Photography techniques in comics

[spider]

I've noticed a good percentage of Marvel books (particularly Marvel Knights) use photography as sequentials or some variation therof.
Many more books of many companies use photo reference though I don't know how much is just reference material and how much is the real thing.
I've used some photo's in comic work already, animated to mesh with it...

http://www.digitalwebbing.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=4547&stc=1

http://www.digitalwebbing.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=4548&stc=1

I'm just unsure how much is drawn and how much is manipulated photography, it's something I'd like to see other companies try more because it adds a real cinematic edge.
Do they hire life models? What about scenes within the white house?
If you know more than me and can explain or can point me to articles on the subject I'd much appreciate it.

[NILgravity]

I use a combination of models, reference, and 3d programs like Poser, Daz3d and Google Sketchup. It's also easier to fake things with photo reference because the perspective in a photo is perfect.
I think it's important that we stay unaware of how much is created with photoshop and how much is faked.

[j giar]

Photos in comics are alright for me as long as they mesh with what's being done. By that I mean..either use it throughout the story or use sparingly with the artist interpretation of the scenery and backgrounds. When using both I think you have to have that perfect blend...I know Bendis used photo work a lot during his Goldfish/ Jinx and Torso days....Guys over at Optimum Wound comics are doing a lot of it as well. Jim

[citizentim]

I've played around with it, with some level of success.
Truthfully, I think it looks halfway decent for backgrounds, but for characters, not so much.

Here's a cityscape (I believe Alex Maleev's comment was: "Not bad")
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/116/281908653_002ffa756e_b.jpg

Random Kabuki Clown at Comic Con:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/110/281906596_8ec116117e_b.jpg


See what I mean? Personally, the look of the cityscape-- I'd "buy" that in a comic...the Kabuki guy though, it still looks like a photo...

[Kody]

I'm not big on rules, so I say use whatever works to achieve the desired result (short of stealing someone's work).

Having said that, my big problem with using Photoshop to create finished artwork is that everyone else has the same Photoshop and the same filters.

So the artwork ends up looking like "generic" Photoshop stuff and usually ends up being rather dull because of it. Same goes for those that are using Poser to generate figures, I've seen a ton of comic samples lately at conventions and they're obviously using Poser to generate the reference to work from, and they all have the same generic Poser look to them. And they also have the same flaws.

It's really hard to get noticed as an artist, I think if I were trying to break in right now, I"d be doing everything I could to NOT look like everyone else.

[citizentim]

I'm not big on rules, so I say use whatever works to achieve the desired result (short of stealing someone's work).

Having said that, my big problem with using Photoshop to create finished artwork is that everyone else has the same Photoshop and the same filters.

So the artwork ends up looking like "generic" Photoshop stuff and usually ends up being rather dull because of it. Same goes for those that are using Poser to generate figures, I've seen a ton of comic samples lately at conventions and they're obviously using Poser to generate the reference to work from, and they all have the same generic Poser look to them. And they also have the same flaws.

It's really hard to get noticed as an artist, I think if I were trying to break in right now, I"d be doing everything I could to NOT look like everyone else.

I tend to agree with this-- mind you, I consider myself a writer that dabbles in art-- not an "artist". Although, from the whole "film school" thing, I've got a hankerin' to do an "Auteur book" one day...hi everyone, meet my pet ego: Massive!

That said, I totally agree with Kody, you can't use the filters-- I've seen some nice results out of them, but yeah-- they really look homogenized.

My personal approach is to just play around until I get something I like-- also, since most of my stuff is photo-ref'ed, I've found that it's necessary to "degrade" the image as much as possible in order for it to "read" as a comic.
Which is sort of ironic: Comic artists strive for realism, but total realism looks cheesy.
Go figure.

Here's an image that illustrates my theories on the subject-- It might not be your cup of tea, but I like it:
(note: Colors are a little wonky...I need to get a better monitor)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2155/2096706327_06f6461cd8.jpg

[j giar]

I don't mind the photo reference or the use of photos used for backgrounds...but I really like to see the artist shine through the work and leave his own signature on it. And at times you get that cookie cutter look to the whole photoshop thingy.

[Calloway]

Yeah. I could do the same in such a unique way you'd be digging forever to figure out how. These are pretty simple filter tricks you guys are showing. It all looks the same. Although I must say I believe Spiders work would be fitting for these. He's awesome!

