How to write a comic

[wordmonkey]

Speaking of resources, Monk (or Word, if you prefer)...I know a couple of comics pros in NC...maybe you crossed paths with 'em at Heroes Con or elsewhere.

Oh at the moment, I'm very aware that I'm a very small fish in a small pond. In fact I think the big fish use my pond as a toilet.

I am going to HeroesCon later this summer. If you have contacts to share, feel free to PM me. (I only say PM so they don't have names bandied around and are hit with an in-flux of messages and you get some grief. Of course, if you'd rather not, for the same reason, that's OK.)

And it's always nice to look up someone at a con. Put a face to a name.

 

[wordmonkey]

Um...I drink beer from the bottle and have been known to cuss...but you can speak for yourself on the rest of it, as I don't do this things.

Not just men reading this thread.

Clearly you hang out at classier places than I. I WAS talking about the women! You don't wanna hear what the guys do!

I'd love to have someone discuss pacing within a story arc, and how to break events down into issues but still have each issue have a full build-up and climax.

I think you have to almost take EACH issue as if it were a single story. You're driving for the END of that issue. That is your goal. Each page 22 is the finale. Of course, each one throughout the arc has to escalate, but in broad stroke, that's my take.

Also, it might be interesting to hear about the differences between scripts twenty-thirty years ago, with all of the thought bubbles, and now. I went back to read the Dark Phoenix story a while ago and it was really interesting to see how much the writing style has changed between then and now.

Hey, last I heard DC scripted in a panel-by-panel breakdown, where the Marvel way was loosely say what happens on the page, let the artist do the layout, then the writer goes back in and adds the dialog for the letterer.

I think the "thought bubble" has disappeared, because there are more subtle ways to convey what those bubbles did. At heart, if you look back, you will see that the "thoughts" are expostion, or explaining things that aren't obvious.

What are some outmoded techniques, or things that are cliche?

I think there is always room for everything, as long as it's used judiciously. Even writing "in vogue," if done badly, or over-killed, then it's bad.

 

[wordmonkey]

PANELS

I think the key is watching what you do. While I do plan out my panels in the thumbnails I do prior to the script writing starts, I'm looking at ways to keep the visual dynamic interesting and keep the narrative flowing.

There's obviously the left-to-right, top-to-bottom, and you should NEVER need arrows, but you can also use them to emphasize a scene or minimize it's importance.

HOWEVER, you gotta also be aware that your penciler might well throw out your layout and rework the page layout.

I tend to favor less is more when it comes to fancy panel shapes, but occasionally they can be used to great effect, but...

 

[PeeDee]

Outdated concepts: The captions talking to the Super-heroes. They used to do that in early X-Men comics. You'd get the panel going:

CAPTION: But you're not good enough to lead the team, Cyclops.

CYCLOPS: No...

CAPTION: ...Are you?

CYCLOPS: ....NO!!

I don't know if it counts as a 'concept,' per se since it was a very Jack Kirby, Stan Lee thing to do.

 

[Axler]

Personally, I never cared for thought balloons and I've used them only sparingly.

As for pacing, I always strive to establish a rhythm per page...the last panel should contain a small "kicker" to induce the reader to turn to the next page.

I never change locales or character POVs in the middle of a page, I do both on a seperate page.

Usually, for a page that contains a lot of physical action, I try to hold it down to a minimum of four panels.

For the prerequisite talking head pages, I'll go as many seven panels but no fewer than five. Even then, in order to keep the page from being too copy heavy, I try to reduce the number of dialogue balloons to two per panel.

I had a mind-set when I wrote arcs contained within four issues that I was writing a half-hour television drama, along the lines of The Rifleman or a show like that and paced the action accordingly. You had a limited amount of time to introduce the characters, the plot, the conflict, the action and that issue's resolution, even if the resolution was a cliff-hanger.

By the time you reached the last page of the fourth issue, you had completed the equivalent of a two hour long screen or teleplay.

Word--I was thinking of Hero Con perennials like Terry Collins, Bill Neville, Mike Wieringo and Al Bigley.

They're just regular people, last I heard. Walk up to 'em and demand they buy you a beer. They won't do it, but they won't scream for security, either.

