Diseased #Comicsgate - The Culture Wars Hit The Funny Books!

[Newman's Own]

How is it a grift when he delivers everything he peddles as described?

$2.75 per page of new content.

Enjoy your "value".

As for complicated backgrounds, WTF. Bloodhoney was full of spectacular backgrounds, and
so is this new one.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

Over rendered tree trunks with no branches aren't exactly complicated or spectacular. Nice work avoiding having to draw in perspective though.

It's no wonder you pay Ritter so well. He can ad the depth for you.

 

[Rupin]

$2.75 per page of new content.

Enjoy your "value".


HAHAHAHA!!!!!

Over rendered tree trunks with no branches aren't exactly complicated or spectacular. Nice work avoiding having to draw in perspective though.

It's no wonder you pay Ritter so well. He can ad the depth for you.

Can we see your artwork, so you can show a man who has been drawing comics for 27 years how perspective is really done? Or are you just gonna be a tard and use the sealion excuse to run away from the fact that you you don’t know what you are talking about?

 

[Newman's Own]

Can we see your artwork, so you can show a man who has been drawing comics for 27 years how perspective is really done? Or are you just gonna be a tard and use the sealion excuse to run away from the fact that you you don’t know what you are talking about?

I understand enough about art to tell when someone is faking perspective. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.

EDIT:
He did a good job faking though. I'll give him that after 27 years.

 

[SaidNoOneEver]

I understand enough about art to tell when someone is faking perspective. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.

EDIT:
He did a good job faking though. I'll give him that after 27 years.

I think I've found the disconnect here. You think comics are "art". I bet you call it a "book" too. Can I interest you in this doll to play with? That tail moves!

 

[Newman's Own]

I think I've found the disconnect here. You think comics are "art". I bet you call it a "book" too. Can I interest you in this doll to play with?

That's a creepy question to ask someone on the internet.

I think comics art requires some basic fundamentals like anatomy and perspective to be quality if the artist is looking for a realistic effect which Ethan clearly is. Ethan's good at faking perspective but he lacks the fundamentals that would make him good at actually drawing in perspective.

Whatever. Good for him if he's gotten away with it for this long but using a drawing of branchless trees in faked perspective as an example of his "complicated" and "spectacular" backgrounds should be embarrassing to him.

Perhaps your definition of "art" is more highbrow than mine. Good for you. Do you have any Grey Poupon?

 

[FROG]

"Faking perspective."

LOL

 

[Newman's Own]

"Faking perspective."

LOL

"Complicated and spectacular."

You do know that trees narrow as they go up don't you? Especially when the artist is attempting a worms eye perspective.

I'm not sure if it's because you're lazy or you just don't know how. I'm guessing it's the latter tho.

EDIT:
I'm not sure if the subject in your drawing is running leaping or levitating but if you've decided to put your camera at ground level it would be a good idea if that was reflected in your perspective of the figure.

Why do the trees in the foreground have no branches for 20 feet up while the trees in the background have low branching habits?

Why is your vertical vanishing point all over the place? You seemed to be trying to do a one point on your vertical perspective.

Complicated backgrounds tend to have man made elements like buildings with straight lines and engineered curves that are difficult to draw but good job adding all those rendering lines to your tree trunks. "Complicated"

Perspective done well.

 

[NasserRabadi13]

Thanks for comparing me to Stephen King.

I'm not Stephen King. I'm still a nobody. Stephen King has publicists and all of that shit because
he's BECOME Stephen King after many years of establishing himself above and apart from his peers,
having started at the ground.

I promote myself because nobody else will. I'm ComicsGate. I ship my own stuff, with the help of my
family, because we're a small business and it's more economical to do it ourselves. It's EXTREMELY expensive
to hire a fulfillment service. We tried that for BLOODHONEY.

We'd rather just do it ourselves, keep track of our own packages, and maintain
good customer service. Small business.

As for complicated backgrounds, WTF. Bloodhoney was full of spectacular backgrounds, and
so is this new one.
Have a great night!View attachment 1448809

While it's not a complicated background or spectacular or anything, it is a good page. I dont see the perspective problem with this page--as long as things look pretty much normal, artists can get away with winging perspective. I've seen worse perspective issues.

