This topic is a spinoff from the "Pet Peeve: Overexplaining" topic. I started to derail my own topic! Here's an edited version of my derailment to help kick this new topic off and provide context:

In my arrogant opinion, there are a lot of webcomics that don't belong on the web. They belong in print because, really, they're meant to be read in chunks, not in morsels. I think the idea of reading in morsels is essential to making a webcomic effective.

Now, several people are going to call hogwash on that. Some of my most favorite webcomickers would no doubt argue that the web is just a vehicle to get their story out there. You can do ANYTHING on the web. Pace things how you'd like, draw donkey butts for panels on end, etc.

Not knowing much about webcomics when I started, I looked at my vehicle of presentation--the web--and made a conscious decision to let it inform my approach.

This is why I do strips and not pages. The onus is always on me to make it stand alone, even while it's part of a whole. (Not that all my strips stand alone, but about 95% of them do.)

There's practical side to this whole debate that as well. The web is not just a unique vehicle of delivery for comics that can require and inspire an adjustment of approach, it's also--for some--the ONLY vehicle of delivery.

If you have a story you want to tell and you want people to read it no matter what, then the web is for you. What I'm truly arguing is that the most successful webcomics are going to take into account the unique nature of publishing on the web, i.e. parceling out your story in bits at a time. This call can be answered by adjustments to pacing, format, style, etc.

Or not at all. I get that. I get that for some people they just don't care and they want to tell their story their way and damn the internet torpedoes. But...that doesn't change the fact that, for me, it's quite obvious their story--paced and designed for chunks-- would work better in print.

That’s just my arrogant opinion. Is there a soul on Drunk Duck that agrees with me?

I drew my comic for my friends, and it's made to read like a book. My brother told me to scan and upload my pages. I originally tried to do it in chunks but was advised not to simply because that's not the way "webcomics" work. (I wasn't a webcomic person, so I didn't know anything. I just needed a way to share my story with my dad, friends, and anyone else interested.) I was told not to upload more than a page a day or people would miss things, so that's what I did. -- Some of my readers prefer to stay away a while, let pages pile up, and then read a bunch in one sitting. And that's cool. (I can't do that myself. I get really excited to read more. I love my daily story fixes!)

I read very few "strips" on Drunk Duck. They may "work" better, being drawn like the newspaper funnies, which are naturally released daily/weekly. Plus, they don't have to have regular readers. Any random net surfer can read one strip from the middle of an archive, laugh, and (if he chooses) move on without ever reading another. (However, not all people on the internet are "fear of commitment" types. ;) )

I'm just more into stories myself. I like a long commitment and plot/character building. (And I can't afford to buy things in print on a regular basis. I want free stories!!!)

To be honest, I like getting a page at a time because it's easier to keep up with. I can always find a few minutes a day to read a page or two. It is much more difficult to find a bunch of minutes all together to sit down and read a whole chapter. I have to read actual paper books in short segments too. (I used to read them cover to cover, but there's no time any more...) Plus, it's fun to have something new to read regularly and not have to wait a month (or more) for the next issue.

So, I guess, to me, it isn't "these are webcomics and those aren't." It's simply two notably different categories of webcomic. I believe both work just fine on the internet and in one page or strip per day/week. I don't believe the two are really that comparable, but I also don't think one is "better" or "more suitable" than the other

Hey Brock...

I'll throw you one better - I've been told by at least five people that my comic belongs in the world of ANIMATION.

I'm playing with some flash work to give it a try so...YES, I CARE!

And YES...you should!

usedbooks
I read very few "strips" on Drunk Duck. They may "work" better, being drawn like the newspaper funnies, which are naturally released daily/weekly. Plus, they don't have to have regular readers. Any random net surfer can read one strip from the middle of an archive, laugh, and (if he chooses) move on without ever reading another. (However, not all people on the internet are "fear of commitment" types. ;) )

This is one of the big things I was looking at when I chose the web as my vehicle for a comic. I wanted it to be something that people could find by pure chance at work or school, flip through a few pages while they take a quick break and move on if they wanted to. While I do like the idea of having repeat readers, my main goal was always just to give people something to laugh about for a few minutes. I never intended to make a profound statement with it or leave a lasting impression so the fuzzy, kind of transitory nature of the web appealed to me. There are very few set requirements or readers, which means I'm free to make different jokes, screw up and learn things as I go. I began what I do as an experience in learning so if people don't happen to like it, there's several thousand other comics they can try or they can come back the next day and it will be different.

The web allows for a huge deal of freedom. And in that freedom I've learned a lot of things about creating work than I would have in a classroom or working at some comic book company. For instance, I have definitely learned a few things about properly organizing my files since I didn't number them when I made them I now have over 125 comics to go back and rename the files for and then re-upload. Similarly I've learned something about why there are size restrictions on the physical size of a lot of comics.

