I know MANY who like digital art and MANY who like pencil and paper art. Matter of preference. Just do what you like doing and everything will be fine. :)
For me personally I am an pencil and paper kind of gal. I have nothing against digital art, I totally support it. But I feel like I get more out of my drawings and feel more accomplished in completing a picture when a picture looks awesome in pencil/colored pencil/markers vs. a pic in Photoshop. But that's just me. Everyone's different and everyone should do what works for THEM.

blntmaker
So now begs the question if it hasn't been asked yet - which do you all tend to gravitate towards comic-wise: PENCIL/INK ART -or- DIGITAL ART?*

*I do realize there is a grey area here given after effects, I know that even most pencil/ink art here is cleaned up with Photoshop...But still, I'm curious to see where most people stand.

Yeah, there is that silly stigma on how one should view digital versus traditional. Because of that, I tried to use both media to create a comic page for awhile. You know, because it MUST be blasphemous if you don't use a traditional medium. And so, I would draw and ink the page, then scan it and digitally add the speech bubbles, boxes, and maybe color.

In the end, it was way too much work and only proved to be counterintuitive. I had to go with one or the other. I eventually chose digital. I figured there wasn't much point to draw a page out for a scan when I could just focus my skills on getting used to the tablet pen. Eventually, that was what I did, and am glad I made the decision.

I still bow down to pen and paper, though. Whenever I need to practice my drawing, the pencilled sketchbook still reigns supreme.

Brock
For me, it's a simple matter of what I can do versus what I can't. What I can't do is draw a straight line digitally to save my life (I don't mean that literally, I just can't make digital drawing work for me.) I pencil and ink on paper and then color digitally. I just can't get the same feel from a computer I can from paper and my brain won't translate what I'm doing from wacom tablet to screen.

I was the same until I invested in a Cintiq screen... now I can't live without it... well obviously I could... ahem...
I must say, however, that I believe I do draw slightly better with pencil on paper... There is something about the feel of pencil on paper, rather than digital pen nib on glass.

Digital all the way^^

If there's a stigma, it's for F*ing morons... Jebus.
But there's always some Luddites who just don't "get" it. Work in what you feel most comfortable! Whether that's hand prints, glass mosaic, CAD, whatever.

I remember when I was in art school; watercolourists thought people who used gouache were cheating somehow... Oil painters thought acrylic painters had some sort of easy shortcut... People who used charcoal thought people who preferred pencil were wimps lol!
...And pencilists would look down on those who used erasers!*
I kid you not! :)

All 100% true and more, people realy are idiots!

Meh, for me I'll obviously work with the best tool for the job that I have to hand and try to make the most of it. And if that means drawing with a softer rock on a harder one I'll do that too, I have before.


*That's for the comparable media and skill sets, obviously performance artists, ceramicists, textile artists, instilationists etc, all thought they were avant gaurde, the bees knees etc, but that's another thing all together lol!

I've worked in traditional media and in digital media. My style works well in both. I've gravitated to doing digital for the last several years. The underlying drawing is harder. A mouse is not a good way to sketch. I need to invest in a pad. However, Inking is much easier. I miss the control I had over line weights I have with traditional media but I love the ability to do layers and have levels of Undo within PhotoShop. I liked rendering with a rapidograph so working in Photoshop is not much different.

first off I started drawing in ballpoint pen as a child. Think about that...an early draftsman 'child' working in pen, oh yeah! I only had one chance to get ALL the proportions right and if not I started completely over.

hmmm, I'm going to say in my honest opinion that, certain 'styles' require the right tool. I think people get the idea that working digital speeds up the process but you almost never cut corners doing it that way. Nor should anyone cut corners cause we all want to see good stuff! ;p

...but now I'm being hypocritical. While I do take the time to do a really nice clean penciled lineart, I'm far to lazy to ink it. So over time I've gotten used to penciling so stinking "clean" and "tight" with my lines that a little leveling in photoshop could maaaybe pass it off as ink.