I'm actually pretty interested at the horror on the bottom of the page. That seems more important than the branches.

"Complicated and spectacular."

You do know that trees narrow as they go up don't you? Especially when the artist is attempting a worms eye perspective.

I'm not sure if it's because you're lazy or you just don't know how. I'm guessing it's the latter tho.

EDIT:
I'm not sure if the subject in your drawing is running leaping or levitating but if you've decided to put your camera at ground level it would be a good idea if that was reflected in your perspective of the figure.

Why do the trees in the foreground have no branches for 20 feet up while the trees in the background have low branching habits?

Why is your vertical vanishing point all over the place? You seemed to be trying to do a one point on your vertical perspective.

Complicated backgrounds tend to have man made elements like buildings with straight lines and engineered curves that are difficult to draw but good job adding all those rendering lines to your tree trunks. "Complicated"

Perspective done well.
View attachment 1448980

Good example of a complicated background. Most artists cheat those with 3D models now. That gives me even more appreciation with intricate art before Photoshop or Manga Studio or whatever.

Edit: Boomer and forgot to delete something.

 

[FROG]

"Complicated and spectacular."

You do know that trees narrow as they go up don't you? Especially when the artist is attempting a worms eye perspective.

I'm not sure if it's because you're lazy or you just don't know how. I'm guessing it's the latter tho.

EDIT:
I'm not sure if the subject in your drawing is running leaping or levitating but if you've decided to put your camera at ground level it would be a good idea if that was reflected in your perspective of the figure.

Why do the trees in the foreground have no branches for 20 feet up while the trees in the background have low branching habits?

Why is your vertical vanishing point all over the place? You seemed to be trying to do a one point on your vertical perspective.

Complicated backgrounds tend to have man made elements like buildings with straight lines and engineered curves that are difficult to draw but good job adding all those rendering lines to your tree trunks. "Complicated"

Perspective done well.
View attachment 1448980

You're comparing a 5 point perspective splash with an almost fish eye lense of a city street scene with a single panel of a guy running thru a forest.

It's as though I pulled out an acoustic and strummed a few chords, and you said, "That's garbage, listen to this:" and played a Joe Satriani CD.

You're retarded.

The dude said, "You aren't drawing detailed backgrounds." I'm drawing full backgrounds with lots of detail.

You're looking at a pseudo 3 point perspective shot of an organic environment, with enough information to sell the illusion that the guy is running panicked thru the Pine Barrens. It's perfect. You're nitpicking out of gay rage.

Just be happy. CYBERFROG 2 is coming!

 

[Adamska]

Eh, Ethan understands perspective since the backdrop is fine as is, all I can say negative about it is that the backdrop doesn't QUITE match the angle that the character is moving at, and it's only noticeable if I look for the issue. Clearly a two part stage for drawing, where one component is made after the other, which is done pretty often in drawing. It's also decently detailed; simple scene in design, but he focused on adding texturing to it.

I'll shellack him on work ethic and in behavior, but I'm not going to argue too hard on art since he's good when he picks up his pencil and inks.

Like, even the example you post @Newman's Own seems a bit off, multipoint perspective for the car is a bit off for the car, since it wasn't drawn seriously with one of the vanishing points.

 

[Newman's Own]

While it's not a complicated background or spectacular or anything, it is a good page. I dont see the perspective problem with this page--as long as things look pretty much normal, artists can get away with winging perspective. I've seen worse perspective issues.

I agree. It's a decent comics page. It's just neither complicated or spectacular.

I did a quick google image search of Marcos Mateu-Mestre. He literally wrote the book on perspective for comics. He knows how to make a good background great.

The difference is where the quality lies. At $2.75 a page I think Ethan's customers should expect more quality than faking it.

Spoiler: Marcos Mateu

You're comparing a 5 point perspective splash with an almost fish eye lense of a city street scene with a single panel of a guy running thru a forest.

