I blame the tools
Saturday, 13 October 2007 02:05 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
A minor rant on packaging of supplies for comics artists, with boobs.
This is the old packaging for the illustration board I usually use to draw the comic.
Simple, professional, and you don't have to feel goofy when you buy it, because you are totally a serious artist, and stuff.
And this is the boobified new packaging.
While I understand the marketing reasoning for going with the gigantic eyes and the water-balloon boobs, I'd never pick this up in a comic store, an art-supplies store, or from a convention table. But, of course, I'm not the demographic they're marketing to.
It's not a cheap product (though it looks cheap, nowooh, see how I used the two connotations of the wordburn). I'd think if you need the more expensive stuff (it holds up pretty well to eraser abuse), you wouldn't need boobages to attract you to the product, you'd simply buy what you need. But maybe they'd like to get artists who don't consider themselves professional level to upgrade to the heavier stuff; one-ply Bristol Board being a gateway drug, and all. In fact, I don't know why they don't just indicate the ply of the paper by the size of the cup.
Good thing there's mail order. I guess.

Simple, professional, and you don't have to feel goofy when you buy it, because you are totally a serious artist, and stuff.

While I understand the marketing reasoning for going with the gigantic eyes and the water-balloon boobs, I'd never pick this up in a comic store, an art-supplies store, or from a convention table. But, of course, I'm not the demographic they're marketing to.
It's not a cheap product (though it looks cheap, nowooh, see how I used the two connotations of the wordburn). I'd think if you need the more expensive stuff (it holds up pretty well to eraser abuse), you wouldn't need boobages to attract you to the product, you'd simply buy what you need. But maybe they'd like to get artists who don't consider themselves professional level to upgrade to the heavier stuff; one-ply Bristol Board being a gateway drug, and all. In fact, I don't know why they don't just indicate the ply of the paper by the size of the cup.
Good thing there's mail order. I guess.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 06:18 pm (UTC)I can totally sympathize. I wouldn't want to be seen buying that. Or be seen dead with it, as it happens.
Which reminds me... got to learn to draw. :P
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 08:53 pm (UTC)It's not by any means the worst such thing I've seen even just today, but I really could have gone without seeing it all.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 07:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 07:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 02:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 08:55 pm (UTC)One can tell a non-English speaker did the translating on the catboy paper--the grammar is quite awkward. 135lb wt. paper is a bit unusual--then again, the Papeterie here sells paper from 20g to 600g in 10g steps. *shrug*
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 02:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 07:15 pm (UTC)O_O... there's a balloon on the front... but not two of em XD
that's just like saying that women don't make comics... regardless of demographic, cause paper isn't specifically for boyz or gurlz...
pro-boards 4 teh FAIL. >_<**
*thumbs down*
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 07:49 pm (UTC)Do I want to continue buying a product that has become yet another laugh-in-the-face for women in comics? I don't think I do. One gets tired of this sort of thing after a while, just plain down-to-the-bone tired.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 08:03 pm (UTC)if it makes you feel better, i don't buy or eat at places if i hate their commercials :)
But I like not having to measure the rows out myself. I was ending up with way too many crookedy lines.
i think i just got used to mine. LAWL. i like the paper and i'd probably end up bankrupting myself getting the fancy stuff for a dicky project :)
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 09:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 08:14 pm (UTC)When I was in DC and wanting to learn how to draw better, I saw a book on figure drawing at the National Gallery of Art. Nearly all of the naked bodies in the book are female, and some of them are in just ridiculous poses. The very few men are Ward Cleaver types -- stiff, stalwart and boring. I ended up buying it reluctantly because there wasn't anything else suitable, but it was annoying.
My great aunt Nell was an artist, and I have a print of hers from the 1940's era, a watercolor of a naked man wearing a jock strap. I bet she made the sketch at one of those figure drawing classes. She was a seriously cool woman.
Where are the figure-drawing books for people who'd rather draw men's bodies? Somebody start marketing stuff to ME, dammit!
You know, some artist could really make a bundle by writing a 'figure-drawing' guide with mostly naked men.
That poor woman!
Date: 2007-10-13 08:32 pm (UTC)So I have to assume the people who peddle this stuff think all artists and comic lovers are adolescent males? Zu Schade! DRW
Re: That poor woman!
