Between the Writer and Artist, which do you value more?

>>94449428
artists

Artist. Even if the story is good I can't suffer through terrible art, but I can totally read some trash while admiring pretty pictures

It's tough to really say. In all honesty both matter a tremendous deal. However Ive never seen an artist fuck up a character like I have a writer

>>94449428
Dumb question really. In comics it's essentially a ying and a yang
Phenomenal art cannot carry a weak story just as a well written story cannot carry bad art
A good balance is what is most important
Whether someone appreciates visuals over writing though is completely different. I myself find that I appreciate the writing more often than the art

>>94449575
Good artists have been carrying Bendis's shit writing for quite a while now. I am honestly surprise Bendis is capable of monopolizing most of the good artists in Marvel.

File: Ultimate_FF_Vol_1_1.jpg (212KB, 900x1366px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 900x1366px

>>94449554
oh you didn't read Ultimate FF the interiors were hot garbage and its a shame because the story wasn't to bad

>>94449428
It entirely depends on the comic.
I've enjoyed things with trash writing that get carried by the art and I also enjoy ONE's version of OPM

After reading squirrel girl, I'd have to go with the artist.

>>94450110
I partially agree, but I think art carries more often than writing.

>>94449428
bill watterson of calvin and hobbes fame claimed that good writing carried plain artwork more than good artwork could carry a basic story

but he also said that if he didnt have a good idea he would go for broke on the art

File: Ultimate FF 004-021.jpg (1MB, 1988x3056px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1988x3056px

>>94449859
Fialkov could have saved it all

>>94449859
i completly forgot this existed

>>94450274
I think bad art is easier for the average reader to spot than bad writing.

Memers would say art because "muh visual medium" but they would be wrong. Personally though, I value the cartoonists and mangaka more than artist or writer.

>>94449428
There's less than 5 good writers in the industry, and at most they can juggle 1-3 books per month while keeping quality up. So 99% of the time, the artist is the only valuable part of a comic. The writing becomes just enough to keep you coming back for a basic progressing storyline.

File: beast.jpg (16KB, 400x267px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 400x267px

>>94449859

Yeah but if the art is bad you can just write it off as bad art and move on. Come next issue or next book everyone will be back to looking better.

A bad writer can ruin a character for YEARS to come

>>94450444
All it takes is a good writer to fix it though. Look at what Ewing is doing with Bendis's shit

>>94450400
I'm going to assume you are a capeshitter/mainstream fag and I would say look at the classic of the medium. More often than not they stood out because of the stronger writing than the better art. It's the writing that made those books the classics.
People do stomach mediocrity because of various reasons, doesn't mean that art is more valuable than writing.

>>94449428
Art, because it's what attracts readers to buy in the first place

Writing is just as important, tho. But comics are mostly a visual medium

File: 1499367056103.jpg (40KB, 550x512px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 550x512px

>thinking art is more important
>thinking writing is more important
>not knowing that the two have to work together to create a story

>>94449520
>Even if the story is good I can't suffer through terrible art

Same

>>94449428

Writer.

A good writer can make a run memorable. A bad writer can ruin decades of continuity with one page and incite rage in an entire fandom for years to come.
A good artist can bring a story to life. A bad artist can be replaced without hurting the story. Their shit work will either be forgotten by everyone at best, or turn into "YLYL" fuel on stupid imageboards at worst.

File: 1461881746343.jpg (21KB, 293x300px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 293x300px

Both are fairly important in their own regard, but the absolute best writers are often their own artists and vise-versa

for instance, the visuals and the poetry in 'Where the Sidewalk Ends' wouldn't be nearly as good if the writer and the artist were not the same person.

>>94450522
>being a coward

>>94450491

It's not impossible to undo bad writing with good but the stigma lasts longer

Writer, if I had to pick.

I suffered through some pretty shitty art during Morrison's New X-Men run, but I loved pretty much every issue still. Granted there were a few scene's the art did actually ruin.

>>94450644
Not being a coward is what got JFK killed

>>94450444
Yes and no.
Bad artwork is a form of storytelling too.
Including a dead character in a scene's background, showing a character using powers they don't have, messing up a major costume element ...
those are all mistakes bad artists have made that have forced changes in Marvel books.

