Germ Viral Competition
Posted by Beau Bo D'Or in Uncategorized, tags: Current Events, ImagesTime to get your skates on to enter this year’s Germ Viral Awards.
I’ll be entering a couple of pics but competition will be tough this year with a greater awareness of the competition and an enlightened decision to encourage art students to enter.
Copyright restrictions are very tough which will exclude a few classics unless the creator is prepared to pay a library for an image’s use (and for each time it is used).
Alternatively, the creator can, using vectors or pixels, paint a likeness of the celeb/politician in question which is what I have done for one of my images.
I think this year’s competition is of immense importance to viral work, even greater than last year’s as I think this will signify the legitimacy and maturity of the viral medium from what is seen by some as a purely tits and ass medium to one that can convey serious messages as well as humour.
When Brian Sewell slagged of virals in The Independent as having “no intellectual foundation and being feeble rubbish.”, I believe he had only been exposed to the tits and ass virals that dominate some of the ‘top viral’ charts.
However, the word ‘viral’ is about the distribution of whatever someone wants to create and not about the content.
Brian Sewell’s generic attack on the viral medium is the same as him slagging off a gallery wall after seeing a painting he didn’t like.
Enter the Channel 4/Boreme.com viral competition here – Link.
I mentioned in a small interview for Channel 4’s website my respect for ‘traditional’ cartoonists and make the point that they have a greater creative freedom than those who may manipulate images.
The only reason that some ‘traditional’ cartoonists do not have a greater audience than they already have may be their reluctance to embrace the internet as a method of getting their work seen.
Some of this can be explained by inertia but, another key factor may be the creator’s belief that (frequently) an image needs to appear in the correct environment for it to resonate properly.
However, once a receptive audience becomes aware of a cartoonist’s work, that sympathetic environment can exist in one’s head. You don’t always need relevant editorial to frame the picture.
It may spell the death for aspiring viral creators like me, but it is good to see that some acknowledged traditional media talent have taken to the net as Morten Morland has done. – Link.
Edit – and also Matt Buck – Hack link to blog.
He also has his own website with an overview of his creative process as well as a portfolio. I previously mentioned that this site (not his blog) was a bit slow but it is fine now.
I don’t see any reason they can’t decimate the opposition by entering the Germ competition, not for the prizes, but to increase awareness of their work and that of the medium.
Entries (RSS)
“The only reason that some ‘traditional’ cartoonists do not have a greater audience than they already have may be their reluctance to embrace the internet as a method of getting their work seen.”
I totally agree with this statement. Frankly, the distribution costs are so low, and the effort required so minimal that I don’t see why all newspaper cartoons aren’t published on the web. It’s crazy that in order to show a friend that may not live nearby an interesting cartoon I have to technically break copyright laws by uploading a low-quality photo to an image sharing service. Cartoons are such an easily digestible medium that it boggles the mind that “traditional” cartoonists haven’t taken advantage of the net to get more exposure.
[...] Inspired by Beau Bo D’or. When I get my Mac back, I’m going to splice some masculine and feminine music into each 5 second switch in response to all the crazy talk that the hairdo switch was an attempt to make David look more masculine. Hah! [...]
You make a very good point, but with regards to the viral competition, I think it’s lack of awareness rather than will which is the main reason why so few ‘traditional’ cartoonists enter.
There are so many reasons why newspaper cartoonists are seemingly shying away from online publishing though (If you assume that they are…).
Without wanting to offend anyone, age probably has something to do with it. That plus the fact that the likes of Bell, Brown, Rowson, Garland and Brookes frankly don’t need bigger audiences than they already have through their newspapers. Young cartoonists trying to make a name for themselves should use the web for all it’s worth, but with the more established ones, the work is spread across the web anyway.
Contrary to for example America, where most cartoonists are syndicated, there is a well kept tradition in British cartooning for the cartoonists to be associated mainly with one or two papers. That probably explains to a degree why so few feel it’s necessary to push their work anywhere else once they’ve achieved that association.
What Conrad says about not all cartoons being published online is obviously true.
This has nothing to do with the cartoonists themselves though. It’s more to do with the speed (or lack of it) it has taken for newspapers to come to terms with the fact that the online section needs to be a quality product in its own right.
The breaking of copyright laws by the way, when cartoons are uploaded by others onto image sharing services and blogs, is generally not an issue, as long as correct credit is given to cartoonist and newspaper. (The newspaper often holds something like 50% of the re-publication rights.)
The problems start when they’re used in commercial publications (like Zoo!) or, as we saw a few weeks ago with a cartoon Iain Dale used, when someone took elements of another cartoonist’s work and passed it off as his own.
So, anyway, I think you’re right to a degree. But I think even those of us associated with national newspapers are slowly catching up…
Within the next year or two the lines between viral and ‘traditional’ cartooning will probably have all but disappeared.
…or maybe I talk bollocks.
I think I should be told…