Offbeat webcomic
November 25, 2010 8:50 PM   Subscribe

Offbeat webcomic
I've been doing this for the past few months to entertain myself and possibly some of the people I work with. I don't know for sure, they may be fake laughing. I thought I'd open myself up for random abuse from strangers & ask what you guys think.
posted by Treefood (6 comments total)

The comic isn't sitting in the middle of the page for me so it's a bit annoying having to scroll down and then sideways to see them.
posted by gomichild at 12:40 AM on November 26, 2010

Well, you did ask...

It's very webcomic-y in that it's a set of quirky characters saying quirky, cute things. I know that a lot of webcomics do very well with that sort of thing. It's a heck of a lot easier than being genuinely funny, that's for sure.

Technique-wise, the scribbly shading doesn't work for me. The JPEG artifacts around the text make it look messy too. And I don't like the typeface at all.

But if it entertains you, then that's a perfectly good reason to draw them, and other people's judgements don't matter. You should keep drawing.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 6:35 AM on November 26, 2010

I actually enjoyed these, especially the ones in color. "Floppy Clock!" gave me a good chuckle. I think the technique is fine, certainly better than the multitude of stick figure and MS Paint comics out there all hoping to be the next XKCD or MS Paint Adventures. It does look like your technique is improving over time so I hope you do keep it up.

The only thing I'd suggest is that you ditch weebly and get a real site with a blog, maybe using something like ComicPress or Inkblot for Wordpress, so you can have archives, an RSS feed for the comic, additional pages, better navigation, that sort of thing.
posted by Gator at 7:30 AM on November 26, 2010

I enjoyed it! Thanks for posting this.

One question: why are you using JPG format when GIF would probably be cleaner and smaller, especially for your black-and-white images? You could probably use a 16-color palette with fine effect. PNG might be better, too. Just an idea.
posted by amtho at 5:50 PM on November 26, 2010

Thanks for taking the time to have a look & give some feedback! This is my first try at maintaining a site, and I know it's super low tech. I'll have a look into Wordpress and also using GIF - to be honest I have no idea what the differences are, so your suggestions are valuable :)
posted by Treefood at 10:02 AM on November 27, 2010

The difference is basically this: JPEG compresses the image, and in doing so loses some detail, and also introduces 'artifacts', which are those weird greyish blurred areas around the text. Using GIF (or better still, PNG) doesn't compress the image, so the quality is usually better. The rule is pretty much this: JPEG for photos or scans of things that have no text in them, or when you really have to have the smallest possible files; PNG or GIF for anything containing text, or anything requiring clean lines.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 1:54 PM on November 27, 2010

« Older Tom Dooley: The Full Story...   |   Project Neighbor... Newer »

You are not currently logged in. Log in or create a new account to post comments.