A friend (and artist collaborator) of mine made me aware of this very interesting thread on Warren Ellis' board: http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=8398&page=1
After you've had a chance to read this, I'll comment on my own experiences with artists I've worked closely with!
anyone know if that "Name" is common in manga or just a device in the story? It seems it must be common or it would be odd the add to the story but it seems like a clunky way to go unless the writer is an artist too. So, for example, I can't draw for toffee so would be wary about being so specific, whereas Grant Morrison started out drawing some of his work and does quite a bit of preliminary character designs (although seeing them the artist seems to take that idea and run with it).
Of course, Alan Moore's approach scares the willy water out of me too (as quoted in the writing thread):
QuoteBC: Now you're probably best known to our readers through for your work on Crossed. How does drawing from Alan Moore scripts differ from, say, Garth Ennis? What do each demand from you that's different?
JB: Garth's scripts read as fairly traditional comic scripts. He'll describe the acting, actions and elements of a panel that must be there and generally leaves the layouts and angles up to you except in instances where camera direction is being specifically dictated for effect. Alan's scripts take a totally different approach where each panel is being described as a finished picture. Elements are described by the location on the picture plane and even small details are described by their placement in the composition. Moore's method of controlling the picture plane allows him to work in additional layers of subtext or to control the story flow from panel to panel in ways other writers don't. You get a sense that every element is part of a greater design. But he also says in the script that he is just bombarding with details that you can choose to keep or toss as fits the story.
BC: Well, Alan's famous for long involved script descriptions that at the end say "but if you have a better way, do that instead".
www.bleedingcool.com/2010/06/07/jacen-burrow-on-alan-moores-neonomicon-puff-piece-interview-of-the-week/
I remember reading an interview with Dez Skinn saying Gary Leach had to give up drawing Miracleman because he was trying to put in all the detail Alan was listing, including dustmotes! He must have been driven insane!
I don't think I could cope with a Moore script. I'd give it one read and think "you'll get what you're bloody well given me lad!"
I've been guilty of writing some lengthy and highly descriptive panel descriptions in my time, but I think people can miss two key points.
1) When the editor reads the script, there are no pictures. S/he may not well have not decided on artist so the words have to give some idea of what the strip may look like.
2) I've never viewed a lengthy panel description as an instruction to the artist on how to draw the panel. Rather, there is a picture in my head, which I am trying to put in the artist's head. If I could draw that picture, I wouldn't need an artist, but I can't, so all I have is words. When they put that picture onto paper, I understand entirely that it's going to be the product of how their brain renders that picture.
I have no idea if that makes sense.
Cheers
Jim
Neat link. Cheers.
Well I'm only a Newby to this but it is something I am always very self-conscious of when I finish a script...Have I put too much detail into each panel description...am I being overly directional...? I have to go through each script a few times after finishing to make sure its ok. I've worked with a few artists now though and haven't had any complaints yet so...maybe its going ok!!!
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 June, 2010, 10:49:29 PM2) I've never viewed a lengthy panel description as an instruction to the artist on how to draw the panel. Rather, there is a picture in my head, which I am trying to put in the artist's head. If I could draw that picture, I wouldn't need an artist, but I can't, so all I have
This description came up over there and I think it is a good one. It doesn't mean you have to describe everything in mad detail (unless it is required - Alan Moore, for example, may be aiming at adding layers of symbolism and meaning) but it could just mean hitting the right description or finding a good analogy (YouTube is very handy for finding clips of people doing something similar) or making sure you've established the characters (so all John Wagner needs to do is right "Dredd is angry" and the artist knows the look, posture, etc.) or just explaining what you were thinking about (or what inspired the idea, especially if it isn't obvious in the script, as ideas can). If the artist can get under the skin of the story, action, characters, etc. then everything can flow from that.
I USED to make sure that I did everything exactly as the writer mentioned/asked for....I'd try and jam it all in there.
Now that I've done it for a while, I look for the bare bones of what elements MUST be in there, then I look for how to make it cool/dynamic on an art level! This is important to me. The thinking goes like this: writers WANT the book to look good, that's why they hire artists they like. This is where the art part of the 'team' comes into play. So far, (touch wood) everyone I've worked with has liked what I've added. I find that 2 creative folks (writer+artist) combine to make a stronger overall product.
If I HAD to put in EVERYTHING that writers often describe (especially beginning writers!), I'd lose my mind and not enjoy my work.
Writers need to let the artists have room to do their thing, and worry about art stuff like narrative page flow, dynamism etc.
Thats my 2 cents anyways...
Cheers!
Thoughts from Alan Grant:
QuoteAlan Moore writes the longest scene descriptions I've ever seen in scripts—he can easily fill an A4 sheet telling the artist the precise contents of a single panel. Artist Carlos Ezquerra, creator of Judge Dredd, refuses to read any script if the scene descriptions are more than one line long; Carlos considers it the artist's job to decide what the reader sees, to best understand the story.
http://www.graphicnovelreporter.com/content/alan-grant-batman-and-beyond-interview