Q: Love reading the blog and getting a little insight into how caricature and MAD Magazine works. One thing I’ve always wondered: when you’re working on a MAD movie or TV show parody, what do you get from the writer? Is it a script, with just words? Does it include sketches? Are you responsible for all the sight gags, or are some of them laid out for you? Who decides the panel layout and what happens in each panel?

A: Everything starts with the writer, but there are a lot of hands involved in a MAD parody before the final results are printed in the magazine. The editors and art directors at MAD act as the filter and and conduit between the artists and writers of a given movie or TV parody (or as the MAD staff calls them “continuity pieces”). I have zero direct interaction with the writer of a MAD piece… everything goes through the staff. If I have a question or need clarification over some point or intention of the script, I call Sam Viviano or Ryan Flanders in the MAD art department and if necessary they go back to the writer.

What I receive from MAD is a copy of the writer’s script that has been edited by the staff and the entire piece laid out into complete pages with every panel, word box and text in place. I get the writer’s script because it will describe a given panel’s needs in some way. Sometimes it’s no more than the names of the character speaking and what they say. Sometimes it’s a short sentence or two just describing the scene. Sometimes the writer might get more specific about some gags they want thrown in.

The splash page of a parody is where the most detail is usually described by the writer, and it’s where the editors and art staff at MAD will do the most work and specifics as far as the visuals go. This is simply because splash pages are complex animals that need a lot of problem solving to make work. There is usually a lot of dialogue, spoken by a lot of different characters. The dialogue usually needs to go in a certain order to make sense, and that means the characters need to appear across the splash in specific places and can’t be moved about. Within these limitations the splash “scene” must be worked out to include all the action and environment needed, must “read” and move the eye well, and must also include plenty of gags and (hopefully) be funny… that’s a lot of problem solving.

When I first got started working for MAD I usually got a Sam Viviano “doodle” on the splash layout, which demonstrated what he and the editors where envisioning when they placed the text and laid out the splash as they did. After a few years Sam stopped doing that because they had confidence I would come up with my own solutions that would be effective. Today it is rare but very occasionally Sam will do a rough sketch on the splash if it makes it easier for him to show me than to tell me what he is thinking on a particularly complex layout.

The writer seldom includes visual gag directions. I would say 99% of all the gags you see in a MAD parody that do not have anything to do with the written text will be ones put in solely by the artist. I can really only think of a handful of visual gags that I was specifically asked to include in a MAD piece, although I get “suggestions” a bit more often. Some writers more than others will suggest visual gags… Desmond Devlin usually has a couple of suggestions in his scripts, whereas Dick DeBartolo or Arnie Kogen only occasionally get specific with the sight gags.

Here’s some examples of what is typical in a MAD continuity piece. This is “Botchmen” from about this time last year, written by Desmond. Here are the first few pages of the script:

Printed copyright text was added by me for this post.

As you can see, Desmond described the splash scene in a general sort of way, leaving plenty of room for interpretation. He also specified two visual gags: the “World’s Worst Dad” coffee mug and the 60′s Batman and Robin cameo. In the first two panels of page two he briefly describes just the scene itself.

Here is the layout as sent to me by MAD:

Click for a closer look…

The splash is pretty complex and Des’s description of showing both a man being tossed out of a high window on a skyscraper AND having a recognizable figure talking at ground level is obviously impossible. This was one of the rare recent instances where Sam also sent along a rough idea of the visuals for the splash. Sam always tells me to feel free to ignore his suggestions and explore my own solutions, but he is a real genius when it comes to layouts and I seldom can come up with anything that is better than his roughs:

Click for a closer look…

I didn’t stray far from Sam’s layout. I included the two gags that Des asked for and included a bunch of my own. Here’s my pencil rough, drawn at print size right on the printed out layout:

Click for a closer look…

And the final:

Click for a closer look…

Here is how the first two panels described in the script above turned out:

I added a few visual gags to these… nothing very elaborate… the gag clothing in Funnyman’ closet, some feathers on Dan’s coat, the scribbles on Wackjob’s mask and the homage to the Rorschach’s weird sounds from the graphic novel.

The movie and TV parodies in MAD are a truly collaborative effort between the writer, the editorial and art staff and the artist. They are by far my favorite thing to work on for the magazine.

