Slashdot Mirror

The Scott McCloud book you refer to is Understanding Comics, which I also strongly recommend.

What's the big deal on the Tinsel Town club video? It was just a lark, a fun project a couple of staffers wanted to do, and as far as I know the animation and singing were all volunteer/donated efforts. You seem to dislike it because it looked too good to be the simple fun side project that it was?

No, I dislike it, and the even more annoying DRM Game for the reasons I already stated: It's very ineffective and not particularly informative or even funny, and it doesn't survive media transitions because of Flash. (Aside from that, the drawing style is of the cute+annoying variant that, in my experience, hardly anybody likes.) If you want to use art for propaganda purposes, take a few lessons from Scott McCloud and other web comic artists. These people not only draw well, they also know how to convey messages. Good information design is very hard, and both EFF animations are an example for how not to do it.

The CBDTPA animation, for example, may be cute for someone who knows what it is about, but these people probably haven't even installed Flash. The actual target audience will just see it as some anti-corporate rambling, with little actual substance. You can't just reprogram people to suddenly dislike Disney, Disney is associated for millions of people with fond childhood memories. If you want an example for Flash animations on the subject which were at least funny (and successful to the extent that people spread them on their own), take a look at the "Napster Bad" video and its successors.

I have no problem if little money is wasted on these efforts, but especially with regard to the DRM game, that's not my impression.

The EFF had a discussion area (comp.org.eff.talk) from the very beginning

Most people aren't even aware that Usenet exists.

but it became clear that it was not cost-effective to have staff spend the amount of time that would be necessary to even read the flamewars

Yeah, that's why modern web forums, including the one you're using now, have moderation systems that allow community volunteers to moderate and evaluate the posts by other members. The most sophisticated system is IMHO the one used by Scoop.

Instead it's better to listen directly to the specifically addressed comments from members and the public, and surf more casually the many discussion areas that cover the same topics, from slashdot, to greplaw, to 100 blogs.

First, this misses one main point of the discussion forum, which is to create a social bond between the EFF and the visitors to the site, and to encourage them to visit the site daily. Slashdot got millions of pageviews per day because it's a group-froming site (see Metcalfe's Law). It would makes the EFF site a more powerful outlet for action calls, which Slashdot is NOT because action calls disappear in the archives a few hours after they were posted at all.

Second, no, that's not better even for your own use if you compare it with a local moderated forum, because you are bound to miss important information if it's spread across different places, and you miss opportunities to explain.

Our outreach coordinator, Cory Doctorow, runs one of the most popular blogs, and has run some for the EFF directly.

Sorry, but I'm not impressed by Cory's work so far. He tends to talk over people's heads, he is used to writing for the geek/blog scene. The blog "Consensus at Lawyerpoint" is a perfect example for that. A random example entry:

The parent group of the BPDG, the Copy Protection Technical Working Group (CPTWG), will hold its next meeting in Los Angeles on July 19, 2002. $100 gets you a seat at the table and a chance to eat a hearty catered lunch. What's more, you can make a presentation to the CPTWG just by emailing Maryann Nicoletti. In times gone by, the EFF has brought down the GNU Radio people to demonstrate the futility of the BPDG; we'd love to get your suggestions for future speakers to bring to the meeting (anyone friends with any tony anti-trust attorneys, open source video hackers, ASIC engineers, fair use advocates, or capture-card vendors who'd like to present on the technical feasibility of the BPDG mandate?)

Now read this entry to someone who has no idea what any of these acronyms mean. Cory is terrible at explaining stuff, and, worst of all, the blog doesn't even have a discussion forum. Cory is great at creating hypes (see his OpenCola past), but that's not what you need. The blog style is good for a simple "events of my life" type site, but it's not what the EFF actually needs, namely a news/discussion community on cyber liberties issues. For something like that, you need a more sophisticated system like Scoop or Slashcode.

You can do this yourself, or you can outsource it to groups that will take your money and apply it for you to direct action. The EFF does that. It has several lawyers on staff who do the scutwork on all sorts of cases. Some we lose -- that's the way of things -- and others we win.

That's great, and few people criticize the EFF's legal work. Sometimes the people outside would like to understand better what the EFF is actually fighting for, but most people generally believe that the legal work is reasonable. Personally I think that the DMCA-related stuff didn't work so well so far, and that there was a major communication problem regarding the function of DeCSS -- even today, people still tell me that it's "just a cracking tool". IMNSHO the EFF should have focused more on the simple "You cannot play DVDs under Linux because .." message than on more complex "you have a right to do .." messages. Specific messages that can connect to what people already know are more effective than abstract ones.

I personally am not very convinced of any long-term approach that tries to use the legal system to combat laws that should not have been made in the first place. I believe that our political system (and I'm speaking globally here, I'm not in the US) is fundamentally corrupt and needs to be replaced, step by step. That's one of the projects I'm working on. You can support me if you want, see the infoAnarchy donation link ;-)

Is there a reason that most online comics are in Black and White?

There are lots of possible reasons, the specific reason will vary from comic to comic, but I expect one of the following will account for most:

• The newspaper comic tradition. Newspaper comics are generally black and white most of the week and color on Sunday. Some web comics follow this behavior out of traditional, a desire to become syndicated in newspapers, or simple habit.
• Not enough time. Color takes time to add. Especially for those artists doing their web comic in their spare time, they may not have the time to do up nice colors.
• Artistic decision. A black and white comic has a very different feel from a color comic. Scott McCloud, in his book Understanding Comics points out some key artistic reasons that you might want to stick with black and white.
• Minimizing bandwidth. A black and white image will generally compress better than a color image. Bandwidth is money.

Color is not always "better", it's just different.

8. The right to prompt payment of a fair and equitable share of profits derived from all of our creative work.
9. The right to full and accurate accounting of any and all income and disbursements relative to our work.

"Intellectual property" is much easier for others to enjoy without payment than it is for the authors to create. No, I'm not bashing Napster. Tower Records steals more from its artists each day than Napster-analogues do in a year.

