The Significance of Art

[DrakeNavarone]

papillion >> The thing is that I am one of those writers. I can't draw at all. I personally do not think the art should be considered any less important than the writing, even if the writing is the only element I can work with hands-on. I am wondering why other writers don't think this way. Maybe they do, but I don't get that impression from their works or their posts.

mikey >> What I'm really looking for are scenes where the art really says something in place of words. Moments where words would hurt more than help. Moments you really have to see rather than just read. I admit, I'm having a bit of trouble describing what exactly I'm looking for, so it's probably better defined through examples, and the O3 one was the only OELVN example I could find. I'll admit I haven't played every game completely (Actually, I don't think I ever finished River Trap.. I'll have to find that scene you're talking about...) so there may be more examples out there, but most of the games I've played don't have it. Perhaps there were moments that came close in some projects, but were somehow ruined by the text, by the author's need to explicitly state what is going on.

I think both of your examples has the potential to be the kind of thing I'm looking for, it would really depend on execution. I particularly like your first example because of the subtlety. That is one of the moments where if anything was stated at all, no matter how well written it is, would lessen the meaning. That's the kind of thing I'm looking for. (But it doesn't have to apply to just being subtle, anything that shouldn't be told through words...)

kara24601 >> I think one of the problems is that art plays second string because it is merely decoration, not that art is merely decoration because it is second string. I think that sometimes it's there just to be looked at, rather than to say something. Take real art, for example. The kind you see in museums, the masterpiece kind. Are you supposed to just glance at it and say "Oh, that's pretty"? Even if you do, was that the artist's intent? No, they were trying to say something. The art has meaning. I'm not saying anyone should go make a masterpiece work of art for a visual novel, but they should give it meaning, more than just "Oh, I'll just throw her smile sprite 'cuz she's laughing during that line". And I'm not trying to say that every single piece of art should mean something so grand and deep either, but some should, even just one scene...

DaFool >> I'm not trying to say that every piece of art has to be absolutely necessary to the project. I don't want people to ask "Do I really need this picture?" I'd rather have people ask "Could I tell my story without this picture?" (That might sound like the same thing, but at least in my head, it's not. Like I said, I'm not saying every piece of art should be vital. I really don't mind the smiling sprites, but I do mind the lack of some more meaningful images.)

Also, maybe having artist-writers, mangakas, and production artists make visual novels could be a solution. But I'm not looking for over-the-top art intensive projects. It really would be enough for me for a game just to have one scene where the art said everything.

F.I.A >> You might be right. Maybe the community is still in its infancy, and this kind of thing is beyond us. But there's already been games with high quality writing, as well as high quality art. Is integrating them to tell a story, high quality or not, that much more difficult?


Maybe I don't really need that "scene" I keep preaching about. Even if I ignore the desire to have that "scene", I still feel like the art element of a visual novel isn't as appreciated as it should be. Visual novels should be a holistic experience, with all of its parts of equal importance. Yet I still get that feeling the art is just tacked on. I imagine it's because the writing is viewed as much more important, but why is that? Because there's more writing than there is art? Is that really such a great reason, especially since it seems the art is what takes more effort? And what about the microgames? They're not filled with hundreds upon hundreds of pages, there isn't that much writing to them... and yet the art still feels tacked on, to even such a small project. While some of them are probably done out of either necessity or a desire for minimalism, but if someone was purposefully aiming for that length, should they be able to get away with tacked on art? Maybe I should start a separate thread, "The (Exaggerated) Importance of Writing", to find out why it is always so much more important...

[DaFool]

And what about the microgames? They're not filled with hundreds upon hundreds of pages, there isn't that much writing to them... and yet the art still feels tacked on, to even such a small project. While some of them are probably done out of either necessity or a desire for minimalism, but if someone was purposefully aiming for that length, should they be able to get away with tacked on art?

Uh, I don't think the art was purposefully 'tacked on'. Its just the result of having waaaaay too many contributors for a single short story. There's more unity in something that uses a single artstyle.

Mikey's examples are good. The problem is that I can only envision them in mikey's games. While I would love a mystery story with a sudden revelation at the end, I just can't bring myself to write such a thing.

Maybe you just need more mikey's games Or more people providing art, as long as mikey directs their application.

[M12]

I think visual novels have artworks, because we live in a "visual society", as many call it. A lot of people these days lack the imagination, and prefer to be guided by images and sounds. It makes their job of reading easier too. Oh and also, a lot of VNs are "girl games", so people would want to see the girl, not just imagine them through a piece of writing.
Yep .

