NappuccinoSurveyor of Things and StuffRegistered Userregular
edited March 2010
I do think the olive should be redrawn.
It just isn't very olive-like. I first through it was some kind of prototype green football.
And the Michale Jackson one seems like a funny idea but it could have used a different set up and a different punchline to avoid the overbearing racial aspect.
edit: like maybe a truck full of teeth whitner crashes into MJ and the final panel is MJ rising up from the muck a white man in one of his trade mark poses.
Go Go Gadget Racism. If I were you I'd act fast to remove this latest stain from your resume.
I just read all of your comics. You have many grammatical errors. I didn't make a list, there is a then and than error on the mouth comic.
You're rushing. Not just in the art, but with everything. Before you publish a comic, publish it here and get critiques, then put it on your site.
You are letting too many sloppy mistakes go through, then when people notice errors or have good criticisms, you can't take it. I don't mean, "You can't handle it." I mean you just don't make the corrections, or changes, because in your mind it seems to be too late. It's already published! I'll do better next time. But then you publish more sloppy almost funny work.
To really succeed, you need to care about a project so much that the idea of imperfection offends you.
As far as grammatical errors go, I for the most part change those as soon as I find out about them. As far as "art errors", I'll admit I don't really fix those. If I go back to fix one thing here and one thing there, I'll probably end up redrawing the entire comic. Granted that would help with some of the comics probably. I'll see what I can do about the olive.
Now, as far as the racism goes, well, I'll say this. The comic is making fun of racism and it's ridiculous stereotypes, it's a two way street. Now perhaps it could of been better in a different comic, but with the Michal Jackson joke, it seemed to fit.
I'm not at all advocating it and I am not racist. I thought about changing it this time because of yours and napp's comments, but if I change something because it offends someone, that just opens a big can of worms for future works. Even if no one else knows about it, I'll know. Again, I thought hard about this comic a lot and how it could be received, and I found it was funny. Sorry if you didn't like it.
Hopefully this doesn't explode into a whole racism debate, or what's acceptable and what's inappropriate.
Go Go Gadget Racism. If I were you I'd act fast to remove this latest stain from your resume.
I just read all of your comics. You have many grammatical errors. I didn't make a list, there is a then and than error on the mouth comic.
You're rushing. Not just in the art, but with everything. Before you publish a comic, publish it here and get critiques, then put it on your site.
You are letting too many sloppy mistakes go through, then when people notice errors or have good criticisms, you can't take it. I don't mean, "You can't handle it." I mean you just don't make the corrections, or changes, because in your mind it seems to be too late. It's already published! I'll do better next time. But then you publish more sloppy almost funny work.
To really succeed, you need to care about a project so much that the idea of imperfection offends you.
As far as grammatical errors go, I for the most part change those as soon as I find out about them. As far as "art errors", I'll admit I don't really fix those. If I go back to fix one thing here and one thing there, I'll probably end up redrawing the entire comic. Granted that would help with some of the comics probably. I'll see what I can do about the olive.
Now, as far as the racism goes, well, I'll say this. The comic is making fun of racism and it's ridiculous stereotypes, it's a two way street. Now perhaps it could of been better in a different comic, but with the Michal Jackson joke, it seemed to fit.
I'm not at all advocating it and I am not racist. I thought about changing it this time because of yours and napp's comments, but if I change something because it offends someone, that just opens a big can of worms for future works. Even if no one else knows about it, I'll know. Again, I thought hard about this comic a lot and how it could be received, and I found it was funny. Sorry if you didn't like it.
Hopefully this doesn't explode into a whole racism debate, or what's acceptable and what's inappropriate.
Don't change your comic to make someone else happy.
Also, when they give you advice about the art, they're not expecting you to go back and re-draw your old comics. Mike doesn't do it, Kurtz doesn't do it, you don't need to either. They're just telling you things you should look at when drawing future comics.
Seriously though, the point of comedy is that everything is funny. Do I personally find "black people are like this, white people are like this" jokes funny, no. Am I going to stop reading your comic over it, hell no. If that's your sense of humor and you want to bust out one of those from time to time, go for it. Those that don't like it can go read Ziggy. Just tell yourself that whenever you want to change something to make someone else happy.
Great potential for a strip with that first frame. By the second frame, though, I already knew what it was going to be about...so the third felt a little predictable. I could have easily been thrown off by a really clever 2-line banter, but the delivery guy's line fell a bit flat for me.
Off the top of my head, something like "Nahhh, I don't think it doesn't" would be a bit punchier in terms of drunkenness. I guess it's a bit Family Guy-esque, but a bit of absurdity is what I was looking for there. Again, though, keep thinking of setup like in the first panel, and you'll never run out of material.
i think this one had potential. personally, I would have enjoyed it alot more if there was no speech in the third panel. and maybe a visual burp with a bubble or something.
i really like the comics. quite a few of them have made me giggle... like a MAN.
although I'm shiite at drawing, I can hopefully possibly throw in a few "funnies" tips
awesome work, read through this entire thread in the past hour or so.