[madelf]

I'm not a fan.
If the figures are hand-drawn with photo or photomanipulated backgrounds it's really jarring for me.

On the other hand, I read an article (many years ago) about Byrne's technique on the early Alpha Flight comics where he said he used xeroxed photographs for a lot of the backgrounds and then inked over them - and that looked great. Inking over them made them tie in completely with everything else. So I think if someone can manage a really unified look with photoshop, which I haven't seen (or didn't know if I did - which would actually mean they're doing it well), then that's great too.

I would be interested in seeing examples of what folks think are good examples of the technique, just to see what's being done that I might have missed.

As a counter-point, I've played with using photoshop filters over my drawings (with mixed results) and an approach along those lines, where everything is photoshopped (assuming it's done well and consistently), might work too.

[Jason Thibault]

Sorry for coming to the conversation so late.
I've played around with realism and photo-realism for a few years. I was obsessed with the work of Tim Bradstreet and John Van Fleet.

My comic Battles Without Living Witnesses (http://www.webcomicsnation.com/optimumwound/battles/series.php?view=archive&chapter=6469&name=battles&mpe=1&fromwhich=2&direction=b) was a hybrid (80% hand-drawn and 20% digital) But after a while the digital pages were bothering me so I spent a few weeks re-drawing them in ink. Now only one page out of the 25 posted is digital, everything else is realism with ink on paper.

To learn the techniques I used to play around with magazine reference but for years I've shot my own photo-reference.

Some of my earlier experiments were over-rendered and I've since been trying to go for a looser (but still realistic) approach.
Here's a page of photo-realistic ink rendering. Only the lettering is digital. Love it or hate it.
-Jay
www.optimumwound.com

http://www.webcomicsnation.com/memberimages/battlesreduxpg18.jpg

[The Anti-crest]

I liked harlequin valentine

http://www.bdselection.com/imagesbd/h/harlequin_valentine/harlequin_valentine_1.jpg

[carynord]

Hm. The thing I like most about comic art is to see how an artist interprets the world around him. We all draw the same subject matter but everyone has a slightly different take on it. That's pretty fascinating to see. Then there's the blending of styles and influences in every artists work that's fun to try and spot...

Taking photos really kills that.

Backgrounds I don't mind if they're traced for some guys, but could you imagine if Chris Bachalo traced his BGs? We'd all be losing out if that happened. His backgrounds are totally unique to him.

I think there's also a big difference in guys that can draw that trace and guys that trace because they can't draw.

[Nick Pitarra]

Hm. The thing I like most about comic art is to see how an artist interprets the world around him. We all draw the same subject matter but everyone has a slightly different take on it. That's pretty fascinating to see. Then there's the blending of styles and influences in every artists work that's fun to try and spot...

Taking photos really kills that.

Backgrounds I don't mind if they're traced for some guys, but could you imagine if Chris Bachalo traced his BGs? We'd all be losing out if that happened. His backgrounds are totally unique to him.

I think there's also a big difference in guys that can draw that trace and guys that trace because they can't draw.

I couldn't agree more. I like getting lost in an artist' imagination. Like looking into Art Adams world...fun and full of character...nothing you'd see in a photograph,but we all visually interpret it as this real/cartoon world. Moebius has a great couple of paragraphs in the back of The Silver Surfer hardcover(that he did with stan lee), he talks about his style compared to american artists, and lots of interesting takes on how illustrators interpret reality. Anyways, at the end he basicly says "an artist encodes the world around him". I love that qoute...thats the joy in opening up a comic for me....getting to see how an artist has encoded/interpreted reality.

~nick

[Justice41]

You could try live trace in Illustrator C3.
http://architecturalartz.com/images/Miami.jpg
http://architecturalartz.com/images/Miamibw.jpg

[Jason Thibault]

It always fascinates me to see how Live Trace and other vector tracing programs interpret images. When it should be a straight line it renders a curve. And dig the apocalyptic sky over the cityscape.

It's a big world out there and there's room for everything under the sun as far as artistic styles go. From photo-realism to loose expressionism. It'd be incredibly boring and mundane otherwise.

80-90% of artists that work in the superhero and genre illustration use photo reference. Style is more about how they interpret it.

If everyone could merely take photos and "trace" there'd be hundreds of artists getting sweet Marvel and DC cover gigs. The truth of it is, photorealism is a pain in the ass and takes twice as long as free-form illustration. And it certainly divides the masses.

-Jay