I agree with Wesley here. Where would the thigh be connected to the shin if the flesh-colored area were really the thigh? It doesnt make sense as the hideous illustration shows.
She's got her left leg tucked and her right leg extended back. Take a look at the following panel.
From the viewer's perspective, that flesh-colored area is her left thigh; I haven't seen an average woman where the shin is as big as or bigger than the thigh. With the left shin on the 'outside' of the thigh, the 'inside' thigh would be visible.
Any more spread and it'd be a GPS.
__________________
May you get EXACTLY what you wish for.
If you can get close enough to wet willy Manpower, why do they need to open the door to the warlords? Just start the attack while right next to them if you have free reign to move between them. Tactical error, or something else still up?
...
Edit: how rude of me. Excellent art. Seat edge storyline.
This is a valid point, but I'm afraid we'll have to live with this inconsistency for drama's sake. Both the wet willy panel and the archon attack sequence are dramatically necessary. Still, I included this in the bloopers.
Maybe he thought that Parson's dialogue was Wanda's, in which case it would've been in the wrong font?
Anyway, totally minor nitpick: I couldn't help noticing that 'bivouac' was spelled with a 'k' on page 73. It was spelled without a 'k' on page 8. Of course, one of my fanmixes used that page to ship Ansom and Jillian, so I've given it an unusual amount of attention.
__________________
My avatar is a remix that I made of Prince Ansom. Resource credit:
A number of people have noted (here, among others; but this is not the first mention) that Wanda's room looks different in Erfworld 74, panel 4, than it did in Erfworld 27, panel 2. Specifically, the demon skull over the archway dividing the room, the candlestick between the bed and the archway, and the dressing screen on the right-hand side are missing in the more recent panel. As for the rest of the decor the matter is moot, as it is not visible from the viewing angle in one of the panels.
Now, this is probably poetic license: the bareness of the room reflects the forlorn state of Wanda's mind. However, a number of posters have voiced other ideas, from a simple continuity error to a result of Wanda's upkeep costs having been disciplinarily cut. I'm halfheartedly listing this as a blooper. If anyone is strongly opposed, let us have a piece of your mind.
A number of people have noted (here, among others; but this is not the first mention) that Wanda's room looks different in Erfworld 74, panel 4, than it did in Erfworld 27, panel 2. Specifically, the demon skull over the archway dividing the room, the candlestick between the bed and the archway, and the dressing screen on the right-hand side are missing in the more recent panel. As for the rest of the decor the matter is moot, as it is not visible from the viewing angle in one of the panels.
Now, this is probably poetic license: the bareness of the room reflects the forlorn state of Wanda's mind. However, a number of posters have voiced other ideas, from a simple continuity error to a result of Wanda's upkeep costs having been disciplinarily cut. I'm halfheartedly listing this as a blooper. If anyone is strongly opposed, let us have a piece of your mind.
Or, assuming that "Occam's Razor" is not the name of a tool in her interrogation kit, maybe it's not her room (Parson and Sizemore got her out of sight ASAP in the first empty room they found -- there ought to be plenty of those in what used to be the HQ of a much larger empire).
Ahm ... you see her as if you were lying down in front of her, looking up at her. So it is indeed her thigh.
I'm getting really tired of this, but I can't let that go unanswered. It seems that a lesson in anatomy is needed.
The thigh is a barrel of flesh around the femur. The femur is a bone, more or less a straight line, joining the hip joint to the knee. You can see her knee clearly enough, but where is her hip joint? From what we can see, it's a little to the right (our right, her left) of her shin, roughly in line with a point about a third of the down her lower leg.
Got that? Good. Now imagine the femur joining those two points. See? Because she's holding her leg up, no part of the femur goes below the visible part of her hemline, even from our “below” perspective. Although the femur is quite a long bone, the viewing angle and the position of her leg greatly foreshortens it. It's also not where it would have to be for the colored area to be thigh.
It should already be obvious from this that the coloring between her legs cannot be her thigh. But in case it still isn't clear, imagine adding the barrel of flesh around the femur. Keep adding flesh until the gap is filled. How much flesh do you have to add? About as much as you'd need to make a Sumo wrestler's thigh. Literally.
No, that is not her thigh—unless she has a butt the size of an elephant.
This may have been pointed out already (I haven't the energy to read through all five pages) but I noticed that Wanda said "Crap!" back on page 6. Presumably this was before anyone thought up the "boop" joke, so I'm not sure if it constitutes a blooper per se.
Last edited by Nerd_Paladin : 10-21-2007 at 10:39 PM.
This may have been pointed out already (I haven't the energy to read through all five pages) but I noticed that Wanda said "Crap!" back on page 6. Presumably this was before anyone thought up the "boop" joke, so I'm not sure if it constitutes a blooper per se.
Crap appears several places in the story, well after the first boop. Some words are just not strong enough to be censored. So, it's not a blooper after all.