Thanks to Robert Gidley for the question. If you have a question you want answered for the mailbag about cartooning, illustration, MAD Magazine, caricature or similar, e-mail me and I’ll try and answer it here!

This is a new video promoting the International Society of Caricature Artists. I have been a member since 1997 and served as president for two years in 1999 and 2000.

I have written plenty of posts over the last few years extolling the virtues of the ISCA. If you do caricatures in any capacity in your work it is a very worthwhile organization to be a part of.

The announcement of the new executive team at DC Entertainment- Jim Lee and Dan DiDio (Co-Publishers of DC Comics), Geoff Johns (Chief Creative Officer), John Rood (EVP, Sales, Marketing and Business Development) and Patrick Caldon (EVP, Finance and Administration), sure wasn’t just made and then glossed over. Both The Beat and Comic Book Resources have already had some informative interviews with these folks over their new duties, the directions they envision and the future of DC and it’s properties. DC Entertainment is, of course, the owners of MAD Magazine. Naturally those who work for and with MAD want to know what it all means to the future of our beloved rag. The articles linked above mention MAD specifically a few times:

From The Beat:

Q: How will Vertigo fit in with the new structure?

Nelson: All of the imprints are equally important key parts of the business. Geoff will also be involved in shepherding them in the future. With Vertigo, the importance of creator owned properties, creator generated properties, as an expansion and supplement to what we do, is a huge part of what the DCU is moving forward. Vertigo is enormously important and Dan and Jim’s mandate is to give it the same business parameters and goals as each of the imprints have. Geoff Johns will be looking at it with Karen to make sure we’re using the library to its fullest. The same will be true of MAD Magazine. We have a very deep and broad library.

From CBR:

Jonah Weiland: So all three of you guys are going to be driving the editorial direction of this company?

Jim Lee Correct.

Dan Didio: And let me back that up for a second. i don’t want to diminish Karen Berger‘s role because she is the voice and direction for Vertigo, and while we will be involved in overseeing that, she will still be so integral to everything that goes on there. And that runs the same at WildStorm with Hank Kanalz and at MAD Magazine with John Ficarra.

and

Geoff Johns: I am competitive in a way where I just look at competition in terms of making better products and getting our characters out there more. I’ve always believed that the DC Universe has more potential, and DC as a whole is a more diverse publisher than any other company out there. That’s what is great about it. I spent most of my years in the superhero world, but DC has Vertigo. It has MAD. It has all these other things that make it, quite frankly, better than any other company out there. And I think everybody’s extremely competetive in a very healthy, aggressive way – including Warner Brothers.

So what does all this mean for MAD?

There had been meetings between the new forces behind DC Entertainment and the editorial team at MAD prior to this announcement, and what I’ve heard echo the sentiments expressed above… MAD is considered a valuable part of the DC library and a valuable asset. Maybe it doesn’t have the feature film potential of Green Lantern or the more traditional superhero fare (although don’t count out a “National Lampoon” like foray into MAD branded comedy films… “Up the Academy” notwithstanding), but MAD has plenty of assets and potential in other areas of media. DC Entertainment once again holds the rights to a MAD television show now that the license with FOX’s “MADtv” is over. MAD‘s web presence is a blank slate, and there has been virtually no foray by MAD into social media like Facebook, Twitter, etc. There is so far no MAD iPhone app or other type of phone/PDA portal. Lots of possibilities exist.

Personally I think many of the naysayers who believe MAD‘s time is over are not taking into account the whole picture. If the profitability of the sale of actual comic books was the center of the business of comics, then companies like DC and Marvel would have been out of business a decade ago. The best selling comics today sell at circulation levels that would have seen them canceled as failures in the heyday of the medium. Comic books themselves have become the development vehicles for “properties” that then translate into other media that generate real revenue: movies and TV shows that then in turn sell toys, tie-ins, advertising, etc. The new people in charge at DC Entertainment seem to understand MAD has similar potential.

