Why do CGI comics exist?

[bakasama25]

Is that comic suppose to stupid on purpose?

[Kura]

I'm pretty sure (hoping) it's not to be taken seriously and is bad in every way on purpose, else I wouldn't have used it as an example, like I said I've run into a lot of these I really don't want to be pointing fingers at legitimately new creators to get people to laugh at when they are just starting out.

This particular series I'm pretty positive is click bait troll material, as he does make other series (in the same program so they all look the same, but at least this one is not to be taken seriously.

[UzukiCheverie]

Mod note: Yo guys, the discussion is sorta turning into more of a circlejerk, so let's try and get it back on topic, yep? (and that includes the talk about the ebola comic, I know it's weird but we wouldn't want others posting our comic in a public forum and talking shit about it, whether it's a parody/satire or not).

Original discussion: Why do CGI comics exist? What is your opinion about them?

[bakasama25]

That's what I thought.

To be on topic, I find 3D characters hard to look at. A lot of them just suffer from the Uncanny Valley effect. They look really off putting, looking like a dead corpse pretending be alive.

[PotooGryphon]

Agreed.

Honestly, I think they exist because of a style choice, or maybe the artist is more comfortable with 3D software than 2D, or maybe it is for saving time and relying on a library of assets to create their comic, or they don't think they have artistic abilities, they're not comfortable yet to push themselves to practice drawing, and they have a program that "creates" comics for them.

Honestly, I'm indifferent to 3D comics. It's just another medium for a storyteller to use to tell their story/gag.

And actually, there's probably more use of 3D technology in comics these days than people recognize. A lot of comic artists use 3D sketchup to map out settings and shots, and then draw over it in their drawing program. 3D is a very helpful tool so I can't fault anyone for using it.

There might be a lazy excuse side to why people use 3D in comics however I don't think that takes away from the series that use it well and if anything these people may aspire to create better but are currently limited.

[carloswebcomic]

I see the whole 3D model comics the same way as I see instant noodle soup.
Sure, it would be much better to do my noodle soup from scratch, but I have no idea how. So instead I will make some instant noodle soup. Just because I can't do noodle soup from scratch doesn't mean I'll have to starve to death because my instant noodle soup doesn't satisfy purists.

[UzukiCheverie]

My main issue is that one medium is trying to work with another, when they're really meant to be separate (3D and 2D in this case). It's like adding a tomato to a fruit salad - yes, they're both artistic mediums, they can be used together in some rare cases where innovation takes the lead, but for the most part, you wouldn't try and mix the two unless you were going for weird results.

Using 2D in 3D environments can work... sometimes. It depends how well they work together in terms of style. An example of 2D assets that work well in 3D environments? Look no further than the Gorillaz. But the way the art is presented gives it the same dull, dark look as their environments, meaning that the two mediums work together rather than against each other.

That's not to say there aren't places where it doesn't look awkward, but you have to find that middle ground.

When you do a 3D comic, you're inserting 3D models into a restricted 2D environment, including the 2D panels, the 2D (and often intrusive when places over speech bubbles) speech bubbles, and 2D rendering (including lighting, shaders, etc. that are often done in 3D renderings and are behind the scenes). Mix in the fact that 3D doesn't leave much to the imagination and 2D is more about suggesting form, and the hundreds of uses of stock models and amateur modelers who've probably only ever used MikuMiku Dance, and you've got yourself a recipe for a horrible 3D comic experience.

So how can you make a good 3D comic?

First off, find that happy medium. Maybe instead of just plopping 3D assets into a 2D world and arranging them to your liking, find a way for them to mesh into the actual environment. Use your brush tools to paint over them, don't let them just sit on top of the panels.

Here's a classic and good example of how 3D assets can be used to create a beautiful scene in a painted 2D comic:

Notice how the 3D objects don't just "sit" in the scene. They've been blurred, painted over, manipulated in a fashion where they still retain their 3D integrity, but don't compromise the composition as a whole.