It has always seemed to me that the internet is almost always a good place to start out and then make the jump to other places. I look at it almost like the minor leagues of baseball. You've got a lot of young aspiring players out there and the best of the best will rise to the top and join bigger circles and get to do a bit more than just post it online for fun.

I love the medium of print. Thats what I grew up on. I think just being able to hold a product, physically in your hands, is a great thing. It's why newspapers will never go away. I created my comics for print, but enjoy showing or previewing them online. I've met many new friends I possibly would have never met.

Brock
In my arrogant opinion, there are a lot of webcomics that don't belong on the web. They belong in print because, really, they're meant to be read in chunks, not in morsels. I think the idea of reading in morsels is essential to making a webcomic effective.

What about first-time tuners into the story that read the whole thing in a chunk?

I dislike strip themed storys that don't focus on funny intensely. Sure it's great for the current fan of the story to get into, but I don't want to read through something with no clear story or 'funnys' just because the author is trying to please the current fans.

Skullbie
What about first-time tuners into the story that read the whole thing in a chunk?

See, in that instance you're talking about how you read the thing AFTER the fact of its release. Your primary audience, generally, is going to be the ones that read what you produce when you release it.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about: I was listening to the commentary on an episode of Battlestar Galactica and in it Ron Moore was talking about how they play act breaks in the story is very much dictated by where the commercial breaks are and how long he has between them. They structure the show around those breaks, EVEN THOUGH they know that the broadcast on television is pretty much a one-shot deal and where the episode will live forever--on DVD--is a place that no one will care about such things.

What he is doing--and what I am advocating--is keeping both things in mind. I don't think you can just take a 22-page story and parcel it out on the web. I mean, yeah, you can do it, but it's not as effective as saying "Okay, I have a 22-page story. I'm releasing it on the web. What efforts can I make to ensure that each page can be a complete experience, while at the same time contributing to the whole?"

That, I think, is the particular challenge--and opportunity--of the web. In my arrogant opinion, you either rise to it or you ignore it. This isn't a strip vs. page debate. It's a question of approach and consideration for the unique experience.

I had no online comic plans when I began scripting my newest rendition of my comic. It was to be read as issues, in chunks.

But I found this site and started uploading here. I just recently started trying to tweak my pages from the script I had prepared long ago to be a bit more fulfilling to the readers here. I can't always do it, but it seems to work much better.

Luckily, a lot of the pages seemed to work by default... probably since I attempt to generally accomplish something per page.

My dream format for my work is animation, that's the 1st way I envision everything. Then I have to turn that into a comic, then tweak it for online comic formats if possible :~\

I have tried over and over to do a strip sort of comic, but my writing style always heads me over to chapter based stories and the like. I think I'm the type who should be doing printed graphic novels or just monthly issues.

However, I can get impatient, so I like how the net allows a few updates a week. If Looking for Group was only available to me every three months, which seems to be it's release schedule for the printed novels, I probably would lose interest. Hell, I only buy Batman in trade paperback now because whenever I pick up a single issue, I usually find a 'to be continued...' or it's continuing on from the last issue.

And last but not least, with a webcomic, everything's there. You have no chance of missing an issue or it being out of stock. The only downside would be when the site goes down due to server problems or such. But if that's not happening, you can read the story from start to finish.

Brock
That�s just my arrogant opinion. Is there a soul on Drunk Duck that agrees with me?

I both agree and disagree with some of what you're saying. Yes, there is a difference in how a comic could (and probably should) be written based on the medium of choice (print, web, whatever else you can come up with) but I think breaking it down as "a webcomic page should be a complete experience" isn't the right way. I've seen plenty of webcomics that use very effective interactive tools and animation to guide the reader through a story that covers more than a "page" (I remember Scott McCloud working on one such story). And in these cases, you can easily post a "chunk" and have it be enjoyable and not every page has to be a complete experience.

I just think most webcomics sites go with the simplest approach of having users post a page at a time. Granted, they often allow users the ability to play with their sites to change this but it's easier not to. And in these case, yes, a comic written as a chunk may not be as effective as it could be. But move that comic to a different site with a different interface and it can be just as good and sometimes better than it would be in print.

Personally, I find that the difference of a webcomic and a print comic quite great.

To me, it's like a garage band, and some high profile rock and roll band. But I could be wrong.

Some comics do belong in print. Mine, should stick to being a webcomic. I'm still just an amateur artist, and I'm not afraid to admit it. I've never really gotten far into any of my storylines, but I am very capable of it. I just need to work hard and whatnot.