I'm comparing a complicated and spectacular splash page to a less than complicated or spectacular (your words) 3/4 page panel.

The dude said, "You aren't drawing detailed backgrounds." I'm drawing full backgrounds with lots of detail.

" Now imagine, if you will, how much longer it would take you to draw CF if you drew anything resembling a complicated background, OY VEY! "
Rendering is lazy man's detail. Dude said your backgrounds aren't complicated.

He was right.

You got but hurt about it and proved him right with your Simple Jack drawn forest scene. Channel that rage Ethan.

I'm not going to argue too hard on art since he's good when he tries.

I'm not saying his drawing is terrible. It's fine. It's just a little simple and vanilla and I think it's amusing that he used it as an example of how "spectacular" his background work is.

He's been listening to his simp squad's hype a little to much.

 

[jspit]

I think I've found the disconnect here. You think comics are "art". I bet you call it a "book" too. Can I interest you in this doll to play with? That tail moves!

Can we see your artwork, so you can show a man who has been drawing comics for 27 years how perspective is really done? Or are you just gonna be a tard and use the sealion excuse to run away from the fact that you you don’t know what you are talking about?

Has he promoted your stuff yet, or are you still 'proving your loyalty to Caeser?'

It's perfect. Your nitpicking out of gay rage.

Just be happy. CYBERFROG 2 is coming!

Your arts never been a problem, in my mind. Hell, I defended, jeez a couple of pages back. You and simp TDGT and SNOE still haven't answered about Dynamite though...

 

[KingofNothing]

Decided to give the comment section from Mitch's interview a bit to fill out to see if anything juicy popped up. Only 4 so far, but I'm expecting some vitriol to seep through over the week to keep kicking Mitch in the ass. Not a particularly interesting interview and the interviewer seems to be tossing Mitch a bunch of softballs, but the first story of Red Rooster is gonna be split into 3 parts, so expect one more pdf to come out. The question of whether backers would get their book before part 3 hit stores did come up from the chat and Mitch didn't seem completely confident that backers would get their's first, particularly the overseas guys(32:22) but he claims his team is pushing to make that happen. Watching backers shit themselves in a rage when some schmuck can walk into Walmart on a whim and potentially get the whole story before their books hits the mailbox is gonna be a sight to see. Tick tock, Mitch.

 

[Nihil Jung]

Frog: "got better things to do have a good night!"

Also:

"Faking perspective."

LOL

And this is after talking about productive uses of one's time and him having little grasp of truthfulness.

You're comparing a 5 point perspective splash with an almost fish eye lense of a city street scene with a single panel of a guy running thru a forest.

It's as though I pulled out an acoustic and strummed a few chords, and you said, "That's garbage, listen to this:" and played a Joe Satriani CD.

You're retarded.

The dude said, "You aren't drawing detailed backgrounds." I'm drawing full backgrounds with lots of detail.

You're looking at a pseudo 3 point perspective shot of an organic environment, with enough information to sell the illusion that the guy is running panicked thru the Pine Barrens. It's perfect. Your nitpicking out of gay rage.

Just be happy. CYBERFROG 2 is coming!

Not only did you post a flat mid, flat bg diaramaesque environment with zero character or artistry as a "counter-point", not only did you call it "perfect", but you also illustrate your complete lack of understanding of perspective with your break down of someone else's work. 5-point perspective city shot? Lol, I'll redline you them vertical lines tomorrow, champ, they all straight. Strike two? "Almost has a fisheye effect" Genius, all 5-point perspective has a fisheye effect, by definition. And this city shot doesn't because its not 5-point. Ffs the page you posted IS and you wiffed it.

Page in question also keeps in Frog's one panel with a background per page...*max* motif. You're gonna chalk it up to story telling here, and in this case you're right. In this case.

The ego.

 

[FROG]

How does one “fake“ perspective? You either get it right or you don’t.

Mike Weiringo told me once that he never did perspective grids. He just faked it.

If you understand perspective, you can fudge it. It's not a good idea, especially for rigid, structured environments. For organic backdrops, a simple understanding of how the horizon line functions is enough.