What also goes into making a good 3D comic? Accepting the fact that it's a comic - you will have to draw. Even 3D animators are taught how to animate in 2D first before they move onto 3D - if it's an artistic medium that is performed on a canvas and represents an illustration, you will have to draw. If you don't know how to draw, then you have to accept this as well - but don't use it as an excuse to deliver work that's less than what you would strive for. Rather, use it as an opportunity to learn - even 3D modelers have to learn how to draw to some extent (it's like expecting going into the film industry as a boom mic operator but not knowing how to use a video camera - you're still going to have to learn things pertaining to the industry as a whole even if it's not your main job.)

Take the time to make it look good. Use that extra hour to clean up areas where the 3D assets clip, to paint over the skin tones and make them more realistic, to make that character fit into their environment (rather than getting thrown into it). The general consensus by most is that because you can make 3D models once and be done with it from that point on, they're easier and "more convenient" to make than 2D comics. While this is true to some small degree (yes, once you've made a 3D model, you won't have to remake it for a long while, unless you lose the model or have to redo it or add something onto it), it still requires your full effort. Don't half-ass it just because everyone else is.

Finally, know that the path you've chosen by meshing 3D and 2D is not an easy one. You're trying to adapt one medium for another. This can bring its hindrances, but it can be innovative and unique at its best. You're going to have to end up putting in effort to begin with, so you may as well make it your best.

[Kura]

My intent was not to talk shit about that comic. scythe asked for example, and when I said 'nice example' I kinda meant it. It is a satire comic that abused the program that I had fun reading. So it gave you the basic idea of the look the comics in question have, without calling out beginners or people that are using the program seriously. (you can tell it's click bait troll material as the author makes it evident inside the comic, posting things like 'fan mail, thank you to the support of all my fans!!' followed by screenshots of comments along the lines of 'this comic is the worst comic ever')

When someone mentioned they couldn't see it cause of licencing issues, I posted some clips (which were actually pretty funny lines in my opinion) so that they can get the general idea of the look/feel the comic had.

That aside, like I said, I'm not against people using it as a tool, everyone starts somewhere, or there are just some writers that just cannot find artists to help them and choose to do it this way. I'm not a fan of the look and how these programs tend to make many comics that use them look the same, but obviously from my ability to provide a recommendation as an example I give them a try regardless of if the style appeals to me or not.

[eagle1]

Ok, let's break down a few things here.

First, the vast majority of of webcomics are amateur affairs. I see a small number of artists that need to move to the pros, and even fewer writers. Most webcomics are crap, but that's OK. It does not matter what your artistic direction is, when you first start turning stuff out, you are going to turn out crap. Period. Nobody picks up a keyboard, pencil, brush or stylus and becomes a salable artist on their first try.

Second, CGI is an accepted artform in every facet of entertainment except webcomics. Zootopia shows that CGI does not lack for fans. For that matter, there are successful webcomics that are CGI, such as Data Chasers.

Third, most of the CGI hate that I have seen, (and this thread has had some) comes from other artists, not from fans, but there are plenty of fans to dislike CGI (as well as anime, stick figures, hyperrealism, etc, ad nauseum).

And before I get to the crux of my post, let me clear up one other thing. There are over 100 quality 3D models out there for DAZ and Poser, and over 1000 characters to use on them. There are terabytes of clothing, props, and sets. Most of these cost money, so a lot of CGI comics depend on the limited number of free assets out there.
Every one of these assets comes with a license that in almost all cases gives the user (or purchaser in the case of commercial products) permission to use the assets in pictures and art without the need to credit the original creator. In other words the creators created the creations for the very purpose that the comic creators are putting them to. As long as the acquisition of the asset was legitimate, accusing people of stealing is just disingenuous.
And finally most of the people starting out have no interest whatsoever in creating 3D assets, as that would actually take more time and education than learning to draw does, not to mention creating all of the assets for a single street scene would take weeks. For people wanting to tell a story, that's just plain silly. The assets are sold for them to do exactly what they are doing with them. The people using them might not understand that they do not have to take the character as originally distributed, but can instead morph it into something unique and individual.

