Have you read it?Have you implemented it?
>>153644161Yes of course. It's pretty much fundamental reading for anyone interested in comics.
>>153644161Yes and I think so. I probably follow the "Z" composition too much when drawing my comics
Samefagging for your merch won't make it more popular.
>>153645273why are you calling it merch
>>153645309Obviously, you're selling it.
>>153645330merch is an accessory to a piece of mediathis is a comic book
Speaking of McCloud I thought it was neat to see these panels get turned into a fotm meme template recently.
>>153644161Not yet, but I’ve read making comics
>>153644161Is that Harry Potter??
>>153644161Not yet, but I intend to.
>>153645587
>>153644161No and No.
>>153644161I've read Understanding Comics and Making Comics. I haven't gotten around to Reinventing Comics yet, though from what I gather a lot of it is discussing then-experimental stuff that is already outdated.I often think about the artists cycle section from Understanding, as well as the four tribes dialogue from Making. What fascinates me is that while I do try to produce creative works, I am primarily focused on video games instead of comics, and yet many of McCloud's talking points apply to my chosen creative field as well (and I assume they would apply to music, books, film, etc.). An informative and insightful book that has points that can apply across multiple artistic fields is one I believe to be a genuine treasure.
>>153648250I've read all three but only own Understanding and Making. One of my favorite parts is he understands what works across different genres and styles.
>>153644161Yeah it's good stuff. The best part is it's a comic.
>>153648250Reinventing got a lot of flack but in many ways it's been proven to be ahead of its time so it's worth a look. Though compared to the practicality of the other two books it certainly feels like the ugly duckling.Let's take a quick look at the six steps. That part has also stuck with me.
>tfw you didn't get past the fundies
Shoutout to Eisner, approved by McCloud himself. His instructional books are great.
>>153644161it's okay if you're a faggot
>>153645552>Nerdy McNerdah yeah, the famous hero of Revenge of the Nerds
>>153645247This, until it came out Eisner's Sequential Art was the text on the subject.
And that's all for this part. McCloud is describing these steps in terms of comics but you can easily apply it to any other medium.
>>153650527I read this when it came out and it blew my mind. Matt Feazell was right about some kid in his late 20s unlocking these mysteries.
>>153644161>scott mccloudisnt that the guy from the super mario movie?
>>153651075lolol
>>153650408
>>153652347>Is another based boy hating on the liberal arts because we value ideas over race genocide
>>153652404I have dickpoopschizo fatigue
>>153648250>as well as the four tribes dialogue from Making.It's a little reductive, but still an interesting concept.
>>153652347I'm pretty sure there's a tale about this but with clothes instead of "art"
>>153644161I need to reread this and Making Comics in the very near future. >>153648250Reinventing is a book that created a shit storm, because of all its dumb, impossible ideas- many, if not most of which turned out to be exactly fucking right.
>>153652404DO AMERICAN REALLY
>>153650519That was only 8 years.
>>153644161
>>153654063HA!
Making Comics > Understanding Comics > Reinventing ComicsI don’t know if I’d actually recommend any of them, though.
It's really just fascinating reading
>>153645552I gueas this explains why simplistic shit gets a lot of attention from people, using lets say fanart as a metric for how much people care, you have thousands of people doing art and porn of lets say mlp or whatever those things from digital circus are, but you dont see the same behavour for something like 80s semi realistic cartoon or stuff from Mike judge. Something closer would be simpsons stuff which is not realistic but still attracts people towards it enough to draw them and get invested.
>>153654286No that's just autism and brain rot
Are his comics good?Does he apply his own advice?
>>153654546Zot is...okay. He has a good technical understanding of character and scene composition, but there's something kind of lacking with the story. Certainly, characters like Dekko and 9-Jack-9 are interesting, but the stories they show up in are pretty underwhelming, and feel like quite a bit of missed potential. The Earth Chronicles just get worse, with too much ham-handed social commentary and poorly executed interpersonal drama (something McCloud himself acknowledges in the omnibus commentary). Given Zot was his first foray into proper comics, I don't doubt what he learned during its run taught him many of the lessons he'd later expand upon in Understanding Comics.I haven't read The Sculptor, so I can't say if it's any good.
>>153654286>>153654379I'd say it's both, more abstracted visuals will usually have a wider range of appeal, but the more mentally disabled and/or ill that someone gets the more that they develop a genuinely fanatical obsession with stuff that looks simplistic It's for that reason why I believe that shit like wojaks won't ever go away despite being spammed for 15+ years, within the simplicity there's something that these kinds of people "see" in their warped subconscious
>>153652347
>>153654063Kek this is great
>>153652993> It's a little reductiveWhat do you mean exactly
I really need to read understanding and making, they've been on my bucket list for a while, i should probably just outright buy them instead of just relying on a pdf on my computer
>>153655555quints confirm
>>153654546The Sculptor got a mixed reception initially from what I recall. It got a lot of shit for the manic pixie dream girl plot and for being kind of heavy handed. I think he does a good job practicing what he preaches with technique though. It's a smooth reading experience. Personally I've softened up on it over the years after his irl wife who the main girl is based on died in a car accident.
>>153655588Putting artists into one of four boxes devalues their work by giving them arbitrary labels. Art Spiegelman was super experimental, but is most well known for Maus, which was very straightforward and realistic, so it seems reductive to just call him an experimenter and be done with it when the reality is more nuanced than that.
>>153644161Yes but no as I am reading all of his books. It is quite intriguing.
illustrated by the same guy who made r9k mascot
>>153657134Which one?
>>153654546He did some good issues of Superman Adventures
>>153655398Ditto.
>>153655758>manic pixie dream girl"the woman isn't a selfish useless burden" will never be a real criticism.
>>153644161SomeSome
>>153654063This legit could be a McCloud strip, fucking hell
>>153654063>some memes can be replicated with only seven drawn lines!
>>153654063Oh, fuck...
>>153658197Is that what they want?