 

[Tallymark]

If you want to really break in and make some money in comics, you MUST have great art. That doesn't mean that it has to look like DC or Marvel work, there's some great stylized artwork out there that I love. He's a big name, but Mike Mignola has deconstructed the lines to an amazing level and brilliant effect. But he can do the real stuff too, his style just evolved.

ART is what sells a new book. Never forget that.
http://

That is a great point, and I totally agree...I'm probably not portraying myself acurately, because I am capable of good art...in fact, part of what I'm hoping will be most attractive about my comic is the art. But my biggest problem is that it takes a tremendous amount of effort on my part; I can draw well, but I can't draw fast. (which is why deadlines would be an issue for me). I think part of the reason for this though is that I simply haven't been drawing enough lately and am out of practice, so I am hoping that by committing myself to a large art project like this, my ability to draw good+fast art will eventually improve. And even if I don't end up being terribly successful with it, I think that the learning experience will be important, for future comics. I figure, every professional comic artist has to start out on some small project where they figure out hands-on how certain things work.

You made some great points about POD in the other thread...part of the idea of doing the art myself is to cut out the tremendous cost of paying an artist, so that at least what meager money I may make would only have the printing fees subtracted from it (assuming I get stuck doing POD, which I hope isn't the case!). Well, and I'd have to market it myself. Basically, I'm not expecting to make big money, but I'm hoping at least to not lose too much money. 'Cus I'm dirt poor so I have no money to lose. XD

I hope the reason you do it in the first place is for the love, because doing it for the money is probably a flawed place to start from. With comics, short stories, novels, or anything except maybe pole dancing.

This is definately a labor of love. I'm hoping, desperately, that it can be published by a real publisher, even a small one, because I would really like to see it out there and have people enjoy it. But it's also just a personally rewarding project.

..A tedious, time-consuming, financially draining, personally rewarding project. Damn. XD

Anyway, on the topic of panels--so would you all say that six panels a page is, across comics, usually the average? Also, just what size parameters do people usually work at? What are the dimensions of the average comic book, and how much larger does the artist usually work at? Or do they sometimes do it at actual size?

Also, does a graphic novel have an average number of pages? Or is that something that's totally variable? (unlike the number of pages in your standard comic book).

 

[wordmonkey]

Tally

Go for it. I think the most important thing is that you have fun doing it. You'll undoubtedly learn a lot, but what you're planning is such a monster job, that if it's no fun, it's a nightmare.

The obvious flipside is that the fun you have doing it will come through in the writing and the art you do, which obviously makes it a much more appealing product for people to pick up and read.

Despite some doom and gloom, there are ways in, but for myself, I always like to know ahead of time if it's gonna be hard. For me, that tends to be be more of a carrot.

I may refer to it as a Quixotic Adventure, but I love the Don and I think the world might be a little better if more people seized their crazy dreams and went for it. Of course, if you're the owner of a windmill, I will understand if you disagree with that last statement.

 

[Axler]

Received this proof today.

And lest I forget...

Ta. Da.

 

[AzBobby]

For the prerequisite talking head pages, I'll go as many seven panels but no fewer than five. Even then, in order to keep the page from being too copy heavy, I try to reduce the number of dialogue balloons to two per panel.

I had a mind-set when I wrote arcs contained within four issues that I was writing a half-hour television drama, along the lines of The Rifleman or a show like that and paced the action accordingly. You had a limited amount of time to introduce the characters, the plot, the conflict, the action and that issue's resolution, even if the resolution was a cliff-hanger.

Do I observe correctly that the more "literary" a comic (I guess I mean carried by words) the more likely you are to see many tiny panels in a row on some pages, to carry a conversation or represent a character stumbling from thought to thought? I'm thinking Dark Knight Returns and Maus here. Sometimes the plain, old fashioned brick wall effect of some of these panel series hits you by surprise if you're used to the mainstream stuff, but I find them rewarding and effective if they're balanced off with more relaxed layouts and of course if the writing is worth it.

I gotta admit I'm turned off by a routine of pages with few panels. It's a prejudicial thing; it sends the instant message to me that it's juvenile material without me bothering to check the dialogue and captions. I like it for splash effect now and then, though. If they're rare, big panels work well as a signal that something important is going on.

