I agree, but basically it's like a woman who stuffs her bra, once you get to the point you find out you got fooled, you just say "frick it" and go with it.
They're a relic of the anthology days where you'd have several different artists contributing to the same magazine.
Wouldn't exactly call it a scam but I do prefer that the same artist fills up the entire package so to speak.
A different cover art on a later printing by the same artist who draws the whole fricking comic is not the same thing as getting a completely unrelated artist to draw a super special variant cover that looks nothing like the rest of the comic and only exists to try and trick people into buying a shitty book or goading paypigs into collecting variant covers.
Isn't this made by a western company? Also almost all variant covers for manga are made in other countries like France and Italy and not by the nips themselves.
I won't argue that's a valid point in an obtuse kind of way, but just in case that's not your intent I'll point out that the books often include color pages as well, that the covers are almost always done by the same author except for rare special edition "concepts" such as
>You don't see manga pulling this shit.
Except they also do that too and some series do variant covers
that are very much exceptional, AND that the standalone books aren't how the material is first published anyway.
Most of the time it's not bad. It's only a problem when the cover is good and the interior art is bad. Usually the content of the cover is misleading and that's been a thing for decades.
What about when it's the same artist but the cover and interiors use different styles of rendering?
I myself don't mind it. It's unfeasible for most painting artists to do a whole comic that way. Covers are more like a representational idea than how the comic should look. You lose something when comics are fully rendered/painted unless the story works around it.
Given that the current industry puts way more value on the cover than the actual comic I'm inclined to disagree. If comic books were still made to be read though, you'd have a point.
The circumstances is that Scott Kurtz is an butthole and pain in the ass to be around and he always has been. The guy burns every bridge he comes across when dealing with anything he thinks he's right on, and triples down at the sight of any kind of disagreement. He's old Internet, bit like a John Byrne banning forum members for disagreeing with him.
They do this shit because you guys are marks who get hyped up over generic digital painting styles.
You think a guy like this is gonna be able to turn out 22 pages of art? Get real. They don't want to draw the stuff a comic requires(i.e. stuff they don't want to draw, normal civilians, cityscapes, cars in multiple angles), they just wanna draw pinups.
Op suggests that since comics are a visual medium in which artwork is a key element of quality and appeal, a cover by an artist capable of eye-catching art—or simply a popular artist for whatever reason— may be inferred by the potential consumer as representative of the quality of the product as a whole, and as an implied feature that the "real" product doesn't in fact feature. Even in the "harmless" and common context of the consumer actually checking the contents before buying (and finding no claim anywhere that the artwork found inside is made by the same artist) the simple fact that the cover attracted his attention to the product when it may not have managed to do so otherwise may be considerable as false advertising.
As anything related to marketing and advertising though, basically nothing but an outright statement of falsehood phrased using concrete language can be actually considered to be even "misleading" from a legal standpoint.
I will never forget how some Japanese guys picked up a Squirrel Girl comic. It had nice cover drawn by a completely different person.
They were NOT ready for what was waiting inside the book
Is a problem because in the 50s the cover was the main attraction and usually the writers should made a story from it.
It was less weird because many artist need to copy the artstyle , but seeing a Fred Ray action comic cover in a Ira's superman issue is still weird
Nope,u ar right there's no need to fight.
Is a scam and nobody say it.
I agree, but basically it's like a woman who stuffs her bra, once you get to the point you find out you got fooled, you just say "frick it" and go with it.
I have no reason to change your mind, you're right.
This shit should be considered false advertising.
Don’t judge a book by its cover ;^)
Agreed.
They're a relic of the anthology days where you'd have several different artists contributing to the same magazine.
Wouldn't exactly call it a scam but I do prefer that the same artist fills up the entire package so to speak.
No need. You are correct. You don't see manga pulling this shit.
>You don't see manga pulling this shit.
Except they also do that too and some series do variant covers
A different cover art on a later printing by the same artist who draws the whole fricking comic is not the same thing as getting a completely unrelated artist to draw a super special variant cover that looks nothing like the rest of the comic and only exists to try and trick people into buying a shitty book or goading paypigs into collecting variant covers.
