MEGAZINE 231MURDER JUAN

[paulvonscott]

Yeah, I agree with that PJ.

[GordonR]

"but where a job is based entirely on royalty payments (no payment upfront - which AFAIK as is the case with companies like Oni, etc) a 50/50 seems unfair to the artist."


Uh-huh.  But what if the project is all the writer's idea - plot, characters, setting etc?  Why's he giving away an equal share in it to someone who, at the end of the day, could be replaced by any number of other artists looking for work?

I once had an artist try to bully me into giving him a higher share of the (in the end, non-existent) royalties on a project I was doing for a US publisher.  He was getting a decent page-rate for the work as well, so the starving indie artist I spend longer drawing them than you do writing them' argument didn't really apply.

In the end, the editor told him to fuck off.  These days, I would probably be able to manage that part of the debate myself.

[paulvonscott]

"But what if the project is all the writer's idea - plot, characters, setting etc? Why's he giving away an equal share in it to someone who, at the end of the day, could be replaced by any number of other artists looking for work?"

Again, good point, perhaps it depends on whether that strip or it's success would have happened without the artist.

It gets more complicated when more artists come in to replace the orginal artist, see various Warrior debacles.

[pauljholden]

If a project is work-for-hire I dunno that there's any obligation on the writer (or company) paying any royalities (to anyone). It's the murky world of Royalty only payments that it gets complicated. And that's before we get into the even more messy world of royalties in other media (should a movie adaption pay any royalties to the artists if they're only using the plot? should an animated movie pay any money to the writer if they're only using the character design of the artists and abandoning the plot?)


- pj

[pauljholden]

f a project is work-for-hire I dunno that there's any obligation on the writer (or company) paying any royalities (to anyone).

Unless they're contractually obligated obviously.

[Trout]

For added stirring value, I'd like to point out it's the artist, not the writer, who receives the original art to sell on.

- Trout

[davidbishop]

I don't want to put words into Cam's mouth, but he was specifically talking about a Star Wars project i.e. one set in an already established character universe where much of the hard work has done by others.

davidbishop

[Byron Virgo]

Ah, but it's my understanding that Tom Veitch inveneted a lot of new characters and situations for that book, a lot of which were either re-used or simply lifted and used in other projects by Lucasfilm.

I do think that artists are often treated like cattle, and most are incredibly underapreciated, but hardly anyone thinks about the amount of work that a writer has to put in in order to actually write a script. After all, he or she might have to research it for many months, come up with entire characters and situations, as well as a cogent plot, before sitting down and writing the script. Now, I can understand part of the 'artist first' point of view of the writer has been paid for this gestation period, but if he hasn't then he is at least contributing 50% of the workload.

Anyway, Mr Kennedy's argument in the published interview was that he should get a higher cut not just because he had done a greater amount of work, but also because people buy comics for the art, not the writing. I have to say that I just don't think that's true anymore (though I don't think writing or art is the reason someone buys a Star Wars comic): if you go into any comic shop, you're just as likely to find a section devoted solely to writers such as Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman or Grant Morrison as you are to artists like Alex Ross or Will Eisner.

[Conexus]

Also carrying on Byron's point, if art was more important than plot, surely there'd be a lot more love for the recent Slaine?

[Funt Solo]

I don't know if that's relevant to the argument really.  Having read the boards I've seen almost an equal amount of criticism for both Clint Langley and Pat Mills.  (As it happens, I loved both the script and the art in the latest Slaine series, but that's by and by.)

That's an argument about personal taste, though.

There are some series that are "saved by the art", but by the same token there are some that only survive because the story has been compellingly written.

I certainly wouldn't want to say who is more important and who should be paid more between writer and artist:  which is why I initially thought that a 50/50 split was fairest.

I assume these things are best decided on a case-by-case basis.

Do you think Steve Parkhouse has internal arguements over which part of him was more important in the production of TSDM?

[Dudley]

Astonishing.  I've just read Si Spurrier's column and it made sense, taught me about something I didn't know, and seemed to have cut down on the swearing.  There's hope yet...
;)

Not sure about the Johnny Woo story yet, though it's nice to see someone doing a proper world judge tale again.

