The Standard Daily Comic Strip Size: 14″x4.5″ – The height can vary slightly, but most cartoonists start out producing strips at this size. The benefit of working this large is that when reduced, any shaky or insecure lines will be smoothed out if you’re publishing on the web, and you’ll have a good high resolution version for later print use. Use this size if you’re interested in creating a newspaper size comic strip.
Advantage: Plenty of room to work in, and when reduced, lines will be smoothed out, and minor mistakes more easily ignored.
Disadvantage: The strip will have to be scanned in two parts unless you have a over-sized scanner.
Tweaks to The Standard Size – There are a number of tweaks that can be made to the standard comic strip size based on what use the cartoonist is putting the strips to, and to accommodate workflow issues. The imporant thing to remember is that the primary objective is to create a strip that when reduced to it’s published format, is both legible and clear.
Option 1: Slightly reduce the size to fit on a standard sheet of paper. In keeping with the traditional ratio, a 14″x4.5″ strip could be reduced to a 10.5″x3.375″ strip so that it fits on a regular sheet of paper. Working on 8.5 x 11 is a tremendous time saving tool if you can get away with it. For one thing, if you’ve got to scan your work, you can do it in one pass on almost any scanner. The second advantage is that working smaller will mean less room to work, but will also result in a slight speed increase because there’s less distance to cover and because you’ll be forced to simplify more.
More variations to come in the future. Below is the original post:
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the size I work at. Anyone who’s paid attention and read through the archives has no doubt noticed the change in sizes my strip has gone through. I think I can count six different sized off the top of my head. Really though, when you think about comic size, only two things matter, proportion, and font size. Lately I’ve switched to the larger 4:3 ratio size, and I’ve been using a larger font size. I think I’ll stay in this size for a while (so I can leave open the option to submit to ZUDA as I mentioned in a past post.)
That being said, after getting a few of these larger comics under my belt, I went and took a look at some of the old Calvin and Hobbes sunday strips, and I realized, he worked HUGE on those sunday strips. To put it in perspective, I was producing my single strips at 14″x4.5″ and when I switched to this larger size, I changed to 12″x9″, which is a little less than two standard strips (obviously). I measured the difference in strip size (approximately) between one of the later Watterson sunday strips, and a daily strip, (both had about the same letter height) and the standard strip as printed in the treasury, was about 8″x2.5″, while the sunday strips came in at 10.5″x7.375″ (7 and 3/8ths) which is almost four times the size of a daily strip (don’t let those decimals scare you off, I did the math and it’s like 20 square inches vs. 77.175 square inches) Meaning, if I wanted to attempt the internet equivalent of one of those sunday strips, I’d basically have to make a strip twice as tall as I’m making it now.
All these numbers bring me to the point I’ve been trying to get to (by going the long way around.) All those people who say “internet cartoonists can work at any size they want”, obviously haven’t seriously considered creating comics on the web.
Think about it… Cartoonists always have to have one frame follow another, and unless you want to alienate viewers with side scroll, you can only work so many pixels across (around 950 to conform to the most popular monitor resolution.) Which means depending on text, you’ll still only get four to six frames in there. Then you need to start another row. Depending on if you want more text with pictures, that one might have to be the same size as the previous row, which was probably somewhere around 200-400 pixels tall. Now with two or three rows, you’ve just filled up someones monitor completely. Do you trust your comic is interesting enough in those first few frames to compel a scroll? It’s even worse if you decided to to work strictly vertical, because then you have to deliver the goods within a panel or two at max to compel a scroll.
Where am I going with all this nerdery? Basically, I want to make comics that look as awesome as some of those later Calvin and Hobbes sundays. Technically I could match the general square inch to text size, but realistically could I really create giant freakin’ comics? One giant page scrolling strip a week? I don’t know about that. I may just have to accept that no matter what medium they work in, cartoonists are always going to be limited in some way, in this case it just happens to be by time and intolerance to extreme scrollage.
Actually, earlier Calvin & Hobbes Sunday strips conformed to the industry standard Sunday format, consisting of two optional panels, one long and one short, and then several more at fixed sizes, allowing the strip to be laid out in 3 different aspect ratios (for different fractions of the page). I don’t have the exact specs on me, but you might want to think about those, if just as an excersize in pacing.
Yeah, I know what you’re talking about. Shoe uses it still, but I don’t think many new comics do.
I believe the freedom of the web does enable the artist to create the vision as he invisions it, without compromise. That being said, I am still partial to the standard comic strip size.The absence of limitation does not constitute the necessity for alteration; “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.
I disagree. The majority of artists always compromise, that’s how it is. You have to balance what you want to do, what you’re technically able to do, and what you have time for. On the web you also have to consider business considerations (meaning you need regular updates to keep traffic and interest alive) and you balance creative expression with usability, and accessibility. All these balancing acts are compromise.
Another thing you have to keep in mind is the average comic reader’s attention span. Personal Preference: I don’t want to scroll to read a comic strip. But I’m a fan of the classic format (obviously). So you have to find a comfortable balance between what looks great and what is too much. I always thought it was a challenge to fit interesting artwork and a great gag into a standard size. But I think that as long as the comic strip holds people’s interests, it doesn’t matter how big you make it. You have to find your audience’s comfort zone and exploit it like a mofo.
Well said.
“The majority of artists always compromise…”? I said the web enables the artist to create his/her vision without compromise. That an artist chooses to compromise their vision is just that, a choice. I agree that in order to be successful in using art as a souce of income, you have to make compromises based on marketing strategy. I may never make a dime drawing comic strips, but that does not stop my ability to post them on any number of websites in any size, shape, or level of vulgarity I envision. That is what I was speeking about. If I don’t like the format or censoring a syndicate has required for my art to be seen , I have other options that were not availabe in past generations.
I also agree that it can be a challenge to fit good art and and interesting gag into the conventional comic strip format. But that is what my vision is, the conventional strip size. Maybe I lack the originality I have seen in the layout of so many web strips, and I enjoy reading your strip, Jim, but I am stuck with seeing things in a standard view.
Some people like being “alienated with the side scroll.” When I Am King is one of the most interesting things out there, and it’s almost entirely horizontal: http://www.demian5.com/index1-e.php
See also: Infinite Canvas on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_canvas
Just food for thought.
Hey thanks jon. Yeah, When I am King is good.
Some viewers may not mind, but I can’t in good conscience submit people to side-scrolling, I don’t care what scott mccloud says.
Jim:
I don’t know if you’ve seen this article yet (http://comics212.net/2007/08/06/copyright-and-zuda/). Some interesting comments about Zuda and cartoon copyright and trademark ownership.
Thanks worth… Yeah, I haven’t seen that one, but I have been looking into it more in general, and there are a number of concerns about publishing with them. To be honest, I don’t think I will, because that stuff makes me nervous, but we’ll see.
well put. when i first started the layout and design for my stuff i knew about the 10.5?x3.375″ but the local indiana paper refused to let me submit it this small. they needed the 14″ length. i was confused and dazzled but rolled with it. i recall reading some C&H stuff and looking at grass detail and being amazed at the time/energy that he put into it. thanks for the insight. now i need a bigger work station! lol.
well put. when i first started the layout and design for my stuff i knew about the 10.5?x3.375? but the local indiana paper refused to let me submit it this small. they needed the 14? length. i was confused and dazzled but rolled with it. i recall reading some C&H stuff and looking at grass detail and being amazed at the time/energy that he put into it. thanks for the insight. now i need a bigger work station! lol.