The comics that belong in print usually have some great quality about them, such as they have great artwork, a great storyline, a great presentation, or something special that just makes the reader want to go "I NEED MORE!!!"

But I suppose this is all just opinion :P

All my most favourite webcomics are full page stories. Some take ages to update, but it's worth it for all that's in the page when it does. It's like a lovely treat each time ^_^
And it's what I myself do.

I only follow a couple of strips and I'm liking them less and less... They get repetitive and stale after a while and I always feel like I have to keep up with them. My fave web strips have been Alex (British comic about a financial consultant), and Dilbert... And both of those are really actually print comics :)

I've already responded in the previous thread, so I'll just add couple of things here.

The way I read webstrips: I tend to wait for them to progress a bit and then return and read month or months of strips in one (or two) long sessions. For example, I have yet to touch Sinfest this year, and I just caught up with Wulffmorgenthaler. Also, the strips have to be really funny, otherwise I lose interest fast.
Anyway, with this approach, reading a webstory in chunks is pretty natural to me, and I know that a lot of people do it this way too.

Also, I think I've mentioned it already (more than once possibly), this is my learning ground, before I enter the area of monthly comics or graphic novels (preferably the latter). It wouldn't make much sense to practice on webstrips. Can I learn to do complicated but clear to read panel layouts (in Walt Simonson or P. Craig Russell style for example) from making a 4-panel grid webstrip? Not very likely.
Can I learn how to do proper scene transitions from a one-off gag? Nope.
Can I learn how to juggle several subplots to weave together an intriguing story? Well, if it was a strip in the style of Sinfest, perhaps.
Can I learn all the above from doing a story in a "page at a time" system? Most likely, yes. And I'll also learn (at least I hope so) how to keep the reader interested. Because even in a printed book, every page has to be good enough to make you turn to the next one straight away, so that you can't put the book away. By giving the reader something good on every page, you keep them going on. Wether it's damn good art, great dialogue or exciting story, that's another thing. Preferably it's all three :D

Also, the reading styles are changing a little as connections get better. It used to be that small strips with single gags were the only ones feasible, with connection times lagging and large images verboten. With faster connections and things like Youtube gaining popularity, we are getting used to reading things on line more. Many of us read at least sections of larger print comics---at newsarama, at scans_daily, etc.

So the climate's changing. Especially with the price of comics skyrocketing---I think someone estimated that if you wanted to follow SECRET INVASION it would cost you over a hundred dollars to get every major crossover---people are driven more to the web, where reading is usually free, as long as you endure a few ads.

I'm not disagreeing with you, Brock---but I am saying the lines are beginning to blur more than they used to.---Al

alschroeder
I think someone estimated that if you wanted to follow SECRET INVASION it would cost you over a hundred dollars to get every major crossover

I know I shouldn't be taking this thread off on another tangent but it's over one hundred dollars just for the first half of Secret Invasion:
http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=152565

Though I think the second half may be a little less as some of those books only run 1 or 2 issues... But that will depend on how many post-Secret Invasion books they flood the market with.

I wanna reiterate something I said above: I don't think this is a strip vs. page debate. True, my solution to this perceived problem was to do a strip, but I don't have anything against pages. My only real point is that, given the nature of a web schedule release, whatever you put on screen--be it page or strip--should tend to read well on its own as well as part of a whole.

In fact, I'm currently working on a brand new webcomic that will be released as pages. I've got nothing against pages on the web.

Auoroa Borealis - You'd be surprised what you can do with strips. I'd never done one til SuperFogeys and a lot of the things you say you can't do with strips I have found I have been able to play with. ESPECIALLY the several subplots into a greater story.

Brock
My only real point is that, given the nature of a web schedule release, whatever you put on screen--be it page or strip--should tend to read well on its own as well as part of a whole.

That's true of print as well. With print, you release a book that should read well on its own (and you do still have to consider how each page reads and flows into the next). With webcomics, you can choose to release a page or pages, a strip or several strips, animation, an online book, or whatever else and yes, it should read well on its own in order to keep the reader engaged. But I don't see it as being limitted to one thing (be it a page or a strip) put on the screen.

With my book, I know I'm writing it as larger issues so yes, the way I'm posting it (a page at a time) is not the way to go as the pages are just part of a whole. But that doesn't mean it needs to go to print. What I should be doing is looking for a way to release it online an issue at a time as it should be read.

You have a good point. Really, my comic isn't paced for the web - and it is better read in chunks - but for me, a webcomic is a way to try out the craft of making comics, and I'm really doing it for my own sake (even though the comments helps cheer me up when I'm feeling a bit down :)). I probably should pace it better - i.e; have more stuff happening on each page, so that the one-page-a-week schedule doesn't feel like it's taking forever.