It’s not as simple with MAD as it is with Superman or Batman… MAD is unique. In a way MAD is less like a “title” for DC and more like a little comic book company of it’s own. It’s got a lot of “titles” or properties of it’s own with the potential for branching out into other media. For example Spy vs. Spy has already been a revenue generator for DC with it’s licensing for the Mountain Dew commericals, video games, etc. Other properties from the MAD family, either existing or new ones, could see development under the MAD brand. That’s one of the reasons why the magazine itself is valuable whether or not it actually makes money itself.

Comic book writer Mark Evanier put it best on his blog back when MAD announced it’s switch to quarterly publication:

MAD will not go away. It’s too valuable a brand name to ever disappear. (National Lampoon is still around. It just hasn’t been a magazine since around 1988.) Today’s announcement probably translates as follows: “We need to keep the name alive and to keep key staffers and contributors in the family. But it’s losing money and we’re going to scale it back and minimize those losses while we figure out what to do with it.” Its new configuration is not a long-range plan…and maybe that long-range plan, whenever they arrive at it, will restore MAD to its former glory in some venue.

Exactly. DC receives revenues from MAD via licensing of the name and format to other countries for their own version of MAD. There are advertising and other revenues from MAD properties coming in as well as the value of reprinted material from the nearly 60 years of MAD‘s existence. MAD just needs to make the transition from mom and dad’s magazine to a property the new generation will recognize and embrace.

The new team at DC seems to recognize the potential of MAD as an asset to the company and it’s future. It is exciting to be a part of what hopefully with be a re-energizing of the magazine and it’s continuation far into the 21st century.

UPDATE: See links at the bottom of this post to recently posted messages from the new DC Comics and DC Entertainment team.

Rumors were flying around MAD that a big announcement was coming soon from parent DC Entertainment. It came down this morning:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: DC ENTERTAINMENT NAMES EXECUTIVE TEAM
Thursday, February 18th, 2010

By David Hyde

Jim Lee and Dan DiDio Named Co-Publishers DC Comics

Geoff Johns to Serve as Chief Creative Officer

John Rood Named EVP, Sales, Marketing and Business Development
Patrick Caldon Named EVP, Finance and Administration

(February 18, 2010 – New York, NY and Burbank, CA) DC Entertainment, founded in September 2009 to unleash the power of the DC Comics library of characters across all media platforms, has named its executive management team, including new co-publishers of DC Comics and a Chief Creative Officer, as well as heads of Sales/Marketing/Business Development and Finance/Administration. Diane Nelson, President, DC Entertainment, made the announcement today.

The new senior executive team includes Jim Lee and Dan DiDio, who have been named Co-Publishers of DC Comics, and Geoff Johns, who will serve as Chief Creative Officer of DC Entertainment. Additionally, John Rood has been named Executive Vice President, Sales, Marketing and Business Development, and Patrick Caldon will serve as Executive Vice President, Finance and Administration. Each of these executives will report directly to Nelson.

“DC Entertainment’s new executive team is a creative ‘dream team,’ with accomplishments and talent unrivaled in the business,” said Nelson. “This announcement continues and underscores DC’s legacy as the ultimate destination for creators. We’ll benefit enormously from the deep experience this team represents, while re-energizing the direction and focus of the company. I’m excited and honored to have each of them with me at the helm of DC Entertainment.”

“With this new leadership team, Diane will be able to fully and respectfully integrate DC’s brand and characters, not only as key content drivers in the film division, but across all of the businesses of Warner Bros. and Time Warner,” said Jeff Robinov, President, Warner Bros. Pictures Group. “I am very proud and excited about the accomplished executives who are charged with expanding this powerful library. They each have a diverse and complementary skill-set and are deeply committed to contributing to the DC Comics legacy.”

Prior to his current post, Lee served as Editorial Director, where he oversaw WildStorm Studios and was also the artist for many of DC Comics’ bestselling comic books and graphic novels, including “All Star Batman and Robin, The Boy Wonder,” “Batman: Hush” and “Superman: For Tomorrow.” He also serves as the Executive Creative Director for the upcoming DC Universe Online massively multiplayer action game from Sony Online Entertainment.
Lee is an award-winning comic book illustrator/creator/publisher who started his professional career at Marvel Comics where his work on the X-Men continues to hold the all-time sales record for single issue sales at eight million copies sold in one month. At Marvel, he also drew the Punisher and co-created many characters, the most popular being Gambit, featured in 2009’s “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” feature film. In 1992, he started his own production company, WildStorm Productions, and co-founded Image Comics, an independent comics company which quickly grew to become the number-three North American comics publisher. His most notable creations, “WildCats” and “Gen 13,” saw life beyond comic books as a CBS Saturday morning cartoon and as a direct-to-video animated movie distributed by Disney, respectively. In 1998, he left Image Comics and sold WildStorm to DC Comics.