So my point in all of this is as follows. CGI is a legitimate artform, but it's also one with a very low threshold of entry. Think of the bad CGI comics you have seen as the equivalent of stick figures and MS paint mouse art. Most of the people doing these have no understanding of composition, camera angles, or dramatic effect in art. I know my big weakness in CGI is lighting, and something that I struggle with in every shot, but I am slowly getting better at it.

Remember that most of the people using the 3D route to get their comic on the web are just as dedicated, passionate, and eager as anyone else doing this, and cut them some slack.

As an aside, photorealistic CGI is the biggest offender as it's too easy to do it badly, and takes a lot of skill to do it well. I have spent a great deal of time learning NPR (Non Photo Realistic) but a lot of my final panels are still too close to photos.

But remember, there is a group of people who like CGI comics, and seek them out. I know my stuff has fans, in some cases more fans than my traditional artwork.

Eagle
(Just try to be more tolerant, and not compare CGI artists to Nazis, and other bloodsuckers)

[TristanJensen]

Do you ever have those ideas that seem like the greatest thing ever and you make it and feel sorta proud of it, but then you look at it a week later and crawl into a little ball and wonder why your mind and hands would betray you in such horrendous ways?

I think that's whats going on with those and the people who make them just need some time...

[ToonDoctor]

Instead of bashing 3D art users, perhaps offering to help them learn about design would be time better spent. I don't use 3D but it is a legitimate way to create comics. There are no rules about what media to use for comics. And to say that 3D web comics should never exist is a weird argument coming from an artist. Artistic expression and freedom means stuff we don't like can exist too.

[marygold]

There's already a thread about why they exist, but me being the technically uneducated person I am, only came across this kind of thing two months ago and wants to know how people use the software. I don't like this style very much, but what I do find amazing is that people have to position things how they want it, which I'm sure is a lot of work, or do they? I know with drawing you can literally just out on paper exactly how you want your subject to look, but I'm assuming in CGI software you're just given a model in standing position or something. Are there basically a thousand different joint or turning points that the user will have to manipulate in order to get the perfect pose? If that's the case, props to those users for all their accuracy. I could never do it.

[zelkats]

I've never used CGI comic softwares such as ComiPo but I assume the character models have rigs that you can manipulate and pose them however you want. If it as simple as the rigs on the 3D models in Clip Studio Paint, then it can be surprisingly easy to pose them. No complicated stuff like having the choice of using IK or FK handles.

There are people who also create comics and animation using Clip Studio's 3D models. Some even create their custom environments and characters use Clip Studio Modeler. Also, Celsys sells this small robot-like device called Qumarion that you can pose physically with your hands and the pose is applied straight to the 3D model in Clip Studio Paint, Clip Paint Coordinate or Clip Studio Action (and Maya and 3DS Max, if you buy the full package and recieve special plugins). It makes posing and 3D animation a lot more faster and easier but sadly it's only available in Japan for now.

http://www.clip-studio.com/quma/en/

[UzukiCheverie]

Think of them like puppets. 3D models are built on wire meshes (sorta like when you make something out of paper mache - you start with a base to build the paper and glue off of) and have vertices, bones, and other adjustable joints that allow you to move and manipulate its form. The models grow in complexity and detail as the polygon and pixel count grows (polygons are what all models are made out of - even circular ones).

Of course, 3D models aren't moveable at first. This is where rigging (one of the most annoying things in the world IMO for 2D and 3D) comes into play - taking the model and giving it joints and bones. Models don't come with these automatically, so you have to determine where these points will go and how they will properly move without distorting the form (unless you're using premade models). Rigging is important even for still images like comics.

