Tony Harris on real geeks.

[king mob]

I remember walking into a bar during SDCC and it was kind of full and then around 10pm it emptied out....and then I remembered that panels start early so everyone went back to the hotels to get into bed

If things work out then I'll be at San Diego in 2014. They better get some more gin ordered.

after

Nasty. I'd had a kebab earlier and everything.

[Charles RB]

On the other hand, for a really strict geek test, it'd go like this:

1. Here's a live chicken. Gather a crowd, promise to bite the head off the chicken for loose change.

2. Now do it.

Ahahaha, nice try, Kurt. I read Lapham's last Crossed story, I know how that ends!

[thehod]

I remember walking into a bar during SDCC and it was kind of full and then around 10pm it emptied out....and then I remembered that panels start early so everyone went back to the hotels to get into bed

Most British cons I've been to anyone wanting to catch the early panel on a Sunday morning wouldn't bother going to bed.

Fuck, its a toss up as to whether there are more pissed than sober people at the early panels.

[Charles RB]

You joke. But I do feel that where Harris is coming from is that he prefers a certain "type" of fan. The one's that "treat the medium with respect" and don't go in for the "childish" material.

Treating with respect and not going for childish material? Bum! The guys who run the Cartoon Museum in London aren't real fans after all!

Is Asterix a childs book because of the slap stick humour, or more adult because of the biting satire?

Depends if I like it or not.

It's kind of superfluous since Brandon posted the link on Tony Harris' process, but I wish I could find the article on how Steve Rude uses photo reference. Really removes it at all from the idea of 'tracing'.
Also, in the back of the Dan Dare TPB by Garth Ennis and Gary Erskine, there's some nice shots which show how Erskine uses photo

Arthur Ransom did it as well, before he retired. You got so used to realistic faces and photo-based stuff, it was a real jolt when hideous undead armies of the damned or Satan or a really brutal Judge Death turned up. (One of my personal Great Moments of Comic Art was a Judge Dredd Megazine that had Judge Death stories by Frazing Irving and Arthur Ransom, two utterly different takes on the same thing - one all wraithlike and distorted and dark shade, one this fucking brute tearing chests out.)

There's one very well known British writer/artist who refuses to sign anything with just his name, so if you want anything from him it has to be personalised because he got fed up of just this.

For years, I've wanted to get something autographed to "eBay Scum"...

Fuck, even the bar was empty and you never get an empty bar at British events.

The bar was empty? At Bristol? Christ, that is bad.

[Vibranium]

Most British cons I've been to anyone wanting to catch the early panel on a Sunday morning wouldn't bother going to bed.

Fuck, its a toss up as to whether there are more pissed than sober people at the early panels.

Sunday morning panels are the best....unvarnished opinions and lots of sunglasses

[Charles RB]

Apparently in the 90s, if you passed out drunk Garth Ennis would write rude words (backwards) on your forehead.

Well, of course.

[Vibranium]

Apparently in the 90s, if you passed out drunk Garth Ennis would write rude words (backwards) on your forehead.

Well, of course.

that is a standard life rule...pass out at a party or in public in general and you will get written on

[jesse_custer]

Do people who criticize artists for photo referencing know anything about the history of art? Are they aware of the drawings in caves, where it's clear that the artists were referencing the animals that they had seen? Are they aware of the longstanding practice involved in portraits, where the artist sits a person down and stares at the subject for hours to craft a better picture?

It's just amazing that anyone has to defend photo referencing. When have artists not referenced the things they see in real life?

[Kees_L]

On the other hand, for a really strict geek test, it'd go like this:

1. Here's a live chicken. Gather a crowd, promise to bite the head off the chicken for loose change.

2. Now do it.

If you pass this test, you're a geek.

Could work, since for an Ozzy-test it'd need to be a white dove or a bat at least, whereas barbarians or Vikings would be going with fullgrown goats or vultures I bet.

[RDMacQ]

Treating with respect and not going for childish material? Bum! The guys who run the Cartoon Museum in London aren't real fans after all!

Do they include Steamboat Mickey? Real fans.

Do they like Transformers? Get the @#$# out!

[RDMacQ]

Apparently in the 90s, if you passed out drunk Garth Ennis would write rude words (backwards) on your forehead.

Well, of course.

Knowing Garth Ennis' imagination, those fans got off easy!

[RDMacQ]

Do people who criticize artists for photo referencing know anything about the history of art? Are they aware of the drawings in caves, where it's clear that the artists were referencing the animals that they had seen? Are they aware of the longstanding practice involved in portraits, where the artist sits a person down and stares at the subject for hours to craft a better picture?

It's just amazing that anyone has to defend photo referencing. When have artists not referenced the things they see in real life?

I don't really have a problem with the way Harris crafts his art. Personally, I don't think questioning his artistic talent has anything to do with the subject. It just seems like a cheap shot for the sake of a cheap shot. Which is kind of what Harris did what set people off- make a broad generalization in order to be hurtful rather than insightful.

Besides, Harris said enough in his statements alone to have enough to criticize him on. No need to bring in how he draws to look for something to criticize him on. He's given us plenty enough on his own.

[Spike-X]

I don't really have a problem with the way Harris crafts his art. Personally, I don't think questioning his artistic talent has anything to do with the subject. It just seems like a cheap shot for the sake of a cheap shot. Which is kind of what Harris did what set people off- make a broad generalization in order to be hurtful rather than insightful.

Besides, Harris said enough in his statements alone to have enough to criticize him on. No need to bring in how he draws to look for something to criticize him on. He's given us plenty enough on his own.

I agree with this statement.

[carabas]

Apparently in the 90s, if you passed out drunk Garth Ennis would write rude words (backwards) on your forehead.

Well, of course.

I am suddenly unable to stop thinking about Ennis writing a Superman story featuring Mxyplyzyk's cousin called Tidnabesra or something like that.

[Ballard Blues]

Jim Sterling of "The Escapist Magazine" made a video on the issue of "Fake Nerd Girls" in response to the buzz surrounding Harris' foolishness. As usual, he makes sense.