# Comic style preferences



## Aleu (Aug 23, 2010)

So I use deviantArt as the primary art site I frequent. A lot of my favorite comic artists are on there such as humon and Slinkers.
I noted how different their art style is. Humon can draw pretty simple people when it's a small comic and some of her other pieces are more detailed. Slinkers, on the other hand, pretty much has the same style. This made me wonder "Do people prefer a well-drawn comic? Or do they not care as long as it's entertaining?"


----------



## Mayonnaise (Aug 23, 2010)

I don't really care as long as it's entertaining, having it well drawn is better though.


----------



## Cam (Aug 23, 2010)

Its deff gotta be entertaining, otherwise whats the point in reading it?

I hate when comic artists go completely nuts with the word bubbles and you cant tell who is saying what, what comes after what, etc, etc

If it is drawn well then thats just kinda extra points for me

S'long as its not drawn to the point where you don't even know what it is


----------



## Gavrill (Aug 23, 2010)

I like JTHM as an art style, but it only works for dark humor, it seems.


----------



## Stargazer Bleu (Aug 23, 2010)

I would prefer both.

Although as long as it entertaining doesn't matter all that much.


----------



## Fenrari (Aug 23, 2010)

Well-drawn art leads to fulfillment of the entertaining part as the overall base isn't an eyesore.


----------



## Minuet (Aug 23, 2010)

I usually prefer ones that are both well-drawn and entertaining, though in some cases I'll just take entertaining (xkcd being the prime example - it's all stick figures, but the jokes are fantastic.)


----------



## Willow (Aug 23, 2010)

Molly said:


> I like JTHM as an art style, but it only works for dark humor, it seems.


 Lol this. My cousin recommended I read it because I liked Invader Zim and such, though the art style used in both books (JTHM and Squee) I don't know how to describe them really. 

Though when I look at a comic, in some instances I can overlook the art style if the plot is good enough. I'll tell you when I find an example. 

I pay way too much attention to the art, not saying I don't actually read what I'm looking at, but I do tend to study the art when I do.


----------



## The DK (Aug 24, 2010)

it has to entertain, if its well drawn its a plus


----------



## Vo (Aug 24, 2010)

I'm in it mainly for entertainment. I don't mind good drawing, either, but in comics, IMO, it can be too good. Some comics or graphic novels are so "well"-drawn and detailed that I can hardly tell what all is going on without inspecting a single 2-page spread for several minutes longer than I really should need to. Especially if it's in greyscale. Very hard to sort out the image.



> Though when I look at a comic, in some instances I can overlook the art style if the plot is good enough. I'll tell you when I find an example.



Luke Surl writes mostly single-pane comics, geeky jokes, that sort of thing. I generally don't like the drawing style. Too many unnecessary details which really only make things look worse. It's been much better lately. I don't really care, though, because the jokes are fine.

The Punisher is great, but often too busy to read effectively, for example.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Aug 24, 2010)

Greg Capullo.

That's the style I like.

http://comicartcommunity.com/gallery/categories.php?cat_id=149


----------



## Commiecomrade (Aug 24, 2010)

Molly said:


> I like JTHM as an art style, but it only works for dark humor, it seems.



This made Invader Zim seem really awkward for me, seeing as that it was broadcast to minors and without any killing or "FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUCK!" statements.


----------



## CynicalCirno (Aug 24, 2010)

It doesn't have to be well drawn to have good storyline and funny jokes, but if it looks fugly and is full with dog dong caihong then I don't read it.
Like others said, the quality of the art is an extra.


----------



## Term_the_Schmuck (Aug 24, 2010)

This kind.

Straight up, best ongoing series out there.  Can't wait for the AMC live-action show.


----------



## Citrakayah (Aug 24, 2010)

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm
Amazing art and an entertaining story? Sure.

I really don't care about the art as long as it's entertaining though.


----------



## Willow (Aug 24, 2010)

Commiecomrade said:


> This made Invader Zim seem really awkward for me, seeing as that it was broadcast to minors and without any killing or "FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUCK!" statements.


 Invader Zim had a lot of dark undertones, but when you think about it, Konami owns both Dance Dance Revolution and Silent Hill. 
Yea, they come from different departments of the company and such, but they're under the same production label. 

Basically, what I'm getting at is that just because a company or person does one thing doesn't mean they only do that or things similar.


----------



## Waffles (Aug 24, 2010)

Entertaining of course, but the well-drawn is relative. It can be simple yet well drawn, and up to a point the drawing doesn't matter. But without proper or decent visuals, the entertainment factor sort of drops.