If you're really interested in learning more, a writer/artist by the name of Scott McCloud has probably done more for the medium and getting the message out than anybody else.

McCloud wrote an incredibly popular, well-written, and informative book a few years back called Understanding Comics, about the underlying principles that make comics as a whole work. He followed it up with Reinventing Comics, which was more about methods of distribution and why he thinks online comics are the future. But interesting reading nonetheless.

The first was great. I go to an art school, and the kids in the comic art program actually have to read it as a text book for several courses. In my opinion, though, the second book was less successful, and more opinion-based. I probably just don't agree with him on a few points.

Regardless, his site is worth checking out for those interested in the topic. He's probably online comics' biggest and best-known advocate.

Hello, Madam Ian. I'd like to point your attention to Scott McCloud's essays named "I Can't Stop Thinking!", especially #5 and #6, the Coins of the Realm. After reading those two, and the claim that 15 cents per song would be apropriate for the artist directly, what would your reaction and responce be?

Hello, Madam Ian. I'd like to point your attention to Scott McCloud's essays named "I Can't Stop Thinking!", especially #5 and #6, the Coins of the Realm. After reading those two, and the claim that 15 cents per song would be apropriate for the artist directly, what would your reaction and responce be?

Other then porn, content isn't something people will pay for on the web, especially what are basically magazine articles.

I disagree. I think people are not willing to pay the subscription on a regular basis in seamingly large amounts (even $5 a month per site is too much). But if it was a few cents here and there for an article or for a page of posts, people would be much more willing to pay. We need micropayments, and we need them bad. What I don't understand is why they still haven't appeared and spread, the market for them should be huge. The only explanation for it that I've seen makes me sad...

I think this image by Scott McCloud says it all... (scroll down).

(I know, I keep saying this stuff...Now it's a rant).

This essay is a work in progress. It's a compilation of various rants of mine. If you have ideas for improvement (or critiques) they'd be welcome.

My saga into the online music controversy began at CFP99 (the Computers, Freedom, and Privacy conference). A panel with both an RIAA representative and a rap-artist and a few other folks were talking (actually they were mostly shouting!) at/to eachother.

The RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) is a very politically-well-connected music distribution cartel, consisting of five major record companies. The rap artist (whose name escapes me) had his own label, but he favored MP3s, too, because his music's popularity had grown in part due to online music trading. To summarize the arguments...

RIAA side:

You're a criminal, an ordinary thief! Taking this information is AGAINST THE LAW, even if you own the album/CD! The person who downloads music is stealing from musicians as much as a person who "pirates" software steals 'warez'!

Unknown Rap-dude's side:

No, you're a corporate shill, feeding enormous layers of middle men (who don't help our fans at all!) piled onto the backs of artists - who have 0 negotiating power against a giant cartel that's as powerful as the RIAA!

Needless to say, the session ended with the panel still arguing, mostly right past eachother. Everyone wanted to talk about the artists and the fans, but if you listened it was all about money even though words like "money" and "payments" were rarely if ever mentioned! A 1950s-era payment system was assumed to be the only alternative to "100% free."

I walked up, handing out business cards and quietly saying, "you know, I might have a solution to all this, it's called e-gold" to both sides, and both sides have been very slowly getting it (no marketing budget to speak of!) ever since! (Well, it's not been quite that bad, but it's close!) Now, I spend a lot of time asking artists to try e-gold, and some new tools have made it easier than ever to use.

One fan has set up http://www.radsfans.net for The Radiators, a very cool bar-band that should be more popular than they are, IMO.

I can understand why the RIAA dislikes the idea of e-gold. They hold onto their middleman position only because of the difficulty artists and fans have traditionally had in directly reaching or paying eachother. Some bands, like the Grateful Dead, thumbed their noses at anti-recording policies for years, though. I don't think Jerry's heirs are suffering now, despite the massive music-trading of recorded Dead shows which has gone on for decades. Despite the well known fears of bands like Metallica, there are a lot of subtle ways to make it in the music business, and my intent is to spread e-gold tipjars as another one.

I want to jump in on the RIAA's game (and as a middleman, I may charge a lot LESS than the RIAA does, but I'd charge something!) so they're understandably apprehensive about losing the things Courtney Love mentions in http://www.hole.com/speech/ such as "trips to Scores" (a popular NY City topless entertainment club). I think e-gold can be a much more efficient and transparent 'middleman' -- but of course I'm biased as hell.

I want small bands I've never heard of to be able to quit their day- jobs and play music full-time because of what I'm selling, and I'm not going to quit. Other people have said this better than I can, so I'm going to rely on them now.

I would urge everyone reading this to read Courtney's whole rant, even though it goes on for pages...In it, she reveals things like a band declaring bankruptcy after they received less than 2 percent of the $175 million(!) earned by their CD sales. Toni Braxton sold $188 million worth of CDs, and went broke because of a contract that paid her less than 35 cents per album. We all know what CDs cost, and I'm pretty sure most of us imagine the artists getting a better cut than THAT! Anyway, please go read the whole thing so that you can see from Courtney's math that the examples above are typical. Don't despair, the good part about tipjars is near the end.

Ok, now that you're back, let's get to the fun part and read some online comics about micropayments! First:

http://www.scottmccloud.com/comics/icst/icst-5/ics t-5.html

and then:

http://www.scottmccloud.com/comics/icst/icst-6/ics t-6.html

Whew. Ok, now look at what Courtney & Scott were both asking for, between the lines! First:

http://www.fastsci.com -- which allows ANYONE, even someone who is VERY non-technical, to set up the e-gold shopping cart. Then:

http://101574.clicktwocents.com/ -- which attempts to get two centigrams (about 19 cents worth, but two cents US is possible, too) donated to me for my long rant. Think to yourself, "I should ask Courtney & Scott to accept e-gold!" They were both asking for this, and Jim just demonstrated it!

Well, I've already asked them, but more voices will have MUCH more of an effect than just mine, so feel free to help me, and thanks for reading.
JMR

(I know, I keep saying this stuff...Now it's a rant).

