Are comics the true form of representing fourth dimensional art,

>>2868982
Again this is assuming the fourth dimension is Time.


It could most definitely be another axis of spacial depth, I'm not arguing about that. I'm saying that in the possibility that the 4th dimension is time, then wouldn't comics be a simplified representation of said concept?

>>2868982
>>2868985
yes, but so what? you realize movies and animated works can also do the same thing right? you can capture every frame and look at them forward and backwards in time as you would comic panels.

I feel like you're trying be really pretentious about this all and once people say "yes you are right" you can go parade comics as a really high brow concept instead of the painted pictures that they are.

>>2868993
What's with the hostility? I'm just trying to open up a conversation of ways time is represented within art. In no way was I thinking comics is superior in the sense that it may contain aspects of the "4th dimension" in comparison to other works of art.
I was merely wondering if other people agree or disagree, and or if some had a different view on the matter.

Like for example, Duchamp's nude descending a staircase is the first that comes to mind that isn't a comic.
Also, yes animation and film could be considered to have the same traits. Although, when viewing a movie it's usually frame after frame in sequence over a certain amount of time. But you do theoretically see each frame, just not all at once. It is only when you lay out the roll of film, or animation pages that you can truly see it all at once.
But you could argue that possessing the ability to pause, fastforward, and rewind a movie is just another way of representing the viewer as a "5th dimensional being." Putting inhuman capabilities into the hands of a human to control the way a story is presented (the tv remote and the movie). being able to adjust the speed at which something is viewed, like how some movies utilize slow motion, allowing us humans to perceive something that which we cannot in reality. Super speed, or freeze frames achieve the same affect.

It's just an interesting topic that I wanted to talk about. I haven't realized it until recently and wanted to understand how it's been utilized and perceived.

>>2868993
Also you're right
They are just pictures on paper.

But then why, when pictures are placed together, do we as the viewer try to form connections between them? Especially when they're placed in a book.

Museums place art next to each other, but why do we not consider that as sequential art? Is it because of the spacing between paintings and sculptures? Would having multiple paintings in a persons line of sight cause them to make unintentional connections or not?
Art books on the other hand (think spectrum art books) contain images from a vast array of artists. They compile these images in a book that intend to be viewed as if you were in a museum looking at specific art pieces that stand alone. No one would say that a book like that is a "comic." How does one achieve this, then? Where IS the line between looking at a singular art piece by itself and looking at a sequence of images on a page? Time? Subject matter? Technique?

Guy I just did a smoked a whole bag of bad weed that had been left out in the sun and I keep bumping into all the planets becuase my legs are too long

Thinking about it further,
Historical paintings about epic battles have displayed time all at once. Where your eye is in the painting displays a certain moment in the battle. Maybe it shows the battle's beginning middle and end all at once, or even a shorter sequence of time.

Storyboarding as well is pretty unique. Why is it called storyboarding rather than comics though? Storyboarding doesn't play with the panel frame, nor does it play with "word bubbles" or "oxymorons." usually dialogue and other sounds are described BELOW the image. However, camera movements and character actions ARE in fact quite obviously defined. Maybe that's what sets the difference. Comics are more like the final product of a movie; the director/artist decides the angle/position at which an event is viewed at. Whereas storyboards consider the motion and angle that a person can envision. The storyboard artist must try and represent not only what the final product might look like, but the way in which it should be filmed. Alternatively, storyboards aren't meant to be what is shown as the final product, but rather a process of how the final product should be shot and viewed. To relate it back, storyboarding could be considered as more of a blueprint than a comic. Yes it represents time and a juxtaposition between images, but it doesn't play with the frame shape, the position of dialogue boxes, the composition of each panel on a page, etc. But rather it focuses on the way something should be done through character and camera movement and properties (lens, dolly shot, etc)

>>2869003
>I haven't realized it until recently and wanted to understand how it's been utilized and perceived.
All you can do once you learn a rule is to break it or bend it in interesting ways. Stories often go for the amnesia trope to discombobulate the timeline of events and create drama out of the confusion. Like the movie Memento.

I don't really find the whole "wow we're so superhuman manipulating the flow of time within this movie, amazing!" aspect you found very interesting. In art slow mo scenes and the opposite are great when done right but most of the time it's a crutch used by amateurs.

>>2869011
>Museums place art next to each other, but why do we not consider that as sequential art?
because obviously the art usually varies in scene depiction, style, characters, etc. we can follow things fine in movies and animation because things happen RIGHT after one another minute changes at a time like they do in real life. unless a gallery is set up with specific series of pieces that flow in time to depict a story we're not going to think or call it sequential art obviously.

