How Do You Prefer The Disney Characters To Be Drawn?

[Orora]

Do you prefer Mickey with eyebrows...


Or without eyebrows?


Do you prefer Donald and the other bird/duck characters with nostrils...



Or without nostrils?



Do you prefer the bird/duck characters to be drawn with bird legs/feet...


Or with human legs/feet?


Do you prefer Daisy with light/blue eyes...



Or with black eyes?


Do you prefer Mickey, Donald and the others to be drawn in their classic traditional outfits...


Or to wear different casual wear at times?


Do you prefer the Phantom Blot to always keep his mask on...


... or to take it off more often?


What do you think of humans being around Mickey and Donald? Does it disturb you? Including realistic ones?


Do you think that it is a bit cheap to put a black dognose on an otherwise human-looking character, therefore making it technically a "funny animal"? Is that enough to have them classified as "dogs"?


By the way, do you mind having other anthropomorphic animals as characters? Besides the usual dogs, ducks, pigs and mice, what do you think of also having anthropomorphic elephants, rhinoceroses, tigers, crocodiles, hippopotamuses and whatnot?

[nectaria]

Hmm.. That's an interesting thread, orora. Well, here are my opinions on your questions:

1. I like both Mickey Mouse designs. I know that the one without eyebrows is the most used design for him. I have no problem with Mickey being drawn with eyebrows because I also have seen some old animated shorts where he have them.
2. I'm fine with Donald and other Ducks being drawn without nostrills but I liked them better with nostrills.
3. I prefer the duck/bird characters to be drawn with bird legs because they looks weird with human feet in my opinion.
4. I liked how Don Rosa drawn Daisy with blue irises on her eyes but I also liked her with normal black eyes because that's the most well known version of her. Yes, I liked both versions of Daisy.
5. I prefer them to wear their classic traditional outfits but I'm fine with them with wearing different outfits.
6. I like both versions of Phantom Blot. It was not bad to see him with taking his mask off.
7. I have no problem with Mickey, Donald and other Disney characters being around with humans (both real humans and dognose humans). I always thought that the Barks story with Madam Triple-X was interesting.
8. I think it's great to see other anthropomorphic animal characters who are not ducks, mice, birds, pigs and dogs in Mice/Ducks stories. Having those anthropomorphic animal characters appearing in a Mouse or a Duck story makes the story itself to be interesting but of course that just my opinion.

[Scrooge MacDuck]

1. I prefer the one with eyebrows.
2. I think they technically have nostrils, but it's one of the details artists should ignore because we see them from afar (just like they don't have to draw every single feather on their body).
3. I think the birds with humanlike legs are hybrids of birds and humans. So they're just not the same species, to me: it's not a matter of design. A Gyro with bird feet wouldn't make sense because that just not what he biologically is.
4. I prefer the black eyes -- not just on Daisy. Duck characters with light irises and black pupils always look weird to me, like if they were hypnotized or something.
5. I prefer the traditional outfits. For that matter, I prefer Donald's blue shirt as opposed to his black one.
6. I like both versions. The normal outfit is foreboding, but it is not very good for putting expressions. I guess my favorite would be when he has his cloak, but you can see the pupils on his eyes (and sometimes his mouth).
7. I have no problems with that either. What is strange is how some stories have only the one or only the other. I consider the Duckburg society to be a melting-pot of humans and various anthropomorphic species, so what would the odds of Donald only meeting humans on that beach?
7. I too think it's great when there are various animals.

[That Duckfan]

I'll get back to the other questions, but IMO the most perfect rendition of Mickey Mouse is the Gottfredson style, circa 1933. Either that or Ub Iwerks.

[Matilda]

I don't care much about Mickey at all, so I don't care about his eyebrows or outfit. Donald: trad outfit except when he's choosing to be in costume, prefer nostrils but that's less important. The Phantom Blot is only interesting to me when he is fully cloaked. Unmasked or uncloaked, he's just Some Guy, and the menace and mystery that make him a good villain are gone. I'm fine with the tradition of dognose humans, and pleased that thanks to Don Rosa we finally have a dognose president of the United States.