This essay is a work in progress. It's a compilation of various rants of mine. If you have ideas for improvement (or critiques) they'd be welcome.

My saga into the online music controversy began at CFP99 (the Computers, Freedom, and Privacy conference). A panel with both an RIAA representative and a rap-artist and a few other folks were talking (actually they were mostly shouting!) at/to eachother.

The RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) is a very politically-well-connected music distribution cartel, consisting of five major record companies. The rap artist (whose name escapes me) had his own label, but he favored MP3s, too, because his music's popularity had grown in part due to online music trading. To summarize the arguments...

RIAA side:

You're a criminal, an ordinary thief! Taking this information is AGAINST THE LAW, even if you own the album/CD! The person who downloads music is stealing from musicians as much as a person who "pirates" software steals 'warez'!

Unknown Rap-dude's side:

No, you're a corporate shill, feeding enormous layers of middle men (who don't help our fans at all!) piled onto the backs of artists - who have 0 negotiating power against a giant cartel that's as powerful as the RIAA!

Needless to say, the session ended with the panel still arguing, mostly right past eachother. Everyone wanted to talk about the artists and the fans, but if you listened it was all about money even though words like "money" and "payments" were rarely if ever mentioned! A 1950s-era payment system was assumed to be the only alternative to "100% free."

I walked up, handing out business cards and quietly saying, "you know, I might have a solution to all this, it's called e-gold" to both sides, and both sides have been very slowly getting it (no marketing budget to speak of!) ever since! (Well, it's not been quite that bad, but it's close!) Now, I spend a lot of time asking artists to try e-gold, and some new tools have made it easier than ever to use.

One fan has set up http://www.radsfans.net for The Radiators, a very cool bar-band that should be more popular than they are, IMO.

I can understand why the RIAA dislikes the idea of e-gold. They hold onto their middleman position only because of the difficulty artists and fans have traditionally had in directly reaching or paying eachother. Some bands, like the Grateful Dead, thumbed their noses at anti-recording policies for years, though. I don't think Jerry's heirs are suffering now, despite the massive music-trading of recorded Dead shows which has gone on for decades. Despite the well known fears of bands like Metallica, there are a lot of subtle ways to make it in the music business, and my intent is to spread e-gold tipjars as another one.

I want to jump in on the RIAA's game (and as a middleman, I may charge a lot LESS than the RIAA does, but I'd charge something!) so they're understandably apprehensive about losing the things Courtney Love mentions in http://www.hole.com/speech/ such as "trips to Scores" (a popular NY City topless entertainment club). I think e-gold can be a much more efficient and transparent 'middleman' -- but of course I'm biased as hell.

I want small bands I've never heard of to be able to quit their day- jobs and play music full-time because of what I'm selling, and I'm not going to quit. Other people have said this better than I can, so I'm going to rely on them now.

I would urge everyone reading this to read Courtney's whole rant, even though it goes on for pages...In it, she reveals things like a band declaring bankruptcy after they received less than 2 percent of the $175 million(!) earned by their CD sales. Toni Braxton sold $188 million worth of CDs, and went broke because of a contract that paid her less than 35 cents per album. We all know what CDs cost, and I'm pretty sure most of us imagine the artists getting a better cut than THAT! Anyway, please go read the whole thing so that you can see from Courtney's math that the examples above are typical. Don't despair, the good part about tipjars is near the end.

Ok, now that you're back, let's get to the fun part and read some online comics about micropayments! First:

http://www.scottmccloud.com/comics/icst/icst-5/ics t-5.html

and then:

http://www.scottmccloud.com/comics/icst/icst-6/ics t-6.html

Whew. Ok, now look at what Courtney & Scott were both asking for, between the lines! First:

http://www.fastsci.com -- which allows ANYONE, even someone who is VERY non-technical, to set up the e-gold shopping cart. Then:

http://101574.clicktwocents.com/ -- which attempts to get two centigrams (about 19 cents worth, but two cents US is possible, too) donated to me for my long rant. Think to yourself, "I should ask Courtney & Scott to accept e-gold!" They were both asking for this, and Jim just demonstrated it!

Well, I've already asked them, but more voices will have MUCH more of an effect than just mine, so feel free to help me, and thanks for reading.
JMR

That's right, this is bound to fail, but not for the reasons you're guessing. Let me start at the beginning:

In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud discusses the various levels of abstraction in comic art. How abstract a character is has a great deal of influence on how the character is perceived. Charlie Brown is Charlie Brown because of how he is drawn as much as because of his personality. If Charlie Brown were drawn by Gary Larson, of The Far Side, or acted by Mike Meyers, it just won't feel like Charlie Brown.

If you're with me so far, then it's not too terribly large a step to say that video game characters don't translate well across levels of abstraction either. The semi-realistic Lara-croft would not feel like the same character if presented as a pudgy Mario-esque character. Of course, over franchises, characters do evolve, this is a tricky process, often involving the redefinition of a character. Donkey Kong, for example, is an entirely different character in Donkey Kong Country than in the original Donkey Kong.

There is yet another aspect of abstraction with games. That is, the gameplay itself can be more or less abstract. Ultimately, players have no problem with a 8-bit Mario who can jump 8 times his own height, and doubles in size when touching a mushroom, but in a 3d third-person shooter, this would seem quite out of place.

So, ultimately, my point is that games that go back and forth from 128-bit near-photo-realistic graphics and advanced simulation to 128x128 pixel monochrome display with menu-based simple game mechanics will ultimately not be terribly compelling. This is more true for games whose characters, settings, and mechanics are more technologically advanced and more realistic. It would be like watching a movie with your favorite actors, and then when you're out of the house, getting to see a cartoon version with simplified plot and dialog. Not that there's anything wrong with either form, it's just that they do not mesh well together.

