Comic Genesis Forums

Turnsky wrote:true enough.. also, davidcsimon, may i take the opportunity that while your ships look great, some of the textures suggest either age, hull plating, or both, but don't reflect either fairly well the specular and bumpmapping don't match the textures at all, really. This gives your ships a rather plastic look, to be honest.

Yeah, it's a learning process for me. I try to make improvements with each new chapter.

mcDuffies, I didn't join this discussion to plug my work - I actually found this thread because someone had *already* plugged my work. I joined because as a 3D artist with over 20,000 unique visitors reading my comic each week, I thought I might be able to contribute something to the discussion. I'm arguing in favour of 3D comics because, well, because people were arguing *against* them. My motive is simply to engage in debate, pure and simple.

mcDuffies wrote:I wouldn't be troubled by people who'd say that I'm taking shourtcuts. My respons would be "yeah, isn't that good for me?" rather than "no, no, no, you don't know how much effort it takes this and that..."

Uhhh... people were saying that 3D art took less time and effort than HD art, which is *wrong*, so I corrected them. Of course I still take shortcuts whenever possible, all artists do, but I'm not about to say something is easy when it is *not*!

20,000 ???
i think i have like... 40?? i have no real idea how to figure out -
but someone said that "vists" is pretty close .. and i think i have around 500+ that keeps coming back ( when the server doesnt choke )

mcDuffies, I didn't join this discussion to plug my work - I actually found this thread because someone had *already* plugged my work.

Well what'cha gonna do, I'm funny that way.

people were saying that 3D art took less time and effort than HD art, which is *wrong*, so I corrected them

Well, I guess those people didn't believe you when you said it first. But you gotta admit, if you put it as "do you know how much time it takes me to pose these dolls and snap a picture of them!" it does sound kind of funny.

davidcsimon wrote: Uhhh... people were saying that 3D art took less time and effort than HD art, which is *wrong*, so I corrected them. Of course I still take shortcuts whenever possible, all artists do, but I'm not about to say something is easy when it is *not*!

well, yours would take a little while longer, it seems as from what i can tell from your processes, you pretty much make the lineart CGI style, then fill/paint in photoshop the rest, making the backgrounds, etc in photoshop or whatever 3d program you use.
all in all, you wouldn't count as a "poser" comic, really.
also, i shall point you to these guys: http://www.hard-light.net/ there's some modelers there, etc that might be able to give you a few pointers on texturing your prides and joys.

datachasers wrote::o 20,000 ???
i think i have like... 40?? i have no real idea how to figure out -
but someone said that "vists" is pretty close .. and i think i have around 500+ that keeps coming back ( when the server doesnt choke )

Oh, to be popular... every comic's secret dream :P

davidcsimon wrote: mcDuffies, I didn't join this discussion to plug my work - I actually found this thread because someone had *already* plugged my work.

suuuure now it's all MY fault!

my comic isn't exactly 'cgi' but still it is - its purely tablet drawn and hasn't seen pen/paper in years...

but as per comics made from 3d animation program stills and such, like dreamland chronicles, then i really dont mind them: its a great way to reproduce a lot material very quickly, a bit like a cut&paste comic

...but thats the CGI comics greatest weakness too: the characters often appear painfully rigid and stiff, and often so much so that it completely ruins the comic experience!

although IMO then dreamland chronicles is a rare find and doesn't suffer that much from that kind of 'terminal stiffness'

One thing I don't like about 3D comics is the character's faces. They don't show emotion nearly enough in my opinion. The position of the eyebrows may change, or the shape of the mouth, but in such a photo-realistic medium, exaggerating the expression too much just looks...wrong.

And the simple fact is that, without sound, movements, or exaggeration, the s look like dolls. If you look at a snapshot of someone laughing, it's sometimes difficult to distinguish whether they are laughing or crying, and that problem attaches itself to 3D comics as well.

Granted, if artists had any idea how to pose their characters, the problem wouldn't be nearly as obvious. since you're dealing with human characters in a soundless medium, you'd do far better by studying mimes than actors. Without that style of over-the-top eggageration, the comic is pretty visually boring quite often.

^ That's a really good point.

The only 3D comic I have ever liked was Concerned

The writing in superb, the character posing is great and the facial expressions are perfect. And it works well on the basis that it is contained within a well know world with well known characters. I guess it can be considered slightly cheating having all the content made to a high quality standard already but really it doesn't matter when the comic is that well written.

