Transformers 'Ongoing' #2 Five-Page Preview

first post
Yay!

This looks really cool, especially with omega supreme!

I still need to read issue 1, though!

Say what you will about the art, that Omega Supreme looks bad ass

who is the bot behind Jazz and Mirage in the last panel??

The Omega does look really good. The Hot Rod on page 7 of the set looks like crap. Good to see Brawn though. I hope he punts Hot Rod into next week.

rabstanz wrote:who is the bot behind Jazz and Mirage in the last panel??

Since Streetwise is on Earth in disguise, I call that guy Hot Spot. Although I think he looks a bit more like RID Fire Convoy, but I do believe it is Hot Spot, leader of the Protectobots.

is that Spike or Daniel with a girl? anyways i like the artwork on Omega Supreme.

who's that behind "Jazz" on page 5? (i put in "Jazz" because i don't know who it is.)

Simply put...WOW. Omega looks awesome, as does Jetfire. I'd like to see Omega's alt mode, because it looks like he has tanks on his shoulders now...

I like the body designs mainly due to the fact that they dont have chicken legs or wheel feet.

I know I'm going to come off as a huge dick for this but to the person who put the News topic "BAD ARTWORK" on the main page, Do you have any kind of degree in any form of art? You can't call it bad art just because It's different. I'm not a fan of this style myself for this continuity especially when we're so used to the new age G1 style we've seen in previous IDW works

I remember when the movie designs came out everyone was like "What in the name of Primus is that shit" But i think Most ppl are a bit more accepting of that "art" of the movieverse and accept it for what it is.

Different art, yes. Will it take some time(Maybe A LOT)to get accustomed to, Sure. But "Bad Artwork" it is not.

tigertracks 24 wrote:

rabstanz wrote:who is the bot behind Jazz and Mirage in the last panel??

Since Streetwise is on Earth in disguise, I call that guy Hot Spot. Although I think he looks a bit more like RID Fire Convoy, but I do believe it is Hot Spot, leader of the Protectobots.

Good call! i totally forgot about streetwise so i agree it probably is hot spot, although the orange chest looks a bit weird. also very nice to see brawn. i don't think i've seen him since the dreamwave ongoing.
and is it just me or does jetfire look like an overgrown energon skyblast?


the only problem i have is with hot rod. I actually do like what he is saying and think it makes alot of sense, but i don't buy the drastic change. After disobeying orders to look for sunstreaker (who he said he didn't even like)in maximum dinobots, after all the guilt from his "failed" mission from his spotlight, and after getting ironhide killed leading a rescue operation he begged prime to let him do, i can't believe he would just pick up leave his comrades behind.

I don't like how they are putting the names of the autobots near the characters in the comic issue. It was fine in issue one, but I know who Optimus Prime is, I don't think I would have forgotten what the characters look like just after one issue.

Aeros wrote:I know I'm going to come off as a huge dick for this but to the person who put the News topic "BAD ARTWORK" on the main page, Do you have any kind of degree in any form of art? You can't call it bad art just because It's different. I'm not a fan of this style myself for this continuity especially when we're so used to the new age G1 style we've seen in previous IDW works

I remember when the movie designs came out everyone was like "What in the name of Primus is that shit" But i think Most ppl are a bit more accepting of that "art" of the movieverse and accept it for what it is.

Different art, yes. Will it take some time(Maybe A LOT)to get accustomed to, Sure. But "Bad Artwork" it is not.

Well-stated Aeros. I completely think that the title splash on the homepage was in poor taste and was immediatelt displeased by it. I personally love the artwork and think that Don's angles and scene settings capture what tone the faces supposedly lack. I actually think that the facial design is better because the reader can create more depth with each character by pondering what they are thinking or feeling without immediately seeing it drawn out on the page for them. As far as taking this in-fiction, these robots have been at war for very little for millions of years... wearing your emotions on your sleeve usually goes out the window early on for battle-hardened warriors and career soldiers.

Mechabreaker wrote:I don't like how they are putting the names of the autobots near the characters in the comic issue. It was fine in issue one, but I know who Optimus Prime is, I don't think I would have forgotten what the characters look like just after one issue.

This a very oriental way of respecting and introducing key characters (specifically the "good guys") within a story that takes place in a more far-removed setting from previous stories. We see it in Asian cinema all the time, and it has even been homaged in the all-CG 'TMNT' film.

Anyway, I love that Furman wrote Hot Rod a tad more serious due to the war and his choices, and now I am loving this story so far. Great work by both the writer and the artist in my opinion, though I suppose many already knew where I stood on this series.

