The Story So Far: Episode Zero
Officially, my comics career started last year, around February 2004. In this post, I'll briefly talk about the things that happened before that [Stan Lee] momentous, milestone of a month! [/Stan Lee]After getting out of college, I took part in the production of our college yearbook, which took a significant amount of my time. It was a lot of work, but it was fun and was a tremendous experiece. Along the way, I managaed to cajole my way into getting my college comic, Optiman (The Economic Avenger!) added as an extra feature in the book. Very, very cool. I also did the cover, which can be seen here.So, as that thing was coming to an end, I was at a crossroads in my life. Do I pursue comics, which is something I've always wanted to do? Or do I take up a "regular" job, at least for awhile, to make use of what I'd learned (and what my family invested in) in college? Bear in mind that I had been out of the comics loop for years, and didn't know a single thing about the industry, local or foreign.Unfortunately for my UP professors, I decided to take the plunge into the world of comics. I knew that I had to make a sample, and maybe mail it off to Marvel, Top Cow, DC, whoever. So my first attempt to do a proper sequential sample would be my favorite heroes, Cloak and Dagger. This was around the time that Marvel was looking for talent for its Epic line, which was pretty good timing. I remember downloading and printing their release forms, feeling really giddy and excited about the whole thing. Marel would later cancel its Epic line, so I wasn't able to send my package in, but at least, it was a fun experience.It was also around this time that I met my first honest-to-god comic professional, Gerry Alanguilan, at a small con in Shangri-La. Yes, I'm probably the only Filipino comic fan who had never met Whilce or Leneil in the past (still haven't). I remember being very excited about the whole thing, as Gerry had told me via email that he'd critique my Cloak and Dagger sample.I found a few days before the con that Leneil and Gerry were working on Superman, which I thought was very cool. See? Out of the loop!I watched in the crowd while Gerry inked a sweet Batman sketch which Leneil had done the previous day. After his demo, I nervously approached Gerry with my sample. Hahaha, my hands were actually shaking while I handed him the pages! He caught all my mistakes, of course, and politely pointed out to me that I should use professional tools when I work. My parallel lines weren't even parallel! Overall, Gerry gave me a good critique, and I took a lot of things out of that.Right after that meeting, I went straight to National Book Store and got a triangle, a portable drawing table, and a french curve set, which I still use today. My lines are parallel now! Well, most of the time, anyway... hehehe.About a week or so after that, I stumbled upon the alamat yahoo group, which is where a lot of local pros and fellow aspirants hang out. I even saw a post by Whilce. This, of course, blew my mind. However, bear in mind that I didn't know anyone from the local scene, so the only names I recognized on the list were Budj Tan, Whilce, and Gerry. Hehehe, this is where I first came across Wilson Tortosa's name. I saw some of his art online, which of course, rocked. I remember thinking, "wow, this guy can really draw! He has potential to become a pro!" Little did I know that he already WAS a pro! I could be the only person to recognize Wilson Tortosa's name from the yahoo group first, before learning about his Battle of the Planets run!I later ended up buying Wilson's scanner, which has been a TREMENDOUS help in my short career. I've been doing fairly well for myself lately, so maybe the scanner is magic! Hehehe. But seriously though, if I make it big, I'm planning on selling the scanner at the same price that Wilson sold it to me, so it can help yet another aspiring artist out. I think that'd be cool. Wilson has also generously given some of his free time to critique my samples, and has been a good influence as well. He really knows his fundamentals, and is very, very good at making dynamic lay-outs, poses, everything!Very nice, that yahoo group. Also met some fellow creators there who've since turned into friends. Wilson D, Jeff V, Paulo and Chez, Joel, Fero, etc., etc.Whew, this is longer than I expected. Gotta wrap it up quickly... uhh, the end! (How's that for quick?)