Isn't this made by a western company? Also almost all variant covers for manga are made in other countries like France and Italy and not by the nips themselves.
Manga covers tend to be in color.
I won't argue that's a valid point in an obtuse kind of way, but just in case that's not your intent I'll point out that the books often include color pages as well, that the covers are almost always done by the same author except for rare special edition "concepts" such as
that are very much exceptional, AND that the standalone books aren't how the material is first published anyway.
>Scott Kurtz
just found out he's getting a graphic novel published
https://www.comicsbeat.com/small-press-spotlight-table-titans-club-cover-reveal/
is Scott Kuntz still morbidly obese?
He's still large, but he's lost some weight over the years.
Most of the time it's not bad. It's only a problem when the cover is good and the interior art is bad. Usually the content of the cover is misleading and that's been a thing for decades.
I will never not be angry about Squirrel Girl.
Japan got swindled harder than the west.
What about when it's the same artist but the cover and interiors use different styles of rendering?
I myself don't mind it. It's unfeasible for most painting artists to do a whole comic that way. Covers are more like a representational idea than how the comic should look. You lose something when comics are fully rendered/painted unless the story works around it.
Nope, you're right.
That's why I think Sandman should have been drawn by McKean, Astro City by Alex Ross, and a few other examples.
More acceptable, but still a letdown.
I vive sandman a pasa because the covers clearly aren't trying to fool no one.
Given that the current industry puts way more value on the cover than the actual comic I'm inclined to disagree. If comic books were still made to be read though, you'd have a point.
That dogs got the right idea haha
They never think it is like it is
Did he put the PvP archives behind a paywall?
Whatever happened between him and the Penny Arcade guys anyway? Went from a full partner in their d&d stuff to not even mentioned,
Didn't he also push the Starslip guy away after being friends for years? I think Steve Kuntz isn't really a nice guy to be around.
I remember there was also a falling out with Frank Cho but don’t know the circumstances of any of them
The circumstances is that Scott Kurtz is an butthole and pain in the ass to be around and he always has been. The guy burns every bridge he comes across when dealing with anything he thinks he's right on, and triples down at the sight of any kind of disagreement. He's old Internet, bit like a John Byrne banning forum members for disagreeing with him.
agreeing with OP
They do this shit because you guys are marks who get hyped up over generic digital painting styles.
You think a guy like this is gonna be able to turn out 22 pages of art? Get real. They don't want to draw the stuff a comic requires(i.e. stuff they don't want to draw, normal civilians, cityscapes, cars in multiple angles), they just wanna draw pinups.
I agree.
i'm with u op
>The usage of "cover artists" in comic book publishing is basically false advertisement
Explain
Op suggests that since comics are a visual medium in which artwork is a key element of quality and appeal, a cover by an artist capable of eye-catching art—or simply a popular artist for whatever reason— may be inferred by the potential consumer as representative of the quality of the product as a whole, and as an implied feature that the "real" product doesn't in fact feature. Even in the "harmless" and common context of the consumer actually checking the contents before buying (and finding no claim anywhere that the artwork found inside is made by the same artist) the simple fact that the cover attracted his attention to the product when it may not have managed to do so otherwise may be considerable as false advertising.
As anything related to marketing and advertising though, basically nothing but an outright statement of falsehood phrased using concrete language can be actually considered to be even "misleading" from a legal standpoint.
I agree. But as long as the comic isnt polybagged, you can flip through the pages. You can say it is rather a bonus for having a poster like cover.
I agree
I will never forget how some Japanese guys picked up a Squirrel Girl comic. It had nice cover drawn by a completely different person.
They were NOT ready for what was waiting inside the book
Post the cover
Is a problem because in the 50s the cover was the main attraction and usually the writers should made a story from it.
It was less weird because many artist need to copy the artstyle , but seeing a Fred Ray action comic cover in a Ira's superman issue is still weird