digest #309

Don Rosa donrosa at iglou.com
Mon Nov 6 15:37:28 CET 2000


> From: "Fluks, H.W."
> Don:
> > "Incredible Shrinking Tightwad"
> Am I right in assuming that you did
> - a 3-part version for Egmont
> - a 1-part version (2 different splash panels)
> - an extra page's worth of panels for Gladstone

From: Kriton Kyrimis
> Perhaps they'll be printing the story in two parts, so that they can use
> both the uncensored version and the extra page that Don made to convert
> the story into a two-parter.

Er... both of these statements are either incorrect or are not stated
clearly. Let me explain --
With all my stories for Egmont, I simultaneously do TWO versions. One
version (well, just as regards a certain page or pages) is the 2-part or
3-part version and has big splash panels on the top half of the first pages
of the chapters with plot-recap caption boxes and a scene that usually
recreates the last panel in the previous chapter. The other version is a
1-part version with additional story and art for the top halves of those
pages mentioned above -- in place of the splash panels there are
multi-panel half-pages with some gag or bit of plot that is not essential
for the story and won't be missed by the readers that see the serialized
versions. Both of these versions are available to Egmont publishers or
other publishers, and my ongoing challenge is four-fold:
First, I am trying hard to let all publishers know that the 1-part version
is readily available to them on request. This does not work all the time,
even when the publisher knows it -- for example, In Holland they always
print the wrong 3-part version of the story in one piece, with the annoying
and inexplicable half-page splashes suddenly interrupting the plot -- they
seem to know it's wrong but they don't want to color the pages themselves
and just use the computer-coloring that Egmont has already done on the
serialized version. (This would be annoying to me since the readers would
think that *I* am inserting these meaningless and redundant half-page
panels into my stories, but the Dutch editors don't tell their readers the
names of the people who write and draw the stories anyway, so I try not to
worry about it.)
The second challenge is to get Egmont to send the correct art even when the
publishers correctly *ask* for the 1-part version. According to the
publishers, they only receive the correct art about half the time, at least
this is what they tell me, I dunno. I sometimes must supply the publishers
with the correct art they need. It seems to me that it would be simple if
Egmont always just sent *both* versions to the publishers, but I can
imagine this would cause great confusion with those publishers who are not
so adept at understanding comics as they should be.
The third challenge is to get Egmont to send the correct script with
whatever version of the art they send. I sometimes must supply the correct
dialogue, etc., to the publishers (I did this recently for KOMIX).
The fourth challenge is to get the publishers to recognize and care whether
they get the correct art they ask for. It seems to me that this should be
painfully obvious if the editor looks at the art that he is sent -- he'll
see those sudden redundant half-page splash pages in the story's middle and
know that something is wrong -- but apparently some publishers don't pay
that much attention or something because they will use the wrong art and
say they didn't notice any problem (i.e. the German Rosa albums).
But ALL of these problems are so easily avoided since the publishers only
need to send me an e-mail when they have a problem, which I will answer
within one or two hours, and immediately send them whatever art or script
they need, all at *my own expense*. I do this for selfish reasons because I
am anxious for my stories to look nice even if I don't get paid for their
re-use.... I have a lotta pride in that stuff and I've already gone to
extra effort to make alternate versions of my stories for however a
publisher wants to use them. So I figure I am only protecting my investment
in time and effort when I spend more time and effort and my own $ to help
them use my stories in such a way that does not embarrass me. And this pays
off well with some diligent publishers to whom I am grateful!

Anyway, as for the "Incredible Shrinking Tightwad", I did not do extra art
just for Gladstone so that they could convert it into a 2-parter. That art
already existed. The extra art I did for Gladstone (and, therefore, free to
any publisher who used the story after them) was simply to expand one part
of the story that I thought was too abrupt when I had to trim pages from my
original script to fit it into the story-length limitations that Egmont
used to give me (3-parts, 8 pages per part, no more than 24 pages). Now
they have thankfully loosened that structure up so I can make two part
stories rather than 3-parters, with each part being whatever length needed
for the plot, and with the page length being anywhere up to 25-30 pages,
plus or minus. (You can't believe how much easier that makes plotting a
story for them! Thank you, Byron!)







More information about the DCML mailing list