DiDio most recently served as Senior Vice President and Executive Editor, DC Universe, overseeing the editorial department for the DC Universe imprint, including the ongoing adventures of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and scores of heroes and villains. He also worked to develop new titles with the industry’s premier writers and artists. At DC Comics, DiDio has spearheaded such bestselling projects as “All Star Batman and Robin, The Boy Wonder,” “Identity Crisis,” Green Lantern, Teen Titans and The Outsiders.

Before joining DC in 2002, DiDio was with Mainframe Entertainment, where he most recently served as Senior Vice President, Creative Affairs, overseeing the development, distribution, marketing and promotion of all Mainframe’s television properties. Prior to that, he served as Executive Director of Children’s Programming for ABC, where he was also a publicity manager, having started his television career at CBS, working in a variety of positions.
Johns builds on his current role at DC from being one of today’s most prolific, popular and award-winning contemporary comic book writers with this new executive role. He is a New York Times bestselling author who has written highly acclaimed stories revitalizing Green Lantern, Superman, the Flash, Teen Titans, and the Justice Society of America for DC Comics.

Johns began his comics career creating and writing “Stars and S.T.R.I.P.E.” for DC Comics while at the same time working with film director Richard Donner. After acclaimed runs on Flash, Teen Titans and the bestselling “Infinite Crisis” mini-series, Johns co-wrote a run on Action Comics with his mentor, Donner. Johns has also written and produced for various other media, including the acclaimed “Legion” and “Absolute Justice” episodes of Warner Bros. Television’s “Smallville” and Adult Swim’s “Robot Chicken” and “Titan Maximum.” He also wrote the story of the DC Universe Online massively multiplayer action game from Sony Online Entertainment.

Rood returns to Warner Bros. after 10 years with the Disney ABC Television Group, where he most recently was Senior Vice President of Marketing, ABC Family. While at ABC, he also consulted for ABC News during the recent transitions at “Good Morning America” and “ABC World News with Diane Sawyer.”

Prior to Disney, Rood worked for six years at Warner Bros. Consumer Products, negotiating promotional deals with national advertisers using Warner Bros.’ properties, including the DC Comics characters. He has also worked in promotions for Equity Marketing on the Burger King account and in advertising for Leo Burnett on the McDonald’s and Miller Brewing accounts.

Caldon most recently served as Executive Vice President, Finance and Operations of DC Comics and MAD Magazine. Before that, he served as Senior Vice President, Finance and Operations, and his other posts at DC include Vice President, Finance and Operations, and Controller, the position in which he joined the company in 1985. Prior to joining DC Comics, Caldon spent a decade at Warner Communications in corporate accounting and as Senior Vice President and CFO of the Cosmos soccer team (owned by Warner Communications at the time).
DC Entertainment, a division of Warner Bros. Entertainment, is charged with strategically integrating the DC Comics business, brand and characters deeply into Warner Bros. and all its content and distribution businesses. DC Entertainment utilizes the expertise the Studio has in building and sustaining franchises to prioritize the DC properties as key titles and growth drivers across all of the Studio, including feature films, television, interactive entertainment, direct-to-consumer platforms and consumer products. The DC Comics publishing business is the cornerstone of DC Entertainment, releasing approximately 90 comic books through its various imprints and 30 graphic novels a month as well as continuing to build on its creative leadership in the comic book industry.

So… what does this bode for MAD‘s future? Unknown… but it’s better I think to have comic book people who are both familiar with the business and have their hearts in it to be in places of authority than a lot of ‘executives’ who maybe haven’t read a comic book since 6th grade. I find this quote especially telling of the future of MAD”

“With this new leadership team, Diane will be able to fully and respectfully integrate DC’s brand and characters, not only as key content drivers in the film division, but across all of the businesses of Warner Bros. and Time Warner,” said Jeff Robinov, President, Warner Bros. Pictures Group.

