Beau Peep Notice Board
Beau Peep Notice Board => Outpourings => Topic started by: Malc on May 01, 2011, 12:42:24 PM
-
I sell cartoons through Cartoonstock, as do some of you here I'm sure. I've actually met Joel and Ed, the guys who run Cartoonstock in person and they're lovely fellas, but either the submitted cartoons are processed by a computer system or they employ pedants, or they secretly hate me.
Today I got this back from them:
"Thank you for sending us this cartoon, unfortunately it has been rejected from cartoonstock because of a punctuation error. There needs to be a full stop at the end of the caption. Please make the change and resubmit. Thanks."
Indeed there was no full stop at the end. So what? It had no bearing at all on the presentation of the cartoon or the effectiveness of the gag, the way a spelling error would. Plus, I'M the bloody artist, aren't I? If I don't want a full stop at the end of the sentence, just leave it alone.
-
Absolutely, Malc! How dare they have standards?!!
-
...and you shut up as well
Note there was no full stop
Nor there neither
You get the point, I'm sure
-
Actually, it's only recently come to my notice that no speech bubbles in the Andy Capp strip ever end with a full stop. Exclamation marks, question marks, yes, but full stops, no - not one, possibly ever (I haven't checked them all). If there are two sentences within the one bubble, then yes, a full stop is used, but not at the end of the speech within that bubble. It's as if the end of the bubble itself is enough to signify the end of the speech... which is fair enough, really. Because it does
-
I occasionally get such emails and have to rectify submissions. One recent one was of a crowd gathering to welcome someone, and I had Press and TV guys in the scene. It was rejected because I had "BBC" on the side of one small camera. I had to remove it and just put "TV". Another gag, which showed a book with "Dummies' Guide to Ventriloquism", alongside another book entitled, "Ventriloquists' Guide to Dummies", was rejected for a similar reason. I couldn't change that because then the joke would be lost!
-
Yes, I had a Batman and Robin gag sent back just the other day because the characters are copyrighted. I was about to send them another couple which featured Superman and Spiderman, but I've done a little redrawing on each to change them to similar, but not obviously the same, super-heroes (Heroic Man & The Human Spider), and am about to send them off today. I'll let you know if I get away with it... 8)
-
I wouldn't mind, but the reasons for the rejections have no real validity. You CAN show Batman and Robin and Spiderman, etc, as characters as long as you don't use their trademarks, copy their original drawing or try to pass them off as actually being products (i.e. approved by the original creators).
Therefore I wish the "moderator" had done their homework regarding Fair Use, parody or Passing Off, which are all part of copyright/trademark law.
I used a cartoon recently for the Murdoch Press which had a copy of the US Presidential Seal in it. I've done similar cartoons with CNN logos and Fox News logos in them (in full or in part). Never any legal queries from the suits. As long as it's legit parody or comment, it is kosher.
-
Malc, the full stop thing is just ludicrous---particularly as they asked you to re-submit it in the "corrected" form. I'm guessing someone was having a bad day.
-
In fact, such grammatical pettiness is so ludicrous, I've a feeling Mince would have loved it.
-
Malc, the full stop thing is just ludicrous---particularly as they asked you to re-submit it in the "corrected" form. I'm guessing someone was having a bad day.
I guess there are two ways of looking at this. It does seem more than a little pedantic, and officious, but it also shows that our cartoons are being very carefully checked, and that can certainly benefit us as contributers from time to time, especially if there is a glaring error in our work that we fail to notice (it happens).
I agree that this 'error' appears to be insignificant, but I think on balance, I'd rather know that Cartoonstock are paying close attention to such details, than allowing any cartoon to pass through their gates unchecked. I also know there are many pedants among the 'cartoonist community' who would probably be eternally grateful that even an AWOL full stop was spotted and prevented from entering, and who would have been apoplectic with embarrassment had it not been (they know who they are... koff-koff!).
Unfortunately, these things can't be corrected by Cartoonstock themselves, since text is part of the artwork, and only the can or should be allowed to change it, and so it had to be returned for the change to be made. They could have let it go, but on balance, I'm happy to hear they didn't.
Sorry to the majority of you out there who haven't a clue what any of this is about, or care even less.
-
I agree that they are becoming pedantic. I sent in a cartoon and was told that they are rejecting it because it's "shit".
-
"that can certainly benefit us as contributers from time to time, especially if there is a glaring error in our work that we fail to notice (it happens)."