Thor Pitt
The art of mainstream comics (heck, even the medium itself) has been of a generally cyclical nature. Back in the 90's, the flashy style of art was the predominant one, a fact which made people like Rob Liefled, Jim Lee, and Todd McFarlance into superstars. However, the rise of artists like Bryan Hitch and John Cassaday over the past few years has influenced a more realistic trend to sequential art. Now you've got guys like Trevor Hairsine, Steve Epting, and Adi Granov being built into the stars of tomorrow. Realistic art isn't simply defined by a more realistic way of rendering faces, or of drawing the human figure. There's also been a marked downtrend when it comes to the symbols and shorthands that have been part of comic lore for many decades. You don't see too many sound effects these days, simply because you don't REALLY see a big "POW!" appear out of thin air when someone throws a punch. Also being seen less and less from mainstream US comics are action lines, dynamic panel borders, and other storytelling convetions that "just don't look real." Personally, I'm not so sure if you can say that comic art has evolved over the last ten years, as many people seem to believe. It seems like there's a movement to turn comics into movies on paper. Blame the success of Marvel's Ultimates, i suppose. Or blame the success of movies like "X2" and "Spider-Man."
Comics are so much more than that, though. Cinema is just one half of the media that comics can draw from. But I digress. Back to the art.
Whenever I see comics drawn realistically, I always remember the part of Scott McCloud's excellent Understanding Comics that says how doing photo-realistic art actually loses the reader, as it serves to distance them from relating to a particular character by making that character's face too specific. Indeed, sometimes when my buds look at art, what they notice immediately is that "Hey, Tony Stark looks like Tom Cruise!" or "Gee, Thor kinda resembles Brad Pitt, doesn't he?"
It moves them out of the story, stopping their involvement cold. (My friends are actually comic artists, so I think its okay that they notice/analyze things like that... but what about casual readers?)
Another thing I don't like about realistic art is a tendency towards stiffness. Check out Granov's work, or even Travis Charest or Steve McNiven. The figures look like mannequins being posed for a picture. Compare that with the work of Marc Silvestri or Adam Kubert-- their figures are always very dynamic, very fluid. In terms of being better illustrators, man, the realists will always win out. But the expressionists make better storyellers, in my opinion.
Note that I'm not saying one style of art is better than another. As of the moment though, the realistic school is probably more marketable to publishers and fans alike. Although I feel that it doesn't make the most of what comics can do, the art itself is very "pretty" and certainly more appealing to the eyes. And that's why many developing artists are pursuing that style of art, including myself.
Down the road, however, I think there's going to be another shift towards more dynamic, adventurous styles. It could be a long ways off though, as there are going to be big budget movies based on comics for at least three more years. But when it all dies down, I've got a hunch that we're going to see another wave of Quesadas and Liefelds.
"On Inking" (Or, "The Horror!")
Inking. God, inking.
You ever find yourself clarifying your thoughts, maybe by making your voice louder when you speak, or by rewriting something you've already written? That's what inking is. It's repeating yourself, just to get your point across more clearly. It's a monumental waste of time. It's essential to the process of creating comics. It's just putting ink over lead. It's so beyond tracing its not even funny. It's annoying. It's fun.
My first introduction to the world of ink was through a local comic workshop series. That's the first time I got to use a penbrush, which is still what I use up to this day. I love the damn thing. Although it can get a bit difficult to control the ink flow, I think the fact that you don't have to dip it makes it really easy to use. I also like the variety of the lines you can produce.
I recently bought a set of pens. Man, they're tough to use. The constant dipping is an annoyance, and I can't get the lines that I want sometimes. Hopefully, I'll improve with practce, because there are some thing that you just can't do with a penbrush.
I also use markers from time to time. Sue me. ^_^
There's definitely an art to inking that I haven't been able to acquire. Honestly speaking, I lose some quality whenever I ink myself. It still comes out okay-- but my pencils are usually better than my pen and ink work, at least for sequentials. For pin-ups though, I'm fine.
Inkers rule. Literally and figuratively. Love 'em all to death.
