How and why do bad artists manage to get published?
>>7167942Because a bad artist is still an artist which creates content while you complain.
>>7167946That doesn't answer OP's question, though. You can have any artist that makes bad drawings. The question is why some get commercialized anyway whereas others end up sitting in dust.
>>7167942I wouldn't even allow myself to draw this. I would have started over and tried to do better with the construction.So my only explanation is you have to be a bad artist AND you have to have no drive to improve, so your drawings are honest and aren't trying to be more than they are. When I draw, every line is pure agony and I'm terrified of doing things wrong, because my entire life is me getting beat down every time I make one wrong move. If you are rewarded for everything you do, you will be confident so even if your art sucks, it will have soul.
>>7167942Because comics are ultimately judged by their story, the art being good is just a nice extra.Also, I believe one punch man was just a web-comic, it was redrawn by a very talented artist to become a commercial product, no?
>>7167942Japanese. He's not a bad artist.
Pic not related? That's a self published web comic
>>7167959because they focus on drawing and publishing content. While retards like you are too busy bitching on a basket weaving forum and not even drawing.
>>7167967>I wouldn't even allow myself to draw this. I would have started over and tried to do better with the construction.Pussy coping under the guise of perfectionism and "improvement"Fpbp honestly. Good writing is the most important thing followed by good visuals, but any published work is infinitely better than whatever imagined potential work you only dream of.Studio Ghibli movies fucking suck for example. Nobody gives a shit past the first two that has good writing, the rest are forgettable visual popcorn that you'll find zero fans of.
>>7168030Ok How about pic rel
It's a web manga, he self published it, at least at first
>>7167942bad is bad but style is style. Even if YOU tried to draw that it wouldnt be that level of bad, you would never be able to replicate it. it does have some value in that it has its own charm. if you tried to draw a bad comic it would look bad in its own way.
>>7167969Yes, the print version is redrawn by a pro, still the only reason there's a redrawn version is because the original was successful, and while it is true that stories carry comics more than art, no one's going to check out your webcomic if it looks like ass unless someone recommended it first, but there won't be that first if it looks like ass. Or at best it stays relatively niche, like Gunnerkrigg Court. OPM got massive somehow, though.
>>7168077So were pretending the art of scott pilgrim is bad now?
>>7168159Are we gonna keep pretending it isn't?
>>7167942>why do bad artists manage to get published?Because believe it or not, comics are visual storytelling and not just art.
>>7167942One Punch Man was successful because it's bad art emphasized it's comedic tone. Without Yusuke Murata it would've likely never gotten an animation adaptation.
>>7168159Is and always was
>>7168171>>7168262>itt bitter begs and nodraws who dont make anything ankle-biting people who make things
>>7168159>>7168262It is not but to humor you I'll ask why is it that you consider it bad what aspects of it is it doing wrong
>>7168267meant for>>7168171
>>7167942That wasn't published.>>7167959Because the editor the author approached believed their work could sell (for any number of reasons, yes despite whatever flaws there may be -- they're publishing comics, not artbooks, artistic excellence is not a necessity), and the person in charge of the content of the publication agrees. And then if it does end up selling (it often doesn't, you just don't remember all the failures) then they continue publisher the author's work and you eventually discover and seethe about it.>>7168171Learn to draw before you start through stones in your glass house.
>>7168159Pretending?
>>7167942>why do bad artists manage to get published?Picrel is the first anime that Makoto Shinkai did. He animated the whole thing by himself and became famous from it because of its emotional story (like every movie he made) he's the guy that did "Your Name" and other sob animu flicks. He made people cry, even with that terrible art and he got enough money and attention from it to produce several hit anime movies.It's all about the story and characters OP.
>>7168159>pretending the art of scott pilgrim is badHis art is atrocious and /beg/ tier. No art fundamentals competence, probably traced manga when he "learned" to draw and every single character looks the same.
>>7168485>first anime that Makoto Shinkai didSecond*
>>7168493He's gotten better imo
>>7168159Its not great. It gets the job done at being a stylistic work meant to tell a grungy teen story, but not great.If it weren't for the movie it would have been a mediocre success at best. The writer himself admits to this, and frankly I can see why.