>no one would say that a book like that is a comic, how does one achieve this then
The line is intent. comic artists set out with the sole purpose of making art panels that flow from one to the other, and often study how to make sure that sequential art flows well from one to the other and make sense as a whole.

so all you did was ask for the definition of a "comic book" which you could have just googled instead of making us write so many paragraphs.

File: u95odyhzovgy.jpg (113KB, 1100x1509px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1100x1509px

>>2869032
I find those giant epic paintings to be kinda eh, specially when they show beginning middle and endings all at once. kinda feels like novelty to me. I'd prefer a series of individual paintings that separate each instead of the shotgun approach.

In the discussion of time in art I feel like the benefit of the artist is that he can choose the exact moment within a timeline he wants to depict and really go at it on the details (unlike a photographer who has to wait for that moment to happen for him to capture and then choose from the many captures the one he was actually going for like pic related. So not only is the execution important but I feel like the choosing of which moment to depict over other moments that could be even, say, seconds apart, is an art in and of itself and of course isn't talked about a lot except among artists. A more mainstream and similar conversation is discussing the endings of stories (when and how the artist/writer chose to end the story), but I feel the same conversation can be had about all moments in a story. but that's more a writing thing not an art thing so that goes on /lit/.

Personally it is why I'm torn between animation and illustration. I love depicting a single (perfectly chosen) moment in time really really well rendered in amazing detail and composed in a painting just perfectly, but I also love doing that 24 times per second to depict perfectly choreographed sequences that tell a story.

So I find this aspect of the discussion much better than "dude 4 dimensions lmao"

Sequential.

File: son.jpg (543KB, 1800x783px) Image search: [Google]

543KB, 1800x783px

Land a plane nigga

>>2869115
Torn between illustration and animation as a career/major? Is there some way to incorporate both? I remember some students at my design school that were two years ahead of me, and they did something kinda like that. They managed to create a book that had static illustrations. However, if you scanned the page with a phone that had an app, the page would breathe to life in animation. Kind of a cool concept, idk how they're doing on it though.

>the choosing of which moment to depict over other moments that could be even, say, seconds apart, is an art in and of itself
Reminds me of David Hockney's pictorial collages. How hockney displayed what he himself thought was important in a scene through series of photographs stitched together almost like a panorama. Whereas the same result could have been achieved with a standard wide-angle lens, but since hockney took separate pictures (of the same subject) at different angles, at different movements, etc allows it to become much deeper than a single picture. Rather than time being frozen into a singular frame it becomes a collage of a subject viewed under different circumstances. (Perhaps someone is smoking, and there are two instances of an arm: one holding the cig at the mouth, and holding it away. But they exist simultaneously conveying a sense of motion in a frozen image)

>>2869099
I've also seen a lot of detective movies/stories that play with the timeline. A lot of cop and detective tv shows occur after the climax (usually shown at the beginning) and it's up to the characters and the audience to work backwards in time to make a proper timeline.

>comic artists set out with the sole purpose of making art panels that flow from one to the other
It could also be argued that there exist comics that do away with such conventions.
I guess comic artists do, in fact, draw scenes that transition from one to the next. But it is also up to the reader to make such connections.

>>2869488
Also, I don't understand the negativity towards the using 4th and 5th dimensions.
I'm not trying to say, "lmao weed we all just stardust existing within the ether"
I'm saying that the mundane motions of "rewinding a cassette," "using slow motion in a home video to emphasize a impact to the nuts," or even "going back to reread a portion of this sentence because I didn't understand it properly" could all be considered a simplified form of "time travel"

OBVIOUSLY we aren't actually traveling through time. We aren't super human, nor are we interdimensional beings. BUT it's the concept of WHY do we feel the need to "slow down" a video when something goes wrong?
Humanity has been able to figure out many things by manipulating "recorded time" into 10k fps in order to see what isn't naturally seen in our day to day life.

In sports, we "go back and rewind the tape" for miscalls or when someone scored a goal. We see instant replays of events that have already happened. Why? We found that if we slowed down footage, and filmed at different angles, we can interpret an event through different perspectives to come to a conclusion. Perhaps it was a miscall! Going back and reinterpreting information to come to another conclusion, or fast forwarding because you've seen this part already
We can do this in comics, and or any form of sequential art.

I remember my friend showing me this one comic where a fight scene occurs between some guys. There's some dialogue and action, and the reader gets a sense of the situation. Later on, the same exact scene occurs again (in a flashback) but this time we find that one of the characters was talking to someone else through their mind! And so what we thought was an average action scene, had actually multiple plotpoints at the same time. You wouldn't have known if the artist didn't tell you.
I brought up dimensions because I thought it'd be kinda cool to talk about dimensions, but I guess not.

>>2868982
nah. that's animation, friend.