Story vs art in comics

[Pedro1974]

 

or vice versa

 

To everyone

 

In your comics fan life span experience, do you give a certain preferance to the story over the art, or vice versa?

 

When a great story is developped by an artist that you really don't like, do you still buy/ read the book?

 

And the other way around, an artist you love on a project that the story (it can be the characters in them too) you don't appreciatte at all, do you still buy the book?

 

To me the art it can drive me off from a good story, if the artist isn't at the same level, i have an hard time appreciatting the comics. The other way around not so, i can ignore the story and apreciatte the art/ inkers vision.

 

regards

[techvoodoo]

I used to be all about the art, back when I collected as a kid. Mainly because I rarely read the comics. I quit collecting for years and when I got back into over the last few years I started going down the same path.

 

Then I started finding out what some of the really good stories out there were, and started reading them. Now I don't really collect individual books anymore outside of some favorite key issues. I barely look at the art, so long as it isn't distracting, I don't really care.

 

At this point I'm like 90% story 10% art.

[aszumilo]

I think it goes hand in hand. If the art sucks, it is really distracting and the story suffers. If the story is bad, the art will only hold interest for a little while.

 

Case in point. People have been saying the story in the new She-Hulk is pretty good, but, i can't read it because the art is horrendous. It is so bad i couldn't get thru the first couple of pages. Same thing with the art in the new Ghost Rider, although, I thought the story pretty much sucked as well..

[Ken Aldred]

Story and art are equally important to me.

[Waylander]

Story and art should complement each other.

[Unca Ben]

Both.

I do put a lot of weight on the artist, however. By artist, I mean a sequential storyteller, not just a guy who draws well and has a popular style.

 

In the visual arts, comic books and strips are all about storytelling. A comic book artist worth his salt is a major contributor to the story, even if he's not the writer.

 

A well written comic in the hands of a poor sequential storyteller can be confusing and read like garbage. The finest action poses, good girl art, and stylized noodling don't compensate for a mediocre understanding of how words and pictures interplay to create strong graphic storytelling.

 

A good comic book artist can make a poor story more visually interesting, whereas a poor artist can make a good story seem to "suck".

 

Eisner. McCloud. Required study, IMHO. Unless I buy comics just to look at the pictures.

 

 

 

 

 

[jimbo_707]

Now that I buy mostly slabbed books, I seldom read comics. If a free digital version is available, I'll sometimes read the stories, and once in a while I'll get my hands on a reading copy of a comic or a reprint, but I collect mostly for the cover art.

[goldust40]

Both.

I do put a lot of weight on the artist, however. By artist, I mean a sequential storyteller, not just a guy who draws well and has a popular style.

 

In the visual arts, comic books and strips are all about storytelling. A comic book artist worth his salt is a major contributor to the story, even if he's not the writer.

 

A well written comic in the hands of a poor sequential storyteller can be confusing and read like garbage. The finest action poses, good girl art, and stylized noodling don't compensate for a mediocre understanding of how words and pictures interplay to create strong graphic storytelling.

 

A good comic book artist can make a poor story more visually interesting, whereas a poor artist can make a good story seem to "suck".

 

Eisner. McCloud. Required study, IMHO. Unless I buy comics just to look at the pictures.

 

 

 

 

 

Yep. Great comic artists understand the design and cadences of comics, where the story comes first.

[kav]

Story is numero uno. If the story is bad, no art can save it. Bryan Hitch did some book America's Got Powers and it sucked hard. If the story is good, even bad art won't kill it. The art in 'A History of Violence' was amateurish, but the story was so good it became a movie. As an artist, I admit that the writer is the more important. There are way more good artists than good writers. Proof: a good novel has no art, and it is good. Good art is not 'necessary'. Good story is absolutely necessary. It's possible to have stick figures tell an engaging story. It's not possible to have a story written by a six year old drawn by bryan hitch be engaging.

[Brian48]

Used to value art over story back in the old days of the Bronze and early Copper ages when I first collected. The stories (most anyway) were written differently back then for a less sophisticated audience so I didn't expect much in terms of quality writing. I relied on the artwork to keep me sucked in.

 

These days, I tend to value the story. The talent pool for artists is so packed now and the bar raised so high, there really isn't such a thing as a "bad" artist these days in my opinion. Sure, some styles may not be my cup of tea, but generally the publisher's do a good job of pairing up the writer/artist team where the art style just works for the tale being told. Once again, assuming the tale is well written.

 

Bottom line, I don't normally pick up a modern book/trade and worry about the artwork any more. If the story sucks, the book is a waste of money no matter how good the art work (See Batman Odyssey).

[HeyMoe]

Now that I buy mostly slabbed books, I seldom read comics. If a free digital version is available, I'll sometimes read the stories, and once in a while I'll get my hands on a reading copy of a comic or a reprint, but I collect mostly for the cover art.

 

Why then would you comment in a thread that asks whether story or art is the more important in a comic book?

[Unca Ben]

Story is numero uno. If the story is bad, no art can save it. Bryan Hitch did some book America's Got Powers and it sucked hard. If the story is good, even bad art won't kill it. The art in 'A History of Violence' was amateurish, but the story was so good it became a movie. As an artist, I admit that the writer is the more important. There are way more good artists than good writers. Proof: a good novel has no art, and it is good. Good art is not 'necessary'. Good story is absolutely necessary. It's possible to have stick figures tell an engaging story. It's not possible to have a story written by a six year old drawn by bryan hitch be engaging.

 

That's the thing about comic books. The story is a product of two distinct factors. The words and the pictures. The artist is as much a storyteller as the writer.

