Page 2 of 3
FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: TPG: Week 23- Dayv Gerberding

  1. CalvinCamp Guest

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamH View Post
    High level of detail, maybe not, enough detail to get inference/style of the clothes he's wearing, I'd argue yes.
    Yeah, that's what I was getting at, there at the end. As long as he can get enough semblance of detail to carry that inference/style, so the reader can connect the character on the next page as being the same guy... I think that's all the detail required for that one panel. He can clarify and reinforce the "gangster" look more when he moves the viewpoint closer. Which means the panel may be big enough - only the sketches will tell, I guess.



  2. drgerb Guest

    A reply now that I'm reading the edit extensively.. Any reply from Steven would be appreciated. I just told my manager at work today that anyone I ever learned from was someone who pushed me, talked shit to me, threw me down. All the people who praise you are worthless.

    (I think we all know what “approaching” means…)
    I actually threw in the bit cause I was worried you'd call me on a moving panel. Eek. Guess it wasn't worth elaborating on.

    You could have started this on P1, and then I wouldn’t have screamed in agony. I instead would have been watching to make sure you kept it up through the script.
    I actually was planning on throwing in some monologue into page 1, if it turned into a one page spread or not.. Basically introducing the main character and his circumstances (A lack of sleep can lead to a lot of shit.. I've been awake for 48 hours now..) But I figured you'd take the monologue as being from Mal... In which case it'd throw the story off a bit? Adding it in would, in the one hand, add to the whole 'is this real or fake thing?' Ever read about the kinds of things that a lack of sleep alone could induce? Aside from being stuck in a zombie infested chaos? The brain is capable of some scary things as is.

    Is it still connected to his body? If she's a zombie, why is she not eating him? She did call him meat, after all.
    I thought zombies only liked "alive" / "living" meat? Maybe? I dunno.. I mean in zombie movies you see A. a lot of corpses, and B. a lot of zombies, zombies that aren't frantically chasing the static corpses... So maybe, just maybe?

    No. You can’t have a closeup of his eyes. One eye is looking through the scope, the other eye is closed.
    I guess I could have worded it singular, 'Eye' but I figured 'eyes' would be easier to catch on to, IE the nose up towards the eye brow area? Whether one is closed or not shouldn't *really* matter? One being open, staring down the barrel of a gun seems more menacing... Which is what I meant. But I guess I typed it wrong. For the record I think I must've been drunk when I wrote that script. I forget. I guess an open eye and one closed eye socket no longer counts as 'eyes?' My bad.


    I guess that's it. I like hearing my stories are crap. I think it motivates me. As I mentioned, that manager of mine is a beast. He freaks out from time to time, and some workers go crawl up in a ball and cry themselves to sleep. THAT'S when you learn.

    Not when you're walking down the street in a leather jacket with your head held high, or driving that '10 Chevy Camaro. That's all garbage. You learn and you get better when you're on the bottom..

    And as inane or pseudo-gay as it sounds, hearing Steven bash my scripts somehow motivates me. I guess that's the whole point, right? Woo. Anyway... Anything else bashing my script I'll agree with. It's a decent idea / piece of a bigger puzzle done with no effort at all. I'll try it again sometime.



  3. CalvinCamp Guest

    Quote Originally Posted by drgerb View Post
    I guess an open eye and one closed eye socket no longer counts as 'eyes?'
    Horseshit. Eyes are eyes.
    A clarification was in order, to make sure the artist drew the one eye shut. But just because an eye is shut, doesn't make it a mushroom.

    This is a shortcoming with Steven's approach to editing (at least on here). He sometimes sacrifices clarity on the altar of drama.



  4. StevenForbes Guest

    Clarity is always a great thing, but when the writer himself isn't clear, I can only go with what I'm given. And really, it's saying something when my edits have more 'drama' in them than the scripts I'm sent, wouldn't you say?

    Anyway, before I go much further, there's a point of clarification I want to make. Adam's right. He fell out of the rotation, but thankfully, he caught it before he was skipped!

    Next week brings us Calvin Camp, followed by Adam Hudson, Mark McMurtrey, Joe Webb, and Dayv Gerberding. Those are all the scripts I have at the moment.

    Now, back to this script.

    Eyes are eyes, this is true. But here's what you're missing: if one panel has him looking through the scope, and the next panel is a close-up of his eyes...how are you going to be able to see the other eye if it's looking through the scope? Not only that, where's the drama in a close-up of a closed eye?

    In this instance, you're not going to have anything concerning drama when it comes to the eyes, because both eyes are effectively hidden: one by the scope, the other by the eyelid. This is a bad panel because of that fact. If he was no longer looking through the scope, then that is the writer's fault for lack of clarity. But like I said in the edits, he can't have a close-up of his eyes in that panel. Not the way it was written.

    I suggest, when sending scripts in to be edited, that they represent the best of your current abilities. They should be as polished as possible, because if that's then the best of your abilities, then you have a baseline of where to go when I do my edits. If you send me scripts that basically aren't finished (or at least haven't had a final read-through), then you're doing yourself a disservice. Just my opinion. I don't think you're using your resource (me) to its best ability that way.



  5. StevenForbes Guest

    Quote Originally Posted by madelf View Post
    Huh? What do cars parking there have to do with viewing angles?

    Roof or parking level, either one, as long as she's standing at the parapet wall (which she is, because her hands are on it) all she'd need to do is lean forward a little and she should be able to see just about anything below her that she wants. The only thing that would prevent it would be an overhang below the parapet wall. Since she's looking at someone out in the middle of the street, I can't see why this panel doesn't work just fine.
    You know what? You're perfectly correct. My mistake. I read it wrong. It happens.

