view the rest of the comments
Comic Books
A place to discuss comic books of all types, from old to new, Big 2 to indie, and everything in between.
Floppies, graphic novels, compilations, omnibusses (omnibusi?) are all fair game.
There is only one rule:*
Comic Books is a no judgement zone.
You can talk all you want about how Rob Liefeld is trash, Bob Kane is an asshole, or Frank Miller and Dave Sim’s politics have made them toxic, that’s all good.
If, however, another user is LEGITIMATELY a fan of something you don’t like, that does NOT make them a lesser person. Attack the art for being bad, not the person for being a fan of bad art.
* I lied. There are TWO rules... No piracy. Cover shots? That's good. Interior pages, in moderation? Sure. Full books? Links to pirate sites? That's how we get things shut down. :(
I'm not saying it's been a problem, because it hasn't been.
See our sister sites!
Marvel Studios! For all the latest on the Marvel Cinematic Universe!
https://lemmy.world/c/marvelstudios
For other cinematic content, hit up Movies! Aquaman is coming soon, followed by the big reboot!
And don't forget Movies and TV over at lemm.ee! A good place for discussing Marvel, DC and other film and television properties!
Want to talk BOOK books? See Books!
Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay? Becoming Superman? John Carter and the Gods of Hollywood? That's the place!
some did. davinci didnt. and since this is the example you came up with, i feel my point stands.
Your claim that Davinci had no sponsor runs contrary to what I'm reading. Do you have a citation to back that claim up?
did you read that? Because to me it really reads like it talks about davincis comissions. Which are not a publishing/patreoning deal. It even talks about his focus on his personal work outside those comissions. just because the word patreon is used in the article makes it support your point...
But for you i did another quick read of his wikipedia article (do you need a link to that or can you find that on your own?) and read that in the last 7years of his life he had the vatican as a patreon for his art. Before he had two other patreon for shorter times mostly for his engeneering, cartographing and organizing talent.
and to finish this petty argument of: even when all you claim is true. artist are still able to produce art without a publisher. which was my first point. heck even you can shoot him a donation so they are not as dependent on a publisher deal, if you feel that person deserves more funds. My original point was that a publisher breaking a deal, does not prevent the art from beeing made in principle. and this point stands imo, as i didnt see any conter argument against it yet.