Webcomic Above You 2014 Review and Discussion

[LibertyCabbage]

@Cope: I tried to keep the video short, so if you'd like me to elaborate on something, just ask about it.

@Terotrous: If you want help with Blogger sometime, just make a thread in Help for it.

@IVstudios: I forget if I mentioned it before or not, but you should type your dialogue and run a spell-checker on it.

Re: WP review

You're totally right about having a proper archives page. I was gonna make one, and then I completely forgot about it. Derp.

Having the reviews be more thematic is a good idea. My hangup's mainly just been that I've been trying not to be too douchey, but I don't really care about that anymore. I actually used to have "sentences" like you described, but I changed it to be donuts at one point. I have a pretty vivid imagination, so I agree that I should use it as an advantage.

I'll keep that in mind as a suggestion. I could probably be more educational if I tried to. This blog's more educational, for example.

I recognize your complaints. One area in particular I know I need to work on is time-management, since idling and procrastination leads to inferior, rushed work. Using my time more efficiently, I can write about the subjects more thoroughly.

As robybang noted in this thread, the two reviews aren't written by the same person. Maybe I should make the author credit more prominent in order to eliminate any possible confusion. Anyways, it's unfortunate that you didn't enjoy reading my Twokinds review, but I'm pleased with the way it's agitated some members of the furry community.

There was some discussion of the Sinfest rants on the forums here. I didn't properly convey that they aren't reviews. I may edit the rants to add a brief introduction explaining what I intended, which was just to express some thoughts I had about the webcomic.

Thanks for your feedback. I'd like for the Webcomic Police to eventually be an excellent review site.

I haven't necessarily "moved on" to videos. I just feel more confident writing, and I wanted to do something that I'm less confident about. I mentioned Bone in my newest review, and I'll possibly continue mentioning graphic novels if I feel like it. I think it's important for amateurs to learn from expert creators, and I enjoy having an opportunity to mention things outside of the webcomics world on occasion.

I took your advice and included several pages in my latest review. My first review was deliberately underwhelming, but my goal was just to overcome my nervousness, get a basic sense of the relevant software, and post the review in a timely manner. I plan on continuing to make my video reviews more sophisticated as I gain confidence and efficiency.

I'll continue to work on my video skills. Thanks again for volunteering to do this unorthodox review.

[IVstudios]

@IVstudios: I forget if I mentioned it before or not, but you should type your dialogue and run a spell-checker on it.

But I do! I do do this thing.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

The problem is that for some of the errors, spell check won't catch it. "Pleas" is a valid word, but not when you want "please." Same with wrong "your/you're" but I only saw that like once or twice in the beginning of the comic. Same with "cheep/cheap." You get things right phonetically, you just are choosy about your vowels

[IVstudios]

Homophones are the worst.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

Gotta stick to heterophones.

[RobboAKAscooby]

Okay Cuddly, here ya go:


Review of Loud Era:

Let me start by saying, it's kind of difficult to review a work your a fan of, the appeal of the work tends to make one overlook the flaws that may be seen by a more objective viewer.
Nevertheless allow me to talk about Loud Era, one of only a small handful of webcomics I read on a regular basis.

Story & Writing
Loud Era is a charming and funny coming-of-age story set in 1917-ish that tells the tales of a small, close-knit group of friends from varying socio-economic backgrounds all living in a small town where they grew up. If it sounds like I just described a whole genre, well I suppose I did, Loud Era is very typical of the teen slice-of-life genre typified by the likes of Archie comics and every teen sitcom since the late 70s.
Storylines include the usual fare for the genre such as a play, prom, party, graduation and the summer after highschool. Along the way we have the typical dramas of romance and friendship and family, flavoured occasionally with topics of the period such as class, race and religion (for example Cal's confliction with her feelings towards Leon, a jew) but mostly these are the same timeless dramas that anyone can relate to.
And that is a large part of the strength behind Loud Era, it is very relateable. Telling the tales of that time in one's life is a good solid ground to build upon as teens will relate to their current lives and older readers will remember their own teen years (there's a reason Archie is still going strong 70 years later).

Writing-wise it's pretty solid. From the beginning there is a general tone of hope and happiness that carries through to even the latest pages but along with that is a building undercurrent of something sad in the characters' future. I am especially worried for Uly, his time in the army and the few flashbacks to happy times just don't bode well.

Since the last time I reviewed (and especially since the first time) , you've cut down the beginning into a much tighter intro which does a much better job of introducing the characters in their broadstrokes, it’s easy to get a grasp of who’s who despite the large cast.
A good example is the first appearance of Cal, Aggie and Marie. In that one conversation it’s clear – Cal (hopeless romantic dreamer), Aggie (no-nonsense realist) and Marie (the weird one) – and this kind of economical intro pays off well enough for the rest of the cast.