Having finally read Watchmen for the first time recently, I'm sensitive to comics getting too heavy with dialogue and captions. For a superhero yarn, that one was talky as hell. Still great, though. Definitely more impressive for its writing than for its art. I think I prefer the Hellboy balance -- also writerly to the extent of getting talky at times, but balanced with action and always terrifically stylish art. My own style is flawed on the side of the talky, so it helps to take such notes.

BTW, Rifleman rocks. Excellent pacing comparison.

 

[wordmonkey]

Do I observe correctly that the more "literary" a comic (I guess I mean carried by words) the more likely you are to see many tiny panels in a row on some pages, to carry a conversation or represent a character stumbling from thought to thought? I'm thinking Dark Knight Returns and Maus here. Sometimes the plain, old fashioned brick wall effect of some of these panel series hits you by surprise if you're used to the mainstream stuff, but I find them rewarding and effective if they're balanced off with more relaxed layouts and of course if the writing is worth it.

I think it depends on the writer and the story.

Sometimes you need to put in a bit of exposition. The way I try and do it, rather than have the talking heads, is to have the dialog running over the top of some other action. I just did that in a mini I'm working on. A SWAT team is preparing to hit a building and the hero, a Delta Force guy wants the SWAT team to hold off. He's arguing with the SWAT commander. Coulda bin talking heads, but I started with them facing each other, then ran their dialog over the top of a series of action panels as the other SWAT members got ready, loaded weapons, cut power, etc.

Taking the screenplay parallel a step further. There is an idea that you should be able to watch a movie, without the sound, and still work out what's happening. I try and write comics like that. It's partly why when I start, I thumbnail the page for myself. So I'm always thinking visually. The dialog, bubbles, captions, et al, should merely add a richness, IMO. You should be able to write for an artist and have the core vibe of the story come through in the art alone. It's why gettng a great artist is so important.

And so difficult.

 

[Axler]

My own style is flawed on the side of the talky, so it helps to take such notes.

BTW, Rifleman rocks. Excellent pacing comparison.

Yeah...The Andy Griffith Show is a good one to study for pacing and rhythm, too.

Talking-head exposition scenes are the banes of comics scripter's lives. They have to be in there if you're crafting an actual story instead of a series of fight scenes, but figuring out the best way to present them can be a real pain.

It's why gettng a great artist is so important.

And so difficult.

Exactly. I found the "Caniff-era" artists were the best and most reliable in staging the talking head scenes. They seemed to have an instinctive grasp of how to do it, so the art and dialogue balloons could be in balance instead of in conflict.

Here are links to a couple of classic examples, the first by the great Jim Mooney:

http://www.comicspace.com/markaxlerellis/uploaded/3269/1171507085_tzG35EYrh6.jpg?1171507085

And the other by the under-rated (but no less great) Don Heck:

http://www.comicspace.com/markaxlerellis/uploaded/65/1170282601_sNTUc9RDAi.jpg?1170282601

 

[Dancre]

Received this proof today.

And lest I forget...

Ta. Da.

When does it come out? It looks interesting.


kim

 

[Dancre]

Between 1988-93, the average break-even on a color independent comic with a cover price of $2.50 was around 15,000 orders. Those are the numbers for second tier DC titles nowdays.

One of the reasons choosing the TPB or graphic novel format is that you at least stand a chance of getting the product into brick-and-mortar bookstores and therefore reaching a much greater audience than you can with the direct sales market.

Granted, it may not be a great chance if you're an unknown creator, but at least there is one.

I'm about ready to take the plunge into POD with the Death Hawk TPB and if that's not too painful, I'll do it with my other comic properties.

Now I would like to write a graphic novel, not so much a comic. So I would still use the same formatt as discussed here but more of it? yes? I suck at short stories and I just have to write the novel.

kim

 

[wordmonkey]

Everything here is the same for a graphic novel. If you look at a multi-part story arc that runs through say six issues of a comic series, it's exactly the same as a graphic novel. The only difference is that you turn a page to get to the next part, rather than wait a month.

Everything here about pacing etc. is just the same.

The upside is that if you complete a GN, you can pitch it to traditional book publishers, who are now looking to get in on the GN scene. However, you will need to have it finished, completely, before you pitch it (just like you would a regular novel).