----------



## Zydala (Aug 24, 2010)

I know a lot of people have mentioned that "well-drawn" art in a comic is a plus and all, but there has to be some sort of talent somewhere in there - or else there was no point in making it a visual art in the first place. Visual storytelling needs BOTH to really shine. Without art, it might as well just be writing - and without good writing, it might as well just consist of a series of pretty illustrations. Or nothing at all!

I'm not saying you have to have *amazing* art, but it has to fit the subject and be well-implemented - which is why, as people have noted, some artists have styles that are more befitting to some subjects than to others.


----------



## Aleu (Aug 24, 2010)

So far I agree with a lot of people here. Well drawn is a nice plus but a lot of the time the comedy makes up for it. Though...sometimes the art is what gives it the charm like in Slinkers' comics or Salad Fingers or Foamy the Squirrel


----------



## TopazThunder (Aug 24, 2010)

Well since a comic is very much visually based, I'd say there should always be some kind of artistic merit in the images.  That and an interesting plotline that grabs my attention and keeps it is essential. I wouldn't say one is more important than the other; they both require an equal amount of attention and skill.

If somehow the comic is lacking in innovative plot design, the art needs to pick up the slack, but after a while, no art that amazing will make up for a crappy, slumping plotline. And vice versa. I've seen some amazing webcomics out there, especially as far as the art goes, but I've yet to see any webcomic that holds my attention longer than a month or so of updates. The comic Looking For Group is the one that comes closest for me, not just in art but in plot and character development: http://www.lfgcomic.com/



			
				Zydala said:
			
		

> I know a lot of people have mentioned that "well-drawn" art in a comic is a plus and all, but there has to be some sort of talent somewhere in there - or else there was no point in making it a visual art in the first place. Visual storytelling needs BOTH to really shine. Without art, it might as well just be writing - and without good writing, it might as well just consist of a series of pretty illustrations. Or nothing at all!
> 
> I'm not saying you have to have *amazing* art, but it has to fit the subject and be well-implemented - which is why, as people have noted, some artists have styles that are more befitting to some subjects than to others.



Pretty much what I'm trying to get at, only this person says it better, lol.


----------



## Taralack (Aug 24, 2010)

cmrnmrphy said:


> I hate when comic artists go completely nuts with the word bubbles and you cant tell who is saying what, what comes after what, etc, etc


 
It's called exposition dump. :V

Pretty much what everyone has already said - as long as it's a good read, I'm usually fine with it. For example Questionable Content and Dark Legacy don't exactly have the best art out there, but the story and humor respectively make me keep reading it. On the other hand, _really_ good comics usually have both of those in equal quantities.


----------



## Smelge (Aug 25, 2010)

A comic NEEDS good writing. The writing is what keeps people returning. The art illustrates what is going on. A comic can survive slightly dodgy art if the story makes up for it, but no matter how good the art, it cannot survive bad writing.


----------



## Nyloc (Aug 25, 2010)

I like to think of a comic as a pie (as the cake is merely a fabrication) where the artwork is the pastry on the outside and the writing is the filling. That pretty much covers my opinion.


----------



## Zydala (Aug 25, 2010)

Smelge said:


> A comic NEEDS good writing. The writing is what keeps people returning. The art illustrates what is going on. A comic can survive slightly dodgy art if the story makes up for it, but no matter how good the art, it cannot survive bad writing.



A comic can survive slightly dodgy art as long as it doesn't interfere with what the picture is trying to express, is a better way to put it.


----------



## Smelge (Aug 25, 2010)

Zydala said:


> A comic can survive slightly dodgy art as long as it doesn't interfere with what the picture is trying to express, is a better way to put it.


 
Shhh. This is the tenet I live by for my drawing.


----------



## Taralack (Aug 25, 2010)

Nyloc said:


> I like to think of a comic as a pie (as the cake is merely a fabrication) where the artwork is the pastry on the outside and the writing is the filling. That pretty much covers my opinion.


 
That's a pretty awesome analogy.


----------



## Angelus-Mortis (Aug 30, 2010)

It depends, really. If you're going to judge a comic by its style or the way it's drawn, then it's quite like judging a book by its cover, since comics deliver not just images, but a message with text. Some people can't draw as well as they write, and conversely, some people draw better than they write--it's hard to have both. So long as the drawings in the comic aren't so terrible that you can't tell what's going on, and it's not going to make the message suffer, it's acceptable. If the drawings are good, but the message isn't, it's probably not worth reading. You'd have better luck appreciating the artists' other works that aren't comics. I would say the message is more important in a comic than the drawing--but they're not independent of each other necessarily, and that's when the drawing matters.


----------