Interesting. I'm reminded of when Reboot came on the air. About the same time, there was a fully-CG version of Voltron, which claimed to use the most advanced, realistic motion capture of the day. And yet, while Reboot looked smooth and realistic, Voltron came off as stiff and unrealistic. That's because while Voltron tried to be super-realistic, Reboot went the other direction and based their stuff off cartoons and more physical performance, and it came across in the characters much better.

I figure this is the problem facing a lot of CG and photo comics. Even though they're realistic, they really should be taking cues more from traditional comics in terms of gesture and layout, rather than trying to imitate life directly.

GtF wrote:The only 3D comic I have ever liked was Concerned

The writing in superb, the character posing is great and the facial expressions are perfect. And it works well on the basis that it is contained within a well know world with well known characters. I guess it can be considered slightly cheating having all the content made to a high quality standard already but really it doesn't matter when the comic is that well written.

I was going to mention Concerned as well, a smart use of CG animation to pull off a great parody.

as a comics reader and not an artist, I don't think like/hate is a fair poll, I've never hated a particular medium or style, just certain artists who cannot it pull off. I mean, there are even great stick figure artists and terrible stick figure artists. some professional artists are universally hated, despite using traditional techniques. the style or medium is not the problem, it's the ability of the artist to use it.

grabmygoblin wrote:

GtF wrote:The only 3D comic I have ever liked was Concerned

The writing in superb, the character posing is great and the facial expressions are perfect. And it works well on the basis that it is contained within a well know world with well known characters. I guess it can be considered slightly cheating having all the content made to a high quality standard already but really it doesn't matter when the comic is that well written.

I was going to mention Concerned as well, a smart use of CG animation to pull off a great parody.

as a comics reader and not an artist, I don't think like/hate is a fair poll, I've never hated a particular medium or style, just certain artists who cannot it pull off. I mean, there are even great stick figure artists and terrible stick figure artists. some professional artists are universally hated, despite using traditional techniques. the style or medium is not the problem, it's the ability of the artist to use it.

readers Opinion is important here as well , perhaps more so than the "artists" every artist is going to be biased for the type of art they work with - and no like / hate is not totally fair but ive rarely seen anyone just "meh" about this subject -

montyandwoolley wrote:

The Neko wrote:Well, most people just assume that computer stuff is easier.

Well for a start, real life drawing doesn't crash. - Well, it shouldn't. Unless you're drawing a picture of dividing by zero or something..

No, but drawings get ruined a number of ways before they hit the scanner... and once they're on the computer, most get modified quite a bit before they're done... so crashes are still a threat to ink & paper folks.

Not that that makes pen & ink harder (or easier). I think it's silly that everyone keeps trying to compare how much work/talent goes into the two mediums. It'd be like a painter and a composer comparing their efforts - or a novelist and a dancer. You may occasionally share similar obstacles or require similar training, but for the most part you're going down totally separate paths toward the same goal: ART. You're making ART. If it's good, people will like it. If it's not, they won't. Period.

datachasers wrote:like / hate is not totally fair but ive rarely seen anyone just "meh" about this subject -

I still refuse to vote for just those reasons. As grabmygoblin wrote: "the style or medium is not the problem, it's the ability of the artist to use it." So, meh.

datachasers wrote:readers Opinion is important here as well , perhaps more so than the "artists" every artist is going to be biased for the type of art they work with - and no like / hate is not totally fair but ive rarely seen anyone just "meh" about this subject -

Take a good look, you're seeing one right now. I don't like or hate CG as a medium. You can do a lot with CG that you can't do with traditional work, but there are a lot of advantages of traditional art as well. It's just another medium, honestly, and it takes a lot to like or dislike an entire medium.

That guy wrote:

montyandwoolley wrote:

The Neko wrote:Well, most people just assume that computer stuff is easier.

Well for a start, real life drawing doesn't crash. - Well, it shouldn't. Unless you're drawing a picture of dividing by zero or something..

No, but drawings get ruined a number of ways before they hit the scanner... and once they're on the computer, most get modified quite a bit before they're done... so crashes are still a threat to ink & paper folks.

not to mention folks like myself, whom utilises a tablet for all aspects of comic production, even sketching.

Of course being a CGI comic artist I'm going to say I like CGI comics, but to say all are unimaginative etc. etc. is a crock. Just like with all artwork, you have good and bad.

The only CGI comic I've ever read and actually liked is this one. Probably because it's not made with Poser.

That's really pretty.

JTorch wrote:The only CGI comic I've ever read and actually liked is this one. Probably because it's not made with Poser.

I was just about to bring up Dreamland Chronicles. The artist really spends a lot of time making his own models and everything just looks very good and professional. One of the very few CG comics that's worth it.