The downside is that it's much harder to find an artist who will do this for free. Or at least take the risk on a back-end deal for such a massive amount of work.

If you pitch your story as a mini-series, you are then kinda stuck with comic publishers, BUT you can basicaly get an artist to do the first part (22 pages) and pitch. It's still not easy, but it's easier to do that and get a good artist, than to get someone good to do a GN.

Of course, if are willing to invest, and pay the artist a page rate, ignore the above. Same if you're doing the art yourself.

 

[Axler]

Like Word says, there's no appreciable difference between the comics scripting format and that of a graphic novel.

You might want to look on Comics Space for an artist willing to collaborate with you for a 50-50 type of agreement.

 

[wordmonkey]

Like Word says, there's no appreciable difference between the comics scripting format and that of a graphic novel.

You might want to look on Comics Space for an artist willing to collaborate with you for a 50-50 type of agreement.

I think deviant is a better resource for finding an artist. I've had the most success there. That said, to get a good artist, who won't flake out, knows what they are doing, maybe has something published, AND will work with you on the deal like Axler says, is not easy.

But is IS possible.

 

[AzBobby]

I think it depends on the writer and the story.

Sometimes you need to put in a bit of exposition. The way I try and do it, rather than have the talking heads, is to have the dialog running over the top of some other action. I just did that in a mini I'm working on. A SWAT team is preparing to hit a building and the hero, a Delta Force guy wants the SWAT team to hold off. He's arguing with the SWAT commander. Coulda bin talking heads, but I started with them facing each other, then ran their dialog over the top of a series of action panels as the other SWAT members got ready, loaded weapons, cut power, etc.

There's exposition and then there's talky, I guess. Axler linked two examples that seem to show the difference. One of them was a conversation in which visual interest was maintained with a variety of angles on the couple talking. But it was still all about the talking. The second example showed the investigation of a crime scene. It wasn't merely different because the images were more interesting, though they were. Without knowing much context of the story, I sensed that the scene moved action forward. You were watching characters move through a scene discovering stuff for themselves, doing their jobs, not stopping in the middle of a story but rather playing out part of the story. Slightly removed from the mere talk exposition, even though some talk exposition was part of it.

I'm not saying some stories shouldn't be talky, of course. Some are supposed to be soap operas and that's that. It only seems to be a problem when it disturbs the rhythm set down for the kind of story you're telling.

I like the technique of dialogue layered over other action, whether in captions or stretchy balloons or whatever. In the example you describe, it sounds like it also adds suspense, if they're arguing about whether to go in while members of the team are putting their fingers on the triggers. It's a great idea to use the imagery beyond explicitly representing the words and vice versa, or for exposing the words or imagery in some new light by their juxtaposition. It can also be overdone like a novelty that distracts you from the flow of the story, like the pirate story comic-within-a-comic that added incongruous captions all over the Watchmen without any point I could readily see. But in general I'm all in favor of using that cinematic layering of images and voices that can raise a comic a little over the surface of the paper.

Taking the screenplay parallel a step further. There is an idea that you should be able to watch a movie, without the sound, and still work out what's happening. I try and write comics like that. It's partly why when I start, I thumbnail the page for myself. So I'm always thinking visually. The dialog, bubbles, captions, et al, should merely add a richness, IMO. You should be able to write for an artist and have the core vibe of the story come through in the art alone.

I don't know; your approach to comics sounds right but I never bought that adage about an ideal movie being carried by images only, even just barely. It doesn't apply to most of the best films, in which the marriage of image, sound and words is key. Sticking with a parallel between movies and graphic novels, this notion seems to run contrary to the one you just described, where you broaden a dialogue scene by overlapping it with other shots. Presumably that dialogue is indispensible or you would've cut it out. It reminds me of the typical setup in modern Batman stories, where the caption boxes carry a first-person narrative that stands in place of Batman's thought balloons. These thoughts deliver exposition about his current investigation, or sometimes just rambling thoughts about life that flesh out his character; but meanwhile, in the pictures over which they float, we see him tear across town in the batmobile, throw his batarang, hoist himself up the side of a building, and sneak into someone's window. There's no sense of space wasted on the page while still enjoying the text, the best of both worlds.