I consider this my classroom, albeit one without a proper teacher. I'm feeling my way through the medium, changing things when I feel they aren't working, and learning by trial and error, in hopes that I one day will be good enough to progress into "proper" comics - though whether those are prints, or merely a webcomic I'll get paid for, I don't really know, or even care. Therefore, doing the full-page kind of comic helps - while doing strips would teach me to condense my storytelling (which I really need to do anyway), it wouldn't help me get a sense of what kind of panel-layout works, and what kind doesn't.

Most of my favourite webcomics are of the full page, one (or possibly two) updates a week variety, and I find that I don't really mind waiting. Strips, while occasionally hilarious, tend to be more repetitive than full-page story comics. *shrugs* I think there's enough room for both kinds of comic - it all depends on the reader, really, and if you're doing the comic only for your readers, then the quality of it is going to suffer regardless of the form.

With mine I'm publishing on the web to test whether I have the patience to update and simply to see whether anyone would read a comic I made.
I would kill to have a comic published but it's the case of the possiblity of being picked up/ costs. You seem to be forgetting that a lot of people publish on the web not because it suits their material but because it offers immediate availability and instant feedback, something that publishing often doesn't. It's easier to ask someone to maybe waste a minute of their time reading a page and seeing whether they would like to see more for free on the web than asking someone to shell out money for a published copy. Another thing is in relation to what I said at the beginning certain people may have comics more suitable for print but may not (as with me) have the attention span to sit down and finish it to have it published, publishing on the web gives me time to daydream and yet also drives me to finish this story one week at a time.

mundy
You seem to be forgetting that a lot of people publish on the web not because it suits their material but because it offers immediate availability and instant feedback, something that publishing often doesn't.

I'm really not. I've acknowledged that some (maybe most) put it on the web simply because that's the only vehicle of delivery available to them. Consideration for the particulars of that vehicle isn't important to them, just the fact that they can use it to get their comic in front of eyeballs.

I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

What I'm arguing for is taking things a step further and really giving the fact that you're publishing on a trickled-out schedule due consideration. My argument is that while you don't have to do this, if you do then you'll have a stronger webcomic. Not comic, necessarily, but a stronger webcomic.

I guess for I plan it, draw it and post the pages for with the intention of it being read on the web. With the kind of story I am telling with it being a Horror/Suspense/Mystery story each page builds off the next. I work to build an atmosphere that I hope draws people in and leaves people trying to figure out what may happen and at the same wanting more. In a way reminds me of old radio serials(no I am not that old) where they said, "Tune in next week to find out what happened." I really don't know how my comic would play out in print. or if it would capture the same effect. But I know I produce it with the intent of it being read a page at a time.

It's really just that simple, isn't it Midge?

Brock
It's really just that simple, isn't it Midge?

For me, being a simple minded person (insert shortbus joke), yes.

I really don't see this as being as big an issue as I once did. I write my comics with the end result in mind - how it will read when the whole thing is complete. If other people can get some enjoyment from reading it one chapter at a time or one page at a time, then that's even better.

In my experience, people who are used to reading webcomics do not expect every page to be a complete unit. If we, as creators, choose to impose that limitation on ourselves, that's fine but it's certainly not something that seems to matter to readers. At least not as much as those of us who grew up on print might think!

I won't bore you with repeating what I already said in the other thread, but I've been thinking about this again (because it does bug me), and one thing that's occurred to me is that really, even a comic that's published in print and can be read in 15 minutes should be structured in such a way that at least every double page spread is its own little micro-unit to a degree. A lot of mainstream/commercial creators will tell you it's a good idea to have a mini-cliffhanger at the end of every odd page (i.e. the end of a double page spread) to keep the readers' interest piqued so they'll keep reading. This is something I would personally very much associate with mainstream comics, the storytelling equivalent of the way summer blockbuster movies are structured, but it does work, and for me personally, well, my comic is pretty mainstream I'd say, so it's something I try to live by because it fits the general tone of what I'm doing.

Some excellent points made here.

Personally, I write and illustrate my comic 2-4 pages at a time and update as many at one time. But I'm not doing it to create a 'following' as such but more to get feedback, particularly when I feel in a bind.

This happened recently when I agonised over deleting an entire page from the story.
It only took a few readers to make my mind up, so 'blip' it went.
The great thing about DD is that there is some exceptional talent here so the feedback can be very professional.

My comic is designed to be downloaded and printed off by members of my site, so it is designed for print.

I agree with others that the same rules often apply... a well constructed story leads the reader into the next page whether for web or print.
And mini-cliffhangers are handy for this as well.

I try to keep lots of action and humour in my comic to make people want to read what's next.

Unfortunately I possibly disappoint many readers because I don't update very often.