I used to think that Gyro had human feet because no one wants to see a person with chicken feet. But then, there are the Birdpeople from the cartoons, such as Clara Cluck, who is much more of an overall chicken, including clawed feet (not to mention, no clothes except for a hat!). And Pancho and José Carioca, whose clawed feet are drawn fused, to look like feet with two thick toes. Barks did create the look of the chickenfoot Rockhead Rooster in "Double Date," perhaps to match Clara. (Did he draw other birdfoot characters with non-webbed feet?) But generally in the comics, I'm more used to Birdpeople (as opposed to Duck- or Goosepeople) who wear shoes, like Gyro and Emil Eagle. That said, it does look weird to me to see such a Birdperson with bare human feet. Then again, it looks strange to me to see Mickey or Goofy with bare (human) feet, too.

And while we're on the topic of feet... I'm glad that some artists draw April, May and June with bare webbed feet, like the boys. I never liked the idea of girls wearing high heels. I am amused by the way the artists of Darkwing Duck draw shoes on the characters more or less big enough to fit the webbed feet. (Does this also happen when HDL play soccer? I've mercifully forgotten those stories.) With the adult female Duck characters like Daisy and Grandma Duck, I see the disproportionately small size of their shoes as an exaggeration of the way that many Western women's feet are slightly deformed by being cramped into pointy shoes.

[Orora]

Here are my own opinions:

1- I prefer Mickey with eyebrows. The problem with the eyebrow-less design is, too many times, Mickey's eyes are made smaller along with it, which makes him less endearing. Creating a huge gap between the eyes and the black top area of the head.
You know the basics of character design? Big eyes = cuteness, empathy. Mickey is meant to be a cute and likeable mascot character. THE mascot.
If they can't even manage that... 

And I dislike how eyebrow-less Mickey is the most used one nowadays... I don't know if it is a coincidence I stopped reading Mickey comics in the late 90s, when this design was used more and more prominently.

Mickey with eyebrows forever! Even if it makes a double pair of eyebrows...?

The exception, of course, is the "classic" "old" 1930s Ub-Iwerks Mickey. Because here, he is drawn in such a stylized and simplified way, it comes out much better. Plus, this design has seniority.

2- I prefer Donald and the ducks without nostrils.

Of course, it depends on the artist, and sometimes even of the closeups... but for me, nostrils in comics always felt a bit... "gross"? I just like smooth beaks, for a neat design. That's the way I like it.

I am a big fan of the Cavazzano-De-Vita style...

3- I don't mind human legs and feet on the duck characters. I especially like the attractive female characters to be drawn this way, if they have a female humanoid figure. It conveys the "idea" better.
 

I only remember seeing once a duck lady with human orange legs but webbed duck feet... and it felt odd...
Makes you wonder how the genetics in this world works...

4- Yeahh... even Carl Barks ended up drawing Daisy with light eyes in the end... and also with hair!

And Don Rosa seems to alternate between a blue-eyed Daisy and a black-eyed one!

Guess she wears colored lenses...

I like them both... although the blue eyes on the Ducks characters makes them look kinda weird and even a bit creepy... 

Come to think of it... do you think Daisy's 1940s clothing is a bit old-fashioned?
In most comics, she is keeping her poofy shoulder blouse and her bow... but in the Brazilian comics, she has a wider assortment of clothes. Heck, there was even a comic where Donald is depressed and sad because he misses Daisy wearing her traditional dress!

How about a variety of hairstyles? I don't dislike her modern ponytail look... but I am guessing her classic short "sawtooth" hair and bow are too iconic.

5- Here is a biased one from me: I grew up with late 1980s and early 1990s Mickey, and he was often wearing a diversity of "hip" and "cool" clothes, in all their cheesy and endearing glory, with jeans, jackets, T-shirts... it was also the time where French-drawn Minnie was pretty much always wearing denim overalls. Not to mention the awesome "Totally Minnie" franchise where she seemed to be a cross between Flashdance and Cyndi Lauper! (love it love it! )
 
Yeah, man! I'm chillin' drinkin' my soda with a striped straw! Awesome and not bogus, dude!


Wowww, like, totally with it, girrrrrlfriennnnd! I'm a maniac, maniac, and a material girl!

I don't like Mickey in his red shorts in modern comics... it looks stupid to me, and it doesn't help that it is now commonly used with the eyebrow-less small-eyed design, which makes him unendearing and boring to me. Considering that this design is now kinda forced upon the public, it makes me dislike it even more.
If Mickey wears his red shorts, I prefer it in a special context, in a way to remind the "classic" days, like the game Mickey Mania.

Considering Mickey is usually a bit "generic" in personality, him having a diversity of clothing makes him a bit more interesting to me.