That having been said I agree that the words have to clipped to an absolute minimum without losing elements of your story (and sometimes, if the story is very substantial, the "minimum" still leaves you with a lot of dialogue and captions), and it's impressive when key information is delivered through visuals alone. You don't have to tell the reader the character's an alcoholic if the empty vodka bottles are clearly visible on her nightstand. So that same image can include a caption that delivers completely different information. You end up with twice the depth of story packed into the same number of pages that way.

 

[Dancre]

I gotta admit I'm turned off by a routine of pages with few panels. It's a prejudicial thing; it sends the instant message to me that it's juvenile material without me bothering to check the dialogue and captions. I like it for splash effect now and then, though. If they're rare, big panels work well as a signal that something important is going on.

So big panels mean something big is going to happen, got it. What about the smaller ones that zoom in on a hand, or a face or eyes, a sword, something? What is the purpose of those? What about a split screen? What would that one be used for? How about a panel that uses the whole page? Does this also mean, this is very important, so pay attention to it? Thanks.

kim

 

[wordmonkey]

So big panels mean something big is going to happen, got it. What about the smaller ones that zoom in on a hand, or a face or eyes, a sword, something? What is the purpose of those? What about a split screen? What would that one be used for? How about a panel that uses the whole page? Does this also mean, this is very important, so pay attention to it? Thanks.

No.

You could just as easily use a full page panel to focus in on one small element. In essence completely flip your suggestion that a big panel is for a big story element. I'm working on a book that has a full page panel that's almost entirely black. In the middle is a naked body - quite small considering the blackness surrounding. The emphasis on that page is how small and insignificant that body is.

You should also remember that if you have a page full of small panels, you can use it to not only focus on details, but also directly impact pacing. If you have nine panels on a page, you have nine chunks of time. You can use that to hammer through the seconds as each one leaps forward crucial event to crucial event. The flip side is that you can draw out a moment in time by repeating the same panel over and over.

It all depends on what you do IN the panel.

And remember, whatever books or guides you read, even the massive thread here, once you know the rules, you are free to break them for dynamic effect, just be careful that you don't over do it.

 

[Dancre]

No.

You could just as easily use a full page panel to focus in on one small element. In essence completely flip your suggestion that a big panel is for a big story element. I'm working on a book that has a full page panel that's almost entirely black. In the middle is a naked body - quite small considering the blackness surrounding. The emphasis on that page is how small and insignificant that body is.

Ahhh . . .ok.


You should also remember that if you have a page full of small panels, you can use it to not only focus on details, but also directly impact pacing. If you have nine panels on a page, you have nine chunks of time. You can use that to hammer through the seconds as each one leaps forward crucial event to crucial event. The flip side is that you can draw out a moment in time by repeating the same panel over and over.

So if two guys are sword fighting, I could use the smaller panels to break down the fight? yes?

It all depends on what you do IN the panel.

So if I want to draw the reader's attention to say, my character's face, which is showing sorrow, I can do it in a big panel or a small panel?

And remember, whatever books or guides you read, even the massive thread here, once you know the rules, you are free to break them for dynamic effect, just be careful that you don't over do it.

I love breaking the rules. fun!!! Thanks!! And could a panel almost be considered as a paragraph in a novel?

kim

 

[Axler]

Well, as Word implies...you gotta know the rules before you can break them.

As for a panel translating into a paragraph....I never thought of it that way, but I suppose so.

I always considered panels to be analogous to camera angles.

 

[drybonesreborn]

Is there any Part book, part comic?

 

[wordmonkey]

So if two guys are sword fighting, I could use the smaller panels to break down the fight? yes?

You can do anything.

1. You could set them in silhouette so you see them in some classic fencing type poses, thrust, parry, lunge, etc.
2. You could do a series of close-ups on faces as they glower, snarl, spit and insult each other and add an SFX: CHING as their swords clash off panel.
3. You could run a series of panels that are their clothes being slashed, shoulders stabbed, and various sundry other wounds that are picked up with additional SFX: CHING or SFX: SWOOSH or Character One: UGH!
4. You could also let your artist have some fun (and I do this on fight scenes from time-to-time) and simply give some general overview comments of the fight as it plays out and leave the page/panel arrangement toy the artist. You mayneed to go back in and add appropriate dialog and SFX, but you could just as easily leave that for the letterer and editor to basically ad-lib when the pencils are done.