Aeros wrote:I know I'm going to come off as a huge dick for this but to the person who put the News topic "BAD ARTWORK" on the main page, Do you have any kind of degree in any form of art? You can't call it bad art just because It's different. I'm not a fan of this style myself for this continuity especially when we're so used to the new age G1 style we've seen in previous IDW works

I remember when the movie designs came out everyone was like "What in the name of Primus is that shit" But i think Most ppl are a bit more accepting of that "art" of the movieverse and accept it for what it is.

Different art, yes. Will it take some time(Maybe A LOT)to get accustomed to, Sure. But "Bad Artwork" it is not.

I put it up on the homepage because I am extremely disappointed with this art direction. I've owned this site for almost the past 10 years, I pay quite a bit of money to have this site available for all of you to enjoy, and I feel that I am entitled to some form of editorial opinion on the homepage of my site from time to time. I generally refrain from expressing my opinion on the homepage of this site. However, I feel so strongly against this art style which I feel is a poor expression of the characters we have grown to love over the past 25 years that I feel it is necessary to express my opinion which I feel is shared by many other fans that do not have the ability to express their opinion as loudly as I can.

I think it is obvious that I strongly dislike Don's art style. What I dislike even more, is why WE have to deal with this art style. From what I understand, Don wanted to draw Transformers his way. He was tired of drawing Transformers in the style to which we have been accustomed. Again, from what I understand about this was that he only agreed to come back to drawing Transformers comics if he could draw them the way that he saw fit. He had apparently picked up this new art style during his absence of drawing Transformers comics over the past couple of years. I strongly dislike that he was allowed to come back to drawing Transformers comics on this pretense. If he was able to express his views, I should be able express mine in a way that I see fit when necessary.

I apologize if you feel that this is inappropriate. I am only doing what I feel is best for the Transformers fandom and Transformers brand overall. Thank you for expressing your opinion against me. I welcome opposing views and expressing oneself.

I just went through several pages of this artwork. The faces on the Autobots is essentially the same in all of Don's new artwork. Drawing the same expression on the different characters (not to mention the same "face designs") is simply either lazy or really shoddy artwork IN MY OPINION.

Where's a smile? Where's a grin? Where's a different looking face? Where's something that makes these characters stand out from one another other than their bodies from the neck down?

The unique facial designs of the primary Transformers characters is one of their greatest traits (and attributes). To make all of their faces similar is a strong dis-service to these characters that we've known for the past 25 years.

To me, it'd be like drawing all of the X-Men or the Justice League with the exact same faces, just different costumes. I don't think people would like if Superman and Batman had the exact same face and facial expressions but with different costumes.

I changed the title of the spotlight on the homepage to say "Everyone's Got The Same Face" instead of "Bad Artwork: Part 2". Hopefully this expresses my opinion better.

Aeros wrote:I remember when the movie designs came out everyone was like "What in the name of Primus is that shit" But i think Most ppl are a bit more accepting of that "art" of the movieverse and accept it for what it is.

And I got Megatron's head changed by doing the "Transformers 101" stunt back in early 2007 or late 2006 because of me using the homepage on this site to call them out on how terrible the first version looked. I don't express my opinion on the homepage of this site that often, but when I do ... it's because I feel pretty strongly about something that I think just isn't right. It's been since the first reveal of Movie Megatron since I've expressed my opinion. I feel strongly enough about Don's artwork that I feel it is time to do it again. You are welcome to disagree with me. I'm just expressing my opinion.

Let the Haters hate away. Hate, Hate, hate.

"It's so easy... To destroy something..."

As for this Blue Autobot here, I'm enjoying every bit of this art style and I hope we see TOYS based on the ACTUAL WORKING TRANSFORMATIONS that are CAREFULLY DRAWN IN someday. If fan reaction to the art style stays this divided, we may see someone more popular take over. So I'm gonna BUY as many of IDW's G1 ongoing products as I can to support this book. That's all I can do, so that's what I'm gonna do. I feel great sadness for everyone that can't just sit back and enjoy this wonderful book that IDW is carefully crafting for us.

I like the IDEA of a G1/Movie style blend. I do think a lot of the art is this series looks...lazy. And the faces bother me. It's TOO MUCH detailing and shading. It doesnt make it look more mechanical, it doesnt even make them look more like the live-action movie bots. It just makes them looked elderly and hawkish. Honestly, I have never been a fan of Don's work. Different strokes for different folks.

