Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Seibertron wrote:

Mkall wrote:

Seibertron wrote:I agree that "bad artwork" was not the best choice of words. The faces are extremely distracting, they're extremely plain, and the Autobots look like they're evil now. It's pretty radical departure from anything that's been done before ... and with no reason other than an artist wanting to express his own artistic impression on an established brand.

Maybe you've been following this more closely than I have Seibs, but I thought I read somewhere that Hasbro approached IDW and "asked politely" to have the next series take a more movie-verse feel?

That wasn't the version of the story that I had heard. I'm pretty sure that it was stated on Ryall's blog back in September about this art style being Don driven but I can't find the actual quote right now that I'm remembering.

http://ryalltime.blogspot.com/2009/09/t ... ssion.html

It's not from Ryall, it's from the Andy Schmidt interview:

Now let me ask you THE question: based on discussions been held on the forums here at Seibertron.com, it seems that fans are thinking of this as a reboot purely based on the change in art style for the Transformers. I know you've read the responses and that some of us either love it, hate it or still can't decide. What influenced the change to the representation of our comic book heroes?


A.S.: I'm glad you asked THE question. I'll address a couple of things that I've seen on the boards and whatnot. First, there was no decision to make the G1 guys look more like movie universe characters. If I thought the movie books would out sell G1, I'd just make more movie books. Isn't that the simple solution if that were the case? And honestly, while I can appreciate the argument, I don't see the new character art as reflecting movie styling. They're all in their original color schemes and retain the key elements that make them identifiable; this is a new, updated style for this contemporary series. I think the art is amazing and I've been really happy to see that a lot of posts on the boards now that the issue has come out have shown that people are starting to dig it. Not everyone, mind you, but it looks like some of the jets are cooling a bit. We'll see. The thing to keep in mind is that Don is still figuring them out too. He's testing here and there.

Personally I'm starting to dig the artwork. It takes the classic look and updates it in a much more "realistic" aesthetic.

The "same face" thing is a little weird, but I guess they can tell each other apart.

And Seibs, it's your site, editorialize till your heart's content

Seibertron wrote:

Convotron wrote:

Aeros wrote:Do you have any kind of degree in any form of art?

A degree can help inform an opinion. A background in art, either as an artist or education in art, can also help. However, appreciation, which includes critical analysis, of art doesn't require formal education or a stamp of approval such as a degree.

I agree that "bad artwork" was not the best choice of words. The faces are extremely distracting, they're extremely plain, and the Autobots look like they're evil now. It's pretty radical departure from anything that's been done before ... and with no reason other than an artist wanting to express his own artistic impression on an established brand.

I also don't like that their bodies keep getting changed story after story between artists. I'm up for an artists interpretation, but I don't like that their bodies keep changing for no reason.

No one here needs a degree in order to be able to express their opinion about a certain art style. I'm allowed to express mine and you're allowed to express yours. And while you might not like my art style from ten years ago, I think my ability to draw certainly allows me to be able to express my opinion ... though for those of you who can't draw, you are most definitely entitled to your opinions as well.

I am in no way comparing my artwork from 13 years ago to the work that these artists today do. I'm just stating that I certainly have my own opinions based on my own ability to draw.

I totally agree.

Yes, perhaps the initial wording used on the frontpage of the site wasn't the best but the actual point of discussion put forth by yourself and others is not lacking at all. Simple and unconditional acceptance OR disregard of something does nothing to advance intelligent discourse.

One doesn't have to be an artist to form an intelligently informed opinion and criticize artwork.

I spent some time trying to word my response to Aeros' post as I didn't want to come off in an aggressive manner but one of the things that really grates on me is the assertion that one needs some sort of qualification to criticize artwork. Not that anyone has written this here but I also really dislike seeing people write/say "Why don't you draw it your way if you think you can do better?", which totally avoids addressing criticism and directs effort into questioning someone's ability to criticize rather than debating the points of criticism.

One of the things I enjoy most about artwork is the sharing of the work and I'm not alone in this. Go to any online community populated by artists(professionals and hobbyists)such as conceptart.org and you'll see that most artists want to have their work be accessible by everyone. The same experience can be found at any good art school. Artists and art students want to be able to include all manner of people in the experience of art.

Then I see and hear statements by people, artists and otherwise, who propagate the idea that art must be above the average person, that it somehow requires something more than functioning senses and a brain to appreciate. Viewing art as something esoteric or only accessible by the particularly knowledgeable contradicts the desire of all creative effort, which is communication on some level. Now I'm not saying art or any creative effort should be didactic, literal, and simplistic, but neither should it be only within the grasp of a select few who are somehow more qualified to fully appreciate it.

The fact that Ryan/Seibertron and others have put effort into intelligently expressing their views on Don's artwork, either for or against it, is great to see and shows true passion for the Transformers franchise. Clearly, one doesn't need qualifications to say whether or not they like something and why.