[papillon]

The thing is that I am one of those writers. I can't draw at all. I personally do not think the art should be considered any less important than the writing, even if the writing is the only element I can work with hands-on. I am wondering why other writers don't think this way. Maybe they do, but I don't get that impression from their works or their posts.

Will you leave your projects unreleased forever if you can't find an artist who is good enough, cheap enough, and available enough to realise your vision?

Or will you eventually declare to yourself that the art doesn't matter THAT much?

Again, I don't think people REALLY don't care about art, I think people have to compromise in order to get their projects out there.

[DrakeNavarone]

Will you leave your projects unreleased forever if you can't find an artist who is good enough, cheap enough, and available enough to realise your vision?
Or will you eventually declare to yourself that the art doesn't matter THAT much?
Again, I don't think people REALLY don't care about art, I think people have to compromise in order to get their projects out there.

I mention in my previous posts that I'm not concerned about the quality of art in OEL games. If there aren't any artists willing to meet my insane demands (what'll be necessary for Evergreen Valley coming to mind here), then yes, I will do the art myself, and it'll turn out rather poorly. But isn't that in itself a reason why the art is important, if I am willing to reduce to overall quality of a project with terrible drawings just so it HAS drawings? If the art really wasn't important at all, I'd just leave it as a text file and point my audience towards that, but that's not the case. There are things I want to do with my story that I don't want done in words. It would ruin the feeling, if not for others, at least it would for me. And since it's my project, my opinion is what matters most. I would rather have a game with decent art in it, sure, but if push comes to shove, I'll release the game with my art, my god awful drawing skills burning the eyes of everyone who sees it, just to have those moments where I need the art to say something.

[DaFool]

If there aren't any artists willing to meet my insane demands (what'll be necessary for Evergreen Valley coming to mind here), then yes, I will do the art myself, and it'll turn out rather poorly.

Have you thought about serious recruitment at deviantart? For those writers who have recruited deviantart people from outside the forums (afaik the deviantart people here who are here were into VNs in the first place), care to share experience? How does one determine reliability when you work with an artist?

[frumplstlskn]

I've heard lots in this thread about how artists just finish something and post it on deviant art with no work involved. This is very far from the truth.

Most artists on deviant art are terrible hacks and they won't improve because there's no criticism there. Artists are always constantly studying and practicing to become better artists. When they do a piece, they draw it and retool it many many times to make it either anatomically correct or just better. They post it for critique and change it more to be better. Same with CG'ing. It all takes time. Most good artists don't post on DA for the reasons I stated above, or they do and just don't get many hits because they won't go to everyone else's page and write dumb circle jerk comments. Some people are talented enough to quickly finish really awesome stuff, but not most people. Art takes years to improve, so it might seem like people just have the talent but it doesn't come without time.

Where I'm going with all this is that artists don't have it easy as you think they do. I know because I'm versed in prose and visual art. I must say I find the latter more frustrating and time consuming.

[DaFool]

Most artists on deviant art are terrible hacks and they won't improve because there's no criticism there. Artists are always constantly studying and practicing to become better artists. When they do a piece, they draw it and retool it many many times to make it either anatomically correct or just better. They post it for critique and change it more to be better. Same with CG'ing. It all takes time. Most good artists don't post on DA for the reasons I stated above, or they do and just don't get many hits because they won't go to everyone else's page and write dumb circle jerk comments. Some people are talented enough to quickly finish really awesome stuff, but not most people. Art takes years to improve, so it might seem like people just have the talent but it doesn't come without time.

Thank you very much for that honest revelation. I was wondering for a while about how talent springs up, and thought that deviantart was the end-all of things, and I thought something must be wrong with me since I have no deviantart account and it takes me too much time to produce less than satisfactory results.

Your comments finally enlighten me.

Thank you. I'll go back to hard work and practicing, one project at a time.

[Watercolorheart]

By and far, people always send me notes saying: can you teach me to become a better artist?

Lord, I have a whole bookshelf full of how-to-draw books before I figured out that most if not all were full of biased bullshit trying to keep real artists out of the field ... and everyone has to find their own path ...

I'd say, whether you start with pen or paper or a mouse, practice is a must. I think I was drawing for 5 years before I realized that I sucked at it. 3 more spent trying NOT to suck at it. Now at age twenty-one, I'm a little closer to seeing just how much I know ... and how much I still need to learn.

[Jake]

Lord, I have a whole bookshelf full of how-to-draw books before I figured out that most if not all were full of biased bullshit trying to keep real artists out of the field ... and everyone has to find their own path ...

I think that's a little unfair. I suspect most of them aren't written particularly to keep 'real' artists out of the field, but just to get the authors a quick handful of cash off the back of people who likely never will be 'real' artists because they keep looking for shortcuts.