6- Yeah, I prefer Phantom Blot to remain creepy and menacing, taking his cloak off from time to time because he is still an ordinary guy.
Some stories have him wear his cloak even in prison, treating his costume like it was his body... wearing disguises above the cloak, which I found absurd even as a kid.

7- For me, humans should remain rare and exclusive... I am not too comfortable with humans appearing inside the Duck/Mice universe... and I prefer that they at least get a dognose should they appear. And if you are going to classify them as dogs, at least give them drooping dog ears! (of course, it's not as bad as a bird character having freaking human ears!!)
Funny how the "dogs" seem to furless, all having human-colored skin... makes you wonder how they evolved...

Human girl in a Romano Scarpa story where the people from the fictional country of "Transvania" are all depicted as humans. Scarpa was told to never draw humans again. Kinda like Barks with the Dangerous Disguise story. (although I haven't read that story yet... maybe I will change my mind a bit when I will...)

As for realistic humans... I'd rather not. It feels a bit awkward. I once read a story where Mickey and Goofy were in a photorealistic comic with humans... it was the most boring Disney comic I have ever read.
I have a noticeable exception: the French-drawn "Mickey throughout the World" series, where Mickey teleports through different locations on Earth whenever he sneezes... a successor to the series "Mickey through the centuries" where he time-travels whenever he gets hit on the head... these series also depict humans in majority, but even when they are drawn realistically, they still have a cartoony feel that makes them more endearing to me.


8- I will have to be honest, having a diverse range of animals like that makes the whole thing feel weird to me... having it restricted to dogs, ducks, pigs, mice, cats and a few others give it more of an identity and coherent ensemble... too many different animals make it look more like a Richard Scarry Busy Town story... or maybe it's just my experience...

[Deleted]

Not like this:

[Orora]

May 20, 2016 21:27:37 GMT @debbie said:

Not like this:

Oogah! 

At least it has the excuse of being old.

Wait, what am I saying? It's no excuse!

[nectaria]

May 20, 2016 20:25:26 GMT Orora said:

MOD EDIT: just edited so the same long post isn't repeated twice in the page

It's good to see that you posted your opinions. Your opinions are not that bad but I do respect your opinions .
Here are my answers on your opinions:
1. I can understrand why you don't like the eyebrow-less Mickey but don't worry about it because I also like him with eyebrows. And don't be sad. *hugs*.
2. I'm fine with your opinion on Ducks without nostrills. I have no problem with them being drawn without nostrills, but what's so "gross" about them having nostrills in comics? . So you have no problem with them being drawn with nostrills in cartoons, huh? I'm not a big fan of "Cavazzano" style because I always thought that this style was too "overrated" but I'm okay with fans liking this style.
3. That's okay. I think the female ducks who are too tall looks fine with human feet but not sure about the smaller ones .
4. Was this design of Daisy with light eyes used in this whole Barks story or it was used in only one panel? When you said "blue eyes on the Duck characters", did you mean their scleras being colored blue? What's so creepy about that? I like characters with blue colored scleras on their eyes. I'm fine with her wearing different clothes and I don't mind her ponytail in the cartoons. The pic of ponytail Daisy that you posted is from House of Mouse. Maybe are you talking about ponytail Daisy from Mickey Mouse Clubhouse? Her ponytail in this series is different from the HoM one.
5. I'm okay with that too. I have no problem with Mickey wearing his red shorts in the D-coded stories (if you're talking about about those stories where he don't wear a shirt).
6. I agree that Phantom Blot looks more creepy and menacing without taking his cloak off.
7. Well, no problem at all. That human girl in that Scarpa story looks more cartoony than the humans in the Barks story.
8. This is the only opinion that makes me sad. I don't think having other animals appearing in a Duck/Mouse story is weird and I always thought that it was interesting. Speaking of Richard Scarry's Busytown, I only watched the cartoon series that was made by CINAR when I was a kid.

Well, I have to ask you something... What do you think about my opinions? I would be more happy if you respect my opinions .

[hex]

May 20, 2016 21:27:37 GMT @debbie said:

Not like this:

I’ve been wondering why Wilfred Haughton didn’t do the cover for that annual. He did most of the artwork inside, and that is in a very different style and closer to the model.

The cover artist for the first British Mickey Mouse Annual might be the same as the one doing some early 30’s postcard art for Milton/Woolston and Inter-Art.

[The KKM]

1- Mickey with eyebrows. And white face, incidentally.

2- I like the nostrils, for some reason.

3- I'll take both, really.

