quote:And a lack of reference on the actor doesn't make bad anatomy ok.
Great, now you made Saavik cry, mr bigot. She's had to put up with crap like that ever since she got off the shuttle in San Francisco.
quote:Unacceptable, sir. It's simple laziness.
I'm not so sure, in my experience you can make it worse if you keep copying different reference photos for every panel, you risk ending up with the "South Park Saddam" effect.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
"Cues on facial structure", I'll cue your facial structure...
I didn't mean copy photos as in copy-paste, just drawing from them. It was a liberal use of the word, granted. I don't have access to the example I have in mind, I'll get it tomorrow.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Nim: It's very hard to draw comic books with characters based on real people, the artist usually works from a photo or movie still with one (1) bland expression to choose from.
Unacceptable, sir. It's simple laziness. ImageGoogle the actor, or buy the movie on DVD and freeze-frame. You've got all the reference you need. Same goes with the ships. I could find a dozen cool angles on any ship from any of the movies in about 15 minutes.
And a lack of reference on the actor doesn't make bad anatomy ok.
I know that time is a factor and they may have all of a day to squat out these pages. But I feel like being crabby since I don't get to draw and paint nearly as much as I'd like to anymore.
Something to keep in mind is the licensing/permissions that the comic may or may not have. Sometimes the comic cannot get permission to use the likeness of a certain actor. This is the reason why Stiles in DC's adaptation of STIII did not look like the actor who played him in the movie - DC did not have permission to use the actor's likeness.
Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
That's obviously not the case here though- it's an attempt to depice the actor's likeness- it's just not very well done.
Trek has NEVER had a good art team in the comics- some of the old DC stuff was bad beyond all belief. I read somewhere that books like Trek and movie adaptations (like Krull or Logan's Run) were where they had rookie artists cut their teeth on books like this to see if they could make a deadline- much of the run of such books were "filler" issues that could be published in whatever order, as they were hamstrung by the liscence not to change the characters in any way.
In this case, an artist could have taken screencaps from all the Trek movies, reversed some of the images, traced them from a printout and achieved a better result. They could even have added artistic liscence (shadowing, coloring, whatever) to make it unique.
Aban's right- it's a lazy effort. Comic Book Rescources has the first six pages posted as a preview- none are better than the one linked.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
See, that's a perfect example. The likenesses aren't dead-on, but they don't have to be because it's consistent and it's done well. The art is stylized nicely. The inks are well done and the drawing is solid. The other one is just bad art.
Could it be safe to assume that spacedock design is from before 2233, therefore its design that exists in both timelines?
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
danova
Ex-Member
posted
That art IS wretched. Cool that we get a comic of it at all I suppose.
IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
