This past weekend, I had the pleasure of attending Chicago Comic Con. It was a very profitable show for me, not monetarily, but cognitively. I talked to some wonderful artists and attended some art panels to see what I could glean from the masters. Some interesting stuff came up, but the greatest benefit was having my portfolio ripped apart critically by two amazing artists in particular: Howard Chaykin and Mitch Mitch Breitweiser. I was honored to have them take the time to fill me in, in gore detail, about everything from the very basics of the mistakes I made in my pages. It was all constructive, though I’ll admit, sometimes hard to listen to. Still, I can imagine no better way to learn how to improve. A heart-felt thanks to both of you, Mr. Chaykin and Mr. Breitweiser.
Well, all the information I’d learned at the con got me thinking about how to properly distill it into something I can reference and pass on to others. Thus I have created the below: PRINCIPIA STRONG TOMICA. By diagramming all that I learned over the expertly drawn panels of three consecutive pages from Chris Sprouse’s and Alan Moore’s TOM STRONG #1.
Here is a text summary:
‘Who, What, Where, When, Why,’ must all be explained in the art. ‘How’ is the story itself.
Compositions are Three-fold with Background, MIDGROUND, and Foreground. (Newspaper strips often only have Back and Foregrounds)
Background:
‘where, when’
context of the action
shows the movement
shows essential textures for continuity
Midground:
‘who, what’
subjects and actors
action happens here
Foreground:
‘why, what’
what the subjects in the midground react to or ignore
frames the panel with black to create guide the eye
FIVE SHOTS OF COMICS:
Establishing Shots:
‘where, when’
man vs god, man vs nature, man vs society
extra background, extra midground, foreground
embellished background
draw the feet
frame heavily with black foreground
Wide Shots:
‘where, when, what’
man vs god, man vs nature, man vs society
background, midground, foreground
draw the feetvdraw background
frame well with foreground
important, physical action
Mid Shots:
‘who, what, why’
man vs nature, man vs man
background, midground, foreground
may need feet
action and acting against the foreground
all character equal players in midground
subjects vs environment
important, physical action
Close Shots:
‘who, what’
man vs man
background, midground
no feet, textures for
background
characters unequal
subtlety, facial a cting
relationships between subjects
Extreme Close Shots:
‘who’
man vs himself
midground
just face
often no background needed
externalize the internal
drama, irony, surprise
Agree, disagree? Questions, comments? Love poems, hate limericks? Want to paypal me wads of digital cash for my brilliance? Email: latino.kyle (at) gmail (dot) com.
-
Kyle Latino
August 14th, 2009 at 6:52 am
I don’t know if I entirely agree about all of this. As a writer, I was taught that every panel needs to establish the setting, advance the plot, or illuminate character. And, I feel that TOM STRONG might not be the best example to use. I’d like to see this extrapolated to WALLY WOOD’S 22 PANELS THAT ALWAYS WORK before making any definite opinions.
August 14th, 2009 at 8:40 am
David, you make an excellent observation. As a writer the, you are right, those are the purposes of the panels. But what I am suggesting is that when an artist is composing an image, it is through this method that he can communicate what the writer has purposed each panel for.
In regards to 22 PANELS THAT ALWAYS WORK, I believe that I can diagram everyone of those panels in the manner above (which is a great idea that I’ll get to soon!). I would also like to point out that 22 PANELS is subtitled “Interesting ways to get some variety into those boring panels where some dumb writer has a bunch of characters sitting around and talking for page after page!” I don’t think anyone could tell a very interesting story with just those 22 kinds of panels.
Further disclaimer, none of the above article is actual quotation, and I may have deluded or miscommunicated some of the things I’d learned. So, Mr. Chaykin and Mr. Breitweiser are not to be held accountable for my interpretation of the information.
By the way, David, love HIGH MOON!
August 14th, 2009 at 11:06 am
These are great rules that almost no one abides by in the comic industry which is why so many comics are a mess, just a bunch of “pretty” pictures loosely tied together!
January 17th, 2011 at 6:24 pm
I just wanted to comment & say that I was very impressed with the design on your blog & also your writing skills.. happy holidays!