with mostly franco-belgian comics. there is almost the same differency as with mangas: if it forms a story it's worth being comicified. but I never read everything, of course.
if you don't mind manga, try Adam Warren's "Empowered", or his comic form take on "Dirty Pair". his writing is good, the pages aren't too crowded, he has a lot of good ideas and executes then.
then there is the comic adaption of "Last Unicorn". :) the makers made sure Peter Beagle gets his share of the sales (unlike the movie, for which he has never seen royalties for to this day).
the modern computer-work doesn't do a lot of good to mainstream comics. it halved the crowd working on it simultaneously, though. do you remember the dozen workers on each crappily made comic book? peciller, inker, colourist, letterer, panel borderer, speech bubble executive, and if we're lucky, a writer...
if I recall right artists used to draw on A3 format and had it scaled down later to have it easier to draw details. computer made that unnecessary. :)
I used to read a lot of comics, but the european market is chock-full with mostly franco-belgian comics. there is almost the same differency as with mangas: if it forms a story it's worth being comicified. but I never read everything, of course.
if you don't mind manga, try Adam Warren's "Empowered", or his comic form take on "Dirty Pair". his writing is good, the pages aren't too crowded, he has a lot of good ideas and executes then.
then there is the comic adaption of "Last Unicorn". :) the makers made sure Peter Beagle gets his share of the sales (unlike the movie, for which he has never seen royalties for to this day).
FA+

Comments