There are games for which this system would work perfectly well (Pokemon coming to mind), but as the industry will not rally around the niche created by this phone, the number of games who will take good advantage of this technology will be severly limited, for good or ill.

ben.c

However, I do have a problem with the attitude that everyone should buy a new copy of the book even when there are used copies available. I'd think that authors of all people would be better educated on the negative effects this type of consumerism has on our environment. More new books means more trees cut down to print them. Nowhere to sell your used books means more books in the landfill.

On a not-entirely-related issue, if the Author's Guild is concerned about losing royalties, maybe they should take it up with the publishers. It is the publishers that screw artists out of their profits, not the booksellers. For more about how the internet has the potential to liberate artists of all kinds from the yoke of the big publishing houses, check out Scott McCloud's various writings on the subject.

Comic artist Scott McCloud, author of Reinventing Comics, has voiced his own opinions on this issue in a series of online comics.
Part 1
Part 2

Go *around* the RIAA quintopoly. Scott McCloud's cartoons "I Can't Stop Thinking" five and six have some ideas (which for some reason REALLY anger some folks). I have worked for tips before, it's not always the best living, but it pays the rent and tips of a reasonable size are a lot more palatable than overpriced CDs to consumers, and a lot better than nothing for musicians.

Anyway, lots of technology exists that could easily stop the bottleneck that limits feedback between consumers & the music business. I know, because I sell (some of) it for a living...
JMR

Go *around* the RIAA quintopoly. Scott McCloud's cartoons "I Can't Stop Thinking" five and six have some ideas (which for some reason REALLY anger some folks). I have worked for tips before, it's not always the best living, but it pays the rent and tips of a reasonable size are a lot more palatable than overpriced CDs to consumers, and a lot better than nothing for musicians.

Anyway, lots of technology exists that could easily stop the bottleneck that limits feedback between consumers & the music business. I know, because I sell (some of) it for a living...
JMR

Just thought you all would benefit from some of Scott McCloud's writings on comics (he's the author of Understanding Comics and Reinventing Comics as well as a comic artist himself). His work on Online Comics has been really interesting, and informative. You might also enjoy reading Demian5's webcomic "When I Am King" which has been getting a lot of attention. If you are at all interested in self publishing, you must take a look at Dave Sim's "Cerebus' Guide To Self-Publishing".

Although it's over five years old, this Wired article has a nice summary of the challenges that faced and face the idea.

Ccott McCloud, a prominent comics artist, shares his thoughts in comic form. He humorously addresses these issues from the point of view of an on-line comic artist.

And everybody (most-especially me, to get any self-interest out of the way) wants to be the middleman. The question artists and consumers should be asking themselves is, "what kind of middleman do I want?" The current middleman/men? is what I call a quintopoly (a five-way monopoly) which has survived up to now largely because of the difficulty artists have had in directly reaching their fans through traditional means. The quintopoly is top-heavy with management who are used to (as Courtney Love put it) lots of trips to Scores and other perks. Life for the artists (even when they "make it") is therefore not nearly as lucrative as many imagined before Courtney's rant, which appeared in Salon a while back.

The internet changes (or should change) all that (and yes, I hope that the change will benefit me). How can music consumers make sure that most* of the money that they spend on music goes to actual musicians instead of non-producers? Well, I have a few ideas, but

http://www.scottmccloud.com/comics/icst/icst-5/ics t-5.html

and

http://www.scottmccloud.com/comics/icst/icst-6/ics t-6.html

show some cartoons that explain things visually better than I ever could in this rant. Enjoy.
JMR

* - anyone promising artists "all" the money is probably lying.

Speaking ONLY for myself!!!

And everybody (most-especially me, to get any self-interest out of the way) wants to be the middleman. The question artists and consumers should be asking themselves is, "what kind of middleman do I want?" The current middleman/men? is what I call a quintopoly (a five-way monopoly) which has survived up to now largely because of the difficulty artists have had in directly reaching their fans through traditional means. The quintopoly is top-heavy with management who are used to (as Courtney Love put it) lots of trips to Scores and other perks. Life for the artists (even when they "make it") is therefore not nearly as lucrative as many imagined before Courtney's rant, which appeared in Salon a while back.

The internet changes (or should change) all that (and yes, I hope that the change will benefit me). How can music consumers make sure that most* of the money that they spend on music goes to actual musicians instead of non-producers? Well, I have a few ideas, but

http://www.scottmccloud.com/comics/icst/icst-5/ics t-5.html

and

http://www.scottmccloud.com/comics/icst/icst-6/ics t-6.html

show some cartoons that explain things visually better than I ever could in this rant. Enjoy.
JMR

* - anyone promising artists "all" the money is probably lying.

Speaking ONLY for myself!!!

I just wish we could also say...add to that tips.

I'm sure not everyone would tip for everything they enjoyed, but whether it's Courtney Love saying it or Scott McCloud saying it even better (twice! one and two) it's clear that some of us would like to directly compensate artists we like.

I think that musicians are poorly represented in this debate by the RIAA, and if we as individual consumers reach out to the artists we like, then maybe we'll get more of what we want with fewer (or less-greedy*) middlemen.
JMR

*Obligatory plug -- try it and send me an account number so I can click you a bit.

I just wish we could also say...add to that tips.

I'm sure not everyone would tip for everything they enjoyed, but whether it's Courtney Love saying it or Scott McCloud saying it even better (twice! one and two) it's clear that some of us would like to directly compensate artists we like.

I think that musicians are poorly represented in this debate by the RIAA, and if we as individual consumers reach out to the artists we like, then maybe we'll get more of what we want with fewer (or less-greedy*) middlemen.
JMR

*Obligatory plug -- try it and send me an account number so I can click you a bit.

I really enjoy CRFH. It's one of my favorites. If there were no Internet comics, I would not be able to read it; it would not exist. The Salon article has a direct quote from the author of CRFH saying just that. Mr. Groth can rant tediously all he wishes, but he won't convince me that a world without CRFH is a better world.

Even if you think micropayments will never happen the way McCloud describes them, McCloud still deserves some credit. He cares about comics, and wants to see them survive and prosper. As he wrote in his book, market forces in the printed-comics world can crush new comics: you can't get sales unless stores stock your comic, stores won't stock your comic if it's not just another X-Men ripoff. With the web, anyone can put up a new comic, and the good ones can grow by word-of-mouth.

