InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "2minutes - come join us!"

Doop (xdoop) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-08-10 17:27:00

Entry tags:

creator: joe casey, creator: nathan fox, event: dark reign, publisher: marvel comics, title: dark reign zodiac

One panel from Dark Reign: Zodiac #2

This is the first time I've seen pixelated nudity in a comic; usually the nudity is either in shadows or blocked by a convenient object.

(Post a new comment)

	foxhack 2009-08-10 09:31 pm UTC (link)
	Somehow the nudity being pixelated only makes it worse. D: (Reply to this)

	sandoz_iscariot 2009-08-10 09:33 pm UTC (link)
	O...kay. (Reply to this)

	icon_uk 2009-08-10 09:39 pm UTC (link)
	If anyone can think of a reason that such a scene has to be shown in this manner, please, never, ever tell me what it is, I prefer ignorance. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	neuhallidae 2009-08-10 10:06 pm UTC (link)
	Thiiiiis, this, this, this. As bad as my imagination can be, I'm sorely afraid the truth would be worse. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	freezer818 2009-08-10 11:42 pm UTC (link)
	Motto. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	hyaroo 2009-08-10 09:41 pm UTC (link)
	This is the first time I've seen pixelated nudity in a comic; usually the nudity is either in shadows or blocked by a convenient object. Or, in the case of certain Adam Warren comics, covered up with black censor bars... (Reply to this)

	runespoor7 2009-08-10 09:45 pm UTC (link)
	What bothers me most about is that pixelisation would make sense in a movie/documentary, where the actors move as the camera is running. Obviously in a comic book that doesn't happen, so it looks like a particularly silly attempt at realism. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	xdoop 2009-08-10 09:47 pm UTC (link)
	I'm wondering if the artist didn't bother censoring it, so it was just pixelated before it got released. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	geoffsebesta 2009-08-11 04:20 am UTC (link)
	Gotta tell ya, comics are made out of pixels just as much as movies. Photoshop. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

runespoor7
2009-08-11 02:47 pm UTC (link)

I know that, it's not my point. Comic book characters don't move out of or into the frame as the artist is drawing them. There is therefore no reason to pixelate the picture to censor it instead of drawing the lamp in a way such as to cover the character, or of putting the speech bubble on his butt.

The pixelation is done to create an effect - probably to make it look like something out of a movie/documentary - make it real. It's imaginative, but in this medium (unless of course it makes sense in the story) I find it pretty silly.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	(Anonymous) 2009-08-10 09:49 pm UTC (link)
	what in the world is going on here? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	taggerung301 2009-08-10 10:02 pm UTC (link)
	not sure I really want to know . . . (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	ashtoreth 2009-08-11 12:26 am UTC (link)
	I'm weak! I want context! (Reply to this) (Parent)

	esc0 2009-08-10 10:10 pm UTC (link)
	The art in this was HORRIBLE... sadly this is probably one of the better looking panels (Reply to this)

	mcspakypants 2009-08-10 10:25 pm UTC (link)
	I planned on getting all the Dark Reign minis in trade format, but this one on the other hand... That being said, isn't Joe Kelly writing this? Isn't he supposed to be good? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	xdoop 2009-08-10 10:33 pm UTC (link)
	No, it's Joe Casey. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	mcspakypants 2009-08-10 10:43 pm UTC (link)
	Ah OK. Is he any good? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	aaron_bourque 2009-08-10 11:16 pm UTC (link)
	Occasionally. Not often enough, unfortunately. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	mullon 2009-08-10 10:53 pm UTC (link)
	And the audience for comic books shrinks further. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	punishermax 2009-08-11 06:05 pm UTC (link)
	OH NO, ONE SHITTY PANEL IN A SHITTY COMIC IMPLYS SEX ! DEAR MOTHER OF GOD, THE INDUTRY IS CRAAASSSHHHHHHIIIINNNNNNNNGGGGGGG..... (Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Mod Note:

schmevil
2009-08-12 08:36 pm UTC (link)

Not acceptable. Please review the community's ethos.

2. Do not make personal attacks or insults* in posts or comments. This applies to comments to both other members in the community and the creators whose work is being discussed. We welcome critical opinions, but please try to concentrate on the work rather than the person. It's perfectly fine to disagree with others and to express your own opinions, but if you can't do so without resorting to personal attacks or passive aggression, then that's probably a sign that you should take a step back from the conversation.