The way you handle touching moments with a warm restraint is very welcome.
The scene with Tony and his Mamma after Aggie’s letter is a near perfect example of letting the art tell the story, the scene is simple and plays with only two words of dialogue that could have left off completely.
Contrast this with the more dramatic scenes, such as Aggie’s and Cal’s argument at the train station, and it sets a nice balance of tone.
You let each scene stand as what it needs to be.

Sometimes the dialogue is a little too modern but I don’t really think that’s much of an issue, you avoid using any millennial slang, more honestly it helps to make it readable to the modern audience. Having read plenty of comics from the 40s and 50s I have to say that if you tried to make the dialogue more period it would probably be more detrimental than helpful.

A minor niggling question I had was over the seeming disappearance of Tony’s idolisation of the boxer but surprise, by the time I got to the end there was a mention.

One final note on the writing, whenever the characters get over excited - whether it be Joseph swearing about his legs or Cal’s “Lee-onnn!” or Marie just generally being herself – I can’t help but see similarities with what you write on the forum/facebook/etc, it’s like moments that your own personality peeks through.
And quite entertaining.


Artwork
The first thing that I notice with the art is the colouring, a mix of markers, colour pencils and watercolours at times.
Generally you utilise a warm pallet, the colours are rich but not bright – if that makes sense - the colour range is a little sedate/muted as would be suitable for the era but never feels bland or washed out.
The technique is really good, blending and shading is on par with most digital efforts which is impressive from a practical work. The times when the shading/lighting is done with pencil over marker is quite interesting, similar to the traditional hatching for shape but a little softer.

The title card are a nice touch, obviously going for the silent film intertitle look, helps set up the feel of the idea that life is a play.

Some early backgrounds have that white halo issue where you've been reluctant to colour too close to the characters. Other than that the backgrounds are well done, the level of detail is more or less equal to that in the character or other foreground objects.
Some of the close up panels within scenes become a simple colour or pattern background but almost every page contains at least one good panel that establishes the locale and those panels usually showcase a nice attention to detail.
It’s a welcome change to many webcomics that suffer from “big blank room syndrome”.

Expressions are another strong point, very clear without going to the overblown exaggerations that even a lot of “professionals” tend to fall back on.
Even when it comes to special effect panels like Cal’s “OMG I killed my parents” type moments it only pushes the boundary enough to illustrate the outlandishness of her panic/worry.

Character design is mostly excellent, although there are times that some male characters can be confused (especially in tighter shots), generally speaking the characters have individual appearances that also match their personalities. The range of body types is also a major positive, each of the girls has a distinct sillouette.
Overall the characters look and feel distinctly different but at the same time fit together clearly, at no point do any of them look as if they don't belong in the world you've created.

There are some anatomy issues, most noticeable is the occasionally too long arms. Often these issues seem to occur when the camera angle or perspective changes from the more standard straight angles so it’s possible the anatomy issues are linked to perspective issues. Anatomy is obviously not my strong point so I'll leave it to others to comment more thoroughly on this matter.

In the later chapters the art gets much better as a whole.
The Camp chapter is just beautiful, using some very simple touches you’ve managed to convey the look and feel of the great outdoors.
The city architecture in the most recent chapter is equally impressive.
Overall I think that the various promising aspects of your early art are coming together nicely, even if it may take much longer now to complete the pages, it is definitely worth the effort you put in.


Site
Not much really needs to be said, the site looks good without being too flashy. The colours fit well with the comic and the layout is neat.
Extras on the site are mostly art from/for swaps and contests, it would be nice to see a few stand alone art pieces of the Loud Era cast, maybe presented as photos or Cecilia's paintings. I understand that time constraints make it difficult for extra stuff but it is something that you might like to think about.
The archive is solid, very useful with the hover over thumbnails.


Final Thoughts
I think one of the big things that makes me like this comic so much is that it avoids a lot of the things that I don’t like about so many other webcomics. It is a comedy/romance/slice-of-life/mushy-goofy-thing but never falls into the pitfalls of being too cartoony or overblown DRAMAOMG!!!!!!
For the kind of audience that Loud Era plays to it is a tremendously solid work. The artwork is fairly unique and hard to confuse with any other webcomics I've noticed. The charming lovable characters make up for the genre-trappings of the storylines.
Loud Era isn't the comic you go to for hard, edge-pushing intensity it is the comic you go to for a fun, well-written story.