One last note: if you think Internet comics are all quick gag-a-day strips, you might want to check out the Zot graphic novel. It's very good!

steveha

While not necessarily "a bad thing" this mentality can be unfair to content producers out there that are trying to recover what amounts to a fraction of their costs/time.

Scott McClouds article on this is still the most insightfull I have read in a while (perhaps because he operates with the same media as I do). Usually it takes me around 3 hours for each toon I create. Over a 5 day week this amounts to around 2 work days of tooning. Or if we put a value my time of, say, $30/hr that is $450/week in "spent time". Now I do my thing for the love of it.. I have a "regular" day job and am not dependant on cartoon payments but some people may be. As was pointed out what we need is a truely international and "reputable" (since we're dealing with money) Micropayment infrastructure.

Just my 2c worth...
--

I think that people respect us - and that, to me, is one of the most valuable things someone can give you. I don't think that people really respect the entertainment industry. For the most part, its because they have a tendency to not respect thier audience. They continually betray the faith of the public every single day in so many ways it's abhorrent to me. I watched a thing the other day on how the top 5 media companies in the US literally milk the young population for everything they can. Young people trust them, and when all is said and done, all young people get is a little older and huge credit card debts. And some people wonder why young people are so cynical and full of rage. If your emotions were in the hands of people who were only interested in making as much money off of you as possible, wouldnt you feel pissy too?

Basically, I like quality. A friend of mine told me about MegaTokyo. I didn't look at their web site, despite glowing reviews. Then another friend recommended it. Then another. I decided, "Hm, I think I'll look at this." Hey! Guess what? It's one of the best web comics I've ever read, right up there with electric sheep and Scott McCloud's stuff.

Speaking of McCloud- I've paid for his content. I bought it off line, but if it were online, I'd pay for it there too. Whoah! Wait! I have paid for it online! There you go.

The Internet is a total success for content. Just a bunch of people are saying, "There went my revenue", and proclaiming it as a disaster.

Whatever. I'm going to go back to the MegaTokyo forums now...

My apologies for a repeat post, but I goofed on what I actually wanted to reply to. The links in here point to Scott (Zot!, Understanding/Reinventing Comics)McCloud's "I Can't Stop Thinking" "columns" where he gives his take on micropayments:
Coin of the Realm #1
Coin of the Realm #2

I Can't Stop Thinking #5

and

I Can't Stop Thinking #6

• We have no system aside from credit cards, checks & cash which is universally trusted to be acceptable for transactions. Few people trust systems like PayPal, and definitely not for miniscule payments when the charge for each is more than the payment itself.
  
• cash is problematic to send to a content person
• checks are similarly hard to transfer
• so, we're currently stuck with credit cards, which have their own history and problems
• Most people don't want and are trained not to have small purchases on their credit card. It's gone down in recent years, from a minimum of $20+ to $10+ to sometimes $5, but people are hesitant to do that.
• And finally, and it's really the truth: most content sucks. Lots of people produce and sell stuff that probably shouldn't, so the quality is at best low to poor for the majority of work. We're not all Shakespeare or Picasso.

Scott is setting himself up as an expert in the field, yet the advice he is giving is all hype and theory. While those not actually trying to make a living in on-line comics may applaud his "vision", those at the coal face finding out, for example, that payments through the Amazon Honour System approximately halve each month are a little less positive.

I think Bluetooth is inevitable, but you try finding anything other than Ericsson's headset and the odd PCMCIA card. I believe that simple, robust devices are preferable to powerful complicated ones, but MS' Pocket PC is gaining on the Palm. I could give you all manner of predictions, but in a depressed economy those people who know that your wonderful-sounding bits of fluff are totally impractical are not going to be your greatest fans. For every person that claps when Scott finishes a speech on the future of e-comics there's an artist having to give up what he likes and become a suit because at the end of the day, this day, today, it doesn't work.

And some of us resent that Scott's making money off of what are tantamount to lies.

--

Scott is setting himself up as an expert in the field, yet the advice he is giving is all hype and theory. While those not actually trying to make a living in on-line comics may applaud his "vision", those at the coal face finding out, for example, that payments through the Amazon Honour System approximately halve each month are a little less positive.

I think Bluetooth is inevitable, but you try finding anything other than Ericsson's headset and the odd PCMCIA card. I believe that simple, robust devices are preferable to powerful complicated ones, but MS' Pocket PC is gaining on the Palm. I could give you all manner of predictions, but in a depressed economy those people who know that your wonderful-sounding bits of fluff are totally impractical are not going to be your greatest fans. For every person that claps when Scott finishes a speech on the future of e-comics there's an artist having to give up what he likes and become a suit because at the end of the day, this day, today, it doesn't work.

And some of us resent that Scott's making money off of what are tantamount to lies.

--

Scott is setting himself up as an expert in the field, yet the advice he is giving is all hype and theory. While those not actually trying to make a living in on-line comics may applaud his "vision", those at the coal face finding out, for example, that payments through the Amazon Honour System approximately halve each month are a little less positive.

I think Bluetooth is inevitable, but you try finding anything other than Ericsson's headset and the odd PCMCIA card. I believe that simple, robust devices are preferable to powerful complicated ones, but MS' Pocket PC is gaining on the Palm. I could give you all manner of predictions, but in a depressed economy those people who know that your wonderful-sounding bits of fluff are totally impractical are not going to be your greatest fans. For every person that claps when Scott finishes a speech on the future of e-comics there's an artist having to give up what he likes and become a suit because at the end of the day, this day, today, it doesn't work.

And some of us resent that Scott's making money off of what are tantamount to lies.

--

I suggest you read Scott McCloud's book, Reinventing Comics. He tackles the same self-deprecating issues that face comic artists throughought the last century.