That is in keeping with some of the other media that is being explored as potential outlets for DC’s library of characters and properties… including MAD.

• A Note from Diane Nelson
• A Note from Jim Lee and Dan Didio
• A Note from Geoff Johns
• A Note from John Rood
• A Note from Patrick Caldon

I found this video interesting:

Those are a lot of eye opening statistics. I’m not sure how any of that applies to anything, but there it is.

Here’s a tiny little study of Johnny Galecki of “The Big Bang Theory”… actual sketch size only about 3.5 inches tall. The Lovely Anna, the kids  and I all love this show. I don’t usually enjoy sitcoms but this one is a riot. Any comic book/Sci Fi geek will absolutely appreciate the inside jokes, and it’s smartly written so you don’t have to be a comic book/Sci Fi geek to enjoy it.

Things are slowing up a little for me right now. Just three projects in the works right now:

• Animated movie storyboards- I did a few storyboards for the now defunct Mike Jones Animation Studios here in the Twin Cities, but that was years ago. After designing several animated characters for director Ray Griggs‘ upcoming film project, he tapped me to storyboard the four animated scenes in the movie.
• Private commission- If you are one of the many people who have written me over the years asking if I do private commissions and I have given you this answer, please don’t be angry. This was requested by a colleague whom I greatly respect as a gift for a celebrity friend’s 50th birthday… and I could not say no to her.
• Workplace poster- a rare one with a caricature in it! Here’s the pencil rough:

If there is one thing I really hate drawing, it’s bicycles. Just ask Stephen Pastis about drawing them. We all wish we could draw bicycles as well as Rick Kirkman.

I got a few cool cartoons drawn by some of the cartoonists who I accompanied on the recent cultural exchange trip to Cuba:

Image © 2010 by Brian Narelle

Brian Narelle drew this one on some note cards he’d brought for doing doodles on. The joke is that the one souvenir I wanted from Cuba was an EMPTY cigar box. I wanted one of the authentic wood boxes to use in the studio for pens and stuff. I had a hard time finding one, so I bought a box of 10 cigars (Partigas No. 4s) which we smoked throughout the week and brought the box back with me. In fact, one of our tour guides gave the group a present of a partial large box (for 25 big cigars) of Montecristos and specified while the dozen cigars inside were for all of us the box was for me, and our tour organizer Paul Bardwil also gave me a small empty box of Cohiba Cigraillos as a gift. So I ended up bringing three different sized empty boxes back with me. However…

Image © 2010 by Brian Narelle

I made the mistake of being honest with the customs people, and they confiscated all three of my empty boxes. I asked them if it was illegal to import GARBAGE from Cuba, and all I got back was a smart-assed answer that anything made in Cuba, garbage or not, was illegal to bring back to the U.S. I should have torn the tops off the boxes before I allowed them to toss them in the garbage, because you can bet those cigar boxes went home with some customs agent. Anyway, Brian sent me the cartoon above to commemorate the occasion.

Another thing that happened while I was in Cuba… my kids and The Lovely Anna bought a dog. That’s right, I came home to find a new puppy in the house. Hillary (Rhymes with Orange) Price gave me this cartoon on our return:

Image © 2010 by Hilary B. Price

She also sent me a box a week later containing… an empty Cuban cigar box! Apparently she has a neighbor who does a lot of traveling to Cuba or something, because it’s a real one and now resides in the top drawer of my studio cabinets next to the drawing board and contains all my pen nibs and holders! Thanks, Hilary!

I did a few caricatures when in Cuba as well of a number of the cartoonists we met as well as of our two tour guides, Ludwig and Mayen:

They were a lot of fun. Check out a bunch of great cartoons telling about the trip from Lex Fajardo.

Q: I have a technical question for you; What rules do you use for shading your caricatures? I checked several of your examples and in many of them it is not clear to me where did you place your light source. It seems, for instance, that you imply primary and secondary sources… Moreover, do you have suggestions on where to place the light source for typical poses? In particular, with profile caricatures I have lots of problems…

A: I am not sure if you mean live caricatures or just caricatures in general, but both have the same answer: the light source is placed where it makes the most sense, but I am not very militant about it.