Bonus - Some stuff I noticed/thought along the way...
Here's just a list of a few things I jotted down that made me smile/laugh/whatever...
Letter from Cecilia and the girly mag – first page
Eyes look a little weird in extreme closeup with lack of pupils.
The barracks photo scene could have used a “pause” panel before the “ohhh!” moment.
Joseph swearing is very much like Cuddly on the forum.
Gerry’s appearance kind of reminds me of that sparkly vampire twat.
Pearl using the power of cleavage lol (my character Naomi would be proud).
TITnotized. I’m stealing this.
Tony’s rejection montage is fun.
Flashback violin scene, just how much age between Uly and Joseph? Also widdle cutie kiddo.
Eddie looks a little drugged out watching the play.
Pearl’s skirt caught on the bench, how scandalous.
Lee-onnn!
Marie – little boy in a dress lol
Cal’s haircut revelation misgivings, only slightly dramatic.
The baseball flashback – logistical issues. Also very sweet relationship Uly and Joseph have.
Cal’s prom dress, yowza!
Joseph for the trip.
Drunk Eddie
Marie’s face going out to see drunk Eddie is just bizarre.
Sexy forest nymph Cecilia, who knew Cuddly had fanservice in her.
Just what was Cal’s dream?



Hope you like it...

[Terotrous]

As robybang noted in this thread, the two reviews aren't written by the same person. Maybe I should make the author credit more prominent in order to eliminate any possible confusion. Anyways, it's unfortunate that you didn't enjoy reading my Twokinds review, but I'm pleased with the way it's agitated some members of the furry community.

I did actually notice that they were written by two different people, but it still comes off as very inconsistent, particularly since Robybang names Djandora as an example of a furry comic done well in the Bittersweet Candy Bowl article. Generally on a review site you expect the reviewers will try to be impartial so it shouldn't matter all that much who reviews what.

Also honestly to me that one review just seems dumb because the premise is so clearly and completely incorrect. It just seems like you've never read a "porn comic" and you have no idea what you're talking about, because the one feature that they all share is that they're focused on graphic depictions of sexual acts. Even if we do consider Twokinds to have frequent non-sexual nudity, at most that would be considered fanservice, but it could just be part of the world design, as in Djandora.

A much better way to describe Twokinds would be something like "an painful exercise in contrived awkwardness, a hideous amalgam of overdone anime tropes laid end-to-end", which is still equally biting if not more so because this position is actually defensible.

I haven't necessarily "moved on" to videos. I just feel more confident writing, and I wanted to do something that I'm less confident about. I mentioned Bone in my newest review, and I'll possibly continue mentioning graphic novels if I feel like it. I think it's important for amateurs to learn from expert creators, and I enjoy having an opportunity to mention things outside of the webcomics world on occasion.

I took your advice and included several pages in my latest review. My first review was deliberately underwhelming, but my goal was just to overcome my nervousness, get a basic sense of the relevant software, and post the review in a timely manner. I plan on continuing to make my video reviews more sophisticated as I gain confidence and efficiency.

I definitely think including the comics helps, but I would probably leave them onscreen a bit longer. You might also consider zooming in on a particular panel if there's one specific thing you want to highlight, for example perhaps the punchline of a joke when you're talking about the humour.

The graphic novel comparison doesn't seem to really be used as much this time. I also think a black-and-white comic might be more suitable because you spend a lot of time talking about the art and world design and you main issues are that the backgrounds are a bit sparse and that the world isn't that interesting, so a black and white comic that does both of these things well would make for a good contrast.

[RobboAKAscooby]

Building on what Tero just said about comparing comics more appropriately - and expanding it out to reviewers in general - this is a problem I've noticed often enough in reviews, the reviewer often seems to draw comparisons between two works that have only the most superficial link.

Completely selfish example here - in your review of my admittedly dreadful comic you open with a comparison to Robert Crumb's "My trouble with Women" stating basically that both are examples of authorial fantasy. Unfortunately beyond that point the comparison falls flat, Crumb's work is an unrepentant sleazy look at the author's sexual fantasies whereas my comic is a dopey rom-com-esque creation. Completely different genres, target audiences and overall vibes.

Now, and I'm not just picking on you LC, with these kind of messed comparisons it can appear that either:
a. the reviewer is trying to prove their wealth of knowledge, show to their readers that they "know their stuff"
or
b. that they are, consciously or subconsciously, indicating their own preferential approach to the given subject matter.
The latter of which often leads to a response of "Well why don't you go read that instead".

The reason I didn't mention this in my response to your review LC is, well, I didn't want to come across all sour grapes. Your technical review stuff is spot on, no arguments here.
I do think however you have some issues with context, I'd have to go re-read some of your other reviews to be certain, but I do think sometimes you approach material from too serious a viewpoint rather than addressing a work within the trappings of its genre.

Getting back to the general problem of reviewers misusing comparisons. One needs to understand that, while links can be made between subject matter or genre or target audience or authorial background, it also has to be taken into account the intent behind not just the comparison but also the work being reviewed.
After all I'm sure one could do an interesting comparative review between the movies American Pie and Kids (after all both are about teenage sexual misadventures) but to do so would really do justice to neither, one is a harmless goofy romp and the other is a hard-edged look at sex, drugs and STDs.