4- Black eyes, don't like coloured eyes on these characters much. And I prefer the Italian take on her hairdo, where it becomes outright a buzzsaw.

5- I prefer Mickey in neither, actually. I mean, I don't mind either the original outfit or the 90s casual ones, but to me he's at his best in the green overcoat-red fedora-red pants combo.

6- Both. I prefer him to be cloaked when being the Phantom Blot, and uncloaked in his usual life. Don't like it much when they merge both and have his uncloaked head on the cloaked body.

7- Nah I like them. Don't mind dognoses, but I mean, I also grew up with characters like Hard Haid Moe or Mad Madam Mim, so I'm fine with humans.

8- I love seeing other animals. It's one of the things I liked the most on the Pippo Reporter series and other stories by the authors. Also like it in the new Mickey shorts. Doesn't mean go overboard, I'm fine with dognoses being the default "generic character".

Additional notes- I prefer Fethry with the yellow shirt, Gyro with the US colours, Donald as drawn classically (IE the eyes wide apart instead of close together), Mickey as drawn by Cavazzano.

[Orora]

May 20, 2016 22:57:37 GMT nectaria said:

May 20, 2016 20:25:26 GMT Orora said:

MOD EDIT: just edited so the same long post isn't repeated twice in the page

It's good to see that you posted your opinions. Your opinions are not that bad but I do respect your opinions .
Here are my answers on your opinions:
1. I can understrand why you don't like the eyebrow-less Mickey but don't worry about it because I also like him with eyebrows. And don't be sad. *hugs*.
2. I'm fine with your opinion on Ducks without nostrills. I have no problem with them being drawn without nostrills, but what's so "gross" about them having nostrills in comics? . So you have no problem with them being drawn with nostrills in cartoons, huh? I'm not a big fan of "Cavazzano" style because I always thought that this style was too "overrated" but I'm okay with fans liking this style.
3. That's okay. I think the female ducks who are too tall looks fine with human feet but not sure about the smaller ones .
4. Was this design of Daisy with light eyes used in this whole Barks story or it was used in only one panel? When you said "blue eyes on the Duck characters", did you mean their scleras being colored blue? What's so creepy about that? I like characters with blue colored scleras on their eyes. I'm fine with her wearing different clothes and I don't mind her ponytail in the cartoons. The pic of ponytail Daisy that you posted is from House of Mouse. Maybe are you talking about ponytail Daisy from Mickey Mouse Clubhouse? Her ponytail in this series is different from the HoM one.
5. I'm okay with that too. I have no problem with Mickey wearing his red shorts in the D-coded stories (if you're talking about about those stories where he don't wear a shirt).
6. I agree that Phantom Blot looks more creepy and menacing without taking his cloak off.
7. Well, no problem at all. That human girl in that Scarpa story looks more cartoony than the humans in the Barks story.
8. This is the only opinion that makes me sad. I don't think having other animals appearing in a Duck/Mouse story is weird and I always thought that it was interesting. Speaking of Richard Scarry's Busytown, I only watched the cartoon series that was made by CINAR when I was a kid.

Well, I have to ask you something... What do you think about my opinions? I would be more happy if you respect my opinions .

Everyone has the right to have their own opinions, don't worry!

1. Yes, Mickey with eyebrows forever!

2. I don't know, I just find nostrils a bit disgraceful in comics and also cartoons... it's fine for me with art like Don Rosa's because his style is meant to be detailed, so you might as well throw it in.

3. Yeah, the shorter ducks look better with a variant of the classic Donald design.

4. Daisy had this design during the whole story, it was Hall of the Mermaid Queen. If I am not mistaken, it was the last time Carl Barks drew Daisy before retiring.

I was quite surprised how different Daisy looked; she had longer "hair", light eyes and even puts on a wig and makeup later in the story.

And she was also acting like she had a different personality: she was much less agressive and trying more gently to be attractive to Donald so that he wasn't seduced by the mermaids.

I didn't mean the scleras colored blue, I am fine with that.
What I mean are when the eye irises themselves are colored blue.
French artist Patrice Croci would sometimes draw Donald on the magazine cover with blue eyes, and he looked kinda... unsettling.

I love Croci's cover art, although this blue-eyed Donald is... certainly something!

There's also artist Flemming Andersen who has a special style... but one thing I don't like much in his art is when he draws the Duck characters shocked or scared: they suddenly get blue eyes. It's... awkward. (almost as bad as modern Smurf comics where the Smurfs suddenly get red eyes when shocked or scared. Hate it!)

