Cartoonists are untrained artists, while illustrators are more trained.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I feel like there are comic book artists who are comic book artists, and then there's comic book artists who are cartoonists.
Cartooning is for people who can't quite draw and can't quite write. You combine the two half-talents and come up with a career.
Illustrating is more about communicating specific ideas to a reader. Painting is more like pure science, more about the act of painting.
Well, there are better cartoonists now than there ever have been. I firmly believe that. There's some amazing work being done.
Not very many people can draw who are illustrators today.
Obviously there's not much options when you're a cartoonist - you pretty much either work at home or rent an office I guess, and working at home just seems easier.
James Thurber was an inspiration because his drawings were so primitive. I am self-taught - I didn't go to art school - so I thought when I started doing them, 'If James Thurber can be a cartoonist, I can,' because his stuff is very raw.
Student cartoonists as well as professionals should always be careful that they're not doing a cartoon that already has been done.
You know, comics were created at the same time as the cinema. And the cinema very quickly became a major art. Cartooning didn't become a major art. There's a reason for that. People don't know how to deal with drawings.
I've been trying to make this argument that digital comics and print comics are both art, but there are subtle differences.
No opposing quotes found.