(Replies frozen) (Parent)

	ex_zemo315 2009-08-10 11:04 pm UTC (link)
	Yeeeeaaaaahhhh...no, just no. I'm not being chauvinistic or sexist when I'd prefer to just have a scrawny male butt just not appear, pixelated or not, right? Especially when the art increases the scrawniness... Also, this guy irks me. He's a computer genius and still has the body of an Olympic athlete. I smell a Mary Sue >_> (Reply to this) (Thread)

	midnightvoyager 2009-08-10 11:41 pm UTC (link)
	He also has armpit hair on the back of his shoulder. Wut? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	interrobamf 2009-08-11 12:31 am UTC (link)
	I think that's supposed to be a wound. Or I hope it is. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	foxhack 2009-08-10 11:45 pm UTC (link)
	"Also, this guy irks me. He's a computer genius and still has the body of an Olympic athlete. I smell a Mary Sue >_>" Or a mutant. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	aaron_bourque 2009-08-10 11:17 pm UTC (link)
	Are those even people? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	liarashadowsong 2009-08-10 11:55 pm UTC (link)
	The one laying back on the bed appears to be a half-starved dragon. With magical shadow powers. I think. tilts head to the side and squints Is the guy with the pixelated ass wearing a garbage bag on his head? And black leather gloves? (Reply to this) (Parent)

	grimmbear 2009-08-10 11:51 pm UTC (link)
	oh god. I will never be able to have sex again. why do bad artists have to draw nudes? (Reply to this)

liarashadowsong
2009-08-10 11:53 pm UTC (link)

The pixelation looks seriously weird. It makes sense in, say, a video. But a comic book? Shadows and conveniently placed objects make so much more sense. Also, the art is somewhat unpleasant to look at. I mean, the guy appears to have armpit hair on his back. And it just seems... I dunno, over-busy? If it was just inked and not colored, I don't even know how it'd be possible to figure out where the divisions between the two people were, and where they ended and the bed began.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2009-08-11 01:26 am UTC (link)
	It's funnier this way. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	geoffsebesta 2009-08-11 04:21 am UTC (link)
	Again, I have to point out, this comic was done in pixels. Photoshop. It even looks like digital inks. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	kingrockwell 2009-08-11 12:35 am UTC (link)
	Pixelating? Why couldn't they just redraw the lamp a few more inches from the border? This is ridiculous. What does the rest of the book look like? Aside from the dumb parts, the art's kinda interesting, in a Paul Pope way. (Reply to this)

goodfellow_puck
2009-08-11 12:42 am UTC (link)

LOL! I thought this panel was from the Heavy Metal issue my beau just picked up (b/c he liked this exact art style when he saw it, no less)! The same artist has a story in it, and in true HM form you can see all the tits and balls you want in that story. Give you an idea of what you're missing in this one. Maybe the artist drew everything in anyway and editorial decided to get creative. He's got a blog and such...we could ask. ;) I was really confused there for a bit. His HM story centers around a skinny, scarred/tatted up wht boy getting his sex on with a tatted girl too. I guess you find a thing you like drawing, and..

(Reply to this)

	generalfreedom 2009-08-11 04:08 am UTC (link)
	Someone needs to read a book on drawing comics apparently. That censorship method looks incredibly stupid in this format. If it was for parody purposes, maybe I could accept it... (Reply to this) (Thread)

	ex_menagerie993 2009-08-11 06:49 pm UTC (link)
	Parody or someone watching tv. I could deal with either of these, but this I have a feeling is going to be stupid. >_ (Reply to this) (Parent)

	geoffsebesta 2009-08-11 04:22 am UTC (link)
	I don't like the panel but I do like the pixel trick. Inventive. (Reply to this)

ex_menagerie993
2009-08-11 06:36 pm UTC (link)

Ugh. This actually leads me to the reason I stopped reading Marvel. It happened in a New Avengers comic (and it wasn't Bendis' writing that got me out of it!)

The Avengers were naked in the Savage Land. For whatever reason white energy bars covered their parts. I don't find nudity offensive personally. Either commit to it, have them chained up naked, or do something else with the scene because it is damn unnecessary the way it was done. The same goes for this. Either move the lamp, or do something else. Unless this was a television show or something that a character was watching.

I do actually sort of like the art in an odd way. I'm assuming the woman on the bottom is heavily tattooed and I'm kind of curious about that.

(Reply to this)

	khamelea 2009-08-11 09:20 pm UTC (link)
	As far as stylistic choices go, the pixellisation sure is a stupid and ugly one to make. (Reply to this)

	proteus_lives 2009-08-12 07:59 am UTC (link)
	That's silly. Just use a convenient object. (Reply to this)