Even legendary comic artists decided that what they were producing wasn't "art." When discussing Will Eisner's political views, the reknowned Rube Goldberg (of bizarre contraption comic fame) said, "Bullshit! What we do is not art! We're vaudevillians! And don't you ever forget that." (Not to mention that even vaudeville stage acts are a form of art!)

If you express yourself, it's art. If you didn't do it to further some physical need, it can be argued, then it may be art.

Scott McCloud also comments constantly about micropayments, writer's rights versus the big publishers, and other issues I see as near-and-dear to the software developer. His focus is on comics, but I see a LOT that applies to non-comics industries like software engineering.

Check out Scott McCloud's web site. He's a comic book author and the author of probably the best teatise on the subject, Understanding Comics. He also wrote a followup called Reinventing Comics that touches on a lot of multimedia ideas. Also, his web site can often be a playground of fairly inventive multimedia applications. He's got a different eye to this sort of stuff than most folks.

This might be a good spot to subtly mention my ideas about "ComicsML", a collision of digital comics and XML.

http://www.jmac.org/projects/comics_ml/

I'm of the opinion that XML can help web-based cartoonists, both spare-time amateurs (like myself) and professionals trying to make a living, in lots of ways, inlcuding self-syndication, accessibility, and content management, and further help open up the road for a lot of the future technology standards that'll have to take hold, such as micropayments, before digital comics can enter the state Scott McCloud dreams of in "Reinventing Comics".

J
MacOS Open Source

I should have included this with the last email... These are awesome links.

First, some from electric sheep, a very socially conscious, interesting, and humerous collection of comics.

• The Guy I Almost Was - everyone who works with technology and OpenSource/Free Software should read this, to get a sense of how some of our idealistic roots came.
• Rush Limbaugh Eats Everything - Rush Limbaugh does Reality shows, and decides to eat... The LAST Spotted Owl.
• The Jain's Death - An insightful and beautiful story on a Jain's lives.
• Overheard at a Rave - A cute story about a daughter who takes her father to a rave with her.

Here are two Scott McCloud links. Scott McClouds greatest works, unfortunately, are not online: Understanding Comics, and Reinventing Comics. Get them at a comic store near you, or at BarnesAndNoble.com. Here's some of his online work, which are of exceptional quality:

• I Can't Stop Thinking! A meta-comic, also by Scott McCloud. Very interesting ideas are expressed here.
• Scott McCloud's "Hearts And Minds" - not my favorite online comic, but a good taste of Scott McCloud's web form, doing things that could *NEVER* have been done in print. (Such as the falling scene in Week 3.)

Finally, Unicorn Jelly, for those who love science, mathematics, and anime. Be sure to check out the alternative time lines, and the powers of ten map of the universe of tryslmaistan.

I have a hard time respecting an article on web based comics that doesn't even mention the work of Scott McCloud, easily the person who has put the most thought and effort into the web as a medium for comics..!

Go check out Scott McCloud at once. The article we just read is under-researched.

The same market forces work on other art forms too. Scott McCloud came to some similar conclusions about comic books. In his book Reinventing Comics he examines how a single genre (superhero comics) took over the industry. Same story, different day.

The same market forces work on other art forms too. Scott McCloud came to some similar conclusions about comic books. In his book Reinventing Comics he examines how a single genre (superhero comics) took over the industry. Same story, different day.

Though the rules have sections about points and winners for these games, I guarantee that everyone that I have played with ends up just enjoying the process:

Apples to Apples:
This is a word association card game in which a Green Apple Card (adjective) is played by the current "judge" and then other players (which can number up to 20 or more... great for get togethers) search their hands for a Red Apple Card (noun) that is best descibed by the Green Apple Card. Green Apple Cards include words like "evil," "peaceful," "yummy," and "hip." Red Apple Cards include nouns like "Puff Daddy," "earthquakes," "rain forests," and "Martha Stewart." Whether cards match is completely subjective and up to the judge. The winner gets the green card and once a total is met the game ends. Everyone we've played with doesn't care at all about the points, but just likes the strange combinations that can be had. Also, it is very easy to think up variations on the game rules that are fun to play in and of themeselves.

5 Card Nancy and other "storytelling" card games:
There are a couple of these out and about and a few have web versions. 5 Card Nancy is a Dadaist card game developed by Scott Mccloud. Being Dadaist, in most respects, at their core, the process is more important than the result. Creativity is rewarded more than strategy and finesse.

Though the rules have sections about points and winners for these games, I guarantee that everyone that I have played with ends up just enjoying the process:

Apples to Apples:
This is a word association card game in which a Green Apple Card (adjective) is played by the current "judge" and then other players (which can number up to 20 or more... great for get togethers) search their hands for a Red Apple Card (noun) that is best descibed by the Green Apple Card. Green Apple Cards include words like "evil," "peaceful," "yummy," and "hip." Red Apple Cards include nouns like "Puff Daddy," "earthquakes," "rain forests," and "Martha Stewart." Whether cards match is completely subjective and up to the judge. The winner gets the green card and once a total is met the game ends. Everyone we've played with doesn't care at all about the points, but just likes the strange combinations that can be had. Also, it is very easy to think up variations on the game rules that are fun to play in and of themeselves.

5 Card Nancy and other "storytelling" card games:
There are a couple of these out and about and a few have web versions. 5 Card Nancy is a Dadaist card game developed by Scott Mccloud. Being Dadaist, in most respects, at their core, the process is more important than the result. Creativity is rewarded more than strategy and finesse.

Well,dang. Now I feel bad about being so harsh in my last message. Thanks for the thoughtful response.

Having full control over one's work is really
what McCloud is asking for, isn't he?

No. Not here, anyway. The essay we're supposed to be discussing here is all about the proverbial Benjamins. The freedom-of-content issue has pretty much been fought and won on numberous different fronts in the last decade.

<cheap shot>While Image was a valuable demonstration of the right of "hot" artists to write their own scripts, no matter how bad an idea it was&lt\cheap shot>, other publishers, like Fantagraphics and the late lamented Kitchen Sink, were giving artists the freedom to explore their own sensibilities and visions. It opened the field up enough that now as personal and genre-defying a book like Reinventing Comics (admittedly, one with proven market value) can be published by DC, albeit with a funky disclaimer on the title page.