Sure, bad writing is an obvious threat, but there's been plenty of good writers always coming in after the fact and retconning those mistakes into the weave and making a fuller and more complex narrative overall.
Claremont always intended to write Wolverine as an eventual X-Men washout, but was forced to keep him by idiotic executive mandate. Can you imagine another way to end up with a cold-blooded maniac killer on a team book? Let alone place such a character in one of the best unresolved love triangles in comics history?

>>94450574
I've suffered through some really shitty art if the story is good and i like the characters, but i'll put down a book after a few minutes if im not enjoying myself

>>94449428
Artist definitely.

>>94449428
Artist

A good comicbook artist can be a great storyteller even without words.
Even a good comicbook writer cant tell a story without any pictures.

>>94449520
>>94449497
This.

>>94449428
They are both equally important and equally powerfull. A good writer can attract a good artist and a good artist can attract a good writer.

artist. i can't read comics with shitty art. Sub par writing can be dragged through with pretty pictures

A lame story can still be elevated by great art but even the best story will be a chore if the art is shit

>>94449428
Artist
The story could be absolutely phenomenal, but it loses weight if the art is shit
Also, the story could be absolutely shit, but the art can carry it

>>94449428
Whomever is the better storyteller.

File: I don't wanna.png (727KB, 1114x574px) Image search: [Google]

727KB, 1114x574px

>>94449428

Writer. There's so few artists I can't stand and so many more writers I wouldn't even give the time of day.

>>94449859

Loeb fucked up the Ultimate universe so badly and nobody could save it. Bendis started getting worse as a writer and there wasn't anything compelling until Hickman came in and then he left right at the end and Humphries fucked it up.

It was at that point that it was obvious Marvel didn't care about it and only kept it around because of Bendis.

>>94449428
Writer, no matter how good the art it is, if the story is shit nobody will care or remember.
What i think about the best comics i have read is the story, the characters, the ideas and dialogues. Artists are very important but not as much as the writer.

>>94450491
Ewing is fighting a losing battle.

For every Bendis continuity fuck up he fixes, two more take it's place.

Add to that Mark Waid's total disregard for character continuity.

>>94449800
His books sell cause he has good artists, and he has good artists cause his books sell. It's a cycle.

File: One punch 1.jpg (111KB, 600x849px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 600x849px

Writing. Good writing will give you a story you remember, comic art is usually fleeting if not backed up by something more substantial
That being said, it is waaaay easier to get into a series because of art. Art is an instant pay-off, story takes time

>>94449428

Personally, I like visual things in general AND we're talking about graphic novels, or sequential art - either way you look at it, even if we talk animation, it's the combination of the art work AND the story that make a comic book, graphic novel or animation media.

File: file.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>94449428
That's a really small face

>>94449428
Ideally, it'd be a balance with good art and good writing. If I had to choose instead of being a filthy fence sitter, I'd pick the writer. Good art is instant gratification and I have bought books for art alone, but if the writing is shit it's not worth remembering or revisiting. Good writing, even when bogged down by mediocre or bad art, sticks longer and is worth going back to.

Looking at it another way, it's not often that bad art has left any major, lasting effects on a character or story. It's usually something to bring up later just to laugh at. Bad writing, on the other hand, often leaves a long-lasting stain on a character or story that other writers will have to either work around, try to fix or flat out ignore.

If either is bad I don't think it's worth your time. That said I'd rather have mediocre art with a great story than the other way around.

>>94449428
An artist can ruin a book. A writer can ruin a franchise.

>>94460334
I think the thing is that I'll read a book with bad art for good writing, but I'll only read a book with bad writing for amazing art. The art has to be something truly special to balance out bad writing. On the flipside, it takes truly awful art to get me to not read a comic with good writing.

An example is Jurgens' Action Comics. I don't think the writing is that bad and the art is pretty good, but I find the writing just too mediocre to bother with and the art just isn't good enough to compel me to read it in spite of the mediocre writing. I don't think the writing is BAD and I do like the art, but I'm not going to read a mediocre comic for good art, whereas I'd be OK with the art being worse if it meant better writing.

File: 09.12.13.03-Already-Done.jpg (50KB, 450x233px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 450x233px

>>94449428
Objectively both are equally essential. Without art it's just a novel, without narrative it's just a random jumbling of imagery.