One of the things I appreciate about Seibertron.com is that it often stands apart from the more common attitudes of fandom where volume and furor rule and rational thought takes a back seat. Had the tagline of "bad art" remained and a hyperbole laden post backed it up, then yes, it would have been in bad taste. However, this is not the case. I commend the decision to state up front on the web site that there is criticism of an aspect of the art direction of the current ongoing Transformers comic book and then have it supported by well thought out postings.

I like to think I’m pretty in-tune with the beat of the fandom, that I follow the taste of trends fairly well.

That being said, at this point in the Hasbro/Media/Artistic-direction issue I either:

A. Am completely out of touch, or;
B. Am part of a large group of people who are no longer being listened to/addressed

I’d prefer to think that it’s issue ‘A’. I’d prefer to be out of touch with what’s what and what’s cool. If the media-marketing of Transformers is being evolved and the input goes only one way, down, dictated by the top; then I’m kind of going to lose my incentive to care.

The comics are G1.

They are the last story-telling venue for G1.

G1 has 25 years of history driving it. It is defined, iconic, and to a large extent unexplored. It does not need to be bastardized with the current trend towards the movie concept universe.

Dress up what’s going on anyway you want. Tell me that I’m a geewuner now and that I should know change is good. Go ahead with whatever rationalization you like. I’ll just put my wallet away. I know and you know it’s the only thing that actually gets listened to anymore.

Wow a real debate that hasn't de-evolved into a flame fest.

I'm in...

First things first. Seibs, i love the site and i remember the success of 'Megatron 101' from back in the day. But, this is a news/information site and, as such, it should not be biased one way or the other. If you want to express your personal opinions in an editorial, you need to present the opposing view as well as the reasons behind behind both views.

Otherwise you get pigeon-holed as a G1 purist site and risk alienating the young'uns who know little of what existed before the movies. In their eyes, you risk becoming the TF equivalent of FOX News Channel.

On the flip side, we [as in all of us who threw a hissy fit at the movie designs or the name 'Sam'] have imaginary stock in this franchise. If it wasn't for our dedication to the toys and cartoons during the rough and tumble 90's, there wouldn't be a Transformers movie-verse for Hasbro/Bay/IDW to profit from today. [I left Takara out purposely as I am focusing on the Western Markets.]

Unfortunately, G1er's ARE NOT the target audience of the Transformers line anymore. We get thrown a bone every once in a while; Encore/Reissues, Masterpiece and a handful of comic book series'. But, for the most part, it's all about hooking the young'uns with looks and material that they can relate too... Remember how much RID imitated the Poke'mon animation style? What about the Unicron Trilogy's attempt to 'Catch'em all' with the Minicon gimmick?

The truth hurts and the truth in this case is simple. Ongoing is designed to market G1 and G1 paraphernalia to the next generation of fans to make another buck since the primary buyers of G1 stuff have already 'Caught Them All'.

The Omega Supreme on the cover looks familiar to Cybertron Menasor... Doesn't look like G1 Omega, but looks interesting.

The half-naked girl is cliché, but OK, but the little doggy is too much. Anybody else thinks it is Red Alert on the same page?

Cliffjumper really needs some stress-reliever, his emotions change too quickly. From "This has to be a test!" to "We'll need to elect a new leader!" in a few seconds?

Hot Rod looks too Wolverine-like with his claws, aren't those supposed to be exhaust pipes/blasters?

Jetfire looks cool, but anything but G1 Jetfire.


All in all, this artwork would fare good as a new Evolutions series, but as they want this to be the continuation of the awesome -ation series, the face-artwork is worth Ratbat-guano.

Serpent O - R wrote:First things first. Seibs, i love the site and i remember the success of 'Megatron 101' from back in the day. But, this is a news/information site and, as such, it should not be biased one way or the other. If you want to express your personal opinions in an editorial, you need to present the opposing view as well as the reasons behind behind both views.

I do? Some of you might want me to do that, but I feel no need to do that on this site. At least the site is doing something to stand out from the crowd, whether you like this presentation style or not.

Look, I don't like the art style. Plain and simple. I feel like there's enough fans out there who feel the same way so that I can express this view as I see fit on the homepage of my site. If I felt that I was the only one with this opinion, I wouldn't be featuring this on the homepage of the site.

I think I should be able to express my opinion from time-to-time. I don't do it often so when I do, it's because I feel it's a battle worth fighting for.

I don't like seeing a movie styled artwork applied to the G1 comic. Yes, it is a G1 comic. I'm tired of "G1" used like it's a bad word some times. It's G1, I'm a G1 fan, I love G1 references. This doesn't mean that I don't like other styles, concepts, ideas, etc applied to the Transformers hobby. My favorite cartoon series story-wise is Beast Wars hands-down. I really enjoyed Transformers Animated because it was a fun series. RID was pretty darn cool in my book as well.

I've said it before that I would be just as passionate and up-in-arms if the Transformers Animated art style had been applied to the G1 ongoing series. I don't feel that it's appropriate.

