#I'll claim this one

[deoidesign]

How I save time on backgrounds as a full-time webcomic artist

Hi! I make webcomics for a living, and I have to be able to draw a panel extremely fast to keep up with my deadlines. I draw about 50 panels a week, which gives me about 45 minutes per panel if I want any semblance of a healthy work-life balance.

Most webtoon artists save time on backgrounds by using 3d models, which works for them and is great! but personally I hate working in 3d... I went to school for it for a year and hated it so much I completely changed career paths and vowed never to do it again! So, this is how I save time without using any 3d, for those of you out there who don't like it either!

This tactic has also saved me money (3d models are expensive) and it has helped me converting my comic from scroll format into page format for print, because I have much more art to work with than what's actually in the panels. (I'll touch on this later)

So, first, I make my backgrounds huge. my default starting size is 10,000 x 10,000 pixels. My panels are 2,500 pixels wide, so my backgrounds are 4x that, minimum. Because of this, I make them less detailed than I could or that you might expect so it doesn't look weird against my character art when I shrink portions of it down.

I personally find it much easier to add in detail than to make "removing" details look natural at smaller sizes, but you might have different preferences than I do.

I also make sure to keep all of my elements on separate layers so that I can easily remove or replace them, I can move them to simulate different camera angles more easily, and it's simple to adjust the lighting to imply different times of day.

Then I can go ahead and copy/paste them into my episodes. I move the background around until it feels like it's properly fitting how I want.

Once I've done that in every panel, I'll go back through the episode and clean up anything that looks weird, and add in solid blacks (for my art style) Here's a quick before and after of what that looks like!

This makes 90% of my backgrounds take me just a few hours. This is my tactic when I'm working in an environment that an entire scene, or multiple scenes, will take place.

But many panels will inevitably have a location that's used exactly once, and it would waste time and effort to draw a massive background for those. So in 10% of cases, I just draw the single panel background in the episode. I save all of these, just in case I can re-use it later (this happens more often with outdoor locations, but I save them all nonetheless!)

I generally have to draw about 2 big backgrounds per episode, and 3-5 single-panel backgrounds per episode! At the beginning of an arc/book the number is higher, but as the series is continuing and I'm building up an asset library of indoor and outdoor elements to re-use for the book, the number generally goes down and I save more time.

My series involves time travel and mysteries, so there's a lot of new locations in it and we're constantly moving around. If I were working on a series that was more consistent in this aspect, this process would save me even more time!

Like I said earlier, this also saves me a lot of pain and gives me a lot more options as I'm converting from scroll format to print format!

panels that look like this in scroll format...

can look like this in print!

because I drew the background like this, so I didn't need to go through the additional effort to add in the extra detail to expand it outwards at all.

Anyways, I hope this helps someone! As always if it doesn't help, just go ahead and disregard. This is what I do and what works for me, and I feel like I only ever see time-saving tips for comics that involve 3d models and workflows, which don't work for me at all! I know there's more people like me out there, so this is for you!

Enjoy!

Also obligatory "my webcomic" if you want to see this in action or check it out!

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Out of sight, out of - wait.

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[corpocyborg]

You know, I think one of my favorite things about a super evil play through is actually how hard it is to net approval with even the most potentially evil-leaning companions.

Astarion talks a big game about how much he likes violence and evil, and he does often give you approval for those types of actions, but you get this distinct impression from interactions with him that he's just sort of put on a permanent mask. I saw this post going around that Astarion dislikes it when you are very benevolent and heroic because he's thinking "How can there be so much goodness in the world but none of it was ever for me? It's not fair." And I think that's true. And I think when you actually take him down the road he claims he wants to go down, he takes on this mentality of "Ah, yes. Of course. I knew it. The world is without love." And he tries to pretend that it doesn't bother him but there are moments you can see it breaking through that it does. That's why I'm at the end of Act 1 of nonstop evil and I can't get him past medium approval.

On the other hand, I can't even get Shadowheart past neutral approval. She goes back and forth on giving me approval and disapproval, and, in my experience, she does the same exact thing in a good play through. I always find it hardest to predict what Shadowheart will approve of or disapprove of because she's so inconsistent. I think this is because her whole story is about the fact that she doesn't know who she is. I mean, she literally can't remember much about her life, to begin with. But also, she's in a state of indecision, not only does she not remember who she is, but she hasn't decided yet who she wants to be. Or more precisely she feels like who she wants to be is not a real option. She is definitely the companion (of the ones I actually had) who reacted most poorly to raiding the Grove. She got drunk and she went off about how it's not a real victory if you're killing people who can't even defend themselves. But then the next day she acted totally different. She was sober, and she took on this mentality of "Goblins killed some people. They didn't kill us. Time to move on." So she reasserted this control over herself that she has on most of the time, that had mostly only slipped because she was so upset and because she was drunk.

