That’s an odd thing. At first I didn’t notice that the last frame of the comic is drawn from a different viewpoint than the previous two frames. Now that I’ve seen it, I realize it breaks the “180 degree rule” of filmmaking, which says you shouldn’t cut between scenes shot from opposite sides. (Read the Wikipedia entry, they may explain it better.) It’s funny that it works fine in this comic strip for a couple of reasons: the relative heights of the characters and the fact that the background really doesn’t matter. Imagine the last frame with the background of the preceding frame, if you have the motion lines from Gary coming off the roof to the left the comic works just as well. This leads me to wonder if Mark Buford did this, not out of ignorance of the rule, but to break up the redundancy of the background and because he knew it breaking the rule wouldn’t matter.Or am I over-thinking this?
That’s an odd thing. At first I didn’t notice that the last frame of the comic is drawn from a different viewpoint than the previous two frames. Now that I’ve seen it, I realize it breaks the “180 degree rule” of filmmaking, which says you shouldn’t cut between scenes shot from opposite sides. (Read the Wikipedia entry, they may explain it better.) It’s funny that it works fine in this comic strip for a couple of reasons: the relative heights of the characters and the fact that the background really doesn’t matter. Imagine the last frame with the background of the preceding frame, if you have the motion lines from Gary coming off the roof to the left the comic works just as well. This leads me to wonder if Mark Buford did this, not out of ignorance of the rule, but to break up the redundancy of the background and because he knew it breaking the rule wouldn’t matter.Or am I over-thinking this?