5- Well, I dislike how most modern D-coded Mickey stories look, so I hardly pay attention to them.

But for me, Mickey does look his best when he is chalk-white faced, and with his overcoat, shirt, pants and hat. Heck, even in the classic private detective attire! He looks and acts cooler this way, and this is what you find in Italian stories. (plus eyebrows!)

And to think TV Tropes claims that Mickey is at his worst when he has eyebrows and wears regular clothes! Apparently, that makes him "boring"!! Pfehh!!

I wonder why the Italians have decided to keep Mickey, Goofy and the other classic characters with chalk-white faces, while most of the rest of the world uses peach-colored faces...

6- Yes. Some stories had Phantom Blot never wearing his cloak, and the French translators called him a different name, like he was another character!! At the time, I didn't know Phantom Blot actually had a face, because I was used to French-Spanish comics where he always wore his cloak... in a story where he impersonated Yen Sid, when Mickey unmasked him at the end and called him Phantom Blot, I was like "Whaat? That's not Phantom Blot!"

7- Indeed!

8- Well, having many different animals feels a bit unfitting to me... at least in the Duck and Mice comics. It is more a question of habit, since they would usually have the same main species. There were exceptions, of course, such as Gen-Clo's Mickey stories that also had monkeys, rhinoceroses, hippopotamuses, eagles, etc...
I didn't see the cartoon; I played the educational MS-DOS game. It was the first game I ever played on my own computer, back in 1996! (Yup, I'm old) This game had awesome songs! "Busy Town! The kind of place I'd love to settle down! Busy Town! Such wonderful sights and sounds!"

Also, 

[nectaria]

Really? Thanks for respecting my opinions, orora! . Yes, I know that every fans have their own opinions like me. *smiles*. So you don't like the nostrils on the Duck characters in both comics and cartoons but that's fine. As for Daisy's design in the Barks story, I was thinking that she does looks so different with that hairstyle compared to her classic design, Quack Pack design, HoM design and MM Clubhouse design. I wonder why Barks changed her design in his last stories? Maybe he forgot what she look like in his previous stories or something? If he really forgot about her design then that's weird. Daisy wasn't the only Duck character who was drawn differently by Barks. I remember that I saw Gladstone appearing with a different design along with Daisy in a different Barks story I think. Now I see that you were talking about the irises on Ducks being colored blue and I understand that's you don't like them that much. Do you have any scans of The Smurfs comics where the Smurfs have red colored irises on their eyes? I want to see what they look like with those red eyes. I didn't know there was a Richard Scarry's Busytown MS-DOS game. It's interesting to hear that. Was this game based on the books or the cartoon?

[Orora]

I don't think Barks forgot her design; if I remember correctly, he was her creator.

It seems more like he was experimenting with her, trying to make her look more than Donald with a bow on her head, like Ms Pacman...
She also had a very different style in The not-so-ancient mariner.

However, after retirement, he still drew her again... in her classic black-eyed bow-on-head style.

---

I don't like very much the art in the recent Smurf comic books. It feels colder, and doesn't have as much the sense of wonder and mystery as when Peyo drew it.

The Smurfs don't look as cute; for instance, they are drawn with narrower heads than when Peyo drew them (do you know the basics of character design? Big head=cuter. It's simple!!), and the "red eye" thing is awful and stupid, in my opinion.

Some stories feel completely pointless, such as the "Golden Tree" and "Bathing Smurfs" stories. It doesn't feel as epic as when Peyo did it. Some stories even go as far as recycling Peyo's stories: the "Smurf Menace" story is a repeat of "Smurf VS Smurf"!!

Of course, not all modern stories are bad. The "Book that tells everything" story was interesting and could be seen as a satire of the Internet... The "Smurf Police Force" brought interesting points about Smurf identity, although it is awkward when the Smurfs need to pay fines when they abandoned the money system (so they are paying in hazelnuts!!)... and it has an annoying copout ending.

Oh, and by the way, I hate the look of the 3D-CGI Smurfs from the 2011-2013 movies. Not to mention their waste-of-potential considering they use the cliché-overused premise of "coming to the modern world" instead of focusing on classic forest adventure.

---

I don't know much about the Busy Town universe to answer that. I am guessing it took inspiration from both the books and the cartoon, although they made changes such as Mr Fixit being able to actually fix things so that you could help him make a machine that works.

