Now that I’m more well known for comic writing than art, most of the correspondence I get asking about breaking in or feedback is writing-based. People ask me to check out their comics, read their scripts or give them feedback on their pitches. With all the deadlines I have on my plate it’s almost impossible to do that, unfortunately, and I generally send a polite “no” form letter reply.

I was really surprised to be asked about inking. Comic art inking is one of those things that’s taken for granted by a lot of people, but when you see great inking you’re amazed at how much an inker can do to improve and clarify the pencil line work. I was asked if I could put an inker in touch with editors/art directors and I was actually curious about what their inking portfolio would look like. They sent along a gallery link, I checked it out and the small jpegs there made it very difficult to tell how much their inking was bringing to the work. I requested high/print resolution samples to check out and they obliged.

Figuring that other people might find the feedback helpful too, I’m reproducing my reply below:

—

Thanks for sending those files along.

Looking at the high resolution images gives me a much better idea of where your current inking skills are at.

In short- you still have quite a ways to go before you’re ready to apply for professional comic inking work. You’ll need a lot of careful practice, analysis and more practice before you could reasonably be considered for an inking job with a worthy page rate.

Inking is more than just following the penciler’s line work. It’s about enhancing, clarifying and strengthening the material that’s there. In many ways it requires the same kind of skills in drawing (perspective, anatomy and composition) that the penciler has, but with an extra eye for finished lines and storytelling clarity.

When you’re working over top of a good penciler your inks are noticeably better, but even then you’re not enhancing the lines or improving the sense of 3 dimensional form in the pencils. Where the anatomy or perspective is muddy you’re not able to fix or improve upon it. There’s no sense of depth created by using different thicknesses of lines or outlines, there isn’t a consistent sense of texture adapted to the penciler’s style and there’s still a lack of confidence in the final lines themselves. Your work currently feels more like tracing than inking, and there’s a big difference between the two. It’s absolutely natural to be missing these qualities at the start when you’re learning how this stuff works and building up your skills, but those qualities stand out as work in process, not finished professional samples.

I’d recommend analyzing the work of top-notch inkers like Tim Townsend. He has great samples on his deviantART page, quite a few with pencils and inks side-by-side so you can see how he enhanced and clarified the base pencils with his own subtle flare and substantial drawing ability. You can also see how he adapts his approach to different pencilers and brings out extra subtleties in the final work. Dig into his archive and look very closely at the quality he brings to the page:

http://timtownsend.deviantart.com/gallery/

Inking positions are becoming much harder to get in the industry as things go more digital and publishers cut corners by using pencil art for many books. Getting work as an inker means you have to really bring a fantastic quality to the page and your work has to be that much better than the people already getting what little work there is. It’s a very tough job to break into and it requires a very skilled hand and keen eye. Even then, the opportunities may be limited.

I hope you understand that I’m trying to give you feedback, not trash your hopes. Only through hard work, analysis and practice will you get where you want to be and along the way there are all kinds of twists and turns. I wish you the best of luck with your creative pursuits and hope you find what you’re looking for down the road.

Sincerely,
Jim

Here’s a question I received about comic writers breaking in to the business:

—
Thanks for the advise… but this works only for people that can attend comic cons or similar in the states. What about aspiring writers that live in other countries and have no possibility to attend those events? I’m asking because I’ve read from many artists that were hired by sending samples, but that seems not to work for writers. In fact, the majority of the USA companies do not receive written submissions (if not packaged together with art). In fact, I consider this policy as unfair and discriminative.

Can you give some advice to this? Meaning, is there any other way to be considered than to socialize with the editors at cons? I understand reading samples takes a lot of time, but is it not part of the editor’s job to “discover” or attract new talents? (and by “new talents” I do not imply novelists, TV writers or any other writers that have entered other media and seem to be “offered” a gig writing comics, even if they haven’t done that before!). Thanks in advance for your answer and for your time.

—

Writers definitely have an uphill battle because, unlike an artist, it’s incredibly hard to take a quick look and see what a writer is capable of.

An editor’s job is to make sure their projects are taken care of by capable people who can deliver high quality professional work on time and, ideally, whose involvement with the project will help sell the work. Testing and nurturing new talent is generally low on their priority list compared to managing current ongoing projects. Trying new people is risky and difficult compared to using people who have a body of work and proof that they can hit their deadlines. I know it can be frustrating seeing writers plucked from other talent pools but if someone has writing work in other mediums (novels, TV, etc.) at least there’s proof they can tell stories, even if it’s not comic specific. Why should a publisher (a business) take a risk on using unknown/untested talent when they don’t have to? What’s the advantage?

If you had a choice between working with people you knew could do the work and others who might not and your job depended on making the right choice, I expect you’d choose the proven talent almost every single time. That’s not discrimination, it’s just common sense.

If I wanted to be a chef I wouldn’t just walk into a restaurant, tell people I could cook and expect them to take me seriously. I’d need to prove that I could be a chef by practicing my craft, slowly working my way up through the ranks until I had the skills and experience to give an employer confidence that I was the right person to be in charge of the kitchen.

The same goes for sports. People start with amateur teams, then intermural matches, single-A, double-A, triple-A and then, possibly, get their shot at the major leagues. You’re essentially asking why major league sports don’t randomly pluck people out of the crowd at a stadium to tryout for their team. Why should they? Why would they expect someone to be ready when they haven’t shown they can do it at all? Why hope for that one-in-a-million long shot amateur when they can work with capable people who are actively proving they can do the job?

The most consistent way to get an editor’s attention is by creating your own comics as a platform to show you can do the work instead of just sending incomplete sample concepts or scripts and expecting someone to take their time poring over it (and the hundreds of other submissions just like it) to see if it’s any good.

If you don’t have a body of work you need to create one and keep building. If you’re not willing to put in the time to create quality stories on your own then how is anyone supposed to trust that you’ll suddenly be able to do it ‘on the job’?

There’s no open spot waiting for you. You have to earn it.

You need to prove you can write complete stories and deliver quality before people are going to pay you to do it for them. That’s the simple truth of it. It’s skill, passion, hard work, promotion and a bit of luck all working in tandem.