Oh, and Ryan, while I agree with your points about the art. I can see where some people's concern comes up. The simple "Bad Artwork" statement just comes off as a bit abrasive. I'm thinking of people who may not visit this site often, or are perhaps visiting for the first time. They might be a bit put off by it. Now, this is your site, which you've put a lot of work into over the years, so you're definitely more than entitled to say whatever the bloody heck you may catch a whim to say anywhere you want on the site. But, might I suggest an alternative that may actually further your cause? Write a news article, outlining all of the faults in the art. Don't pull any punches, go through it in detail. Sticky the article. Entitled it "Bad Artwork: Seibertron Speaks Out". This way, people can read it as a mission statement to voice our likes and dislikes to IDW. Also, the rest of us could reply in agreement to show the strength of our opinion. And those with contradicting views can express them as well. This idea would also serve to quarantine all the opinionated discussions of the art into one thread, instead of having the argument come up in every single thread posted about this series which merely compounds this divisive issue.

Anyway, that might be more effort than you have time to do at the moment. But it was a thought I had that would definitely get your voice (and the overwhelming opinion of the entire Seibertron.Com community) heard. Perhaps it might catch IDW's attention. And either way, I think it would be a service to the fandom to give them an opportunity to speak out as a resounding group rather than one or two single voices. And you still get your "Bad Artwork" title on the frontpage, but this time with a whole slew of evidence and voices behind it.

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'm speaking as someone who is pursuing education and training as an artist(formerly of Sheridan College in Oakville, Ontario, Canada, currently seeking an atelier to enroll at). The only reason I feel it's relevant to mention this is that I've witnessed some artists wave the "you have no right to criticize art unless you're an artist" card, which I see as something that parallels the approach of questioning of someone's credentials in order to invalidate criticism of artwork.

A person doesn't have to be a professional cook in order to say something tastes good or bad. The processing, analyzing, and ultimately forming judgment of visual information isn't something that requires a degree.

Aeros wrote:You can't call it bad art just because It's different.

I have yet to read anyone's opinion at this forum state that they do not like the artwork or that it's bad artwork simply because it's "different".

Ryan/Seibertron has recently posted the factors involved in his opinion of Don's artwork, specifically the way he portrays the Transformers' faces.

More than one person, including myself, have expressed similar criticism of how Don draws faces in previous threads discussing the ongoing monthly Transformers comic.

Aeros wrote:Different art, yes. Will it take some time(Maybe A LOT)to get accustomed to, Sure. But "Bad Artwork" it is not.

Maybe it's not "bad artwork" to you but the way in which you posted your opinion comes off as assertion of fact rather than a personal judgment of the artwork.

Personally, while I don't particularly like Don's current style with regards to the faces, it's not as simple as not liking the faces. My criticism is that the faces seem to possess little emotive potential beyond a few expressions. All of the expressions I've seen so far involve closed mouth deadpan faces, baring of teeth in grimaces or open mouthed showing of anger or pain, and what could be a smile but looks more like a rictus grin.

I think Don's intent was to create simulated facial features with mechanized components to bridge the gap between the humanistic G1/typical anime Super Robot faces and the mechanically heavy features of the live action movie Transformers designs. Unfortunately, he ends up creating very sinister facial features. I actually think this style of facial design, as Don is utilizing it so far, is great for the Decepticons but isn't successful when used for Autobots. Don did a great promotional piece for the comic where the Autobots and Decepticons are having an all out fight with Optimus Prime and Megatron in the center. Seeing this style of facial design on Megatron was very cool.

To me, Don's current style for the bodies of the Transformers characters is great. I have a definite bias because I'm a big fan of mechanical design(I love the complex designs of the live action movie CG models and I'm a fan of the Binaltech/Alternators and Alternity toy lines). My nostalgic side definitely enjoy the G1 style of blocky late 70s/early 80s anime robot designs but my eye for mechanical designs developed over the years of mecha fandom enjoys the more detailed style that Don is currently employing.

It's a shame that a lot of negative attention is centered around Don's facial style. I haven't read a lot of comments all around the internet on the rest of his artwork, for better or worse.

well anyways. just for fun, i nominate bumblebee as new leader.

err.. I'm wondering.. does anyone know what Hot Rod's new alt mode is supposed to be (I guess we find out in the next panel when he drives off..)

Sadly, (a word I use here with hesitancy, as I genuinely love all things Transformers and hate to have to associate my following opinions with the brand) I agree with Seibertron.

The faces are a major put-off. They are so distracting and obscurely dull that I am woefully confused by whatever might be going on behind the hatched lines. If they were wrinkles, I'd understand their inclusion, as wrinkles are a means of depicting life. But these horrors evidence none of that. There is no life behind these faces. If you look at the movies, the faces are done is such a way as to bring out the uniqueness of the individuals, not as a means to homogenize all with an assembly-line protoform within some ugly bulked-up armor.