Date: 2007-10-13 08:57 pm (UTC)I wasn't sure if you'd be able to tell from the scan of the catalogue just how huge the woman's eyes are. Perhaps they are wide with pain from her aching back.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 08:49 pm (UTC)Believe me, I've been hunting around for figure drawing guides that aren't:
two-thirds (or more) female figures
women in submissive, slinky, or "delicate" poses
women in fan-service poses
only the men in active/action poses
I like Giovanni Civardi's reference books, but (surprise) his book Drawing the Female Nude or the generic Drawing Human Anatomy are the only ones I can ever find in stores or online, and Drawing the Male Nude appears to be out of print or just very hard to track down. Drawing Human Anatomy is marvellous in that it is primarily images of male figures, young and old, but it is way too scanty.
I think a figure-drawing guide with only naked men, in both active and submissive poses, would be TERRIFIC. I wish I had the skills to do it myself. And then a second book showing women in all manner of active poses, women of all sorts of body types, so artists can see how boobs and hips really work.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 09:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 09:16 pm (UTC)(Bear icon was intended for the stunned expression, not in reference to Russia, but why not both.)
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 12:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 12:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 12:58 am (UTC)(Okay, I am now officially too sleepy to make much sense. New pencils (http://www.spqrblues.com/images/pencils.png) are posted, and maybe I can wake myself up sufficiently to ink :P )
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 03:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 04:13 pm (UTC)When I was a wee thing and did not know of the concept of figure-drawing books, I used to peruse selections from Leonardo's drawings trying to figure out the figures. Not so bad for learning grotesques, heroes, and where to put the intestines.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 04:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 04:15 pm (UTC)may I have an invitation code please?
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 04:49 pm (UTC)If it doesn't get to you, email me: j D0T schoffstall AAATTT pobox D0T com. Or the address on my LJ info page.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-16 02:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-16 02:08 am (UTC)And I'll e-mail you too.... :)
The girl probably has to wear two bras, and sill gets a backache...
Date: 2007-10-13 08:49 pm (UTC)As has also happened to me. :D
Re: The girl probably has to wear two bras, and sill gets a backache...
Date: 2007-10-13 09:00 pm (UTC)Re: The girl probably has to wear two bras, and sill gets a backache...
Date: 2007-10-14 03:23 am (UTC)*searches through knitting catalogues for the stupid one*
*concludes that etako must have been successful, cause can't find it*
Re: The girl probably has to wear two bras, and sill gets a backache...
Date: 2007-10-24 01:26 pm (UTC)knittedmoved on.no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 10:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 11:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 01:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 02:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 03:53 am (UTC)I was curious enough about the origin of the marketing style change to make a few google searches. It turns out that the owners come from the comics collector supply business. They're used to selling plastic covers to fanboys. Sorry, I mean fanboyz. Looks like they just hired one of the boyz to design the new packaging.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 02:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 04:57 am (UTC)Ugh...yeah it's sad they have to Market to the XTREME! for all those Anime fanboyeez.
it's as uncomfortable as trying to get any Human Anatomy for the Artist or 'drawing the nude' book.
I don't understand the contortionist or BDSM poses they have women pose in some of those anatomy books...It's just painful! If you need to stare at a [woman] in such a wacky pose, then you're in the wrong profession!
SIGH
[rant!]
Date: 2007-10-14 02:06 pm (UTC)It probably just comes down to the fact that it's dead easy to get someone stirred up with an image of violence or sex or the two in tandem. You'll get more box office for the gladiator bouts and the executions than for the new production of Sophocles or Euripides with genuine flying deus ex machina. And this is why we remember the names of the gladiators. Oh, wait, we don't. But then, who cares, when you need a quick box office boost to keep quarterly profits up. I dunno, I've worked at places that sold tens or hundreds of thousands of copies of books that didn't have a single wacky-pose woman in them. But that does take more effort than inflating a pair of boobies and parking an enraged muscle-man with big knives behind them (in case you can't tell from the scan above, that's what's going on behind the woman.)
I think what our nation's school libraries need is a book cover showing Lewis & Clark screaming war cries as they battle a giant bear that's threatening a scantily clad and cowering wasp-waisted Sacagawea. These books I have on drawing will have exactly the right poses.
Re: [rant!]
Date: 2007-10-14 04:16 pm (UTC)Then again, a scantily-clad, wasp waisted Sacajawea, with milk-distended boobs (like the cover-girl on Heinlein's "Friday" (not to initiate another rant) would definitely have some adolescent appeal. I, on the other hand, would pass such a cover by with a sneer... after taking a good, long look so that I might despise the obvious pandering to an appropriate degree.
DRW, stalwartly un-amused by sexist pandering... after all, I could imagine a much more appealing babe, with substantially smaller boobs and her own sword.
Re: [rant!]
Date: 2007-10-15 04:47 pm (UTC)Re: [rant!]
Date: 2007-10-15 05:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 11:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-15 02:57 pm (UTC)