If you ever want to mess around with 3D models and objects and learn how they work, I'd highly recommend downloading Blender - it's a free 3D modeling program, and has quite a bit to offer for a free program (it's also open-source!) It's not as advanced as Maya, but it's definitely good for people starting out (and still has a lot of great tools even in comparison to its costly counterparts; with tons of community and professionally made tutorials to find online as well).

[apurviance]

Some people has have limited motion or pain in their hands. Making 3D comics can be more comfortable than drawing.

[mariusthered]

well reading this thread has made me feel welcome, i now understand why my comic has never really had big numbers fans on this site. I could go into a rant but why waist my time typing, instead i will simply say if you think using the software is easy try it. yer popping a few figure on a scene take a few minutes but try doing a complex scene with lots of tiny props in the background and perfect lighting and materials that look right. it can take hours to get one picture correct. My biggest gripe with 3d software is people who have abused it and made crappy porn, this stuff has so many uses and people really should try it before they attack it.

[scythe]

Thanks for posting. I wasn't exactly sure what the OP was talking about. I mean, I've seen plenty of comics where 3D has been integrated successfully. I myself use poser for reference, which I don't think they were talking about.

From what I can see, it looks like the issue is, it's still new technology being used by amateurs. I was a rollerblader back in the day, and the no1 criticisms we used to get from skateboarders in the early 90s was that we had no style, that having our wheels strapped to our feet was cheating, and that what we were doing was too easy.

And they were right. If I ever look back at those first videos from rollerblading's birth, we looked awful. But we got there in the end, developed out own style and culture, added technicality, and even surpassed skateboarding in many ways.

I think that's what's going on here. You don't measure something by how easy it is to pick up the very basics, you measure it by its potential, and looking at what 3D artists have been able to do with animated movies over space of just a few decades, I think it's just a matter of time and improved technology before this medium takes off.

[isaacfriedman]

I've been using Cinema 4D, Sculptris, Maya, Poser Debut, and a couple other software for almost two years now and I still struggle to design even the most basic monster, but there are so many dozens upon dozens of programs that allow for basic human modeling and many allow for exportation in the form of files usable by most of the aforementioned software. in two of those animating/modeling tools, lighting comes in so many beautiful presets that are only a click away that it's absurd that so many poorly lit or completely matte comics exist. I'm sure yours is fine based solely on the amount of work you claim to be putting in, but I'm referring to the ones that are made by people who view CGI as a cheap, easy, and quick way to get around a lack of talent (basically the same way CGI is used in amateur animation contests).

[mariusthered]

point taken but blaming the medium for how it is being used is offensive to people who have dedicated parts of their lives to using it. I have been using poser since 1995 so you can forgive me being defensive about the work I enjoy.
People have to learn and the best way for them to do that is to read their work and give feedback. I have read and seen comics on this site that frankly the artwork was appalling but the story was good so a gave constructive advise on how to improve. and even so why should people who have no talent for drawing not be allowed to use software to make comics, writing is just as much a talent . some people just are not born to draw or mess around with bs shading (a part of art I hate)

enjoy the stories dont victimize the medium it was made with.

[PotooGryphon]

Agreed.

There's been many cases where artists get annoyed with writers that post "seeking artist" threads, because these writers won't try drawing their ideas themselves. So if a writer resorts to using 3d software to tell their story/gag, they shouldn't be shunned for it.

Comic creators shouldn't victimize each. We each have different methods and the variety is what makes it so great.

At my day job, I use a 3D software called IClone. It's very straight forward 3D animation software to the point where I can't model in it. My company buys models and assets to use in the program, much like buying istock photos and such. I really can't stand it and would prefer working in Maya, however that software is too expensive for the company to justify one animator to use on strict deadlines. So, ya know, I get why these programs exist and they do have a genuine purpose and the people that use them aren't any less a creator for using them.

Actually, sometimes working under limitations yields the most interesting results