    Quote Originally Posted by madelf View Post
    I don't know... If it was just the girl in the panel, headed left, I'd say, yeah, it's leading the eye out. But he's got a guy on one side of the panel and a girl on the other, both facing into the middle of the page (it's not like we're seeing actual movement on the girl's side, it's still a static picture), so I don't think he's really sending the reader's eye much of anywhere. And there might be a way to play with the viewing angles, perspective and relative figure sizes to still lead the eye to the right.

    Flipping the locations of the characters is going to screw up the balloon placement for the dialogue - the person speaking first would be on the right. So that particular solution may be a bigger problem than the problem.

    And how come you didn't tell him it was a moving panel?
    Here's how it's leading the eye out of the book, instead of in: the action is going from right to left, not left to right, like I said.

    And I didn't call it a moving panel because I didn't see it that way. Sure, it could be, but a few motion lines around the woman can give the suggestion of a slow shamble. If he were raising a gun, firing, and then rolling to duck for cover, then I'd call it a moving panel all day long.

    I'm happy you brought up the dialogue for this balloon. This is one of the reasons why I highly suggest writers also learn how to letter. This is actually a perfect example.

    At this stage, the script isn't yet set. The script actually isn't really set until the book is shipped off to the printer. But right now, the script serves as a map as to how the writer sees the book. There are going to be all kinds of changes once the pages are in. If the thumbnails are approved, the biggest changes are going to be to the dialogue. Adjustments are always going to be necessary in order to make balloons fit better, to make something a little more clear, or just to get a better handle on the look of the page/panel.

    In this case, going with my suggestion to flip this around, the dialogue could be left as is. The statements within this panel could be independent of one another, and as such, could stand alone without reading strangely. But, if he wanted to, there could be slight adjustments made to either one or both balloons to make them interdependent, and to read well across the page.

    However, that's a dialogue change that can only be determined after the pages come in from the artist.



  6. drgerb Guest

    Next week brings us Calvin Camp, followed by Adam Hudson, Mark McMurtrey, Joe Webb, and Dayv Gerberding. Those are all the scripts I have at the moment.
    Erm... I don't think you have a third script from me? Did I drunkedly send you another script at some point and then forgot about it? Muahah.



  7. StevenForbes Guest

    That's quite possible. Check your Sent Items.



  8. drgerb Guest

    Wait a minute... Is that a trick question?

    (I just checked... Nothing!)

    I do have a brother who recently got into writing comic books who mentioned he was thinking about sending a script your way... Might that be the case?
    Last edited by drgerb; Wednesday, July 01, 2009 at 03:59 PM. Reason: clarification



  9. CalvinCamp Guest

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenForbes View Post
    Clarity is always a great thing, but when the writer himself isn't clear, I can only go with what I'm given. And really, it's saying something when my edits have more 'drama' in them than the scripts I'm sent, wouldn't you say?
    Heck, your edits have more drama in them than some Shakespearean tragedies.

    Seriously, though... you are who you are. You write the way you write. You give good advice. Sometimes you confuse the crap out of things. It's all good.

    You know what? You're perfectly correct. My mistake. I read it wrong. It happens.
    Hey! I got one right! Woohoo!

    Here's how it's leading the eye out of the book, instead of in: the action is going from right to left, not left to right, like I said.
    Yeah, I get that. But I felt what little movement there was weak enough it might be able to be overcome using other methods to work well enough, if not actually well. If she were charging toward him with big obvious movement, no, it wouldn't work. As is... maybe. But changing the dialogue around is definitely a more ideal solution. I didn't think to check how difficult that would be, at the time, though.

    And I didn't call it a moving panel because I didn't see it that way. Sure, it could be, but a few motion lines around the woman can give the suggestion of a slow shamble. If he were raising a gun, firing, and then rolling to duck for cover, then I'd call it a moving panel all day long.
    I don't think you need any motion lines. I was just busting on you, with that one, because of all our moving panel disagreements. It was arguably borderline and you didn't call it, so I seized the opportunity to kid a little.



  10. StevenForbes Guest

    Quote Originally Posted by drgerb View Post
    Wait a minute... Is that a trick question?

    (I just checked... Nothing!)

    I do have a brother who recently got into writing comic books who mentioned he was thinking about sending a script your way... Might that be the case?
    YES!

    No one warns me of these things!



Page 2 of 3
FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Archive Forums (For Archive Purposes only): General Comics Discussion, Original Works, It's Clobberin' Time, Respect Threads, P'wned, General Chat, Beat Down, The Champagne Room (Mature), Marvel News UP TO April 2011 (See the latest news here), DC News UP TO April 2011 (See the latest news here), DC News UP TO April 2011 (See the latest news here), Archie News UP TO April 2011 (See the latest news here), Comic Book Vitamins (See the latest columns here), Comics Are For People (See the latest columns here), Comics & Cinema (See the latest columns here), Comics Pro Prep (See the latest columns here), Bolts & Nuts (See the latest columns here), Seb-Standard (See the latest columns here), Webcomics You Should Be Reading (See the latest columns here), Development Hell (See the latest columns here), The Proving Grounds (See the latest columns here), Pixels Per Inch (See the latest columns here), Bargain Bin Gold (See the latest columns here), Dead Tuesday (See the latest columns here), Have You Considered... (See the latest columns here), Comic Book Vitamins (See the latest columns here)
Project Fanboy is now Fanboy Buzz.
Fanboy Buzz is home to Comic Book News, Comic Book Reviews, Comic Book Columns, Comic Book Forums and Comic Book Podcast
Check out some of our past podcast hosts doing podcasts at GonnaGeek.com. Sci-Fi, Tech, Gaming, Comics and More!