SIRSizzlebottom on
0
NappuccinoSurveyor of Things and StuffRegistered Userregular
I think the art's failing you on this one, it took me a minute to get what happened. And honestly, 2686 is right - you're really rushing through the drawing stage. You could stand to slow it down, maybe thumbnail a bit first to get the action clearer. Overall I'm not seeing any improvement from you art-wise, which is a shame.
edit: oh, yeah, and I'm not sure how this is funny. But maybe there's a reference I'm missing.
Thats probably the weakest comic I've seen from you Coleman, you were going up a notch, I liked the banana one, but this one...unless like Tynic, theres a reference I'm missing it's probably got some humour value but not much.
Well these two characters were in an earlier comic, so this new one is payback for the one guy.
I'll admit the art in this one (new comic) is weaker then I would have liked. Basically I had the comic half done, then had to work at 16 hour day, then had to finish it off the same night to have it ready for update day.
I realize that excuses don't make it right, and I really want to almost redraw the newest one, I'm just not sure if I'll be able to do so at this time.
Coleman, I think maybe you need to establish two-three characters who become your recurring characters so they are recognisable, I get now that its a callback to an earlier comic but even then I wouldn't recognise either of them enough to make that connection.
I know the comic is random but two named, identifiable characters would probably help some of your comics.
I think having the two named characters would limit it too much, he would feel compelled to use them for jokes where other characters work better.
Sipex on
0
NappuccinoSurveyor of Things and StuffRegistered Userregular
edited March 2010
I think, something similar to Penny Arcade or even Questionable content would be nice- where you have a number of well defined characters that you can use for your more normal comics while still being able to bring in one shot characters when you want.
This does mean that you'll need to design some easily identifiable characters but, if you want to do comics like there, where you actually are bringing in old characters, it helps if the reader can instantly realize who they are and why there here.
I'm not sure if he's saying i should use the same people every time, just more often. Perhaps instead of 2-3 it was more like 8-9?
No, no not every time but for comics like this, knowing who they are means it might become funnier where as it is, it only makes sense if you remember that comic and those two characters who don't really stand out against your army of characters used so far.
So not the same guys every time, but maybe pick 2-3 that you use for certain comics because they work for them, can still use random characters for the majority of your comics.
Honestly, this comic was thought of shortly after the first comic was up, and it was forgotten about until now. So I was hoping they would be identifiable, but I really shouldn't expect people to be able to.
I think the art is much improved here compared to everything you've done before. The punchline is funny but a little obvious but the setup is ok. I took a hand at changing the ending which, only in my opinion, works a little better. But someone else can tell me what they think. Overall much improved Coleman.
DarkWarrior on
0
NappuccinoSurveyor of Things and StuffRegistered Userregular
edited March 2010
I wonder if "I'm sorry... the first rule of book club is not to talk about book club" should have been in there somewhere.
Also, seeing how I'm gonna be moving, if anyone's interested in doing a guest comic that would be greatly appreciated, as I'm not sure how quick I'll be able to get back at it again.
Jesus Coleman, how do you draw characters that look so rough and then that awesome lobster? That thing looks really good. If you ever get to a stage where you make T-shirts, that lobster should be on one.
DarkWarrior on
0
NappuccinoSurveyor of Things and StuffRegistered Userregular
edited March 2010
Ok, I defeinately can't think of a better punchline- that is awesome
You know, you could make your characters instantly 200% more appealing by giving them the top/back of their heads back. It's a quick fix, but I guarantee results.
It comes back to 'know your basics before you mess with things', I'm afraid. In your comics, it doesn't look like you've made a deliberate decision to push up the features and slice off the back of the head (and that would be a weird decision to make in any case), but rather that you've made a classic beginning artist's error, which is to overplay the features and underplay the skull.
To illustrate: in a realistic setting, you have the classic skull proportions:
In a cartoon, you're trying to simplify and exaggerate, but you still need to keep in mind that these cartoon people should still appear to be made up of three dimensional shapes, and hopefully should still have somewhere to keep their brains. So they still need a forehead, and they still need a skull.
Look at fletcher or Polk's stuff in this very forum. Both of those comics have characters who are about as simplified as you can get, but the basic location of eyes/nose/mouth, with respect to the skull, is essentially the same. When cartooning (I'm not at all an expert in this, but bear with me), one can of course exaggerate and distort features to obtain various effects. But eye location, for example, is one of the most fundamental characteristics of a human face, and even if you're doing it deliberately, if you shift the features too far off that cranial line, you unnecessarily distance the reader from the character, so these choices have to be made with care.
edit: here's a rather longwinded video that explains what I'm talking about. When the guy draws the really exaggerated cartoon head (about five minutes in), he still gives the character a full cranium, and he lengthens the face by pulling down the jaw, not by shortening the forehead.
Posts
It just isn't very olive-like. I first through it was some kind of prototype green football.
And the Michale Jackson one seems like a funny idea but it could have used a different set up and a different punchline to avoid the overbearing racial aspect.
edit: like maybe a truck full of teeth whitner crashes into MJ and the final panel is MJ rising up from the muck a white man in one of his trade mark poses.
