- This topic has 18 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello, wonderful, wide world of KP!
I’m actually not sure if someone has already done a topic concerning this before or not, but it seems that the Art forum decided to fade away a little while ago, so I might as well ask: Do you prefer to have illustrations in the books you are reading?On one side, I’ve heard that people like illustrations (I think I’m mainly refering to character portraits rather than scenes) because it gives them a more complete personification of a character.
On the other hand, I’ve heard that illustrations can just become annoying and inhibit imagination because they are never how you pictured them in your head.
Personally, as an artist myself, I tend to become easily bored if I don’t have a reference point of what the characters look like before hand. Often what I do is wait until after I’ve read a book, and then go online and find fan art on Deviant Art. But I would rather have a portrait before I start reading rather than a long, clunky, awkward description.
I-J-Anderson Well if the book was written well, there won’t be a long, clunky, awkward description. 😛
I prefer to get my picture of the character from reading the book, not by an actual picture. It just seems more real to me that way. I could like looking at pictures of characters after I already have my own head picture, but not to get my perception.
That’s the right tag but it didn’t work…lemme try again.
I-J-Anderson
@emma-flournoy You need an @ symbol.
🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢
@Daeus Oh gracious, that was dumb. *headdesk*
@I-J-Anderson There!@I-J-Anderson, I don’t go crazy if there are illustrations in a book, but I would rather have a book with no illustrations. Illustrations can be good, but I as the reader would rather fill in the blanks on what the characters look like myself. Also, like Emma Flournoy said, if the book is well written there won’t be clunky descriptions. 😉 It’s when the illustrations are not what I want them to look like, that’s what annoys me. I’ll imagine this cool city, but on the very next page, a boring picture of the same city destroys the image I conjured. Maybe I’m exaggerating a little, but yeah… And I read one book where the pictures were the page before the events, spoiling the story. I eventually just ignored them.
So yeah… No pictures in my opinion. 🙂It really depends, @I-J-Anderson. Some books are good with illustrations. A lot of old classics have illustrations— things like Gene Stratton-Porter, and Ballantyne, and the like. I liked those because they sort of filled in the setting gaps the author didn’t spend much time on, though I could have filled it in without them. I guess what I’m trying to say is, I’m just fine without illustrations. It gives my imagination license to go wherever it wants. But illustrations (done well; I’m an artist myself and so can be extremely picky 😛 ) can add a lot to the color of a book for me without me having to fill it in. So I don’t mind if they’re there. Praise indeed, I know. XD
@i-j-anderson Most of the time I prefer to just use my imagination, but I do enjoy the illustrations in the old classics, like Henty and Ballantyne. Which do you prefer: sketches, or color pictures?
I don’t like it when the illustrations look different from what I imagined them being, but I think I still like having the images even despite that. They’re generally at least close and if I get a book with illustrations, the first thing I do is go through at look at all the pictures.
🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢
if I get a book with illustrations, the first thing I do is go through at look at all the pictures.
@Daeus ha! Me too! 😀*lightbulb* New fad everybody! Forget adult coloring books, the new thing is adult picture books!
🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢
I’m in. Where do we sign up to fund this thing? 😀
I don’t know, you do it @kate-flournoy. I only come up with the ideas.
🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.