Comparisons are best done within the same genre, most readers go to the genres they like so if they see a review comparing a work to something they like they'll check it out and if that comparison was misplaced there can be disappointment (I mean if any Crumb fan came to my comic blindly off your review they'd be really disappointed).



Again LC, I'm not putting this out as some attack, the point I'm trying to make is - a good comparison can add depth to a review but a poor comparison makes readers question the review. Before you use a comparison you need to think "What does this add to the review?" and "How does this relate to the potential audience of what I'm reviewing?"



Oh well enough from me.

[Cope]

Also, LiberyCabbage, you prefaced my review by referring to one of the best comics of all time! That's not fair!

(ha ha, just kidding. There's no bad time to recommend Bone.)

Thanks for your thoughts....and hey, you're putting pictures in your reviews now! That's a good start.

Note to Roby: I haven't forgotten you! Argh, I'm sorry....I've been so busy lately. I'll try to have your review done by this weekend.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

schoooby doooby dooooooooooooooo

SCHOOOOOOOOOBYYYYYYY DOOOOOOOOOOOBYYYYYYYY DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


JUst wanted to post a quick response to say thanks for scouring the whole archive today and for writing such a cornucopia<3

I will respond more in depth.

[LibertyCabbage]

I did actually notice that they were written by two different people, but it still comes off as very inconsistent, particularly since Robybang names Djandora as an example of a furry comic done well in the Bittersweet Candy Bowl article. Generally on a review site you expect the reviewers will try to be impartial so it shouldn't matter all that much who reviews what.

The BCB review (which I wrote, by the way, although I recognize it's generically credited to "The Webcomic Police" since it's an older piece) doesn't mention Djandora (which I still haven't read), so can you be more specific about what you're referencing? As for the inconsistency, I agree that it may be a problem for some readers, but I think that the increased quantity and variety of content that results is a substantial benefit that outweighs the negatives.

Also honestly to me that one review just seems dumb because the premise is so clearly and completely incorrect. It just seems like you've never read a "porn comic" and you have no idea what you're talking about, because the one feature that they all share is that they're focused on graphic depictions of sexual acts. Even if we do consider Twokinds to have frequent non-sexual nudity, at most that would be considered fanservice, but it could just be part of the world design, as in Djandora.

You're giving Fischbach too much credit. He'd be a total nobody if he didn't cover his webcomic in furry ass, tits, and vaginas. I don't care if his fans whack off to his stuff, but I find it comical when they try to pretend that Fischbach's a legitimate cartoonist. If he wasn't a part of the holier-than-thou furry genre, he'd be viewed as a piece of trash, like Cheung is.

A much better way to describe Twokinds would be something like "an painful exercise in contrived awkwardness, a hideous amalgam of overdone anime tropes laid end-to-end", which is still equally biting if not more so because this position is actually defensible.

I chose a sexual angle for the review because I like writing about sexual topics. But I disagree that another angle would've been "equally biting." My Twokinds review gets a strong response because it touches on a sensitive issue that some members of the furry community are ashamed about.

I definitely think including the comics helps, but I would probably leave them onscreen a bit longer. You might also consider zooming in on a particular panel if there's one specific thing you want to highlight, for example perhaps the punchline of a joke when you're talking about the humour.

You're correct that I could've used cropped versions of the pages instead. Unfortunately, I didn't give myself enough time to learn the software and make the video, resulting in a rushed product. (I started filming at around 8:30 p.m., and I posted the video to YouTube at around 12:30 a.m.) I'll likely need to look into superior software options, since Windows Movie Maker seems shitty so far, and even something as basic as inserting images turned out to be a complicated hassle. But it's only my second video, and I'm sure that I'll continue to make improvements.

The graphic novel comparison doesn't seem to really be used as much this time. I also think a black-and-white comic might be more suitable because you spend a lot of time talking about the art and world design and you main issues are that the backgrounds are a bit sparse and that the world isn't that interesting, so a black and white comic that does both of these things well would make for a good contrast.

Bone's b&w, which I was going to mention in the video but forgot to. (I also forgot to credit Smith.) These videos are unscripted, and they're intended as more casual than my written reviews. I mainly mentioned Bone because I thought it would be fun to include it, although now that I think about it, I suppose it's relevant, since it has some notable similarities to Cerintha. Crumb's comic in my previous review was meant to be more relevant. I have a GN in mind for my Loud Era review that's meant as both fun and relevant, so I guess I'll spend more time talking about it.

Completely selfish example here - in your review of my admittedly dreadful comic you open with a comparison to Robert Crumb's "My trouble with Women" stating basically that both are examples of authorial fantasy.

"My Troubles" isn't fantasy; it's a disturbingly realistic autobiography.

Unfortunately beyond that point the comparison falls flat, Crumb's work is an unrepentant sleazy look at the author's sexual fantasies whereas my comic is a dopey rom-com-esque creation. Completely different genres, target audiences and overall vibes.