I never get to stick to one trick of the trade though. While I do work traditionaly, I will paint traditional work, digitaly. I guess there's my key issue there, I only paint digitaly because I just don't have the control with lines as I do traditionaly.

sooooo TRADITIONAL for me... but I have to have Digital as well.

blntmaker
Even Disney has dumped a great deal of artists in favor of digital specialists (Or sent their old school artists to Disney College to learn the software).

oh boy oh boy DRAMA!!
psst, The mouse dreaded competition with the 3D world and decided to can their 2D studio. They tried 3D on their own which was short lived. Then they vowed to take on nothing but live action, like they were going all 'old school' once again. (then the pirates of the carribean franchise died out once they ended the trillogy) Eventually, I mean today, Disney decided to put it's money where its mouth was and buy out pixar. Low and behold all those laid off workers were already swept up by the 3D studios for their expertease in 2D. So they say... it wasn't the competition that made disney fire its workers but rather the Dis got so wrapped up in being the best in the biz they forgot how to tell a story. so they say... so they say...

sorry about that little rant... animation student. but there you have it, traditional all ze way!! nyah ha ha ha!

I've seen plenty of digital and traditional art. But I find that when an art is drawn digitally, there seems to be missing some "lively substance" (for lack of better words to describe). Am I the only one feeling that digital art is "souless" compared to traditional art?

Then again, what am I to complain since most of my comics these days are digitally inked and colored...

Perhaps I only speak for my own work but my digital stuff looks much more lively than my paper stuff.

I can fix things easier as well, though oddly enough I make less mistakes digitally too.

Maybe my stuff is soulless in both mediums haha

Eunice P
I've seen plenty of digital and traditional art. But I find that when an art is drawn digitally, there seems to be missing some "lively substance" (for lack of better words to describe). Am I the only one feeling that digital art is "souless" compared to traditional art?

Then again, what am I to complain since most of my comics these days are digitally inked and colored...

but to what degree does a comic be drawn digitally to be considered digital?

IMO, it really depends on the artist, whether they be digital or traditional, if their work seems lifeless or bland. I read through and it seems there are people who work traditionally and some who work digitally and from looking at their works, there is some talented people here.


But the original question is a good one because I get the impression, that some look down on my comic because its in a PNG format and inked and colored in MS Paint. But to each, their own.

Eunice P
I've seen plenty of digital and traditional art. But I find that when an art is drawn digitally, there seems to be missing some "lively substance" (for lack of better words to describe). Am I the only one feeling that digital art is "souless" compared to traditional art?

Then again, what am I to complain since most of my comics these days are digitally inked and colored...

Traditional art takes on a dimension of its own with the textures, layering, and general style of imperfections (and real world perspective if it is three-dimensional) that give it that fresh, lively substance. That's what makes visiting the old-century artwork you see in books and photographs worth the while. Digital Art has its own perks, but you can only bring so much emulation of traditional on a flat, LED screen. That's why, again, people still visit traditional works.

Anyway, this is detracting from the topic. We should probably get back to discussing digital and traditional in the context of comicing.

I use both. Pencils and inks are sort of traditional (don't think automatic pencils and gel pens for inking are very traditional), panel borders, "painted" color, black/white areas, textures, shading, colored inks, lettering, sound effects etc. are all digital (and all in photoshop).

I can't pencil on screen (don't have the precision since all I have is a cheap volito2) and I can't color or letter on paper (terrible handwriting and I never get along with real paint).

Mixing techniques gives me the kind of results I want to achieve (and while I'm still far, every new page gets me closer to the goal). It's mostly digital, but I try to make it look "organic" rather than "mechanical".

Actually I had another point to make but it got lost somewhere during the typing :)

I mix as well. I draw and ink on paper. Then I scan and clean up and add a few more inked parts here and there and sometimes I redraw parts. Then I color digitally. This is for Of Snake and Apples...Kenyagi and Beyond the page is done by hand (save for a bit of grey shading on BtP and speech bubbles on both)

I can ink digitally just fine I just don't have the time to ink all my stuff at my computer. I ink most of my stuff while at work. That and I find inking by hand therapeutic...almost meditative.

Southpark is done in Maya.I use a Toshiba tablet pc.I love it. Control Z.

ozoneocean
I remember when I was in art school; watercolourists thought people who used gouache were cheating somehow... Oil painters thought acrylic painters had some sort of easy shortcut... People who used charcoal thought people who preferred pencil were wimps lol!

LOL! Ain't it the truth?! Shortcuts! HA HA! Digital techniques are just another tool in the artists' arsenal. Some folks (like Ozone) can use it to make art, some to make a mess, just like any other medium.

Another thing I ran into in college was that if you were a cartoonist or illustrator, it was considered such a LOW form of art as to not be art at all, compared to abstract painting or something of that nature. So I would create some bizzarro expressionistic painting in five minutes and pull an A, and then use the rest of my time to work on my lowly cartoons.