[Tordelbach]

It's a tricky one, alright, the writer/artist split.  Looking at the mad-mad world of Dave Sim's 'Cerebus', he and Gerhard (who drew the backgrounds and part-runs the business side) split the dough 50/50, despite Dave being creator, writer, character artist, letterer, editor, you name it.  Mind you, Ger's backgrounds were truly astonishingly beuatiful, and there's no doubt that he put a shedload of work in.

There's no question that a page of art can take much longer to produced than the words that describe it (I always think of poor Mick McMahon's reaction to Wagner's 'Block Mania' scripts), and so it seems fair that an artist's page rate be significantly higher than a scripter's.  However, when the actual page/story is finished it really has become a indistinguishable mix, a 'third thing', neither script nor art.  As a result, I reckon the royalties (a crude measure of its 'success') should be divided 50/50.  How can you say which is the bigger draw?  I will buy almost any book that Alan Moore writes, but wouldn't follow his collaborators around to the same degree (Gibbons, Davis, O'Neill - love them all, but not enough to buy their versions of (say) Mark Millar's 'X-Men').  

On the other hand, i have followed at least three ex-Moorites, Rick Veitch (Tom's brother), Eddie Campbell and Steve Bissette into their own ventures, but in all cases because I loved the story concepts rather than the (fantastic) art.  Perversely, I *will* pick up Frazer's Morrison-scripted 'Klarion', but will drop it sharpish if the story is shite (a la 'Manhattan Guardian') even if the art is to the usual awesome standard .  
 
Seems to me that the page-rates should reflect the likely effort of each party, but that the royalty rewards should be split evenly, reflelcting the essentially indivisible nature of their collaboration.

In the specific case of Kennedy's 'Star Wars', the art (or rather the vision) was the clear winner, dressing up a pretty weak story and script into a beautiful epic.  His version of 'Dark Side' Luke forms the basis of my very favourite Hasbro Star Wars figure (oh the shame) - it's clear who should be getting the kick-back on that one, BUT (and here's the point) if Cam believed that working for Lucasfilm on Lucasfilm properties was going to be any different than it was, he was clearly not paying attention.  They paid him and Tom to tinker around with their stuff, and like every costumer, set dresser, concept artist, prop maker, and SFX guy, that was all she wrote.    

[philt]

Arkwright? The article could have been a bit more insightful I suppose with a bit more of how Talbot came up with the story. As for the strip itself? It's easily the best comic I've ever read.
Highly recommended.

[Oddboy]

Curiousity...

When a comic's art is done by several people - penciler, inker, colourer.... would it be fair to split proceeds 50% to the writer, and 50% between the artists?

[Carlsborg Expert]

Carlos Esqu is doing some beautiful panels in Dredd this month. Showing the world of comics who draws the perfect story. This man never ceases to impress me.Im glad there is arole model like Esqu. there to say that shot things can recover and not just in the hedonistic world of evergreen musicians.
Any one could have worked an elaboration of that script to something fastpaced and slopped it overboard.What I see is Dredd relaxing in a cruel environment in control and oozing satisfaction at being in the thick of it.

 
Well Cam came right out and said it didnt he. Do not f*ck with me,Ive earnt it the best way I can.Id like to see the original notes from the scriptwriters on show,(in the monthly,yes)when they make *their* case.


Zancudo has more than a hint of understanding between the writer/illustrater.Good to see Spurrer making the most out of his new lenthened column.And not before time too. The first ones just got advertized on TV in a much shitter deal!

Anderson /Johnny Woo were a bit confusing and needed a quiet area to be surveyed more.Some things need time.

As with the rest.Looking forward to Orient as usual. And as usual itll slip by the by.One of my favorite Metro stories in this month.
*Mrs Moople*!Made for judge Dredd that baby.Excellent credit to those involved.(yes I did have a similiar idea,wibble,etc)


I defy my lazy self not to read the Bryon Talbot interview,just because I met him the other week.Can I say this guy is frikkin genuine and gentle and genius.And enthusiatic without being a showboater.Liked him a lot and felt Id been to a lecture for a very good rate for education these days, when I sat listening to him.


BIG Wish that the box had arrived with the first suit of cards tho'.Just cos it would have been more practical.( Im sure theres a marketing crew still weighing up wether that is or is not true)