That being the case, I would love to see a petition which calls for a return of facial features to something more readily identifiable. The bodies I can live with, but the faces? I don't butcher my family for fun: why would I want to open up a comic book to see such butchering done to friends?

Keep on, Seibertron. Your opinion, though rare, is the voice of the fandom.

After reading issue 1 a few times I have to say I like this new series and the art style. The bodies look more realistic than past interpretations while still retaining their G1 selves unlike the movies. The faces have to follow suit to make the bodies consistant. The glum look also helps sell the story. The Autobots are on a world where nobody want's them. Ironhide is dead, Optimus Prime just quit and the human's have judged all Cybertronians on Megatron's actions. The Autobots are hiding in caves and their future prospects are very bleak. If you were part of the group how would you feel.

On an other note, I want Hasbro to turn that Optimus Prime and Omega Supreme into toys.

So much hatred here for the new art.

I like it. It is something different, yet all the the characters are easily identifiable as their G1 selves. OP looks great, Omega Supreme looks more bad a@# then ever before, and as much as as everyone seems to hate him, Hot Rod looks good.

Just my opinion.

Prime looks bad ass and so does Hot Rod. I hope Hot Rod is in TF3.... yeah so I like Hot Rod you got something to say about it?? Get it? HOT ROD?

Ok...I have a thought on the art. Why does Bumblebee have his normal face at the end of AHM, and it changed so much in the five years that has passed to Ongoing? It also seems weird that they place "normal" Bumblebee on the cover. Did they explain this storywise, or is it just a change of artist?

Ok, here's what I was thinking as to why they all look the same: could it be, that they have all removed the outer face covering? I imagine that how they portray Bumblebee in the comic, is possibly what his face would look like under a mask. Just throwing that out there.

I'm ok with the art. The only time an art style ticks me off, is when it makes the comic unreadable. If you cannot follow what's going on from frame to frame because the artist cannot portray it with some polish, then it's rubbish.

Mechastrike wrote:is that Spike or Daniel with a girl?

You mean the half naked one?

No, they're not trying to emulate Michael Bay.

i like this series so far i like how the other bots jetfirs looks like vector prime almost in some parts ill wait for tpb

omega surpreme looks very omega looking

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.

Well first let me state again that I actually like the artwork in this series, it is what the movie designs "should" have been. I DO agree that the half naked girl was a desperate attempt to emulate Michael bay's "more boobs = more enjoyable" attitude.It was not needed in the story.
As an artist myself, and more sepcifically a high school art teacher, I can empathize with an artist wanting to put his own ideas and flavor into something he/she loves. I often feel that I am so busy trying to work within the established guidelines of MY field that I lose a little of my own personal identity as an artist. That's not to say that teaching art and illustrating Transformers comics is the same thing, but hey...Don might just want to get a little more creative for a while.
Now for some, this is a less than successful venture in that regard, hey it happens. Not every new idea is a moneymaker right? That doesn't mean he is wrong to try something new just because it is an "established brand." Transformers doesn't just belong to the G1 fans. It belongs to any and all who love the concept. Trust me, I hate Cybertron, Aramada, Kiss players etc etc....lol I liked Beast Wars, G1 and Transformers Animated where others do not. I have said it on here before, but I believe there is, and always will be, room for different interpretations of designs and characters within this universe, even if I personally do not care for every one.

Ravage Eject wrote:Now for some, this is a less than successful venture in that regard, hey it happens. Not every new idea is a moneymaker right? That doesn't mean he is wrong to try something new just because it is an "established brand." Transformers doesn't just belong to the G1 fans. It belongs to any and all who love the concept. Trust me, I hate Cybertron, Aramada, Kiss players etc etc....lol I liked Beast Wars, G1 and Transformers Animated where others do not. I have said it on here before, but I believe there is, and always will be, room for different interpretations of designs and characters within this universe, even if I personally do not care for every one.

I completely agree with this statement. One of the greatest assets to the Transformers brand is that there IS something for everyone.

I rarely express my negative opinion about things related to Transformers. It's been a while ... I'm using the platform that I have invested ten years of my life into to express my opinion, which I rarely do.

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?

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

Mechabreaker wrote:I don't like how they are putting the names of the autobots near the characters in the comic issue. It was fine in issue one, but I know who Optimus Prime is, I don't think I would have forgotten what the characters look like just after one issue.

This a very oriental way of respecting and introducing key characters (specifically the "good guys") within a story that takes place in a more far-removed setting from previous stories. We see it in Asian cinema all the time, and it has even been homaged in the all-CG 'TMNT' film.