Well, when I very first began, I used to just use any paper I could find, and a .07 mechanical pencil. Oh boy, those were the days.

Then, I quit for a while, and came back to comic-making. I then used lined paper only, and a .09 pencil. Those were even funner.

But now, I use a variety of pencils, printer paper, Staedtler inks, rulers, sharpies, and Photoshop CS2.

So yeah. I've changed.

Back in the day i used to use pencil then ink with a felt pen and then bring that over to colour digitally.
Nowadays i pencil then ink digitally as well as colour and the jump certainly improved my art

When I'm consuming, I have no preference; whatever moves me does so. It's more about what's appropriate and what works with the particular style/substance of the comic.

As to producing, I enjoy the gamut, marker and ink, traditional ink and digital color, or fully digital, it just depends on the mood of the comic. One thing I've noticed since starting to do nearly everything digitally (except for thumbnails) is that it got a whole lot easier once I stopped trying to do things the traditional way and embraced the quirks of the medium. One thing that I personally hate about digital, though, in that there's nothing tangible of it. I guess it's kinda nostalgic, but I love having the originals, they just seem more "real." Kind of like the difference between e-mail and and snailmail. Maybe the "coldness" some people see in digital art is a byproduct of that knowledge and more a psychological perception?

As long as art talent is what produces the image, I appreciate it. I've seen a lot of talented artists on DD who use Wacoms--they aren't my cup of tea, although, like Photoshop, they may have improved in the years since I first tried one.

I enjoy computer colorization and 2D painting, even though I'm a neo-classical revivalist also, who likes using canvas and oil paint.

My only worry is that 3D digital seems to be overtaking 2D everything. I wonder if someday, people like us who draw from life or the imagination will end up as historical anachronisms, like glassblowers or blacksmiths you would see at a renaissance faire.

Everyone has their own way of doing it, but a lot of my story ideas begin on napkins at a restaurant, or out on campus, or here at work in the studio. When that happens, I scribble and sketch it out, make notes, try different pacing or view points. I storyboarded for a while, so that was the natural lead-in into doing a strip.

So then I redraw in graphite, onto my main substrate, and then ink it. The digital aspect comes in for me after I scan it, through colouring and utilizing text in my layouts.

I have always drawn, always will draw on something to get that seed of an idea out and into play. Those energetic lines have subtle nuances that I curtail into the storyline. They feed the motion I need to imply later while inking.

I actually envy those who can use a light pen. I HATE them. Can't use the buggers to save my life. :D And lord knows I've tried! :)

TitanOne
My only worry is that 3D digital seems to be overtaking 2D everything. I wonder if someday, people like us who draw from life or the imagination will end up as historical anachronisms, like glassblowers or blacksmiths you would see at a renaissance faire.

I too, mirror your lamentation. When I did medieval re-enactment, I studied illumination for a while. HOW that art is so lost now, pains me.

But I'd like to think that for all of the digital wizardry that can exist, talent and quality of work can and will find an audience no matter the form it takes.

blntmaker
Okay, maybe this is my own paranoia. In fact, I KNOW it's my own paranoia...

Growing up, I started drawing like most people my age did before computers came along - Stealing printer paper and using a No. 2 pencil/Bic pen to get the job done.

As an educator in my mid-30s though, I've drifted a bit towards digital art.

I'm getting the feeling that in this community, pencil/ink art is favored a bit more than digital art. I can't help but think about say, South Park. Remember how the first two or so seasons, it was all done with cut-ups and a scanner? Now, if I'm not mistaken, it's done in Flash. I'm sure this helps the efficiency of making an episode - but does it take away from the mystique of the show?

Even Disney has dumped a great deal of artists in favor of digital specialists (Or sent their old school artists to Disney College to learn the software).

So now begs the question if it hasn't been asked yet - which do you all tend to gravitate towards comic-wise: PENCIL/INK ART -or- DIGITAL ART?*

*I do realize there is a grey area here given after effects, I know that even most pencil/ink art here is cleaned up with Photoshop...But still, I'm curious to see where most people stand.

Tradintial PENCIL/INK ART.

blntmaker
Okay, maybe this is my own paranoia. In fact, I KNOW it's my own paranoia...

Growing up, I started drawing like most people my age did before computers came along - Stealing printer paper and using a No. 2 pencil/Bic pen to get the job done.

As an educator in my mid-30s though, I've drifted a bit towards digital art.