All of those books I've seen have some useful information in, but they also predicate their existence on those shortcuts, which works fine so long as you want to replicate the images in the book but doesn't help you learn to draw. So people see very quick progress when they first start, but then that doesn't go anywhere.

Using the term 'real artist' here to mean 'person who actually takes their art seriously', I guess.

I'd say, whether you start with pen or paper or a mouse, practice is a must.

Possibly the most valuable art advice ever.


(Anyway, it just struck me - going back to the original point - that I probably drew one such graphic just this evening, by strange circumstance.)

[dizzcity]

I just remembered something... I think a good example of what you're looking for, Drake, can be found in "When I Rule the World". I found that Serena's expressions added a whole bunch of meanings to the sentences I read, which I don't think would have been there if I didn't see her posture.

-Dizzy-

[DaFool]

Here's another thing...notice the trend for comic books / manga / cartoons / anime to be converted into live action.

That speaks for itself, showing that it's the story, the concept, and characters which are important, not how they look like beyond the immediately identifiable basics.

As a diehard handdrawn supremacist, I find that trend aggravating and insulting. It smacks the faces of all the artists who worked tooth and nail polishing their beautiful drawings, and then the bigwigs just decided to take the property and let overpaid actors butcher the hell they please with it.

So if you want further proof that the art really does not matter, well here it is.

Which is why after finishing up the projects I listed, unless I am really, really impressed, I will only work on my own stories from then on, polishing my writing instead. That way I will have full ownership of the characters and the world in their story.

[Jake]

Here's another thing...notice the trend for comic books / manga / cartoons / anime to be converted into live action.

...

So if you want further proof that the art really does not matter, well here it is.

I don't think that's quite the same at all, though - visuals are still being used to tell the story, it's just that now they're acted visuals rather than animated visuals. It's still a 'show rather than tell' method, just a different method. I got the impression that the original intent of the thread was more the distinction between "show Mitsuki happy" and "Mitsuki smiles at me cheerily".

So it would be a better analogy if there was a trend for converting anime and manga works into novels with no pictures. Whereas it seems the reverse; things like Boogiepop, MariMite and Haruhi are making the transition from non-visual prose works to visual animations and manga.

[DrakeNavarone]

I got the impression that the original intent of the thread was more the distinction between "show Mitsuki happy" and "Mitsuki smiles at me cheerily".

Yeah, this is exactly what I meant this thread to be about. Like I said, I believe in practicing "Show, don't tell." This may be easier to do with visual novels because you have art, unlike in pure writing. So I was just curious why more people didn't try doing this. When I started this thread, I thought everyone was telling instead of showing. But then I also realized there are plenty instances of showing AND telling. And honestly, I think that's worse.

Just look at the chronicle page for Wind on NNL's web page. A good amount of their deletions were blocks of text that just described what you could already see, and they got rid of those blocks on the basis that "a visual novel is a multimedia experience." So why aren't we looking at our vns like that, cutting out the unnecessary blocks of text that really depreciate the meaning behind the art?

And as for the live action thing, that's only more reason why showing is important. In fact, with live action, everything that's not dialogue is showing. It's all part of the visual experience. Perhaps I should have titled this thread "The Significance of Visuals" to get the point across better from the beginning, but it's a little late for that now.

And if anybody thinks a movie or a tv show would be alright working off story alone, trying watching it without the video cable plugged in. Actually, I have a little story about this, too. I'm currently interning at a cable company and they wanted me to do some testing on this new enhancement called Descriptive Video Service, which is basically narration for all non-dialogue parts (to help the blind "watch" tv, maybe?). After having watched the same show (the same episode, too) on loop with DVS during my testing, I decided for the heck of it, just to listen to the episode without glancing at the tv. Now while the show in question wasn't exactly a shining example of good television, it was still less of an experience listening to the whole thing than watching it. At home, I would never just listen to a tv show, even if I couldn't see it at the moment. I think that if a medium has multiple means of getting a message across, it should utilize all of the means (but not at the same time!). And while the OELVNs here do use art, there is so so much more room to do more with it. But everyone seems content in their cozy little corner, and it won't be long before claustrophobia sets in.

[DaFool]

Hmmm...looks like achieving that 4 hour epic will be harder than I thought *gets some cutting shears ready*

But I seriously dislike replacing descriptive paragraphs that take 10 seconds to write with illustrations that take 10 hours to draw. So in the meantime, I will tell, and only show what I think are key scenes. But agreed, definitely no 'show and tell'. Just my 2 cents.