When you include the horizon, you force us to look straight also, not only up but straight too, otherwise we woudln't be able to see the horizon, if you see a vertical, 90º degrees with the horizon, building leaving or crossing the horizon at an angle other then 90º degrees, you have the tower of Pizza, collapsing. Others will correct me if i'm wrong, but it's what my guts tell me.
Many agree that it causes issues/distortions.. but what's your thought on the Jim Lee examples ?
This is the second time you've tried to blame me for your bad drawing. Those buildings were drawn YOUR way. That's why they're broken, twisted and falling down. "My" buildings do not suffer the same problem because I followed the rules.
Originally Posted by SebastianSz
Your buildings below are falling down, back and in. If we crop the drawing they stand up straight. Why? Because there is no 3rd point in an horizon level shot; If there is the buildings all fall down. There can be 1 pt, 2 pts or 4 points but, never 3. By placing the horizon correctly, below the frame of the drawing, the problems largely disappear (those that exist from improper VP placement remain)
According to YOUR rules, shape 1 below (blue) is rectangular and square to the page. You're wrong. YOU say shape 2 (red) is non-rectangular and un-square to the page. You're wrong. Even if we straighten your verticals as they cross the horizon, correcting your habit of crushing the bases of your buildings, they continue to collapse back, in and down. Why? Because you drew it wrong. You incorrectly included a 3rd point where it cannot exist.
YOU say fig 1 (red) is a rectangular building perpendicular to the ground. You're wrong. We can prove this by walking to the side of the building and looking from a different direction. Now we see the base is collapsing on itself and the building is tumbling to the ground. Why? Because your rules are wrong.
Drawn by the rules, MY building (blue) can be viewed from north, south, east or west and, in each instance, the building stands up, square to the ground, with rectangular faces. Why? Because the rules of perspective are correct.
Can one break the rules? Sure. If you know what you're doing. Below is Gustav Tenggren's brilliant opening shot in Pinocchio where he uses 1 pt, 2 pt, 3 pt, 4 pt, linear, and curvilinear all in the same painting. The reason it works is because (until someone like me comes along 80 years after the fact) we never get to see the entirety of the painting in a single view. We only got to see a thumbnail sized portion at any given time while the frame climbs, drops, banks and zooms according to what shows in the frame at that moment.
You're essentially railing against the restrictions of gravity. Yes gravity places limitations on us such as forcing us to have an atmosphere and preventing the planet from careening into the sun killing us all (damn that stupid gravity.) The laws of perpsective, like the laws of gravity, keep us safe and alive. This is the equivalent of "new" math which was a complete disaster from start to finish. The only thing new about "new" match was the order of the lessons. They tried to teach calculus to kids who had yet to learn the difference between letters, numbers and a hole in the ground.
You're attempting advanced techniques without any understanding of basic geometry or perspective You're attempting calculus before you can tell the difference between letters and numbers. You're trying to be Tenggren while "Perspective Made Easy" (a beginners level primer) remains beyond your understanding. As your post of my Batman proves: you don't know what an horizon is, what it does, how it works, where it goes or how to find it.
Style comes by deviating from the norm. Learn to draw correctly then you can break the rules and call it style. Breaking the rules because you don't understand them isn't style, it's bad drawing.
It's just my opinion, but i think by breaking the rules he's going for a feeling of unease, tension, opression... it serves the story. Learn the rules first, then learn where and how to break then, it's your art, no one has more right to mess it up then you.
Oh, hell yes!
Originally Posted by ChrisH
Let me start by proclaiming my respect and admiration of Jim's draftsmanship. He's not just good, he's gobsmack good. But in these examples, I'm going to guess someone had a gun to his dog's head or he fell down the stairs and broke his brain.
The last panel we forgive because it's tiny and everyone takes a pratfall once in a while.
The Daily Planet shot almost doesn't suck completely for a couple of reasons. 1 - The width of the panel represents the entirety of our peripheral vision. To see the sphere we must look up, thereby dropping the horizon 1,000 feet below our line of sight. 2 - It makes sense that, should entire city fall down, then the sphere would fall too. However, if buildings are still standing in the next panel, then this shot is completely smurfed.
The Joker page... gouge my eyes out with a rusty spoon! PLEASE! Had I been his editor, I'd have told him to redraw it. Had it come in this way inked, I'd have docked his page rate $50 and given the money and the page to the 15 year old intern in the bullpen who I'd have fix the alley, cut the background buildings out of the page (literally, out of the page) plug the hole and cover it with zip.
Had he then turned in the Catwoman page at a later date, I'd have enforced the morals clause of his contract and fired him on the spot.
yeah, maybe that was his intention, force the camera to make that cinematic movement, and stay a little longer on the panel, feel batman's pain, but i'm way out of my league here.
I'm amazed to see Smitty speak so highly of Jim Lee. I never thought of Jim Lee as a draftsman.
I'm actually amazed to hear that..but I guess we can't try to please everyone.. may I ask who's your favorite artist/style ?
I suppose I could've used a better word.
Originally Posted by Joseph Dredd
When people ask if I'm an artist, I say, "Yes, I'm a cartoonist." This doesn't mean cartoons aren't real art or I'm "just" a cartoonist. It means that when people ask about artists they don't think of musicians, dancers or poets, they think "paints-with-oils-on-canvas."
A draftsman is not limited to exploded views of carburetors in shop manuals, it's anyone who draws. Jim draws and draws damn well... when he's not shooting his foot off by deserting perspective (says the man who's shot his own feet off more times than he can count)
In the Joker/Catwoman shots we have two, undebatable, categorical statements that Gotham City is collapsing. As a stand in for the big apple, Gotham has a population of about 8,000,000 people. Hiding the excruciatingly painful deaths of 8,000,000 people does not add tension, it reduces tension 8,000,000 fold!
Further, it tells the reader they've been robbed by an unreliable narrator; That the story is not to be trusted. That's bad storytelling at it's worst.
It's not our job to draw exciting images. Our job is to clearly illustrate exciting ideas. If the city is collapsing- Show, don't tell! If it's not collapsing - don't lie.