In the meantime, Image has taken up the work-for-hire policies that they were ostensibly founded to combat. One sign the war is over is often when you can't tell which side is which anymore.

The writer of that piece (Scott McCloud) is also the author of two great books on comic art (or Sequental Art, as he puts it):

Understanding Comics
which talks about the atructure of comics, and the mechanism that lets you understand the temporal/spatial/emotial concepts comics attemtpt to portray, and

Reinventing Comics (which the author mentions is the piece you posted), a book I have just received and not read yet - but is about how comics are transitioning into the digital world, and I image if you liked the short piece linked to in the original comment you'd love this book!

My second thought is this - why do more people not use PayPal for online micropayments? I ask this becase witrh PayPal it's easy enough to set up a simple link that you can have a reader use to pay you as little as .01, plenty small enough for most micropayments. The reader gets to use a credit card to pay if they wish. As Scott said, whenever he wrote a really good comic and made it availiable online I'd be happy to cough up .25 or .50 it it was quick and easy to do.

It is true that to offer this service PayPal takes some percentage, perhaps that is enough to stop it from being used. I'd be interested in hearing from other people about possible problems with using PayPal as a micropayment system.

A final note - the comment used in my sig was found in Reiventing Comics.

Scott McCloud's book Understanding Comics has a cartoon about a guy named Carl who crashes his car after drinking and driving. After the main cartoon (which is interesting mainly as an example of how stories can be very long or very short with the same basic elements), there are alternative versions; in one, as I recall, Carl says he's driving away to Borneo. This reaction ensues. The absurdity is that (a) Borneo is very far away from the US; and (b) you can't drive your car there, as it's surrounded by ocean.

Scott McCloud's book Understanding Comics has a cartoon about a guy named Carl who crashes his car after drinking and driving. After the main cartoon (which is interesting mainly as an example of how stories can be very long or very short with the same basic elements), there are alternative versions; in one, as I recall, Carl says he's driving away to Borneo. This reaction ensues. The absurdity is that (a) Borneo is very far away from the US; and (b) you can't drive your car there, as it's surrounded by ocean.

In Understanding Comics , Scott McCloud does point out that it's easier to attach oneself to an abstract form than a realistic one. McCloud explains that is is because other people look very realistic, and are obviously "not you", you most people only have an abstract sense of "self." An abstract character is easier to project myself into. However, he points out that there is a place for the realistic. Realistic things tend to look more "other." The comic Tintin placed the very abstract Tintin against much more realistic backdrops for this purpose.

While it's important to remember these details when designing a game, the lesson is not "don't make games realistic." The lesson is "it's easier for a player to project him or herself into an abstract avatar than a realistic one."

One good example of this working against a game is Diakatana . I never felt I was Hiro, Hiro was the nicely rendered character in front of me. On the other hand, it may be easier to feel for the characters of J et Grind Radio , who are rendered as cartoons.

Thief does a generally good job of making Garrent, the main character, abstract. In actual gameplay, you don't see Garret at all (it's first person). I always found it very jarring when Garret spoke while I was playing, it reinforced that I wasn't Garret.

That said, Understanding Comics is a great read. Anyone who reads comics will probably appreciate it. I suspect anyone involved in graphical arts of any time will find some valuable information.

In Understanding Comics , Scott McCloud does point out that it's easier to attach oneself to an abstract form than a realistic one. McCloud explains that is is because other people look very realistic, and are obviously "not you", you most people only have an abstract sense of "self." An abstract character is easier to project myself into. However, he points out that there is a place for the realistic. Realistic things tend to look more "other." The comic Tintin placed the very abstract Tintin against much more realistic backdrops for this purpose.

While it's important to remember these details when designing a game, the lesson is not "don't make games realistic." The lesson is "it's easier for a player to project him or herself into an abstract avatar than a realistic one."

One good example of this working against a game is Diakatana . I never felt I was Hiro, Hiro was the nicely rendered character in front of me. On the other hand, it may be easier to feel for the characters of J et Grind Radio , who are rendered as cartoons.

Thief does a generally good job of making Garrent, the main character, abstract. In actual gameplay, you don't see Garret at all (it's first person). I always found it very jarring when Garret spoke while I was playing, it reinforced that I wasn't Garret.

That said, Understanding Comics is a great read. Anyone who reads comics will probably appreciate it. I suspect anyone involved in graphical arts of any time will find some valuable information.

Models are necessary to think; Without a Model, you cannot think. Thinking involves manipulation. Unless your thoughts physically manipulate the world in real time, (in which case the world is in your mind, and could be considered to be... "only a model"), your thoughts manipulate a model in your head.

Consider that you wake up in the morning and you'd like to sneak off to eat a sandwitch. But, you're disoriented; your model in your head of how your house is layed out and where you are with respect to it is incorrect. But then you check yourself with the world, and align yourself correctly; you make your model and the world align correctly. Ah, now we can go on to get that sandwitch.

Similarly, if you are manipulating a program, you have a certain model in your head about how the program works. Sometimes we keep it in a hash in our heads (A->B, B->C, C->E, E->D, A->E as well), and sometimes we keep it as a planar graph. This is analygous to playing quake in two ways: One, you run ahead until you get to an intersection. At the intersection, you've memorized the response that you should turn right. This is good for quick response, but bad for cognizing a strategy. The other way, you keep an overhead map in your mind, and then consider your location on the map. This is better for formulating a strategy, but not good for running around in the maze quickly.

But both the hash and the map (cartography, not mathematics) are models in our mind; just different forms.

There really is no way to think without a model.

Now, as for the nature of these models, what do we need from these models?

They are like any tools; Speed of execution, accuracy, reliability, and cost of formation are all consderations.

Visual models are generally the best model for cognitive processing; Aural models are generally the best model for direction processing.