In an illustration I will establish a basic light source that leads both to the best definition of the primary subjects and the creation of a believable and appropriate environment. Since any kind of light source and the shading that defines it will help create the illusion of mass with something you are drawing, it’s only important to find one that makes sense for the subject and scene, and stay consistent with it. Since most real life situations contain multiple light sources either via several different lights or the reflection of a single big light (i.e. the sun), there is plenty of room for fudging the exactness of the shading. To be honest, unless there is a very strong light source in a given illustration I will just keep a general one in mind for things like shadows on the ground and big shaded areas, and I am a lot less rigid when it comes to things like figures and smaller objects. I am sure lots of errors can be found in my illustrations in that regard… I am just not very anal about it. My thoughts are that unless your light source and shadows are so wildly inconsistent as to be noticeable and distracting, then they are not a problem. The one thing I need to keep in mind, and this is especially true when I combine several different caricatures from various photo references into one illustration, is to keep my light source consistent even if the photo references show me different shadow patterns. I may have to ignore the shadows in the reference photo and change them to fit my illustration’s light source.

Of course, some illustrations call for a very specific and demanding light source to establish some important aspect of the image like the mood, time, atmosphere, etc. Then I am a lot more wary of the specifics. I don’t plot anything out, I just wing it but I imagine the scene in my head and how the light from that dominant source would play on the objects around it. I use simple rules like the darker the surroundings and the brighter the light the darker and more dense the shadows become.

This MAD splash called for a night scene and I added two distinct light sources,
The window and the clock, and lit the figures and room accordingly.

This portion of another MAD splash also had some strong light sources

The environment of this scene needed a light source established by both values and color

When it comes to live caricatures, I don’t often do anything fancy… no time. I use a consistent light source from above and to the left of the subject, and then when working will allow for a reflected light source from the lower right, but I am not slavish with it. Suggesting the reflected light is actually easy to do with the live techniques I use, because it’s simply a matter of doing all the shading values on the left side of the face (my left) a fraction of an inch from the actual contour line of the features. I do this both with the blending stomp and the airbrush. This creates a natural feel of reflected light there, allows the airbrush’s slight over-spray a cushion and does not require I go in and add a color with that reflected light. Sometimes, especially when I work on wall samples, I will use a little white colored pencil to sharpen the reflected light edges:

You can see a suggestion of reflected light on the left side of Cosby’s face

And again but more subtly on Stewart’s face… more noticeable on his suit

This sketch has a strong outdoor light source

Slight underlighting was important for this sketch to establish the maniacal
quality of the “Dexter” character

Definite secondary light source on Leo’s right side (viewer’s left)

When it comes to specific lightsources for specific poses, then again I would say you need to examine what you are trying to accomplish with the image and decide accordingly. Something that you want to look dynamic or dramatic will require a strong and dramatic light source. A more intimate or quiet scene would need a more suffused and subtle lighting effect.

As to profiles… those are so flat and dependent on contour lines to establish form that there is little for you to use a lightsource on unless you so something intense. I guess I would stick to a broad light located in front and above the face, and have some shadows under the brow, the nose, the bottom lip, and jawline and the ears and more subtle shadows under the cheekbones.

Thanks to Fabrizio Lorito for the question. If you have a question you want answered for the mailbag about cartooning, illustration, MAD Magazine, caricature or similar, e-mail me and I’ll try and answer it here!

I had been thinking about writing a post on why doing caricature focusing on nothing but ridicule and insult is different than doing caricature focusing on capturing the essence of the subject… but my buddy Ed Steckley beat me to it.

From Ed’s Blog:

Caricatures that are downright mean and nasty, for apparently no other reason than to be an outlet for the creator to freely (and passive-aggressively) be a jerk and go for a cheap laughs are, in my opinion, the lowest form of caricature.  They have nothing to do with satire OR parody, and frankly may be the least cerebral of all types of humorous illustration.

I couldn’t agree more with Ed’s comments. In some cases “capturing the essence” of a particular subject in caricature does demand you are derogatory or unflattering, but there is a big difference between doing what the subject calls for and bashing away without rhyme or reason.