Since no one is going to describe themselves as a hack or a wanna be most of us fall int two catagories.

Originator - The people doing something different and new. (As far as we know anyway.)

&

Inovator - The people who know something has been done before but feel they are doing it better and putting a new twist on thing.

For example

When Allen Moore wrote the Watchmen he was being an Originator. It was new stuff covering material and ideas really never seen before in the super hero genre.

When Frank Miller did The Dark Knight Strikes Back, he was being an Inovator. He took an established character and did something shocking and different with it.

IE: Superman (original) vs Mr. Magestic (Inovator) vs The Sentry (Wanabe)

Neither.

I'm doing a life comic... seen that before.

At the same time, I'm not doing it differently than anyone else.

I don't think "originators" know they're originators. They might be trying to do something different, but, if you talk to most creators, a good many of us think we're being original. Unfortunately, most are just rehashing the same ole, same ole.

I certainly hope I'm being original, but I'd settle for being an innovator.

Later,
Chip

Innovator. I guess all I'm doing so far is putting a little bit of pepper on things that were already there and hoping that people enjoy it.

I can't see myself as either. I'm just telling a story I want to tell.

I dunno. It's pretty clear I'm not an originator, I'd say, and whether or not I'm an innovator... I don't think that's really for me to judge, and I can't write with trying to be innovative in mind. I'm sure that works for some people - you have to have goals, impose certain limitations on yourself to find a direction, but that's just not what works for me.

To be frank, I'm not comfortable labeling myself with either. Seems more something someone else would attribute to you rather than be a thing for self proclaiming.

I don't think this is really a question a person can answer about themselves, at least without being a complete arrogant ass.

In fact i would venture to say that anyone claiming themselves to be either an inovater or an originator most likely has no idea what the hell they're talking about.

Except for me. I'm both.

Hmmm ... it seems to me that the distinction is false to begin with - especially based on the examples given. Both Watchmen and DKR did something highly original and not previously seen but both did it within an existing genre and largely in accordance with its conventions.

To be a true originator (in the sense it's defined here), you'd have to create an entirely new genre or possibly even an entirely new medium. Anything short of that will always be just "putting a new twist" on something.

Someone
To be a true originator (in the sense it's defined here), you'd have to create an entirely new genre or possibly even an entirely new medium. Anything short of that will always be just "putting a new twist" on something.

Good point. A better example of an originator would be Superman himself. Then again while he is the progenator of the superhero comic genre he isn't even close to being the first super-powered hero.

The first gothic/horror novel was Walpole's Castle of Otranto, which was pretty awful by the way, but it was born out of Medieval Romances, which were in turn created from epic lore. Where do we draw the line from where something becomes more than just an "innovation" and truely becomes the "origin"?

Can anyone actually be credited as an originator? Except possibly God himself, but even then there are arguements.

I'd have to say neither. I'm a storyteller.

Doctor Shadow
I'd have to say neither. I'm a storyteller.

I like that one. I think that's the label I'd like to have. Storyteller. My comic isn't really original, nor does it do a lot of things to innovative its genre. I just do my best and hope people will enjoy the stories I want to tell and the manner in which I choose to tell them.

well, for me anything pursued for the sole purpose being this or that really turns out as failure. As when someone self consciously attempts to be funny, intelligent, etc...anything, the results are never as the one intended. Those who have been innovators and original just were. They were filled with fresh ideas and enjoyed what they did.

I also remember what a philosophy teacher once said, "There is nothing original or genius. Everything is inspired or evolved from something else."

I liken it to more along the lines of dialectic in the creative process: thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.

Steely Gaze
I like that one. I think that's the label I'd like to have. Storyteller. My comic isn't really original, nor does it do a lot of things to innovative its genre. I just do my best and hope people will enjoy the stories I want to tell and the manner in which I choose to tell them.

That's all you could ask for really. It's like I've said when I've worked on print books and even roleplaying products/games in the past: If just one person likes or uses what I do, then that's fine by me.

You tell your stories in an interesting way and you're doing it well enough. I'll always say there's room for improvement, because I always say the same of myself.

I just make drawings on paper because I like to. That's all.

Both, in my guarded opinion.

I specialize in fan fiction remixes and revisions, but am crafting my own original Universe; though technically the latter springs from a STAR FOX alteration, it progresses beyond, merely building on that gaming franchise for a few early characters and the Lylat star system. A projected 97% of the material is not really built on anything particular, though I HAVE drawn elements from many popular franchises; Sonic the Hedgehog, Spyro the Dragon, STAR WARS, Robin Hood, My Little Pony and Poke`mon.