The whole point of comic books, like movies, is that they're a union of visual and linguistic art.

even as a literature teacher, in comics I appreciate the visual storytelling more. There's a lot you can convey in visual storytelling and display thing in interesting ways with the paneling and coloring that don't really fit in words.

a lot of cape comics are overwritten to the point of bogging down the art with dialogue (recent examples include any keith giffen or scott snyder comic - blue beetle has a lot more pointless writing per page than just about anything else dc is publishing).

a lot of indie/self-published stuff can be underwritten or overwritten. usually autobio comics are jam-packed with word bubbles and are annoying to read but with something like prophet I wanted even just 10% more dialogue

I think the perfect comics writer is warren ellis because he knows when to go silent and just let a scene speak for itself and he knows when to put in the expository dialogue

-semi-related note: My problem with a lot of comics writing is its expository by nature. explaining what's happening panel by panel is pointless if the art conveys it well

>>94450775
>Including a dead character in a scene's background, showing a character using powers they don't have, messing up a major costume element ...
>those are all mistakes bad artists have made that have forced changes in Marvel books.

That's the fault of a bad editor though. Artist mistakes should be caught out the gate

>>94449428
The writer; I will not be fooled by the art.

File: IMG_3985.png (187KB, 1040x800px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1040x800px

>>94449428
Good art + good writing = people will talk about it
Bad art + good writing = people talk about it probably
Good art+ bad writing = people will talk about the art
Bad art+bad writing = goes unnoticed or dissected/talked about


So in the end bar writers in the industry are truly fucked

Pic unrelated

>>94449428
Is the question would I rather have a good comic with bad art or a bad comic with good art?
Good comic with bad art.

If the question is if I think there are more talented artists or talented writers in the comicbook industry the answer is artists.

If you're an artist
>You must be at least Babs Tarr to draw the comicbook
There doesn't really seem to be any standard for writers though.

>>94449428
Writer
All the things that are most wrong with comics nowadays are the shitty, uninspired writers.

There are some bad artists, of course (Squirrel girl etc) but they're often paired with also-terrible writers.

the artist puts in more work to draw the comic. it can take them 2 weeks to a month to draw an issue

a writer can churn out 3-5 scripts in a month


also the monthly format is bad for comics because it forces writers to move at a fast pace and therefore churn out shitty work with no editing

>>94449428
>Between the Writer and Artist, which do you value more?
Always the writer.

anybody who works in the comic industry would tell you the artist is more important

>>94449428
depends on the character for me. Someone like moon knight i can forgive a shit story if it has interesting and surreal visuals that i enjoy, pretty much becomes an art book then. Also some characters I just can't find it in me to give a fuck about no matter how critically acclaimed it is.

>>94462283
Then I wouldn't buy their comic because they clearly don't know how to make them

>>94452732
You really had to work hard there to specify "comicbook writer". There are writers that tell stories without pictures.

They're called WRITERS.

When has a character ever been ruined for years because of a bad artist?

>>94449428
let's put it this way:
You can write a good story with bad art and it might be redraw in the future.
You write a bad story with good art and nobody will touch it

>>94449428
It is a visual medium. Without an artist you have nothing. Anyone who thinks you can create a comic without an artist is an idiot. You can still create a comic without a writer. It is sequential art, not a novel.

>>94462766
Wrong. Art is what sells the books, while good writing is nice, it is not what keeps comics moving. They have cover pages for a reason, to catch someone's attention. Art has always been first, since Kirby.

>>94449428
Artist. But the true masters of the medium are able to do both.

Ideally a balance of both, but if it's one over the other it's always art. I'm biased as an artist myself though.

>>94449428
Writer. What the fuck is the point of reading a comic if the writing is terrible? If I want pretty pictures I can just look at them without them being connected in any way.

>>94462959
Because if I specifically wanted good writing and nothing else I'd just read a novel. The art in comics is a particular form of a visual art and storytelling unique to itself, and can carry a story even if the scripting sucks ass.

>>94463034
Scripting maybe but not the plotting. The plot is what gives the pictures reason to be connected. No amount of good art can save a Bendis comic but even Igor Kordey's fill in issues of New X-Men were readable

I've read comics just for the art, with meh to bad writing.