 

The artwork may be amateurish in drawing skill, but if the artist has a good sense of composition and knows how to tell a story in a sequence pictures, he serves the writing well.

 

I have read comics with good plotting and writing, but the art, though technically good, made the story uneven and confusing. A bad story.

 

If I read a page or pages, and my eye is lead easily across the panels and down through the tiers, and if I continue to the next page without consciously noting the break, then the narrative flows.

 

The story, no matter how well written, suffers if:

• I have to figure out which panel to read next because it appears I have multiple choices;

• My eye needs to go back because something happened between panels such as an angle change where characters seem to be out of position, or the new position of characters doesn't seem to match the action;

• I have to read all the word balloons or captions in a panel and then go back and re-read them in the proper order based on their content rather than their placement;

 

-these are just some examples of poor storytelling by the artist.

 

[kav]

Used to value art over story back in the old days of the Bronze and early Copper ages when I first collected. The stories (most anyway) were written differently back then for a less sophisticated audience so I didn't expect much in terms of quality writing. I relied on the artwork to keep me sucked in.

 

These days, I tend to value the story. The talent pool for artists is so packed now and the bar raised so high, there really isn't such a thing as a "bad" artist these days in my opinion. Sure, some styles may not be my cup of tea, but generally the publisher's do a good job of pairing up the writer/artist team where the art style just works for the tale being told. Once again, assuming the tale is well written.

 

Bottom line, I don't normally pick up a modern book/trade and worry about the artwork any more. If the story sucks, the book is a waste of money no matter how good the art work (See Batman Odyssey).

+1 and thanks for the heads up on Odyssey...I was thinking of getting it.

[Shadow]

Art tends to "open the door" for me but the story has to be there. But if the story is good and the art stinks, I struggle to read the book. Recently (last 5+ years), I've liked Geoff Johns writing so I tend to give him a chance without worrying about the artist.

[kav]

Story is so hard. You have to create everything. Art, you know what a person looks like, buildings, etc, and you just draw that. Story you are creating a WORLD. Much harder.

[Pedro1974]

Story is so hard. You have to create everything. Art, you know what a person looks like, buildings, etc, and you just draw that. Story you are creating a WORLD. Much harder.

 

couldn't that be said about the art too? I don't consider the art as only a "illustration" of the story/ plot, it really goes beyond that imho.

Specially in this medium (sequences, panels, angles,...). The name Eisner just pops my mind while writing this...

 

regards

[kav]

Story is so hard. You have to create everything. Art, you know what a person looks like, buildings, etc, and you just draw that. Story you are creating a WORLD. Much harder.

 

couldn't that be said about the art too? I don't consider the art as only a "illustration" of the story/ plot, it really goes beyond that imho.

Specially in this medium (sequences, panels, angles,...). The name Eisner just pops my mind while writing this...

 

regards

Well art is technically more difficult but we have lots of reference and practice makes you better. Story-well, you're either a born storyteller or you're not. And you have to create something from nothing. when I draw a panel I'm creating something, based on something. I can draw someone realistically but a writer making someone act and sound realistic-very tough. Just look at some of the corny dialog in some of the modern age X Men for instance...

[techvoodoo]

Story is so hard. You have to create everything. Art, you know what a person looks like, buildings, etc, and you just draw that. Story you are creating a WORLD. Much harder.

 

couldn't that be said about the art too? I don't consider the art as only a "illustration" of the story/ plot, it really goes beyond that imho.

Specially in this medium (sequences, panels, angles,...). The name Eisner just pops my mind while writing this...

 

regards

Well art is technically more difficult but we have lots of reference and practice makes you better. Story-well, you're either a born storyteller or you're not. And you have to create something from nothing. when I draw a panel I'm creating something, based on something. I can draw someone realistically but a writer making someone act and sound realistic-very tough. Just look at some of the corny dialog in some of the modern age X Men for instance...

 

 

Corny dialog is not restricted the modern age X-men. Have you read X-men #1?

[Maccai3]

Story is so hard. You have to create everything. Art, you know what a person looks like, buildings, etc, and you just draw that. Story you are creating a WORLD. Much harder.

 

couldn't that be said about the art too? I don't consider the art as only a "illustration" of the story/ plot, it really goes beyond that imho.

Specially in this medium (sequences, panels, angles,...). The name Eisner just pops my mind while writing this...

 

regards

Well art is technically more difficult but we have lots of reference and practice makes you better. Story-well, you're either a born storyteller or you're not. And you have to create something from nothing. when I draw a panel I'm creating something, based on something. I can draw someone realistically but a writer making someone act and sound realistic-very tough. Just look at some of the corny dialog in some of the modern age X Men for instance...

 

I think you can learn to be a storyteller too, it just comes easier to some people

 

 

[kav]

Story is so hard. You have to create everything. Art, you know what a person looks like, buildings, etc, and you just draw that. Story you are creating a WORLD. Much harder.

 

couldn't that be said about the art too? I don't consider the art as only a "illustration" of the story/ plot, it really goes beyond that imho.

Specially in this medium (sequences, panels, angles,...). The name Eisner just pops my mind while writing this...

 

regards

Well art is technically more difficult but we have lots of reference and practice makes you better. Story-well, you're either a born storyteller or you're not. And you have to create something from nothing. when I draw a panel I'm creating something, based on something. I can draw someone realistically but a writer making someone act and sound realistic-very tough. Just look at some of the corny dialog in some of the modern age X Men for instance...

 

 

Corny dialog is not restricted the modern age X-men. Have you read X-men #1?

You mean the original SA X men? Yeah it wasn't Stan Lee's best. or kirby's either....but at least the dialogue wasn't re-re-re-re hashed smart alecking while fighting stuff.....