..0
-
Anyway, I acceded to their request.(http://malcmcgookin.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/pg-cowboy-latte.gif)
-
They should also roundup the full stop before they go for the Latte, as it appears to be escaping.
P.s. Nice cartoon and artwork.
-
I agree that they are becoming pedantic. I sent in a cartoon and was told that they are rejecting it because it's "shit".
How rude - they could have at least said "shite".
-
Yes, I had a Batman and Robin gag sent back just the other day because the characters are copyrighted. I was about to send them another couple which featured Superman and Spiderman, but I've done a little redrawing on each to change them to similar, but not obviously the same, super-heroes (Heroic Man & The Human Spider), and am about to send them off today. I'll let you know if I get away with it... 8)
Well, I have to report that Heroic Man and The Human Spider made it through the censors, but one of my caricatures did not, on account of copyright issues. It was this one. Thought Mince might enjoy it at least...
-
This pedant is confused. Please explain slowly and clearly.....I thought a caricature was meant to be easily recognisable, albeit with a "twist" in the artist's own style. I honestly didn't think copyright laws extended that far. I guess imitation being the sincerest form of flattery doesn't hold up in court!
ps love the banned result ;D
-
Thought Mince might enjoy it at least...
It's really good. Do you have a higher resolution version of the above? I dare say you draw for big companies and personal clients, so I was wondering if you already have some kind of procedure in place whereby I could steal the caricature and shamelessly pass it off as my own. :)
-
This pedant is confused. Please explain slowly and clearly.....I thought a caricature was meant to be easily recognisable, albeit with a "twist" in the artist's own style. I honestly didn't think copyright laws extended that far. I guess imitation being the sincerest form of flattery doesn't hold up in court!
ps love the banned result ;D
Thank you, Lil.
The likeness to Matt Smith isn't the problem here, I'm afraid. Had I simply drawn a caricature of his face, Cartoonstock would have taken it without hesitation. It's the fact I drew him as Doctor Who, and included the Tardis that did it. Both are copyrighted to the BBC, and therefore not images that can be used without licence for the profitable gain of others. That's fair enough for me. The caricature was originally drawn for a fun competition, and has been used on the cover of an in-house magazine (without payment), so I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. Glad you liked it. :)
-
Thought Mince might enjoy it at least...
It's really good. Do you have a higher resolution version of the above? I dare say you draw for big companies and personal clients, so I was wondering if you already have some kind of procedure in place whereby I could steal the caricature and shamelessly pass it off as my own. :)
Indeed I do, and the system is hot-wired to Scotland Yard. So with that in mind, I shall be mailing you a higher res copy forthwith.
-
Hello all,
I have been reading the latest and I am agog with the illustrious company I am in the midst of!
I had no idea you were all so talented and professional, you speak of stange things and places, me a mere mortal bloke, can only
dream of.
Love it all.
-
Bog's agog! ;D
Cheers, Boggy! Hey, we're all the same here - we all use the lavatory. Well, except Malc, that is - he has people who do that for him, and quite right too.
-
Tarks, I had two sent back just now, one is a Sikh off-licence owner advising a customer that the Jack Daniels is on special (punchline is "INDIAN SPIRIT GUIDE") and the other is a cartoon rendition of Captain Kirk from Star Trek. The Captain Kirk isn't a caricature, it's just a bloke with brown hair wearing a gold t-shirt (no Star Trek Logo) plus the black half-mast pants and boots they all wore on the Enterprise.
Neither one of these breaks any copyright or trademark laws, but it's not a battle worth fighting, I'll just send them back with the "corrections" made, although the Captain Kirk now is un-submittable because the whole premise of the gag is that it's a (perfectly permissible) parody of Star Trek.
This all reminds me of a thread we had on the Wisen at least ten years ago when one member objected to the words "singing doo-wop" as it was an offensive racial slur against Italians.
The cartoonist was incensed that he was being labelled a racist by some idiot who obviously had never heard the term 'doo-wop' as a popular musical genre. The argument went on for pages.
-
Malc, I can only imagine these rejections and suggested amendments are the result of past bad experiences, as it's certainly not in Cartoonstock's interests to turn away what are otherwise good quality cartoons and potential money-spinners for them as well as us. Perhaps they err on the side of caution, but I think I'd rather trust their judgement on these, rather than get all hot under the collar about it. It's never a reflection on the quality of the cartoon (or at least I've not experienced that one yet if it happens, thankfully), and always a technical or legal point. I still reckon that they probably thought they were doing you a favour in the full stop incident.