>>7168159It's shit
>>7167942They all draw porn
>>7168267point out the loomis in these drawings>>7168077>>7168497
>>7168171>>7168262>>7168367>>7168493>>7168516Do you guys not remember that his art was highly influential and had many, MANY, imitators during the comic's hey-day? You guys may think it's bad, but obviously that's a very subjective thing that many disagreed with, though I think he suffers severely from 'same face'.Though I half suspect the shitty 'cal-arts' direction art and animation has gone was because of his art's influence - I have no evidence for this, just a vague suspicion.
>>7167942one punch man was self-published you fucking moron.
>>7168496*he was a professional cutscene director for falcom before making his independent movies
Good communication > Good story > Good characters > Good art
>>7168171>>7168262>>7168367>>7168493>>7168516>>7168584>>7168699>t. constructoids with zero (0) appeal and soulgo 'draw' your math equations while the rest of us are busy signing Netflix- and videogame-deals. LATER SUCKAS!!
>>7167942
>>7168737Plane chickenpox, scary shit, I was nearly in an accident because of it.
>>7168745lmao
>>7168716>>7168734With all due respect, there are a couple different examples of media with lack luster artstyles that continue to inspire artists for several decades. One in particular that comes to mind is southpark. For whatever reason, people continue to draw the same forward facing, round headed, oval eyed figures. If i were to guess, its because its simply easy to draw with only a hint of appeal. But i think its more of the attatchment to the show and its characters, then to the style, at least in some sense. The show's style is crude and not meant to be an artistic masterpiece. My arguement, as well as some of the rest, is that the art is not the major contributor to the success of the scott pilrim series. As i stated before, people only started to care about it, AFTER the movie.
>>7167942You can talk shit about the OPM webcomic all you want, but it was full of moments that somehow made reading through it all worth it. All while the visually-much-better Manga version just feels like a generic shonenshit.
>>7168493Fundiefag blown out by some bisexual HAPA who just draws
>>7168493>every single character looks the same.This is just flat out not true and now genuinely has me questioning how many of you that criticize it have actually read it with how repeatedly that gets said>No art fundamentalsThis is also not true atleast not completely, but the nature of the art style doesn't need it to strictly follow those rules. Saying this is like looking at the power puff girls and going "you know this show is good but I just cant get behind how the artist dont know how to construct a proper face". This hard adherance to fundies without any regards to how it affects the art direction of your work is why so many western stuff especially comics looks like like shit>noooo you cant do that cool pose legs dont work like that>nooo that cool shots awful the perspective is slightly off>the lighting cant work like that regardless of the mood it tries to set its just not realisticThat's how all you sound. The mentality of a mentally stunted child who doesn't know how to suspend their disbelief
>>7168493Pyw
>>7167942The bad art adds to the humor. Also ONE self published this on pixiv originally
>>7168716>Do you guys not remember that his art was highly influential and had many, MANY, imitators during the comic's hey-day?So does Steven Universe. Am I supposed to pretend that Rebecca Sugar's art isn't still low /int/-tier at best?
>>7169204what do you consider pro level artwork in regards to comics and cartoons then?
>>7169224"Pro level" is a worthless term. You can be a mediocre artist and still be a professional in the animation/comic industry. Read Loomis and/or Bridgman once and be able to meet a deadline and you're automatically at "pro level."
>>7169232I don't mean literally I mean what do regard as an example of high level skill in regards to cartoons and comics
>>7167942if its interesting it will have a fan base. Ranking of Kings is another good example that isn't a comedy, which is usually easier to connect to an audience with.
>>7169232This.Jazza is considered a professional
>>7167942They just drew
>>7167942Because muh disability.
>>7169204https://youtu.be/Tgue81LVZ4E?si=cS_K01ank6KHw5lbRebecca Sugar is pro, dumb faggot
>>7172394That narcissist retard cannot draw on model to saver her life.
The most important part of a manga, or any comic really, is the story being told. A manga with godly art and shit plot is a bad manga. A manga with shit art and a godly plot is a good manga. Of course, you want to aim for good art and good plot, but the plot itself is what's most important.
>>7168726I like this
The One-Punch Man webcomic made me wonder why there's no americans who have accomplished the same thing, then I remembered the dozen or so internet cartoonists who make absolute bank of just shitting out hundreds of 4 panel comics every year that all tackle some kind of relatable subject matter.