Bottom line, I feel that they should keep the movie style in the movie books. Give Don a movie mini-series if he wants to draw that style and express his creativity.

Everyone's Got The Same Face

No emotion - Don Figueroa's rebellious art style which showcases unemotional TFs continues to grace (disgrace?) IDW's "all-new" ongoing Transformers series. Love it or hate it, the ink is hitting the paper and this is what we're getting. Check out the preview of the next issue of this controversial art style by clicking here.

Since some of you make it sound like there's some horrible statement on the homepage, I wanted to review what is actually there. I agree with the first poster that confronted me about the use of the title "Bad Artwork: Part 2". I think that might have been up for ten or twenty minutes before I changed it to a more factual statement: "Everyone's got the same face", because, well, everyone's got the same face. There's nothing unique about any of the Autobot faces except for Prime's face. I also stated on the homepage blurb that the faces are unemotional ... because they are. In none of the faces do you see a smile, a grin, a frown ... there is no emotion. The faces are all plain, unemotional, very cold and "robotic" (as in an uncaring machine, not a sentient robot) ... these are not generally traits that apply to the Transformers.

You stated that I should offer both sides of the story. In the homepage text it says "grace (disgrace?)" which leads to both viewpoints, I use the phrase "love it or hate it" and referred to the art style as "controversial" because it is (as you can see from our posts). I also called it "rebellious" because it is also that since Don wanted to depart from the traditional style, hence calling it "rebellious" because he's "rebelling".

I really refrained from making outrageous statements, or even stating what my views were about the facial artwork other than making two statements that I feel no one can really argue against: their faces are all the same and they look unemotional. If anyone can successfully argue against either of those two statements, I would be open to suggestions about how the text should be worded.

So... Am I the only one worried they're about to majorly piss a lot of people off by turning Hot Rod into Rodimus? They've been maturing him, now Prime has stepped down and the preview of issue two has him taking off like this, telling other bots they can follow his lead if they want?

Seibertron wrote:

Everyone's Got The Same Face

No emotion - Don Figueroa's rebellious art style which showcases unemotional TFs continues to grace (disgrace?) IDW's "all-new" ongoing Transformers series. Love it or hate it, the ink is hitting the paper and this is what we're getting. Check out the preview of the next issue of this controversial art style by clicking here.

Since some of you make it sound like there's some horrible statement on the homepage, I wanted to review what is actually there. I agree with the first poster that confronted me about the use of the title "Bad Artwork: Part 2". I think that might have been up for ten or twenty minutes before I changed it to a more factual statement: "Everyone's got the same face", because, well, everyone's got the same face. There's nothing unique about any of the Autobot faces except for Prime's face. I also stated on the homepage blurb that the faces are unemotional ... because they are. In none of the faces do you see a smile, a grin, a frown ... there is no emotion. The faces are all plain, unemotional, very cold and "robotic" (as in an uncaring machine, not a sentient robot) ... these are not generally traits that apply to the Transformers.

You stated that I should offer both sides of the story. In the homepage text it says "grace (disgrace?)" which leads to both viewpoints, I use the phrase "love it or hate it" and referred to the art style as "controversial" because it is (as you can see from our posts). I also called it "rebellious" because it is also that since Don wanted to depart from the traditional style, hence calling it "rebellious" because he's "rebelling".

I really refrained from making outrageous statements, or even stating what my views were about the facial artwork other than making two statements that I feel no one can really argue against: their faces are all the same and they look unemotional. If anyone can successfully argue against either of those two statements, I would be open to suggestions about how the text should be worded.

You're certainly entitled to YOUR opinion on YOUR site. The critics against your prior title choice were simply noting the overgeneralized feel of your site's headline (Good journalism is supposed to be impartial just as Good editorials are supposed to convey a well thought out opinion) which to them came off as more of an attack/ rant rather than constructive critique.

Well, here's my two cents...

Bad artwork, this is NOT. The Same Faces? Does this imply that G1 didn't have them? The G1 faces were Largely the exact face but with different helmets, save for a very scant few. Where Don's faces go wrong here is that there are no distinguishing features between one face or another, again just like G1, save the helmets. Don should take a cue from the IDW TF Continuum cover and the TF movis and use the facial plating to make each face very unique to it's respective 'bot, something the TF movies do very well. The mustache affect is caused largely by this flaw and the darker coloring on the lower sides of each 'bots face only serve to accent the flaw more. Other than that, the TF's look incredible, although a closer G1 resemblance in body structure on Jetfire would serve to make him appear a bit more recognizable as well as sleeker.

Now the story...

In my opinion, the story seems to be going in a great direction and a very character driven one at that. While some fans may not be comfortable with the "Wolverod" persona, I think it's great that we are Finally seeing the writing touch on the "Hot head" part of 'Rod's persona despite it having been written in his bio for the past 20 + years. (Wolverine being the archetypal "hot head").

All in all, I do believe this series is going to turn out very enjoyable. I can't wait for issue 2!