As for the "singing-doo-wop" thing, very few things surprise me about the sensibilities of some Wisens (sorry again to those who haven't a clue what we're on about) these days. Pages of arguments are not unusual (especially when you get stuck in :P). Did anyone take the side of minstrel pigeons?
-
See, I bow down to you all. I will sit back and just enjoy this one. Me, well I am just a fan of real good gags and excellent artwork.
My Mum aways said I laughed at the slightest things. "you would laugh to see a puddin' crawl she would say." Ah the East end!
Did I get he punctuation right?
I had a look at cartoonstock, my goodness gracious me, how am I supposed to do any work now?
Can I have some tips from you guys as to who to look for?
Bog
-
Yeah - look for me, Nigel Sutherland; the rest are all mince.
-
Tarks, I had two sent back just now, one is a Sikh off-licence owner advising a customer that the Jack Daniels is on special (punchline is "INDIAN SPIRIT GUIDE")
That should be easy to amend. Just have him advising on something like the peatiness of certain whiskies, etc. No product name, but still suits the gag.
-
Peeps,
I had a long hard look, love them, especially the ecclesiastical ones. reminds me of Hancock. excellent.
I just dont know how you folk do it. Do you all meet at parties and giggle over the odd sauasge roll?
what is the inspiration? I used to be a Larson fan, bought his entire works in Sarasota one year,
giggled for ages, I feel I have grown up...moved on and feeling better for it!
fanx!
-
I don't know how I do it myself sometimes, Bog.
I started out on a similar kind of level to most of the other cartoonists on this forum, but over time just kind of naturally rose to the top. Bit like cream, if you get my drift.
Thanks anyway for the kind words. I think I speak on behalf of "the rest" when I say that.
-
Bog, Larson's stuff is brilliant. Not quite as good as Nige's, but brilliant. I loved his work from the moment I saw his unique brand of madness.
We are blessed on this site by having regular contributions from three hugely talented cartoonists---Nige, Tarks and Malc. All three have different styles but I genuinely believe they are among the best in the business.
-
We are blessed on this site by having regular contributions from three hugely talented cartoonists---Nige, Tarks and Malc. All three have different styles but I genuinely believe they are among the best in the business.
He didn't mention me because everyone is jealous of my brilliance. Peepmaster learnt his stuff from me.
-
I have been guilty of taking all the brilliance found here for granted.
-
Oh, for goodness sake. We're just a bunch of ordinary guys who happen to be able to draw a bit, and do it for a living because we're completely rubbish at everything else. No big deal. We've been through puberty and go to the toilet like everyone else. Nothing special. Let's not get carried away.
We are blessed on this site by having regular contributions from three hugely talented cartoonists---Nige, Tarks and Malc. All three have different styles but I genuinely believe they are among the best in the business.
"Among"? >:(
-
Roger writes:
We are blessed on this site by having regular contributions from three hugely talented cartoonists---Nige, Tarks and Malc. All three have different styles but I genuinely believe they are among the best in the business.
I'm printing that out out and getting it laminated. I'll edit it a bit. Something like:
We are blessed on this site by having regular contributions from a hugely talented cartoonist--- Malc. All have different styles but I genuinely believe Malc is the best in the business.
Then I will have it put on t-shirts. Nothing gaudy, mind. I'm also, coincidentally, working on small action figures of me.
-
I knew I shouldn't have said anything.
-
My brilliance is, as yet, undiscovered.
-
You been through puberty? Damn, I knew this was one of those unique cliques. ;D
-
Well, I am indeed in the presence of greatness. It is a pleasure to be in your company guys, I guess hero worship is wasted in here!
so I will say no more, thank you all.
Larson is a very good, but like most things, seen them once, twice, three times and they do loose a fraction, the giggle factor goes.
I had a shed load of his books, but once I bought the collection I needed some space.
With all the talent here, is there a "come and get me stuff " website anywhere? books, the Larson publicity machine leaves
nothing to the imagination.
My Peep originals are in pride of place and draw a lot of comment from chums, although many will confess to not reading the Star,
sad eh!
I will be adding to my collection very soon, the framing bloke likes me a lot too and is offering 10% off...
sure there is a gag in there somewhere.
I just wish I could draw......