Lae'zel has been the easiest for me to get approval with. She got up to high approval very quickly, and she's currently at very high approval and stays there consistently. I think this is because she's way more honest than either Astarion or Shadowheart. She really is what she says she is. She's ruthless. And I don't actually mean that she inherently has to be evil. It is very possible to take her down a good path and convince her to embrace ideals of freedom. But I do think that her persona is far more honest than either Astarion or Shadowheart's is. And I think this makes sense because she was raised in a whole society of believers in "might makes right" who have believed in that for many generations and she was given chances to excel in that society rather than completely victimized. This is very different from Astarion because he was always a victim and never had an opportunity to actually strive for power. It is likely more similar to what Shadowheart would have experienced, though I think her memory loss complicates this, but it also just seems like Shadowheart doesn't take to ruthlessness as naturally. They both had to adopt that mentality because it was the only way they could survive, but I think Lae'zel is just better at it because she's just a way more straight-forward person. I think it's also why if she does decide to go against Vlaakith, it's an instant 180-degree change in her allegiance. She doesn't have to waver like Shadowheart does in regards to Shar, she just goes "This is what I believe now." and just switches.

Anyway, yeah... you learn so much about them on an evil play through... can't wait to torture them some more.

[bobbinalong]

bart and max gardening together for @/dcforgaza. you're gonna ignore that there's not grass in front of bart's boots, please.

[cloysterbell]

Pete, I need you to stay here.

[eastbluecrewed]

...

[hadesknockedupintheunderworld]

The fans: Ugh Sonic was just so preachy. I mean obviously he's supposed to be the good guy, so any uncomfortableness I feel here and any way I feel like Sonic's choices are framed as being why some other people have shitty lives is just bad writing because he is obviously supposed to be right always, but this characterization makes no sense. Isn't he right for the things he did?

Ian Flynn, using Kitsunami to say the (barely even at this point) quiet part even louder: Hey it's almost like ever since the Mr. Tinker event we've been purposely running with the critique of Sonic as being more selfish than he appears. Sonic is upholding a system of Eggman v Sonic that currently benefits him and shuts down talk of how to improve the current system because he likes his own personal enjoyment and he's attached enough to Eggman that he'd rather Eggman pretend to be a good person than be stuck in prison for life. He doesn't even quite practice what he preaches. We are trying to show that the current hero v villain system and Sonic's recklessness currently affects some people poorly and that Sonic isn't a perfect hero.

[xx-j4nu5-c4t5-xx]

"An ideal Sims game would have Sims 2's gameplay mechanics, Sims 3's open world, and Sims 4's graphics!"

I absolutely despise this take, and I want to explain why. This is a very long rant and it is full of piss and vinegar directed at everything in the Sims 4. I'm gonna try to keep everything kinda professional as much as I can but I can't guarantee an unbiased opinion.

If you'll let me talk your ears off for a moment, I'd like to explain, from my own experience as an artist and a casual player, my issues with the art style and direction of The Sims 4 compared to The Sims 2. (I'm not really going to comment on 3 because I've never played it.)

I want to start off by explaining the difference between better graphics and higher resolution. The Sims 4 absolutely blows Sims 2 out of the water when it comes to textures and polygon counts on sims, no contest. But I'd argue that the graphics themselves... aren't better. They're worse, even, so much fucking worse. The biggest problems come from the stylization and the animations, in my opinion, so I'll explain what I mean.

Have you ever felt like the Sims in 4 just look... weird? Not quirky, not kinda strange, but off. Distressing. Uncanny. Whatever the fuck the kids call it nowadays. When you strip away the packs and the CC and the shaders, the sims in the base game look bad. They're very close to being human; they walk like us, talk like us, have families like us, but they don't look like us, not exactly. There's always something off about them, no matter how close you try to get. Proportions will be a bit off, or your eyelashes will be like three polygons for some fucking reason, and the jig is up. The illusion is gone.

This is one of the instances where a higher resolution and more detailed models and meshes work against you. You aren't making believe. You are beyond the point of pretending that the pixelated shapes are real clothes and bodies and faces, because at this point, they're close enough that you don't need to. There's no gap to bridge. But that doesn't necessarily mean that they're lifelike, at least, not enough to be completely human. In some ways, they're still tethered to being cartoony and plasticky and fake. Just enough to frighten you. Enough to put you off. They're not using it to their advantage anymore, and instead, it's holding them back.

When the Sims 2 came out in 2004, the developers knew that they weren't going to make a perfectly accurate life simulator. They physically couldn't render every wrinkle in the face or fold in the clothing. In some animations, things clip strangely or the facial expressions are sort of janky or there's just some form of roughness around the edges. But that's okay; your brain doesn't need a perfectly accurate representation this time. That's not what you're here for, anyway.

The Sims 4 is basically Icarus-ing itself into disaster. The entire game sacrifices style for complete realism, a goal that was unachievable ten years ago, and is unachievable now.

The Sims 2 never thought of itself as a completely realistic life sim, though. It has cartoony, low poly meshes and exaggerated proportions and wild, raunchy storylines that would never occur in real life. BECAUSE IT ISN'T REAL LIFE. And it isn't like real life, not because it's failing to be, but because it doesn't want to be!