If you say so.

Now, and I'm not just picking on you LC, with these kind of messed comparisons it can appear that either:

"Messed up"? Crumb's one of the greatest, most celebrated cartoonists of all time.

a. the reviewer is trying to prove their wealth of knowledge, show to their readers that they "know their stuff"

LOL

b. that they are, consciously or subconsciously, indicating their own preferential approach to the given subject matter. The latter of which often leads to a response of "Well why don't you go read that instead".

It's not my job to make people want to read your webcomic. Isn't that your job, as the creator?

The reason I didn't mention this in my response to your review LC is, well, I didn't want to come across all sour grapes. Your technical review stuff is spot on, no arguments here.
I do think however you have some issues with context, I'd have to go re-read some of your other reviews to be certain, but I do think sometimes you approach material from too serious a viewpoint rather than addressing a work within the trappings of its genre.

Getting back to the general problem of reviewers misusing comparisons. One needs to understand that, while links can be made between subject matter or genre or target audience or authorial background, it also has to be taken into account the intent behind not just the comparison but also the work being reviewed.
After all I'm sure one could do an interesting comparative review between the movies American Pie and Kids (after all both are about teenage sexual misadventures) but to do so would really do justice to neither, one is a harmless goofy romp and the other is a hard-edged look at sex, drugs and STDs.

Comparisons are best done within the same genre, most readers go to the genres they like so if they see a review comparing a work to something they like they'll check it out and if that comparison was misplaced there can be disappointment (I mean if any Crumb fan came to my comic blindly off your review they'd be really disappointed).

Again LC, I'm not putting this out as some attack, the point I'm trying to make is - a good comparison can add depth to a review but a poor comparison makes readers question the review. Before you use a comparison you need to think "What does this add to the review?" and "How does this relate to the potential audience of what I'm reviewing?"

The comparison's that readers want intimacy, and everything about your story's fake. You don't need to emulate Crumb exactly, but you do need to learn how to relate to readers, which is something Crumb was able to do. Either that, or just do your own thing and stop caring what others think about your work.

Also, LiberyCabbage, you prefaced my review by referring to one of the best comics of all time! That's not fair!

(ha ha, just kidding. There's no bad time to recommend Bone.)

I'm assuming there might be at least one person watching the video who hasn't read it yet. I've actually mentioned Bone once before, in my review of BCB (since BCB is almost as long as Bone despite basically having no plot).

Thanks for your thoughts....and hey, you're putting pictures in your reviews now! That's a good start.

Yeah, next time I'll probably use larger images, but it was nice to actually kinda show what I was talking about.

[Terotrous]

The BCB review (which I wrote, by the way, although I recognize it's generically credited to "The Webcomic Police" since it's an older piece) doesn't mention Djandora (which I still haven't read), so can you be more specific about what you're referencing? As for the inconsistency, I agree that it may be a problem for some readers, but I think that the increased quantity and variety of content that results is a substantial benefit that outweighs the negatives.

It appears it was actually Forest Hill:

http://www.webcomicpolice.com/2013/10/forest-hill.html

I checked out a bunch of different reviews on the site so I probably got them mixed up.

You're giving Fischbach too much credit. He'd be a total nobody if he didn't cover his webcomic in furry ass, tits, and vaginas. I don't care if his fans whack off to his stuff, but I find it comical when they try to pretend that Fischbach's a legitimate cartoonist. If he wasn't a part of the holier-than-thou furry genre, he'd be viewed as a piece of trash, like Cheung is.

Yeah, that's nonsense. Every handful of pages there's a nondetailed chest or butt and that's about it. Furry porn is so abundant that no one would read a comic just to see some softcore nudity, and the comic was already fairly popular in its early days when Flora wore pants and Natani wasn't even in the comic.

The reason Twokinds is popular is simply because it's drawn very well. It's kind of sad, but that's the #1 determinant of popularity by a long shot. There are plenty of anime-style comics that aren't furry that boast similar popularity despite equally cliched storytelling.

I chose a sexual angle for the review because I like writing about sexual topics. But I disagree that another angle would've been "equally biting." My Twokinds review gets a strong response because it touches on a sensitive issue that some members of the furry community are ashamed about.

I think it got a significant response because it's a load of crap, to be totally honest. I don't see a lot of people getting defensive about their enjoyment of furry comics, most of the responses seem to be various people telling you that you have no clue what you're talking about.

If you look at reviews of other media, like games for example, it is indeed the ones that are just totally divorced from reality that get the strongest response, so I suppose if you mission was just to stir up controversy that's the right angle, but it probably hurts the site more than it helps because now people will be wary of your opinions on other things.