I'm getting the feeling that in this community, pencil/ink art is favored a bit more than digital art. I can't help but think about say, South Park. Remember how the first two or so seasons, it was all done with cut-ups and a scanner? Now, if I'm not mistaken, it's done in Flash. I'm sure this helps the efficiency of making an episode - but does it take away from the mystique of the show?

Even Disney has dumped a great deal of artists in favor of digital specialists (Or sent their old school artists to Disney College to learn the software).

So now begs the question if it hasn't been asked yet - which do you all tend to gravitate towards comic-wise: PENCIL/INK ART -or- DIGITAL ART?*

*I do realize there is a grey area here given after effects, I know that even most pencil/ink art here is cleaned up with Photoshop...But still, I'm curious to see where most people stand.

Tradintial PENCIL/INK ART.

there are two small things that prevent me from making my comics completly on the computer.

1: I'm no good at computers

2: I'm no good at art

I would think that even if I did go digital, my art wouldn't get any better as it's just not my strong point.

In saying that my art has had to adapt twice. First I had to change my comic so that it was easier for the reader, but the big change was when I started scanning them. Now my colours are deeper and the text bigger.

Anyway, I find it quite fun to draw and colour by hand. Kinda makes me feel like I'm back in preschool again.

Characters are drawn with pencils and pens. Colors, layouts, and backgrounds are all digital...now I'm not saying they're any good(they're rarely are, I'm not that good) but the sad truth is that the digital backgrounds are probably better than if I tried to draw the background by hand. Anyways it makes it easier for me to make pages and color stuff quickly. It takes me from about 30 mins to an hour to plot, draw ,and ink most pages, I can normally color my characters in about 30-40 mins, and to do my layouts, background, shadows, and effects about 30 min to an hour. So it takes three hours to do a page. Fortunately I normally space the time between the three steps to make it seem faster.

All of my comics are created traditionally mainly because I'm not proficient at using digital media. I only really use GIMP for making buttons and the like, they look neater.
I'd like to learn how to use some programs, but I'm limited in terms of time spent on the computer.

Despite that, I really enjoy creating comics using whatever I can get my hands on- watercolours, pencils, copic markers, biro- whatever. I think experimenting with all these various mediums actually helped towards my art course ;P and they say comics are a waste of time!

Reading comics, I don't really mind what style it's done in, although I tend to gravitate towards traditionally created ones more. I think it bcause they look less polished than the digital comics that I'm drawn to them, like seeing minor imperfections in the art work makes it more endearing to me. Digital ones can look fantastic but...well, they're almost too perfect, if that makes sense. I ditto the sort of cold feeling some people have expressed.

WELL I've been doing my series inked on paper and then scanned and coloured digitally.
UNTIL I was recently stuck without my computer but wanted to catch up.
SO I did the whole thing with a dip pen/paint brush and waterproof ink and then coloured with watercolours.
AND I've never been happier. For one thing I feel it looks more individual/unique. I get a nice final piece which I can show to people. I never have to worry about computer problems.

Of course whether it looks better or not is another issue. The main problem is that it never looks as nice after it's been scanned :(

i prefer traditional for one main reason...

i can make wicked awesome splatter effect with just dipping my finger in the ink and flicking it at the paper that a computer could never duplicate.

i have used a wacom before,and believe me, i understand how sexy and easy using it can be *i mean, i was almost hooked after one sketch!* but i feel that i am stronger in the traditional art, and my life right now simply doesnt have enought ime in it for me to sit there and take the time to learn how to do things like coloring or lettering on the computer...so i simply have to up my game.

I mean, guys in the 60s didnt have photoshop and they made stuff that makes todays art look like crap.

I had a discussion recently with a friend who claims that anything done digitally is not true art cause it doesn't exist. Basically his reasoning is like this: it wasn't created using real pencil/paint on real paper = no real.

Also, for him, art that you don't spend hours on every detail shading it in layers and layers and layers of pencil equals cheating, and lineart used in comics and cartoons was described as "glorified stick figures". Oh yeah, and mixing media is somehow wrong too. And the fact that I colored my pages in photoshop somehow nullifies the fact that I pencilled them on paper.

Seriously, art students sometimes... *shakes head*

I like using Pencil and ink. Digital gets tedious sometimes D:

I do my comics 100% digitally, but in all honesty, for my art, I like to sketch everything with a plain old pencil, scan it, and color under the pencil art so the pencil art serves as a stylized outline. I think it looks really cool, but for my comic, it'd take too much time for such a small effect that I don't bother.