I've never done the same for a writer.

if you read a comic for the words
>>/lit/ is that way

ITT: Image is formed

>>94463153
So why would anyone care about your opinion? You're not "reading", you're just looking at pictures.

Alan Moore's Jack the ripper story has the worst art I've seen in any of his work so I refused to keep reading

Art

>>94449428
you can make a comic book without words you cant make one without pictures...

>>94463185
Jesus christ when do you graduate high school kid

>>94463034
Give an example of a "good" book with terrible, awful writing, but is entirely carried by the artist.

>>94449428
Neither are as important as consistency in both. If you find a great book with poor art, you'll keep reading for the writing. Find a poorly scripted book? You might keep reading for great art. But inconsistency is the death knell of comics.

Writer is categorically more important.

The art in Marvels' current books is good for the most part, but the writing is god awful and is keeping people away.
If that was reversed they wouldn't be in such a mess right now

>>94463225
Because I appreciate good writing, but I'll put up with Dan Jurgens to get JRJR or clunky over written EC comics for some of the best comics art of all time.

Any half decent artist is just as much of a storyteller as the writer, it's still reading if you're just looking at the pictures.

>>94449428
Writer.

Look at something like For All Seasons, which is great despite looking like shit.

>>94463267
Lee and Kirby

>>94449428
Writer

>>94449428
The writer.

>>94449428
Writing.

>>94449428
I wish I could say neither, but I probably have to go with artist since I will buy books sometimes strictly on the art. Then again, I will read pretty much anything by Gaiman or Moore

>>94449428
Writer

>>94463412
Helps that they almost always work with good artists

>>94461901
>- blue beetle has a lot more pointless writing per page than just about anything else dc is publishing
this. I was really hoping for a good Blue Beetle book but it's SO hard to read

Writer, when it comes to comics the writing is the thing that pretty much make or break alot of the time.

Artists have a higher threshold, and aren't as likely to impact me dropping something.

>>94449428
I'm not into capeshit, but generally I value artists more. Strong art and visual storytelling can make ever boring can elevate a sloppy or uninteresting story, while ugly art and poor visual storytelling at it's worst can make a decently-written comic unreadable.

File: bArSmA6.gif (479KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 300x225px

>>94449428
A terrible artist can make a comic painful to read

A terrible writer make a comic impossible to read

File: alanmooreneonomiconhornbook11.jpg (182KB, 655x1023px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 655x1023px

Thing is Artists tell half the story, unless their scripts are like Alan Moore but I have never heard of any other comic writer who writes 10x more about a page than will be on a page. Usually it's up to the artist to tell the story and they follow what would be called a guideline.

So if you say writer, you have to include artist too, cause they do half the writing.

>>94463689
>I'm not into capeshit, but generally I value artists more


There seems to be a trend of people in this thread who value writers more talking about "characters and runs "and acting like the art is easily replaceable.

>>94456522
One's art might be crude but his composition is spot on

>>94463735
I've seen interviews where the artist who worked with Moore said his script was more of a very clear guideline than a mandate. Moore is a writer who writes with a visual sense, he already has his version of the comic in his mind not just the simple things like setting, action, or dialogue, he has the full page.

>>94463354
So, you don't have an example?

>>94463877
he didn't give a specific book, but he gave an example of a pairing. stan's writing on say fantastic four was dogshit but kirby made that book worth getting. His detail, out of this world design sensibility, and sense of the fantastic carried lee's plodding scripts

>>94463867
Oh, he's completely willing to hear an artists ideas and incorporate those into his story. My point is like you said, he composes the whole thing, from the plot, to the page to the ideas of how things should look. He's just willing to hear out good ideas

>>94463779
That's the mindset of most people who read comics. They're the reason writers are put on a higher pedestal than artists. The majority are unable to appreciate, analyze or even discuss art appropriately, and that extends to comics journalists too.

There are very few characters I give a fuck about enough to buy a book solely on their presence, because at the end of the day they are just a concept, and the creative team is what makes or breaks it.

>>94461901
>even as a literature teacher, in comics I appreciate the visual storytelling more.
Which is part of the writing. Hence why pretending you can divorce writer and artist and pretend one is more important than the other is nonsensical since it's the writers narrative, themes, story, character, messages, idea that is being deftly visually told by the artist. The relationship of skill between the two is what makes a great comic.