The Sims 4 is not ever going to completely replicate human looks or interactions or dynamics. And if it's trying to, it's doing a shit job of it. That shouldn't be the goal in the first place. If I wanted to watch a lonely college student talk to himself in the mirror to try and get better at interacting with people, I'd close the computer and go look at myself. It somehow highlights the most mundane parts of life without any of the whimsy and goofiness that the earlier installments had. It takes itself too fucking seriously for its own good, and it's killing both the gameplay and the art style.

The other point I'd like to bring up is the animation. The Sims 4 allows for much more customization of both sim and environments, but at the cost of dynamic animations. How many times is that grab animation reused? How many times is the same set of animations used for sims with wildly different personalities? Your sims barely feel alive with how little they express themselves.

Now, look, I'm a digital artist. I've dabbled in animation, but only briefly, and only in 2D. I've got no clue how 3D animation works, much less how it worked 20 years ago, but I can see the passion in every single animation in the Sims 2. The more niche interactions allowed for more expressive animations than in 4. They could afford to have a distinct animation for mean sims throwing the football extra hard to be assholes, rather than every sim using the same generic football-throwing animation to save time and money. I get where they're coming from. I get the idea. But in one move, you've both made the art style stiffer and less expressive, and you've made the personalities of the sims seem meaningless. Everyone acts the same, regardless of what their moodlets or their traits say. It's hollow. It's stifled. It's a waste of potential.

But for what Sims 2 lacks in polygons, it makes up for in smaller animated details. Quality over quantity. The sims have hair physics, they open the door before they get in the car, they take utensils out of the counters when they cook, they jump on the couch and the cushions smush under their weight. When they dance, the weight is realistic, and when they smile, it tugs at every one of the few dozen shapes that make up their faces. The sims are lively. They dance and sing and love and hate just like humans, and rather than being some strange attempt at mimicry, it's almost a tribute. They were made with love. You can tell that they were drawn up and rigged and animated by a bunch of people working together, studying each other and making faces in the mirror for reference and watching their kids and neighbors and dogs and hands for reference. The sims are not human, and not trying to be, but they're taking the most human parts of us and making them their own.

You could never have a game with the Sims 4's graphics and the Sims 2's gameplay. The gameplay and graphics are inexorably connected, and the Sims 2 just has so much glorious detail baked into it, that you could never really make it work underneath the limitations of the later games. The developers of 2 knew what their limits were, and they worked tirelessly to make the game as full and complex as they could within those limits. The developers for the Sims 4 just did not have those guidelines, and thus, the drive to bend the rules was no longer there. They didn't go wild in rebellion because they were never told they couldn't in the first place. They spent the entire time chasing a goal they couldn't meet, and lost sight of what made the series fun to begin with.

It wasn't the realism you came for; you had realism already surrounding you. It was the caricature of it that made it interesting.

[pyrotechnicdarts]

they invented romance btw

[lovesodeepandwideandwell]

The unfortunate truth is that no matter how much you tout literature as representative of all human nature, all novels are written by a very specific kind of person: the novelist

[astro-can]

i want the most drop-dead, gorgeous, breath-takingly beautiful girl to show up at camp half-blood and everyone is like "yeah she's definitely an Aphrodite kid" and then she gets claimed by hephaestus and everyone is like WHAT

[fleshwerks]

gEndaRmeriE!

[zareleonis]

A little clarification on how Neuvillette addresses Furina in her story quest—in English it's rendered as "Miss Furina," and shortly after "Lady Furina," implying he uses a different honorific each time.

However, in both these lines Neuvillette actually uses 女士/nǚshì, the same way he has always addressed Furina in the past, barring the instances where he only uses her name, which he only does in private and generally not to her face.

When Furina asks the NPCs in the quest to stop calling her "Lady Furina," they switch from 大人/dàrén to calling her 女士/nǚshì/Miss Furina. Previously Neuvillette was the only character who called her that. When he did, it was always rendered in English as "Lady Furina," the same as the other more reverent honorific.

So no actual change between them in this regard, just the translation team finding themselves in a bit of a bind over how to translate it going forward where the two are concerned!

[mrs-theirin]

so tired of genuine complaints being thrown under the bus with "they will complain just because they want to complain" that's actually not how any of this works!

[honeyspotpie]

Even in our post-season 2 fandom out of all the teens I see the least content centered on Link WHICH IS SO FREAKING UNFORTUNATE. Why are people so blind... THE POTENTIAL FOR HIM IS RIGHT THEREE /lh

His whole arc is him excepting the fact that he's broken and so is everyone dear to him. His entire development is him forcefully maturing, losing interest in the whimsy of everyday things and starting to non-chalant-ly react to the obstacles life throws at him. He doesn't just magically "get better" in the finale, the only glimpse we see of a healed Link is in the epilogue. But he definitely had to go on his own journey of self rediscovery before fully adulting and that is just calling to be explored so loudly... Also the fact that he became a father IS SO IMPORTANT TO ME TOO. LIKE HOW WOULD HE PARENT IN WHAT ENVIRONMENT WOULD HE RAISE JERRY ECT ECT WHY ARE THESE CONCEPTS SO SLEPT ON COME ON

just saying... I need more Link angst and general headcanons on my dash thank you for coming to my ted talk