Cool, eh? And I stopped there, I can think of at least three more ways I could show that fight. You can probably come up with your own list. Just think visually interesting.

(That last example works pretty much only if you have a fight scene where it's just that. But even that I usually want the fight to start in a specific way and end on a specific panel/scene, so the script has to reflect that.)

And again, what's the context of the fight? Is it the same level of intensity as the show-down between Obi Wan and Anakin? Does the fight run an entire 22 page issue (or manga chapter)? Is it a brief skirmish that runs a page before on character flees? Are there other things running at the same time, that dictates you cutting away to show the castle being stormed, or the princess begin rescued, while this fight distracts the main badguy? Oh I know these side issues don't impact the fight per se, but they could impact the way you SHOW the fight. You could even get Eisner on it and ditch panels entirely.

So if I want to draw the reader's attention to say, my character's face, which is showing sorrow, I can do it in a big panel or a small panel?

The sky's the limit. Just make sure you effectively convey the message you want. While thinking about this I remember a Spider-man issue from way back (probably the 70's). I was back in England and the Spider-man comics I got there were English reprints that had all the same artwork but no color inside. This issue introduced the new character of Nova. The cover of the book was very similar to a spash page inside. It was somekind of study or office. On the floor was the dead body of Nova's Dad or Uncle or mentor. Spidey was in the room having just discovered the body and Nova was powering into the room and thinking the Webhead was the killer. The room had been ransacked during what had obviously been a fight, leading to the death, and among the debris all around, by the hand of the murder victim, was the last six pages of a month-at-view calendar, fanned out in order, July, August, September, October, November and December.

The reason this sticks in my memory so clearly was that the cover told you the identity of the real murder. It was there, bang in the middle of the page, and repeated on the splash inside, and ther were several other panels that pointed to the name of the murder. Oh yeah, I do mean name. Spelled out clear as day. Eventually Spidey and Nova work it out. But that is a classic example of using a BIG panel to tell a very small, but crucial detail.

I love breaking the rules. fun!!! Thanks!! And could a panel almost be considered as a paragraph in a novel?

I tend to think like Axler does, that the panels are like camera angles in a movie (which is why the comic scripts helped my screenwriting and vice-versa). Because the content of the panel often dictates the length of time it represents, rather than the actual size, I think that again, it depends. You could have a small, inset panel that ends a scene and it's supposed to convey a stunned halt to the proceedings, like a pregnant pause. So in that case, it's more like a punctuation point. You could have a double page spread that shows a massive battle, lots of characters, lots going on. Takes a while to read, but actually all those various conflicts are running at the same second.

I think it might help to clarify something fundamental here. While we are talking writing here, you CANNOT take the script completely out of context and study it just as is. Because the point is that it is so interlinked with the art that to JUST consider the script is like just considering the melody in "Ode to Joy." The size of the panel is undoubtedly important and you use that tool to your benefit. But what you tell the artist to draw INSIDE that panel carries just as much impact on timing and detail as anything else.

It really isn't like any other kind of writing. The closest would be screenwriting, and even then, when you write a spec script, you keep it much simpler (ie: don't direct from the page) and it still flows. In a comic script, you dictate the camera angle; the degree to which you zoom in or out; the specific detail the "camera" focuses on; when to cut to a person or scene; when to cut away; and lastly, how long a scene takes, or how long ou hold a shot on a character.

THE POWER!!!

Use it wisely.

 

[Dancre]

Wow!! WordMonkey, you're making me very excited to start this new adventure of mine. So do you think it would help me to take a few screenwriting classes? Or concentrate more on the writing and camera shots? And I also liked the idea of those camera shots. That really makes my juices flow!! I appreciate you sitting down with me and hammering out of this stuff.

 

[Dancre]

Is there any Part book, part comic?

Well, Tokyopo.com requires their books to have some illustrations. Maybe around 30ish per book? In fact, one of the editors over there said the book should have a killer pitch if the author doesn't include the artwork. Most of their fiction books are in the book stores, including Trinity Blood. So go check them out. I think other manga publishers who publish novels also require some sort of illustrations.

kim