Anyway, I love that Furman wrote Hot Rod a tad more serious due to the war and his choices, and now I am loving this story so far. Great work by both the writer and the artist in my opinion, though I suppose many already knew where I stood on this series.[/quote]

Well I didn't know this, and now I do... AND KNOWING IS HALF THE BATTLE!... Sorry, I couldn't resist. Still, It is a bit off-putting for me, and it will still take some getting used to, but I think it will be alright, at least the story is interesting, I will definitely be picking issue 2 up when it hits comic shops on December 9th.

LOVE the art!

I'm not going to quote or reference other posts, but this is my opinion on the new direction: I don't like it. Not only because of the art style, which I could maybe get used to if the faces actually had distinguishing features. Also because in the story they seem to be taking characters in completely different directions, all the while claiming it's supposed to be the same continuity. I have to wonder why on earth they decided to do such drastic changes with the beginning of an ongoing series, rather than one of their many opportunities to do a miniseries.

It's not just blind devotion to G1. If they announced from the outset they were going to do something different, then it would be different. But this is supposed to be a continuation of a world they've already established, which is clearly based on and strongly resembles the traditional G1 characters, in both appearance and mannerisms.

I'm just going to wait this out, since I only buy the trades anyway. If neither the art nor story improve, I might just pass on this whole thing.

Side note, does that Brawn resemble the upcoming NEST Global Alliance toy?

Seibertron,

As someone who has absolutely hated everything having to do with the movie, including the sweet sweet Bludgeon figure because it has stupid movie feet and a "too many pieces" skull face- do not edit yourself.

The art is bad. The inking is bad. The faces are all the same and poorly designed.

The terrible movie aesthetic has invaded almost every aspect of the TF Universe, ruining figures like Universe Galvatron and messing up otherwise cool comics like this.

You run this site, and are more than entitled to your opinion. This site is your opinion. You made it because there are specific aspects of Transformers that you enjoy. When something comes along that doesn't sit well with you, tell it like it is.

Neck down is good. Neck up is bad.

Grimlock no like pointy chins.

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!

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.

Mate, don't change it. objectivity and honesty is something that is needed a lot more of these days, especially in these kind of markets. End of the day, you are a fan first, owner of this site second-if I posted my opinion on something i love somewhere I wouldn't expect to ever have to change it, in words or meaning. Your expressing your opinion, not telling everyone to accept it. If your 'name being in lights', so to speak (b'cos your the head honcho here) makes new visitors, or those unfamiliar with the brand think they should be warped by your words (as some have suggested here) then they simply need to stop being sheep. For gods sakes, your not our father.

Personally, i do agree with you, but anyone who says this post is therfore biased can spin on it.

And you like R.I.D?? so do I, i seriously thought I was stranded on that desert island!!

As an artist, I can sympathise that don wants to try something different-but just on a personal note, a few years back I was 'forced' to do a dragonball 'doujinshi' by some folks, but I'm really glad it never left the pencil stages-I'm a good artist (there is some tf art here if you check the gallery)
[url]http://hinomars19.deviantart.com/[url]

but db style is not my strong point. It came out bad, b'cos despite that fact, there was no way I was gonna draw characters i loved in any way other than they were known to look. It's a difficult line to walk, I think. But I guess kudos to don for having the balls.

Oh, and no, you don't need a degree or talent to appreciate art, for those who seem to be talking nonsense. artists are not superior beings, I'm no different to the next average joe who wants to appreciate something in front of him, the fact I can draw it and he can't makes jack all difference. As an artist i may be able to appreciate the reasoning behind the change of art style, as mentioned above, slightly more than somone who isn't-but education and experience don't govern raw emotion. If someone's gut instict to a drawing is 'ooh, that's bad', then no crash course, or strecthed out study of the subject should (or can) change that.

and back to seibertron, stick to your guns, my friend

Take a look at G1:

Soundwave
Shockwave
Rumble/Frenzy
Optimus
Omega Supreme
Bumblebee
Ratchet
Devastator
Astrotrain
Megatron
Grimlock

Just in random order- they all look different. Sure, Bumblebee and Ratchet could be said to have the same face type- but Bumblebee was drawn "stout" while Ratchet had a thinner face. Sure Optimus and Soundwave both had mouthplates- but would you mix them up?

Don's faces make everyone look like old men with mustaches. That's not just bad design work- but terrible design work- especially if it's done for a character driven story. If your characters can't even properly emote- to tell an emotional story- you are indeed in a heap of trouble.