As far as grammatical errors go, I for the most part change those as soon as I find out about them. As far as "art errors", I'll admit I don't really fix those. If I go back to fix one thing here and one thing there, I'll probably end up redrawing the entire comic. Granted that would help with some of the comics probably. I'll see what I can do about the olive.
Now, as far as the racism goes, well, I'll say this. The comic is making fun of racism and it's ridiculous stereotypes, it's a two way street. Now perhaps it could of been better in a different comic, but with the Michal Jackson joke, it seemed to fit.
I'm not at all advocating it and I am not racist. I thought about changing it this time because of yours and napp's comments, but if I change something because it offends someone, that just opens a big can of worms for future works. Even if no one else knows about it, I'll know. Again, I thought hard about this comic a lot and how it could be received, and I found it was funny. Sorry if you didn't like it.
Hopefully this doesn't explode into a whole racism debate, or what's acceptable and what's inappropriate.
Don't change your comic to make someone else happy.
Also, when they give you advice about the art, they're not expecting you to go back and re-draw your old comics. Mike doesn't do it, Kurtz doesn't do it, you don't need to either. They're just telling you things you should look at when drawing future comics.
Seriously though, the point of comedy is that everything is funny. Do I personally find "black people are like this, white people are like this" jokes funny, no. Am I going to stop reading your comic over it, hell no. If that's your sense of humor and you want to bust out one of those from time to time, go for it. Those that don't like it can go read Ziggy. Just tell yourself that whenever you want to change something to make someone else happy.
Off the top of my head, something like "Nahhh, I don't think it doesn't" would be a bit punchier in terms of drunkenness. I guess it's a bit Family Guy-esque, but a bit of absurdity is what I was looking for there. Again, though, keep thinking of setup like in the first panel, and you'll never run out of material.
i think this one had potential. personally, I would have enjoyed it alot more if there was no speech in the third panel. and maybe a visual burp with a bubble or something.
i really like the comics. quite a few of them have made me giggle... like a MAN.
although I'm shiite at drawing, I can hopefully possibly throw in a few "funnies" tips
awesome work, read through this entire thread in the past hour or so.
This was my first thought also, I figured it would be a great punchline and be beer related.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
hahaha... "Its uh...... light beer"
You sir, have won an internets.
edit: oh, yeah, and I'm not sure how this is funny. But maybe there's a reference I'm missing.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
I'll admit the art in this one (new comic) is weaker then I would have liked. Basically I had the comic half done, then had to work at 16 hour day, then had to finish it off the same night to have it ready for update day.
I realize that excuses don't make it right, and I really want to almost redraw the newest one, I'm just not sure if I'll be able to do so at this time.
Also: that's a guy??
I know the comic is random but two named, identifiable characters would probably help some of your comics.
This does mean that you'll need to design some easily identifiable characters but, if you want to do comics like there, where you actually are bringing in old characters, it helps if the reader can instantly realize who they are and why there here.
No, no not every time but for comics like this, knowing who they are means it might become funnier where as it is, it only makes sense if you remember that comic and those two characters who don't really stand out against your army of characters used so far.
So not the same guys every time, but maybe pick 2-3 that you use for certain comics because they work for them, can still use random characters for the majority of your comics.
You know, even though its "finished" you could make an alternate version with a 4th panel where one of the girls says that.
Also, seeing how I'm gonna be moving, if anyone's interested in doing a guest comic that would be greatly appreciated, as I'm not sure how quick I'll be able to get back at it again.
and then tosses it out the window with the bushes and the road :-)
seriously AC your are a conundrum.
I think that's a crowd of people wearing green, in a circle around the lobster and victim.
My Website | My "photo-a-day" 2010
winner is you.
It comes back to 'know your basics before you mess with things', I'm afraid. In your comics, it doesn't look like you've made a deliberate decision to push up the features and slice off the back of the head (and that would be a weird decision to make in any case), but rather that you've made a classic beginning artist's error, which is to overplay the features and underplay the skull.
To illustrate: in a realistic setting, you have the classic skull proportions:
In a cartoon, you're trying to simplify and exaggerate, but you still need to keep in mind that these cartoon people should still appear to be made up of three dimensional shapes, and hopefully should still have somewhere to keep their brains. So they still need a forehead, and they still need a skull.
Look at fletcher or Polk's stuff in this very forum. Both of those comics have characters who are about as simplified as you can get, but the basic location of eyes/nose/mouth, with respect to the skull, is essentially the same. When cartooning (I'm not at all an expert in this, but bear with me), one can of course exaggerate and distort features to obtain various effects. But eye location, for example, is one of the most fundamental characteristics of a human face, and even if you're doing it deliberately, if you shift the features too far off that cranial line, you unnecessarily distance the reader from the character, so these choices have to be made with care.
edit: here's a rather longwinded video that explains what I'm talking about. When the guy draws the really exaggerated cartoon head (about five minutes in), he still gives the character a full cranium, and he lengthens the face by pulling down the jaw, not by shortening the forehead.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epJfMCARtkE