You're correct that I could've used cropped versions of the pages instead. Unfortunately, I didn't give myself enough time to learn the software and make the video, resulting in a rushed product. (I started filming at around 8:30 p.m., and I posted the video to YouTube at around 12:30 a.m.) I'll likely need to look into superior software options, since Windows Movie Maker seems shitty so far, and even something as basic as inserting images turned out to be a complicated hassle. But it's only my second video, and I'm sure that I'll continue to make improvements.

That's fine, I'm sure there's a bit of an art to doing this kind of thing, I'm just pointing out things that can be improved.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

b. that they are, consciously or subconsciously, indicating their own preferential approach to the given subject matter. The latter of which often leads to a response of "Well why don't you go read that instead".

It's not my job to make people want to read your webcomic. Isn't that your job, as the creator?

I don't think Schoob was saying that Crumb's work is messed up, but that he felt it was kind of a messy comparison to make between his comic and Crumb's. Not making any commentary on the quality of Crumb's work, just questioning its relevance.

And I don't think he was suggesting here that you ought to be promoting his comic, at all. A person worse at taking criticism than Schoob might say that, though. He's also referring to the idea that if a reviewer says they don't like somthing, or that they prefer something else, "Don't like don't read," which we can all agree is a foolish response. I think the first sentence there is what Schoob really meant to be the focus of that point. I don't think it's as important as he does, but I do think you're misreading what he's trying to convey.

[RobboAKAscooby]

b. that they are, consciously or subconsciously, indicating their own preferential approach to the given subject matter. The latter of which often leads to a response of "Well why don't you go read that instead".

It's not my job to make people want to read your webcomic. Isn't that your job, as the creator?

I don't think Schoob was saying that Crumb's work is messed up, but that he felt it was kind of a messy comparison to make between his comic and Crumb's. Not making any commentary on the quality of Crumb's work, just questioning its relevance.

And I don't think he was suggesting here that you ought to be promoting his comic, at all. A person worse at taking criticism than Schoob might say that, though. He's also referring to the idea that if a reviewer says they don't like somthing, or that they prefer something else, "Don't like don't read," which we can all agree is a foolish response. I think the first sentence there is what Schoob really meant to be the focus of that point. I don't think it's as important as he does, but I do think you're misreading what he's trying to convey.

Pretty correct on both there Cuddly.

Also...

but I do think you're misreading what he's trying to convey.

...I think he's misreading a lot of things.

Like the actual comics he's supposedly reviewing

Now LC, I'm not gonna get bitchy over my crap being ripped apart, I KNOW I screwed the pooch but here is quite simply the thing.
Your comparison and pseudo-psycho-babble approach falls flat.
The only reason you could make the connection is because, both through here and my blog, you are aware of my fandom of Taylor Swift. If I had presented my comic on a separate site, making no mention of myself, you could make general claims of authorial fantasy and "mary sue" but only by the same token as saying Stephen King fantasizes about having a really fucked up scary life because so many of his protagonists are authors.
As writers we often start with a familiar jumping off point.

The way you have reacted to Tero's comments on your Twokinds review shows how little you actually understand your own craft, particularly this little nugget:

I chose a sexual angle for the review because I like writing about sexual topics. But I disagree that another angle would've been "equally biting." My Twokinds review gets a strong response because it touches on a sensitive issue that some members of the furry community are ashamed about.

Which basically says to any reasonable person reading your comment "I have chosen my opinion before I even started", which is the absolute worst way to approach a review.
But also explains a lot here. As do your flippant responses to my criticisms about your poor use of comparisons:

Completely selfish example here - in your review of my admittedly dreadful comic you open with a comparison to Robert Crumb's "My trouble with Women" stating basically that both are examples of authorial fantasy.

"My Troubles" isn't fantasy; it's a disturbingly realistic autobiography.

Unfortunately beyond that point the comparison falls flat, Crumb's work is an unrepentant sleazy look at the author's sexual fantasies whereas my comic is a dopey rom-com-esque creation. Completely different genres, target audiences and overall vibes.

If you say so.

Now, and I'm not just picking on you LC, with these kind of messed comparisons it can appear that either:

"Messed up"? Crumb's one of the greatest, most celebrated cartoonists of all time.

a. the reviewer is trying to prove their wealth of knowledge, show to their readers that they "know their stuff"

LOL

b. that they are, consciously or subconsciously, indicating their own preferential approach to the given subject matter. The latter of which often leads to a response of "Well why don't you go read that instead".

It's not my job to make people want to read your webcomic. Isn't that your job, as the creator?

I mean, I haven't seen this degree of butthurt around here since the last time we had an absolute noob get their work torn apart.
The way you dismiss the second comment about the complete differences between the two work - "If you say so" - pretty much proves my entire point about misusing comparisons.

The comparison's that readers want intimacy, and everything about your story's fake. You don't need to emulate Crumb exactly, but you do need to learn how to relate to readers, which is something Crumb was able to do. Either that, or just do your own thing and stop caring what others think about your work.

