Spaceship Away: Where Now?

[John Freeman]

Talking with Spaceship Away editor Rod Barzilay last week, he tells me there are some changes ahead for the Magazine, and I'm curious to know what people think of the magazine. Several new strips and more behind the scenes changes are in the offing, but perhaps those more directly involved would be prepared to "go public" about them?

[John Ridgway]

I think it's a very good magazine. Unfortunately, until it expands its readership base, it has to operate on a shoestring. Fortunately, because it operates on a shoestring, the contributors are all people who are dedicated to doing their damndest to see that it remains a good magazine - they're doing it for love of the work, not because its just another job.

[John Freeman]

Totally agree, John: a lot of hard work has gone into Spaceship Away. You and I have had discussions about the magazine many times: I think it could do with more online promotion to help boost sales, perhaps including strip material on the web site. Most people who read SA probably don't realize that the high cover price helps pay contributors, a rarity in small press publishing.

I think the feature pages could do with some sprucing up, and I've said as much in the past. Three column layouts and box outs, for example. Compared with the strips, they don't measure up.

Strip-wise, I'm sure there's material out there that could be considered, perhaps translations of European SF comics material. For example, there's German Perry Rhodan magazine -- some cross pollination might be worth investigating.

A few "short run" strips - perhaps one issue only - might also provide more 'jumping on' points for new readers?

[Bill Storie]

Okay JF, I'll start the ball rolling on this one with a question about CGI strips - Spaceship Away is one of the few mags to have embraced CGI by running not one but two strips in it's pages and as far as I know the response has been positive all the way but it makes me wonder if there is amongst comics fans still the general thought that CGI strips are all populated by Barbi-doll lookalikes with blank eyes and no facial expressions and if that is indeed the consunsus I'd ask readers to check out SA's CGI fare - as well as the main Ex Astris website of course - and give some feedback on how the media has progressed - or not. A simple "I like it" or "I don't like it" is fine but any follow up comments as to WHY you like or dislike the CGI strips would be handy in order to progress this discussion.
It would be especially nice to hear what everyone thinks can be done to improve CGI strips - if those in SA are not giving you what you want, then what exactly is missing? I know the received wisdom is that "oh, the computer does all the work and there's no skill involved" but the computer is just a tool in the same way as a pencil is - it's up to the artist to make the best use of that tool and just as there is good and bad pencil art there will be good and bad CGI art and having working in both media I can assure you that it's just as hard to create a dynamic action pose or facial expression in CGI as it is on a drawing board so I'd be especially interested to hear from people who have worked in both areas.
Cheers!

[John Ridgway]

The problem with CGI work, even on a publication appearing only 3 times a year, is the characters. In order to produce the necessary pictures, characters have to be created, posed, lit and their expressions arranged to suit the story. All this takes time. Iain McClumpha on "Space Girls" and Mike Nicoll on "Ex Astris" manage this exceptionally well. But the number of characters in their scenes are limited. Imagine producing a number of crowd scenes... My solution to this is to draw the characters and use cgi for the backgrounds and spacecraft. It's then up to the individual reader and being given the time for this mixture to be accepted. No-one objected to the use of flat coloured line drawings against fully-painted backgrounds in the old Disney films, and apparently didn't even notice that the ballroom in Disney's "Beauty and the Beast" was CGI work.

[Adam Grose]

I admit I have yet to see one of these magazines. I am intriqued and I am sure I see the editor in Weymouth everytime I used to nip into Cafe Nero. There is a huge amount of talent out here, it's just a case of seeing what is needed/ required and whether people will have a chance to contribute, even if it is as short strips in the style of future shocks etc...

[John Freeman]

Like most smaller indie titles Spaceship Away is self-distributed, and I don't think it is going to gain Diamond listing anytime soon. I'm assuming the magazine will be on sale in Bristol: I don't know if SA has a stand this year, though. Anyone Know?

[Bill Storie]

That's a good point you make about crowd scenes, John - it's something I hadn't noticed before in connection with CGI. That said, as far as Ex Astris (which I illustrate under the pen-name of Mike Nicoll) is concerned the reason for this is simply that the script(s) as written haven't actually called for any major crowd scenes - yet. We did create a one-pager called "Ex Astris:Floods" (reproduced elsewhere on the DTT site) which had a crowd storming an escaping space ship and the "EA: Homecoming" 10 pager we did for "Bulletproof" (also on this site somewhere) had between 4 and 7 characters in many panels and the main storyline which we're working on at present will have a mob of townspeople attacking our heroes which will be fun to do (memo to John F - let's have LOTS of close-ups dude!!).
The problem may be simply that much CGI work is, as pointed out elsewhere, created by technicians who may be adept at computer skills but not in the art of comic creation. That's not to denegrate the creators, it's simply that as someone who is as happy hand-drawing a page as CGI-ing it I have an extra batch of creative skills which many CGI artists lack.
When I create a CGI scene there is frankly as much Photoshop and hand-rendered post-production work as there is pure CGI rendering - I almost never render a complete scene and pop it into place (if only it were that easy!!) - I sketch the image first then I render each element separately via the alpha channel, then compose the panel with every item on a separate layer. Seems like a lot of extra work but it gives me maximum control over lighting, colour balance, contrast etc.but the point I'm trying rather laboriously to make is that it's just as easy for me to make a scene with 2 people as 22 people in CGI - all it costs you is a little extra time but if I were to hand-draw the crowd then I'm taking extra time as well but in the long run I'm saving time by not having to ink and colour the panels.
Phew - a bit long-winded but I hope you get the gist.
That said, I feel the IDEAL way to go about solving the problem is, as you say, to hand-draw the characters but use CGI backgrounds in the same way as actors are shot against greenscreen in the movies. However, as shown to great effect in the movie "Titan AE" it can result in a bit of a mess because the line art and flat colour jars terribly against the rendered backgrounds. My solution is to hand-PAINT the characters with NO line-art involved - at least no black line-art which I feel is the main problem. Fully painted characters against CGI backgrounds (which also have no line art of course) blend in better and make a much more satifsying composite I feel. I'll be using this technique on a Dan Dare wallpaper which I'm doing for fun and if it gives satifactory results I'll be using it for my forthcoming "Saffyre Blue" graphic novel so I'll pop up some sample art a bit later for some constructive criticism.
Blimey - didn't realise I had waffled on so much - over to you...

[John Ridgway]

I find when I draw characters the process is largely automatic. I don't think about the expression or the body language - it comes automatically. With a cgi character, I find the process is not automatic. I have to think carefully about what I am doing - what modifications I have to make to achieve the results I require. This destroys, for me, the spontaneity of line work. In the past, I found that if I had drawn a hand incorrectly, rather than try to see what has wrong with the hand it was easier to rub out the entire arm and do it again. But that’s my way of working. What matters is how the reader goes with it.

I agree that the balance between line work and cgi is a difficult path to tread but I compare it with Frank Humphries work on Riders of the Range in the Eagle. The characters in the foreground were delineated against fully painted backgrounds.

I know I can draw characters. I couldn’t paint them to my own satisfaction. I know that the spacecraft and types backgrounds can be more detailed and interesting if rendered in cgi. Again, I say it is up to the reader whether they like the results or not – but it also a matter of the reader becoming accustomed to what they are reading.

[JOHN PETER BRITTON]

I AGREE JOHN THE OLD WAY IS BEST THAT'S WHAT I LIKE.

[JOHN PETER BRITTON]

THE LATEST SUMMER ISSUE LOOKS GREAT GOT A REAL 1950's FEEL TO IT JUST LIKE THE ORIGINAL COMIC.