This may have been pointed out already (I haven't the energy to read through all five pages) but I noticed that Wanda said "Crap!" back on page 6. Presumably this was before anyone thought up the "boop" joke, so I'm not sure if it constitutes a blooper per se.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PyritePyro
Crap appears several places in the story, well after the first boop. Some words are just not strong enough to be censored. So, it's not a blooper after all.
If crapping and crap golems are allowed, so is the word. You wouldn't want to have boop golems now, would you?
This image is cropped from a panel of an Erfworld comic, written by Rob Balder and illustrated by Jamie Noguchi. The ugly red line marring an otherwise well crafted picture was added for editorial comment.
Ok, the red line looks to be her shin area. which would make the fleshy area that is in question seem out of place, since we are looking at her shin and we shouldn't be seeing that much of her thigh, especially all the way down to her ankle , it just looks to unusual the way it is.
Thats my opinion anyways.
:)
__________________
And it harm none, Do as you will
Between Page 30 / Page 36 and Page 38, Wanda changed her dress from that white
leather outfit to some grey suit, but that does not make sense storywise.
__________________
-HaJo
FLW: Oh, no. We're being rescued. How embarrassing!
BFGK page 80, panel 6, the shadow of Jillian and her gwiffon looks wrong: it appears rotated 90°. This may be intended to be a shortening effect due to the hillside, but that should have the effect of lengthening the shadow, not shortening it. Or it's lengthened in the wrong direction.
BFGK page 80, panel 6, the shadow of Jillian and her gwiffon looks wrong: it appears rotated 90°. This may be intended to be a shortening effect due to the hillside, but that should have the effect of lengthening the shadow, not shortening it. Or it's lengthened in the wrong direction.
BFGK page 80, panel 6, the shadow of Jillian and her gwiffon looks wrong: it appears rotated 90°. This may be intended to be a shortening effect due to the hillside, but that should have the effect of lengthening the shadow, not shortening it. Or it's lengthened in the wrong direction.
BFGK page 80, last panel:
"Extra, special no comment" is bad grammar. The comma is wrong and makes it nonsensical.
There's actually a perfectly fine way of saying this, but it takes emphasis, which is fairly impossibly to clearly convey via text on a message board. "Extra" and "special" are both adjectives here; to say it, simply emphasize the "special" (as if you're trying to make clear that you're putting two descriptors in front of the noun "no comment" - which is, in fact, what Stanley is trying to do.) "Extra, special no comment."
Still, it is confusing, and does look wrong. An emboldening or italicizing of "special" probably would not have been amiss. A comma after "special" could have gone as well, though it might look just as unwieldy.
Last edited by Magnor Criol : 12-23-2007 at 11:42 PM.
This might be completely wrong, but I'm gonna try anyways.
On Page 71, panel 1, we see no huge sword, despite the fact that it's as big as she is. Panel 4, it has completely disappeared. Panel 5, it looks like she pulled a dagger, while Manpower drops his huge sword. Panel 7, Jillian pulls out her old sword again, which is definitely not Manpower's, because the hilts are slightly different shapes, and very different colors.
Please explain. Hammerspace, perhaps?
Edit: I mean, unless Jillian LIKES having daggers with huge handles... Would be kinda silly, though.
Double edit: Even sillier, today's comic's 4th panel should be clewks or cwerks. And last panel: sawad. XDDD
Shouldn't there be some more punctuation in the last panel of today's strip (91)? "Oh it is the eyeball one" looks strange. "Oh, it is the eyeball one" or "Oh. It is the eyeball one" would make more sense.
There's actually a perfectly fine way of saying this, but it takes emphasis, which is fairly impossibly to clearly convey via text on a message board. "Extra" and "special" are both adjectives here; to say it, simply emphasize the "special" (as if you're trying to make clear that you're putting two descriptors in front of the noun "no comment" - which is, in fact, what Stanley is trying to do.) "Extra, special no comment."
Still, it is confusing, and does look wrong. An emboldening or italicizing of "special" probably would not have been amiss. A comma after "special" could have gone as well, though it might look just as unwieldy.
1 - Ansom, not Stanley.
2 - I believe the proper way to write this is "Extra-special no comment." (Or at least, the best way to get the verbal construct across in text.)
__________________
This space intentionally left blank.
Shouldn't there be some more punctuation in the last panel of today's strip (91)? "Oh it is the eyeball one" looks strange. "Oh, it is the eyeball one" or "Oh. It is the eyeball one" would make more sense.
In lieu of punctuation, they italicized the is. I think it's prefectly understandable...
RSS Feeds: 
Re: Erfworld Bloopers
You'll have to be more specific.
Now, this is probably poetic license: the bareness of the room reflects the forlorn state of Wanda's mind. However, a number of posters have voiced other ideas, from a simple continuity error to a result of Wanda's upkeep costs having been disciplinarily cut. I'm halfheartedly listing this as a blooper. If anyone is strongly opposed, let us have a piece of your mind.
Fan Club