Sometimes the reader just wants entertainment.
Granted I failed at that but that was due to poor characterisation and writing, not the lack of intimacy.
You seem to be under the delusional assumption that all artistic expressions have to deep and meaningful, when this is clearly not the case.
I didn't start reading Sluggy Freelance (for example) for it's intimacy, I started reading it because it was fun. The same reason I started reading Archie comics again.
Escapism, that is the most common people read/watch stuff, we want to be distracted from our lives.

Now I'm well aware that I have to work to make my comic appealing to an audience, to make it relateable. I have to improve the characterisation, I have to improve the art and I damn well need to make the jokes funny (yeah, good luck on that one Scooby). But one thing I don't need to do is make it into some dreary introspective wankfest, there's enough of that around already. (And just to clarify, I was using wankfest as a metaphor).


As has been mentioned about me before, I am very good at taking criticism, I've had a ton of it and I come back for more despite having some serious emotional and confidence issues. So far on this forum I've had exactly one bad response to a review - your review of the comic version of FT - I certainly didn't respond to your review of my current comic poorly and only delved back into the subject in response to your reaction to Tero's comments on your Twokinds review.

But since I've reminded myself of your review of my earlier work, it's funny how much that review relates to the current topic.
At the time I had trouble dealing with it rationally since the main vibe (intentional or not) of the review was a personal attack of "you're a sick pervert".
At the time your objections to a little nudity came across to me as that immature, conservative, White Knight, morally indignant "Oh my god boobies, this is all about sex, how dare he". Which has become i-fucking-ronic right about now.
I could take you to town on the obvious projection going on here as you approach things from a "sexual angle" but that is actually the less interesting part.
The interesting part, the realisation I had after I settled down from your FT review, was in respect to your correlation between the focus on Harli and some sexualisation angle:
Of course she was focused on, she's the damn narrator. Even in it's crappy comic form it was clearly a first-person narrative.

That is your main problem, you come at these reviews with your own mindset and don't deviate.
Which isn't to say that reviewers shouldn't bring their own opinions and views to the review but it does a damn disservice to both creator and reviewer when you let those opinions be the drive of the review narrative.


What's really fucking sad is I wouldn't be on this rant if not for your immature butthurt responses to a little criticism of your own work, I didn't make any attacks in my previous post, merely pointed out that sometimes you (and all reviewers) need to choose your comparisons more carefully.
But as you said:

Either that, or just do your own thing and stop caring what others think about your work.

Now LC, you can feel free to ignore or dismiss everything else I've said in this post, I don't care. But since I, personally, don't like tearing people down and leaving them there in pieces I hope you at least take the following on:
When it comes to the technical reviewing, you are pretty damn good, I like your no-nonsense approach, bluntness is a rare virtue in the world of advice giving. Hell I've even taken on your point about elbow position relative to the ribcage (and added it to the list of things McD had already told me to work on). You're one of the best around here at techical criticism - that's why I openly welcomed a review by you, I knew I was gonna be torn apart but it was worth it, even if just for that one tip about elbows.
If you can just change your approach to deeper analysis you will improve your reviews immensely.
Remember: sometimes the funny books are just about the funny and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.


One more sad point before I go. After your review of my current comic I was actually quite eagerly anticipating a point in the future where you would review my work again, say another 50 pages down the line. I was actually saying to myself that I was determined to get a higher score, to prove that I could improve. Now I just don't care.



*sigh*

Okay to everyone else here, my apologies. I know these kind of rants are pretty uncharacteristic of me but sometimes frustration overwhelms civility. I'm sure some of you will disagree with the points I've made but I hope at the very least you will understand what I am trying to say.
And please don't hold this rant against me.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

A few points to be fair to LC- I haven't read twokinds myself, but he's far from the first person I've seen to call it pornographic or fetishistic. And Schoob I did feel there was palpably objectification in your earlier works, though it was also clear that you weren't doing it to intentionally be degrading or anything like that- it's just how it was coming accross.

LC, you know that I really enjoy your reviews, and read pretty much every one that you write even if I'm unfamiliar with the comic. Your responses in here are a bit confusing to me. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt in that your responses are deceptively coming across as sour and emotional but are really just reflecting your actual feelings poorly. You aren't usually this dismissive or argumentative alternatively. I can respect that you disagree with some of Tero's points on the TK review but it's sounding like you're taking *something* personally, whether it's something Tero said or something Schoob said. What really makes me think this is the Schoob quote I tried to clarify earlier, your response seemed to be responding to some unseen implication that wasn't really there.

