Pipeline - Jan 26, 2016

[CBR News]

Now that we're out of the age of extreme decompression, what form of visual storytelling will take over modern day comic books?


Full article here.

[shamus]

Comic book narrative through illustrations has certainly matured and in many cases makes for great reading but I think that in a way emulating the shots from a movie are also limiting and not fully recognizing what the medium can do in terms of juxtaposition of images on the same page. Mind you as more and more people are reading on a tablet the idea of a page and its layout is changing too. Contemporary comics tend to emphasis the visual over the written word, however comics at their finest are a hybrid of literature and film and can do things that neither books nor movies can do alone. I would like to see more creative use of comics to reveal the thoughts and feelings of characters. There is the potential to explore the inner life of characters in away that is done in literature but not in film. i also think that good writers like Neil Gaiman or Alan Moore understand how words and images work together not just in dialogue but in evocation of atmosphere. Their words often enhance the illustrations in a way that is unique to the medium of comics. In short I don't only want to see story boards. Comics need not be only templates for films.

[ChadTHX1138]

In other words ACTION TO ACTION like it is talked about in Making Comics By Scott McCloud. Which I highly recommend reading.

[tedbragg]

When did artists and editors deem making comics cinematic? Comics do what nothing else can -- not even animated cartoons! Cinema, television -- they're incredibly limiting. Comics have their own bombastic, ridiculous language that is oddly easy to grasp and follow, but for the most illiterate among us. They're not movies! Check out early comics based on cowboy flicks. They didn't try to imitate the movies, they put the movies' characters into the comics and did their own thing.

No other art looks like comic art, either. Making books looks like rendered videogame graphics has pushed readership away, rather than attract. Scott McCloud touched on this in his Understanding Comics tome: the more real a character appears, the less a reader can insert themselves into them. A stickman can represent anybody. Wiley Coyote is your failure-prone co-worker or relative. Mr. Blank is -- uh -- oh nevermind. You get the point.

I'm a HUGE proponent of compressed storytelling -- cram as much into each page as possible -- give the reader something to READ, not just nice pictures. There's no excuse to spread out a 4 page story to 20 -- it's lazy storytelling and plain greedy. ESPECIALLY with current cover prices!!

Just for kicks I took a 6 page script and made it work inside of two. TWO. With a panel leftover to entice to left-page-turn surprise. Not touting my own horn (I'm a pitiful artist) but point made here: Current status quo sucks. Sucks money.

[dimo1]

Interesting thoughts.
While I generally agree, in most cases it is unnecessary, because comics are not movies or TV shows.
Creators today work too much with having their work adaptated into a possible film format. While it works in a show, quick cuts between characters, bantering etc. it needs a lot of space in comics. The result is the talking-head syndrome, at times interrupted by unnecessary splash pages.
A good comic combines writing and art, I think about Top 10, some issues out of Snyder's Batman run, where we find a nice flow.
Keeping the uniqeness in mind, comic creators should refrain from limiting themselves to certain fashionable storytelling techniques. Not to say never change, but stay fresh, not overly leaning to one side.

[RobertoDaCosta]

the end of the age of extreme decompression???
looks like you haven't been reading Bendis or Marvel in general lately...

[Lexor7]

Wow, some really good insights. I read your column every week and this is one of my faves, and one I'll be coming back to I'm sure. As someone who doesn't know much about specific techniques and enjoys the casual reading experience of comics I have struggled with why I've become disinterested in most comics these days, especially the single issue reading experience. I think this column and some of the comments above help me make pretty good sense of the problems I'm having with the hobby I love. Apologies if this drags on a bit (we'll call it decompression!).

Decompressed storytelling I get. Decompressed done well I really enjoy - Bendis on Daredevil for example. I first read that run in trades and it was wholly satisfying read as a full story. I think I would put Y-The Last Man in that category too...and I read that series in single issues. It was still satisfying because Vaughan did a masterful job in punctuatinng most issues with a big "reveal" that lent itself to a serialized form. In both those instances I felt that I was getting value for the story even though alot of the moments dragged out longer then they needed to or, in the case of Daredevil, gave artist Maleev an opportunity to cut and paste panel after panel (and get paid for it!) because it showed off some interesting technique that even a casual reader could appreciate (a technique that was uniquely effective in comics) while moving the story forward.

With this "storyboarding" approach I don't feel that. You did a wonderful job in explaining the techniques that went into the Walking Dead page, but when I read it, it was just a five second read that delivered something which IMO could have been done more efficiently. If it were an episode of the TV show I would have experienced just what you said because it's a strong cinematic techniqe. But in a comic it feels underwhelming to me as as a casual read. It feels like the worst of the decompressed stories I read in the early 2000s. It feels...padded. And with shorter page counts, it makes single issues less interesting and less meaningful as a satisfactory chapter of a larger arc.

I'd also argue that the double page splash in the world of storyboarding has gone from being a wonderful comic book technique to one of the worst offenders of padding. In the old days a double page splash page was pure awesome! In a decompressed story a double page splash felt the creators took us from a forward moving story (however slowly it was moving) to a full stop moment. In the storyboarding approach it feels like just another panel, designed to chew up pages. In fact, in a tablet experience the entire concept of a double page spread is lost and it really is just another panel.

Interested in other's thoughts. Maybe I'm just moving into my "been reading comics for over 20 years and I don't like this new fangled approach" phase. I'm just not "getting" what storyboarding is trying to put forward without the detailed commentary because to me it feels like a technique better used to inform what a cinematic experience should be like Vs being a finished storytelling technique in itself. As one commentor said, it isn't what comics do best. This week I'll take a look at some new comics through the lens you've put forward and see if I can appreciate it more.

Great column!

[Old Bull Lee]

Lexor7, I'm in the same boat. Augie's examples are quality work, and the strengths he points out are valid. I've definitely seen examples without those strengths - panels of talking heads where you can't tell who is talking, for instance.

But I still feel a sense of static lifelessness from that Walking Dead page, and it's not just because it's a quiet moment. Maybe that is my own bias and taste. I grew up with mostly 80s and 90s comics. Even they are decompressed when you compare them to a Silver Age book that feels cramped. But I think the post-Silver Age trimming down of unnecessary captions and dialogue, as well as the opening up of panel arrangements, has more to do with that.