Rebirth of Webcomic Above Discussion

Hilarioushenry · Post by **Hilarioushenry** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:03 pm

Sugar....mmmmMMMM

Dragonkingdoms · Post by **Dragonkingdoms** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:10 pm

Well, The Neko at least tells it like it is- even if it does sting for a while. No sugar-covering this review!

While there are some points that seem exaggerated;
No progress in the art in 250 comics?

(2000)

(2001)

(2002-2003)

(2004)

(2005)

(2006)

(2007)

Granted it may not be much after the 2000-early 2001 "NO HANDS" period up until about 2004 or 2005, but there is some change.

most of the rest is true. My website needs quite a bit of work, and I need to work on exposition, namely not performing over-exposition. It was my first, and worst comic, and now there's a chance to improve my up-and-coming comic, Dawn of a New Era.

As for The Neko's charge, so what? So I like 'em big (and small), male or female? Tetsuya Nomura is into zippers (ever played Kingdom Hearts 2? Everybody has multiple zippers, even the enemies!), R.Kelly is into urine, and many are into furries. In fact, it seems nearly everybody is into something different! This is where over-exposition can be a problem, and I need to work on that.

I'm not going to stop drawing, though. Sorry! I've also changed my signature.

SergeXIII · Post by **SergeXIII** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:14 pm

Your asking for trouble Kingdoms...
For one thing, you still construct your charcters the same way, which doesn't really work in some areas, such as hands.

And on an unrelated note, I don't see how my comment as an attack on The Neko, Tdot, cuz if anything I would say it was more pointed to everyone else.

Dotty · Post by **Dotty** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:15 pm

I can see his no improvement comment, in one area. Your figures after 7 years still look stiff as a board. Yes, you've improved in figure drawing, but in making your characters look 3d, or animate...not so much.

I -think- that could be where he was coming from.

Robin Pierce · Post by **Robin Pierce** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:18 pm

I think we should make a new rule: no defending yourself against crits.

SergeXIII · Post by **SergeXIII** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:21 pm

That sounds fair, wasn't it one of the original rules anyway?

Black Sparrow · Post by **Black Sparrow** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:22 pm

Ditto. Your lines still seem uncertain, and there's no depth to your figures... they're all facing straight ahead but with the eyes looking to the side. That looks like it would give you a headache.

There is some improvement, true, but only in some areas.

And heh, "shredded by The Neko"... that provides an amusing mental image.

Dotty · Post by **Dotty** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:26 pm

pierce studios wrote:I think we should make a new rule: no defending yourself against crits.

I'm unsure that's really fair. Sometimes it's a good idea, sometimes the reviewer can learn a lesson or two.

Maybe throw a "publicly" in there. Have them hash it out in PM or something.

The Neko · Post by **The Neko** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:27 pm

Dragonkingdoms wrote: As for The Neko's charge, so what? So I like 'em big (and small), male or female? Tetsuya Nomura is into zippers (ever played Kingdom Hearts 2? Everybody has multiple zippers, even the enemies!), R.Kelly is into urine, and many are into furries. In fact, it seems nearly everybody is into something different! This is where over-exposition can be a problem, and I need to work on that.

I'm not going to stop drawing, though. Sorry! I've also changed my signature.

This is going to be my last words on this matter. There is a big, HUGE difference between having a style or an interest and allowing it to run the focus of a work. What I saw was an interest that took over the narrative entirely, containing little or no entertainment value to anybody outside of that interest. That's called a "fetish comic". The difference is not allowing yourself to be clouded by it and create a work that says something MORE.

Also, good. Keep practicing. Study. Get better.

Black Sparrow · Post by **Black Sparrow** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:28 pm

Well, it works for my creative writing classes to bar the reviewee from talking altogether.

Then again, that would make this thread pretty boring... and nonexistant.

Prettysenshi · Post by **Prettysenshi** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:29 pm

TdotOdot2k wrote:
pierce studios wrote:I think we should make a new rule: no defending yourself against crits.
I'm unsure that's really fair. Sometimes it's a good idea, sometimes the reviewer can learn a lesson or two.

Maybe throw a "publicly" in there. Have them hash it out in PM or something.

Agreed. Nothing's wrong with countering someone's view, but the last thing we need is 2 pages of defense everytime someone gets their feelings hurt. I say if you disagree with the review of your comic THAT MUCH, you should just take it to PM, so you can avoid other people getting into it as well.

Robin Pierce · Post by **Robin Pierce** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:36 pm

we aren't permitted to defend ourselves against criticism in school, whether that crit is from the teachers or the other students.

we just say "thank you" or "nod" or "I'll keep that in mind" and then we either apply it or not.

Stop whining, a review you're getting is someone's opinion on your work. what you choose to do with that opinion is your business.

Killbert-Robby · Post by **Killbert-Robby** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:38 pm

Dragonkingdoms wrote:Well, The Neko at least tells it like it is- even if it does sting for a while. No sugar-covering this review!

*pics*

While there are some points that seem exaggerated;
No progress in the art in 250 comics?I'm not going to stop drawing, though. Sorry! I've also changed my signature.

Hmmm reminds me of the evolution thread, but to the point, I don't really see THAT much of a difference. No offence, but I mean for an idea of 4 years of 7 years of progress, look at this :

(I know PVP isnt really popular around here, but everyone has to admit the art's made it's journey...)

http://www.pvponline.com/images/3005.gif This is 2007

http://www.pvponline.com/article/403/Sat-Jan-08 This is 2000

I mean no offense to you, but your style isnt very appealing. I'm not saying you suck at drawing, I'm saying experiment with new styles til you find something you like. My currents style all started when I tried to draw my character out of boxes and really liked the eyes, then I built around that. It takes experimentation.

Keffria · Post by **Keffria** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:38 pm

Komiyan wrote:Stop saying sugarcoat! It makes me hungry for M&Ms every single time.

It makes me think of those awful sugar-coated "easy to swallow" acetaminophen tablets. I have to suppress my gag reflex whenever I take one.

The Neko · Post by **The Neko** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:39 pm

I can understand, perhaps, if someone wants to ask for clarification on a point here. That could make it more understandable to other people who might read the review as well. Complaining is best suited somewhere else.

Prettysenshi · Post by **Prettysenshi** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:40 pm

Can we get back to actually reviewing comics, please?

Komiyan · Post by **Komiyan** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:42 pm

pierce studios wrote:we aren't permitted to defend ourselves against criticism in school, whether that crit is from the teachers or the other students.

we just say "thank you" or "nod" or "I'll keep that in mind" and then we either apply it or not.

Ditto for my art class, it's pretty bad ettiqutte to rebuff a crit.

Killbert-Robby · Post by **Killbert-Robby** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:47 pm

I wouldn't say you can't react, at least not here. React, but do it on an agreeing term, like when I got reviewed. I acknowledged that the points he didn't like were points I didn't like either, then possible reasons for it. That way, I defend myself, and I learn, and the reviewer wasn't attacked, and we're all happy.

Dotty · Post by **Dotty** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:53 pm

The Neko wrote:I can understand, perhaps, if someone wants to ask for clarification on a point here. That could make it more understandable to other people who might read the review as well. Complaining is best suited somewhere else.

Exactly what I was getting at.

Hilarioushenry · Post by **Hilarioushenry** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 4:06 pm

Killbert-Robby wrote:I wouldn't say you can't react, at least not here. React, but do it on an agreeing term, like when I got reviewed. I acknowledged that the points he didn't like were points I didn't like either, then possible reasons for it. That way, I defend myself, and I learn, and the reviewer wasn't attacked, and we're all happy.

I feel kind of weird being talked about indirectly...