Rad's shit.

rtil · August 1, 2011 03:04 AM

the comic reads like an inside joke, making it pretty inaccessible to people who won't get it, which is pretty much everyone

RadWalrus · August 1, 2011 03:59 AM

Quote from: rtilthe comic reads like an inside joke, making it pretty inaccessible to people who won't get it, which is pretty much everyone

yeah, that's my fault. The dialogue doesn't really lead anywhere, I plan to release the first story arc all at once, and then assume some sort of update schedule. I hope it makes sense when there's actually some context :I

RadWalrus · August 1, 2011 05:57 AM

So, here's just a toning mock-up I did because whatever.
I'd basically be cell-shading. I had to colour this at web-size, though. Still without 300DPI tones. Muh.

I really want 300DPI in case I ever want to print these into a book or something. Is that stupid?
I plan to keep these going for a long time. As long as interesting things happen in my life to make comics about.
I know this section seems boring at first glance, but the dialogue is based on actual chat-logs. And, I guess I neglected to mention that this page isn't a stand-alone piece.

CVG · August 1, 2011 06:25 AM

There seems to be a lack in direction so far with the lettering. You changed fonts a lot in just one page and then the one panel with Whyy? And it's a joke? Was very confusing to me. I didn't know who was talking and about what...in fact I suspect that shrub is either the one who can't come, or shrub is the girlfriend he's chatting with in Ottawa who didn't get the day off for the day he arrives?? I also think the change in characters faces are just being "lol random" for the sake that there is nothing really going on and there is no background or even a setup of where he is. It's basically 9 panels of a close up of a face facing to the left :/ I know you are concerned with adding shade tones but it seems to me that's not really the important thing you should be looking over in this...first is the dialogue (since it's the core of the work and not the artwork), try practicing how a reader follows the flow of letters from panel to panel. In one panel I'm reading in a block shape and the next it's a super long rectangle string of words...this makes having to read the page a chore on the eyes...like I have to bump up and down then left and right all within each panel of reading. Next is settling on some fonts. Then work on the art; I know you said you are going for simple style and I understand that but if the artwork like the lines and shapes of the simple characters are inconsistent then it comes off as just not a good artist. An example is that panel with the shading added...it's a nice shade but the characters lines are squiggly and unsure and the chin is pointed while in another panel it's a rounded jaw and in another is a circle?? That all being said this is not a flat out bad comic or anything it just needs a lot of improvement before an audience is going to catch on to it. And you can lessen that uphill battle by spicing it up in the literacy and visual fields.

RadWalrus · August 2, 2011 12:39 AM

Quote from: CVGA bunch of extremely helpful stuff.

Thanks for all of that, I never thought of how much the eye has to move in a panel, etc. I guess I'll have to go back and fix it!

Edited: a typo

RadWalrus · August 3, 2011 11:26 PM

I THINK I fixed that one confusing panel? Muh.
Here's the finshed(?) page. I think I might as well just move on. The first page of a webcomic is usually shitty anyway.
are there any glaring mistakes that need fixing?

rtil · August 3, 2011 11:31 PM

"that was you and shawg". i don't get it, unless it's going to be explained on the next page?

RadWalrus · August 3, 2011 11:55 PM

Yeah, on the next page, a conversation with "Shawg" (the girlfriend) begins.

CVG · August 4, 2011 05:14 AM

I like how out of all the suggestions I made, nothing changed and halftones were added (the one thing I felt was a useless detail to the actual issues).

Sinitron · August 4, 2011 05:00 PM

'shit' is pretty descriptive

zhicago · August 4, 2011 05:27 PM

i dont understand whats going on

you really want to take into account the things cvg has said, she is the one out of tba that actually has a printed comic book

RadWalrus · August 4, 2011 06:41 PM

Quote from: CVGI like how out of all the suggestions I made, nothing changed and halftones were added (the one thing I felt was a useless detail to the actual issues).

Yeah, sorry about that. I'm going to apply your advice in the next page, I'm sick of this one for the time being. When I'm done this story arc I'll probably go back and fix all of the lettering issues. I'm trying to find a groove... :I
I'm also hoping that everything makes more sense with the next page. If not, I'll definitely rewrite the script, and not use actual chat-logs.
Also, CVG, I'm interested in your published comic, what's it called?

Quote from: Tron Sawyer'shit' is pretty descriptive

Heh heh, you're rude.

Sinitron · August 4, 2011 07:06 PM

it just seems like generic bad webcomic material to me, and you're using those dumb photoshop effects to make it look like an old printed comic but it just looks like ass

rtil · August 4, 2011 09:01 PM

i'm gonna have to echo sinitron on the screentones as well, i don't think they're doing anything for you. screentones are generally used on backgrounds, not the characters, and the textures of them are so large that they are more distracting than anything. why not use flat tones? i don't think the screentones serve you any advantage in this format.

i also have never been a fan of the adventure-timey going wildly out of proportion and off model to make wacky faces, i just don't think it's funny and see it as generally a lazy alternative to making your characters expressive. but i understand that it's usually a stylistic choice and it's a cartoon comic...i just think it's a bad one.

also, a character with hollow eyes is going to be hard to show any real emotion or give off visual cues.. unless there's a really good reason why he doesn't have eyes, i would reconsider his design.

RadWalrus · August 12, 2011 03:32 AM

Fixed an old character design.

I used Sai, it's actually pretty rad. I assumed it was just some weird program that weaboos use.

naturally · August 12, 2011 03:34 AM

why are his headphones disconnected?

Quote from: RadWalrusI used Sai, it's actually pretty rad. I assumed it was just some weird program that weaboos use.

lmfao

naturally · August 12, 2011 03:34 AM

what the hell how did this double post happen

GhostingFish · August 12, 2011 03:36 AM

I like these c:

stick to Sai. it out-dose itself every time

iinnkk · August 12, 2011 03:46 AM

Sai is a really cheap way to do things. you can do all the same things in photoshop, it'll just take more skill.
also if you ever wanted to become professional, no one would ever use sai i doubt (but what do i know im a teenager on the internet)

and try not to make your shading so random, it seems like you have the right idea on it but you're not quite there. pick an angle from where the sun is hitting and shade away from that point.

naturally · August 12, 2011 03:50 AM

Quote from: iinnkkif you ever wanted to become professional, no one would ever use sai i doubt (but what do i know im a teenager on the internet)

yes and no. in japan they use sai a lot. i only say that 'cause i know all the art for catherine was done in sai. it's likely that they use sai for tons of things. it's an incredibly popular program and is really useful. i can't say how it fares for artists in north america.

i'm not incredibly familiar with either sai or photoshop so i have no say in which one is 'better'. it seems subjective anyway.