[RobboAKAscooby]

Your responses in here are a bit confusing to me. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt in that your responses are deceptively coming across as sour and emotional but are really just reflecting your actual feelings poorly. You aren't usually this dismissive or argumentative alternatively. I can respect that you disagree with some of Tero's points on the TK review but it's sounding like you're taking *something* personally, whether it's something Tero said or something Schoob said. What really makes me think this is the Schoob quote I tried to clarify earlier, your response seemed to be responding to some unseen implication that wasn't really there.

That is, I admit, what pushed me into rant mode.
His responses just had this dismissive, reactionary attitude to them that rubbed me the wrong way.
Like, if any of us responded to criticism of our work in that way there'd be virtual head smack of "suck it up princess and move on". And rightly so, the least we owe each other is maturity, this little community is built on respect (well that and poop jokes).

As I mentioned in my rant, I too respect LCs abilities as a reviewer (generally), and as I said I was anticipating a future review, so it was a huge disappointment to get the attitude in return to what I thought was a quite reasonable piece of advice/criticism.

A few points to be fair to LC- I haven't read twokinds myself, but he's far from the first person I've seen to call it pornographic or fetishistic.

I haven't read it either but I've seen enough, through other reviews, to realise that it's quite tame compared to the furry stereotype. Regardless the way LC responded to Tero was rather rude/dismissive.

And Schoob I did feel there was palpably objectification in your earlier works, though it was also clear that you weren't doing it to intentionally be degrading or anything like that- it's just how it was coming accross.

Well I can't argue, with my leanings towards a little fan-service and my poor abilities drawing such, that there isn't going to be some impressions of objectification. But like you said, clearly not intended in any degrading way.
Again this isn't something I wouldn't have even brought up if not for his current comments rubbing me the wrong way.

[RobboAKAscooby]

And I've been getting a bunch of views on my comic coming from this topic in the last 24 hours...
...
...to quote the Jedi, "I have a bad feeling about this."

[RobboAKAscooby]

Triple post (my bad) but I just realised I haven't updated the list for a while:

UPDATED:

List so far:
Scooby's comic being reviewed by LibertyCabbage DONE
Red Slime being reviewed by Djracodex DONE
Masadjra being reviewed by IVstudios DONE
Inhumation being reviewed by Cuddly DONE
Loud Era being reviewed by Terotrous DONE
What Lies Beyond being reviewed by Scooby DONE
Scooby's comic being reviewed by Cope DONE
Cerintha being reviewed by JSConnor800 DONE
Steels Salvation being reviewed by Cuddly
Loud Era being reviewed by Scooby DONE
Flying Tigers being reviewed by JSConnor800
Steel Salvation being reviewed by robybang
Artie The Opossum being reviewed by Cope
Cerintha being reviewed by LibertyCabbage DONE
Webcomic Police being reviewed by Terotrous DONE
...(and also robybang due to a posting error?)
What Lies Beyond being reviewed by JSConnor800
Steel Salvation being reviewed by coyote
Bohica Blues being reviewed by Cuddly
Loud Era being reviewed by LibertyCabbage
Red Slime being reviewed by Dranxis
What Nonsense being reviewed by ...

Please let me know if I've missed any in the walls of text.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

Triple post (my bad) but I just realised I haven't updated the list for a while:

UPDATED:

List so far:
Scooby's comic being reviewed by LibertyCabbage DONE
Red Slime being reviewed by Djracodex DONE
Masadjra being reviewed by IVstudios DONE
Inhumation being reviewed by Cuddly DONE
Loud Era being reviewed by Terotrous DONE
What Lies Beyond being reviewed by Scooby DONE
Scooby's comic being reviewed by Cope DONE
Cerintha being reviewed by JSConnor800 DONE
Steels Salvation being reviewed by Cuddly
Loud Era being reviewed by Scooby DONE
Flying Tigers being reviewed by JSConnor800
Steel Salvation being reviewed by robybang
Artie The Opossum being reviewed by Cope
Cerintha being reviewed by LibertyCabbage DONE
Webcomic Police being reviewed by Terotrous DONE
...(and also robybang due to a posting error?)
What Lies Beyond being reviewed by JSConnor800
Steel Salvation being reviewed by coyote
Bohica Blues being reviewed by Cuddly
Loud Era being reviewed by LibertyCabbage
Red Slime being reviewed by Dranxis
What Nonsense being reviewed by ...

Please let me know if I've missed any in the walls of text.

Whoa, that's pretty good!! I didn't realize we'd already unrolled so many.

I haven't gotten to Steel Salvation yet, I'm working a temporary full-time teaching job for a few weeks woooo and so I have more work outside of school time than normal and am still trying to find time to work on my own comic. I'll aim to at least have my first readthrough done sometime this weekend.

[Terotrous]

Oh damn, I just saw that robybang post that was actually above mine, when I posted it wasn't there, probably because he wasn't approved yet or something.

If he hasn't already done the review he should probably just jump back in at the end, otherwise I can try to throw something together for his comic as well.