Not only did you post a flat mid, flat bg diaramaesque environment with zero character or artistry as a "counter-point", not only did you call it "perfect", but you also illustrate your complete lack of understanding of perspective with your break down of someone else's work. 5-point perspective city shot? Lol, I'll redline you them vertical lines tomorrow, champ, they all straight. Strike two? "Almost has a fisheye effect" Genius, all 5-point perspective has a fisheye effect, by definition. And this city shot doesn't because its not 5-point. Ffs the page you posted IS and you wiffed it.

Page in question also keeps in Frog's one panel with a background per page...*max* motif. You're gonna chalk it up to story telling here, and in this case you're right. In this case.

The ego.

Whoa! You're right. The verticals are parallel, and the artist faked what should have been a 3rd point far off the page.

OWNED.

So we've got one natural point on the page causing the fish eye skew, and another one off the page, and then two false points on the horizon to park those cars at an angle.

It's good stuff! Thanks!

 

[Mister Dongs]

Complicated backgrounds tend to have man made elements like buildings with straight lines and engineered curves that are difficult to draw but good job adding all those rendering lines to your tree trunks. "Complicated"

Perspective done well.

The difference in linework and shading between foreground and background suggest the latter was some Google Sketchup-aided CGi creation though whereas Frog is drawing his art using traditional means.

 

[FROG]

The difference in linework and shading between foreground and background suggest the latter was some Google Sketchup-aided CGi creation though whereas Frog is drawing his art using traditional means.

It still took skill to assemble, and obviously the figures are real.

Sketch Up really broke my heart. I asked Steve McNiven how he managed the Spider-Buggy in all of those great shots in Old Man Wolverine, back in 2008 or so. He showed me. I was bummed out. I'd rather have you draw and some mistakes be present than to use digital models.

 

[Newman's Own]

The difference in linework and shading between foreground and background suggest the latter was some Google Sketchup-aided CGi creation though whereas Frog is drawing his art using traditional means.

You might think that but you'd be in error. This is the cover drawing for Mateo's perspective drawing manual, Framed Perspective Vol. 1, that is highly regarded throughout the industry. As it turns out he's just really good and extremely technical at drawing perspective. You could say "He wrote the book." Ethan could stand to pick up a copy.

I will give you that the drawing was likely done on a computer as I know he likes to use Photoshop.

Framed Perspective Vol. 1: Technical Perspective and Visual Storytelling: Mateu-Mestre, Marcos: 9781624650307: Amazon.com: Books

Framed Perspective Vol. 1: Technical Perspective and Visual Storytelling [Mateu-Mestre, Marcos] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Framed Perspective Vol. 1: Technical Perspective and Visual Storytelling

www.amazon.com

 

[Rupin]

Has he promoted your stuff yet, or are you still 'proving your loyalty to Caeser?'



Your arts never been a problem, in my mind. Hell, I defended, jeez a couple of pages back. You and simp TDGT and SNOE still haven't answered about Dynamite though...

when I have stuff coming out, I will promote it on my own merit. If I can get EVS to give me a shout out, awesome. If not, I still have a book that needs to be funded. My loyalty will be rewarded when I get three comics, a pvs toy and a cool trading card for 25 dollars. Something that no other campaign on now or has been on since has managed to come close to offering for such a cheap price.

As for the Dynamite situation, I really couldn’t give a damn about it. I don’t buy their products anyway If they wanna support BLM than let them, I’m not gonna sperg out about it.

 

[Nihil Jung]

Mike Weiringo told me once that he never did perspective grids. He just faked it.

If you understand perspective, you can fudge it. It's not a good idea, especially for rigid, structured environments. For organic backdrops, a simple understanding of how the horizon line functions is enough.



Whoa! You're right. The verticals are parallel, and the artist faked what should have been a 3rd point far off the page.

OWNED.

So we've got one natural point on the page causing the fish eye skew, and another one off the page, and then two false points on the horizon to park those cars at an angle.

It's good stuff! Thanks!

You continue to illustrate you have no clue what 5 point perspective is. This is really entertaining.