Visual models have two primary advantages over aural models:

1. Visual models are 2 dimensional. Aural models, if they can be called models, are one dimensional streams of syllables. For example, mathematical computation (1.00794*2 + 15.9994) on paper is significantly easier than mathematical computation through a tape recorder. This is because the visual image. Visual models can tunnel through an Audio stream, but this is generally not as efficient as resorting to the visual models in their pure form, and using the aural form only for the elements that it excels at, such as conveying experience, which is fundamentally tied to temporality. For example, consider music, a song, or even the song, "5 'n' 8's 13." (It *is* a song.)
2. Visual models persist. Aural models disappear as soon as the syllables pass through the mind, and are thus terrible for cognitive analysis. Again, consider a piece of paper vs. a sample on a tape player. It is trivial to to remove the 2D element and make the argument orthogonal. Now, the visual model can be shaped, manipulated, moved about. You can take your scissors, either physical or mental, and can move things about with ease. Now, let's consider the audio model. To manipulate it, we need to replay over and over, either on a tape player or in our mind, and reposition information slowly, tediously. While we are replaying, we have no queue's to our location other than the song stream that is going through us. This is what I mean when I say that sound does not persist, but images do.

Excellent examples of visual description are comic books (in which authors have finer control over their communication patterns), manuals for repairing cars with diagrams of the pieces of the car (also a comic), airplane guides for what to do in the event of an emergency (also a comic), and the Illustrated TCP/IP volumes I-III (Stephens; almost a comic).

I'd like to add that there is no such thing as 3 dimensional vision; the illusion of 3 dimensions derives completely from...

• the passage of time
• blurring of distant objects
• overlapping semi-transparent representation of objects

Yes, this is still entirely on-topic; desktops are one of the models that we use extensively. Note that icons and cartoons are the best depictions of our folders and files (rather than, say, physical pictures), since it better reflects the icons in our mind (and by extention, our model). For a better understanding of this principle and a better depiction of the argument, read Scott McClouds's "Understanding Comics". Stated briefly: If you see a cartoon picture of a knife and fork, you wouldn't be surprised if they started talking and dancing around; but if it was drawn realistically or photographically, the effect is quite different. One is an icon, and thus a symbol living in the mind, the other is a picture, and thus a depiction of something dropped in the world.

Some day, I plan to write a more elegant, cohesive, and comprehensive description of these ideas, but I am not there yet; this is just some Sunday morning Slashdot. Don't bother checking out taoriver.net just yet; I just moved, and DSL won't be up for another month.

Let me finish with a general association of mine: Light is for knowledge, understanding, and the mind. Sound is for experience, awareness, and life.

As the discussion has gone on, people have described both Defender and Quake as being enthralling, enveloping games that bring you effortlessly into their world. How can it be that a primitive 2-D game and a modern graphical tour de force share this quality?

I'd like to bring up Scott McCloud's "simplification" paradigm from the seminal Understanding Comics. Simple, uncluttered cartoon images like Charlie Brown and Mickey Mouse have an immediate appeal that realistic drawings and live actors lack. A line drawing is just as compelling a face as a photo of a face. McCloud suggests that detailed images are what we see, but line drawings are what we feel -- my face looks like a photo of a face, but your face feels like two eyes and a mouth. Simple characters give us a place to insert ourselves into a comic's (or a game's) world.

The advent of RT3D that mimics our own perspective may eventually trump this abstraction. But it helps explain why classic arcade games could offer something we are only now recovering.

- Michael Cohn

Any way you group culture, 90% of it is garbage, and another 9% are only for the hardcore fan. What you have here is a board full of hardcore fans, and, well...you.

Seriously, if you have the time, read Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics. Not only is it a great read, it goes into what makes Japanese comics different than American ones, a difference that carries over into animation. The average work of anime is much more sophisticated visually than its average American counterpart. This includes works in all genres. They demand much more of the viewer's attention visually and slightly more plot-wise.

Most people who like anime are spoiled after watching great work like Vampire Princess Miyu (horror), Ranma 1/2 (comedy), Miyazaki, etc...

Many people who dislike anime are really thinking of the garbage we were exposed to as kids (though I always liked Star Blazers... nothing to compare it to at age 4). Artless, poorly translated, badly dubbed, hacked to pieces, how could anyone expect us to develop an appreciation for it?

It's amazing some of us did, and unlike the vicious and stupid way we tend to circle the wagons around linux, those of us who love anime like nothing better than sharing what we like.

The only real answer I can give your question is: Look at the early 90s Conan-era Simpsons, and understand that a lot of that was being done TEN YEARS EARLIER in Japan. The show Urusei Yatsura is still a tough sell to people who saw the original artist's somewhat more intricate later Ranma 1/2 series, but the interplay between both multiple joke "threads" and between those "threads" and the spoken/acted/background-derived punchlines was way ahead of its time in an otherwise innocuous sitcom. Certain aspects of modern anime remain ten years ahead of american productions, in the same way modern american film productions look ten years ahead of films from most other countries.

On top of all that, remember this: the anime we're sitting here talking about now (what's "new to us") was shown in Japan years ago. The modern american otaku (like me) has only the smallest awareness of what the real breadth of Japanese animation looks like today, so we lose both the stuff that's so bad it doesn't come across and some of the hidden gems, which we can only conjecture exists based on past experience with the exported art of other cultures. We see only the top 5% of what comes over, so everything looks good to us. Well, almost everything, DBZ kind of sucks, visually.

-jpowers

• There are a dozen game sites at least as good as this one. It's nothing new.
• How many articles focusing on "Games are violent" "I'm addicted to games" "I play games... and I'm a girl!" can you possibly stand?
• The writers are smug, but in the wrong way. Rather than obsessing on their own substance abuse or misspent youth, maybe they should talk about the games, point their hip cynical cleverness at the true topic at hand. For my money, a site like Something Awful does a much better job of expressing game "culture" by writing well about games themselves. And yes, some of the reviews are hilarious bitchslaps, but that's appropriate. SA's writers are contributing to gaming culture's smart-aleck, blunt, trash-talking nature, not writing article's spelling out these attributes.