[That Duckfan]

1. Without eyebrows, I think. This, to me, is the ultimate rendering of modern-day Mickey:



Fred Moore's the tops. I really don't like the kind of art you show in the promotional images; that kind of what I call 'corporate art' always manages to be so devoid of life and character and distinctive personality, that I'm sure it's been the main catalyst for Mickey's image in the public mind as a 'characterless character'.

2. I doodled Ducks myself with nostrils for years, but at some point I stopped. It depends on the artist I think (an answer which you'll see a lot). Don Rosa makes it work beautifully, but then I love his art style and its level of detail is very much suited to that. Oftentimes, the style of an artist is much more cartoony and less detailed, like with the Italian artists and the Danish 'pocket book art', and there it wouldn't work at all. Even that Branca image you showed is an edge case is my book, but since I'm so used to seeing them with nostrils I don't particularly care.

3. Depends. Some of the ducks, like the Duck family, and shorter and more cartoon-like. Those work best with duck feet. The longer, more humanly-proportioned birds, like Gyro, Kay K from DoubleDuck, and the images you posted, are so much closer to the human end of the anthropomorphic scale that human feet work better on them. Human feet also have the added bonus of being easier to draw clearly than webbed feet. The same I would say goes for breasts and cleavage -- looks really weird on smaller ducks, but more normal on taller ones.

4. Black irises. The problem with the other kinds of irises is that they're also often used to express fear or insanity in a character, and I find it very confusing and off-putting if they're used for any character in normal mode. I'm also not always a fan of the 'gleam' in the iris, although that's mostly because I could never draw it myself. Pie cuts or not, both are fine with me. An alternative here is not to not blacken the irises at all and only draw the outlines. I've begun doing this in my doodles in recent years and it gives the ducks a much more open face. Recent French pocket books have toyed with not making the eyes totally black, and have also started coloring outlines, what would otherwise be black lines. I'm in love with the effect.




5. That's a loaded question! It's difficult to say. The old blue, red and yellow looks really good on Donald, but I'm never against a bit of variety. Most artists manage to make the sailor suit work, so it's not much of a problem even though he lives in a pants/trousers-dominated world. I wouldn't be against him wearing other kinds of casual wear --- provided it has some kind of blue, red and yellow motive.
As for other characters, it should probably be easier. Few outfits are as iconic as Donald's. In fact, I would encourage it when it comes to Daisy and the nephews. I always loved the shirts Walt Kelly gave them on those old WDC covers.



The two exceptions to this are Scrooge, for whom it would be out of character to start wearing anything else, and Mickey Mouse, who always manages to look just a little less good in anything that isn't his traditional red/green shorts. His perfect outfit has yet to be invented.

6. That really depends. In some continuities, like the Blotman comics that Gemstone printed way back when, it's hinted that the identity of the Blot is this grand mystery that we'll never know. I really like that, that mysterious 'secret identity' edge. (Ignoring his reveal at the end of the initial Gottfredson strip, because the Blot has grown to be an iconic character far beyond the scope of that initial appearance.) It's similar to Rosa's playing around with the Beagles' identities, for that matter.
On the other hand, there's a very different tradition in Italy, where some comics show the domestic environments of the Blot, and Pete and his wife Trudy. It's a completely different kind of world, with completely different kinds of stories.
I wouldn't want to trade either one.

7. Yes, humans! Yes please! The art style should fit the demands of the story, naturally, but especially in the more worldly/cosmopolitan adventure stories, I'd welcome more humans. I'm of the opinion that you can populate the Disney world with humanoid characters anywhere on the spectrum between Madame Triple-X, Barks dognoses, and even Taliaferro dognoses. As long as it's the same artist drawing in the same style, you should be able to get away with both funny animals and realistic humans at the same time. (Just don't go too far --- the photorealistic humans you see in the Western and TV adaptation comics of the 50s and 60s, or that French comic about the history of Walt Disney, those are pushing it too far. Then it just becomes weird and boring, and for me it passes that line of "why are you making this a comic strip? please use a medium with real people in it". I don't like too much realism in my comics --- it just gets boring.)

8. Hey, I'm not a taxonomist! *shrug*

9. With some animals it can work, with others it can't. Same goes for art styles. The art you've shown is hideous and terrible and elephants (PINK elephants??!!) are such a bad idea. If you want an example of how it can work, check out the DoubleDuck characters. Gizmo, Jay J, and Head H are all different kinds of birds that work really well in this environment, even for a more 'serious' comic like DoubleDuck (compared to your average European weekly fodder).