Well, I see myself more as an innovator because pretty much all my works are fanworks, but...

PYC. Name another drawn Pokemon comic that was originally sprite, doesn't use a manga art style, and updates somewhat frequently. (I really hope that Pokemon Champ is only on a real long haitus and didn't die) Also, I tend to not A) Make up the story as I go (because that can lead to continuity issues) or B) Create a set story and stick to it for the next few years. The way I do it is with a constantly adaptable storyline that I make changes and revisions to nearly every day. Hey, I'm still early enough in PYC's story to be able to afford to create such drastic changes, but damn, right now, I've pretty much created a complete, detailed, intricate alternate universe for Pokemon. And Pokemon Yellow Version is only being used as a sringboard.

Well, I've never really seen a comic using cut and paste internet stock art the way UPC-X does it... but it still doesn't have original characters.

Bionicle Zeroes: See PYC above.

Now, I'm only basing this off of my personal opinion and the loose definition of innovative you gave. Many people, in their eyes, would not see me as innovative at all. It's all a matter of perspective... I think.

I'd like to think I was an Originator... 12 years ago I was trying to come up with a comic strip premise that no one's tried, or at least one that hasn't been beaten into the ground yet. And that's when I came up with the humorous-time-travel-strip idea.

I know I'm really not an Innovator - according to my definition anyway. To me that describes someone that's pushing the boundaries of the medium, to experiment with all aspects of it. There's a few webcomics out there that are using Flash to enhance their content, like animating some panels, or like this one serialized comic (whose name escapes me) that doesn't show any dialogue until you move the cursor over the panel.

Depends. Chimera, I don't think, falls into either categories; I don't think it's really all that original (at least, not as much as I would like it to be). Faust on the other hand is more of an Innovator-type comic, because it's my attempt at creating a new twist on a centuries-old story.

I'm a hack.

I'm a wannabe. But hopefully a funny one.

cs3ink
I don't think "originators" know they're originators. They might be trying to do something different, but, if you talk to most creators, a good many of us think we're being original. Unfortunately, most are just rehashing the same ole, same ole.

I certainly hope I'm being original, but I'd settle for being an innovator.

Perfect example of what Chip was saying.
Because Chip is an originator and doesn't think he is.
;-)

I'm definiately not an originator. I'm a melting pot of Disney, Bluth, Pini and overused stories. ^_^
But at least I'm having fun!

~B

I'd call myself an innovator, if anything. I guess it's hard to be an originator. However cliche that sounds, the fact is everything has been done before. Oh how many times did I think I did something genuinely original and unique - only to stumble upon something that sounded EXACTLY like my idea. Example? Some twelve years ago or so, back in my early teenage days, I came up with a story of a young orphan who leaves his foster family to go to a school of magic lol!

Now, years later, I'm basically happy telling and re-telling age-old stories and just adding my three cents. My sense of humor. My style of narrative.

As for "A Bit Cheesy"... I don't know if it's original in the strict sense of that word. Basically, it's a talking heads comic with a twist - the twist being that you almost never actually see the talking heads. As they talk, the camera travels all around the place and you get to see everything going on around them. Those events tend to refer to what they're talking about in some humorous, indirect way. At first, I used that device to postpone the reveal about the main characters - but in the process I discovered it to be so much fun that I stuck with it.

I'm mostly a drain on the artistic community

I try to be as original as possible with my work, but I know someone out there might have similar qualities in their comic. I'd like to consider myself an originator :3

Evil Emperor Nick
Since no one is going to describe themselves as a hack or a wanna be most of us fall int two catagories.

Originator - The people doing something different and new. (As far as we know anyway.)

&

Inovator - The people who know something has been done before but feel they are doing it better and putting a new twist on thing.

Ohhh, a little of both. Sometimes I come up with original ideas, like the "skillsharing" in my storyline at http://mindmistress.comicgenesis.com/trust31.htm and as far as I know, there's no superhero with a mentally challenged alter ego like mine...but of course originator is a RELATIVE term. Daniel Keyes did FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON long before I did MINDMISTRESS at http://mindmistress.comicgenesis.com/prison34.htm . In other things I'm an Innovator---sub-sea cultures in comics date back at least to Sub-Mariner in '39, but secret colonies of surface people turned into seadwellers voluntarily on the continental shelf like shown here in http://mindmistress.comicgenesis.com/lost13.htm is, I think, a slightly different twist.

So...little of both, I think.--Al

I feel i'm a little of both. Like, I try to make my story and characters more original, but i'll also take existing things (ie, a certain type of plot or character cliche), and twist them to make them my own.