As well as bad drawing can ruin the best stories XD I mean compare it to making a movie. The best source material can't survive a bad script, a shaky camera and the monster played by a guy in a rubber suit.
But well not going by the stories themselves but about panel arrangement and choice of scenes, Dragonball is a very good example for mangas (well Akira Toryama is definately a pro, and the manga is famous for a reason.)
For the European comics I'd say Asterix, Tintin and Jeff Jordan comics are standing out most to me. Asterix, cause well at least teh old ones got all the mixtures right introducing the setting, never too much text warring with the art and a great flow between the scenes. If you for example compare them to the Blake&Mortimer mystery comics, those have good story, good art but they are buried under giant speechbubbles and explanation boxes. Tintinis especially eye catching to me because of the background art, every place seemed to have its own personality. (That is some tip for drawing BGs I heard somewhere btw. treating the BGs not as neccessary evil, but as an additional character in the scene.) Jeff Jordan is a detective comic as well adn not as well known as the others. The artist who made them was not exactl the fav of their editor and the comics sometimes suffered for that (like 'make that story shorter', 'the characters don't look cartoony enough' - well you get the idea) makes me wonder what masterpiece we missed out on because of that editor, 'cause they are still above average good. Though I went and checked, they use different size but square panels mostly and I couldn't see any big differences in the gaps in between those panels for Asterix or JJ. Playing with the gaps for scene flow seems more common in american comics I got some old Conan the barbarian comic album laying around that has that feature, well that is a case of panel-technic beeing better than the related story or art.
Yes. That's probably why the Green Lantern movie flopped. xD The story was okay but that suit.....
I think I understand what you're trying to tell me. Both America and Ironheart are famous for having too much dialogue on one page. So much in fact that you sometimes can't see anything else besides the currently speaking character. Or look at the female Thor series. Everything is orange and you can't make heads or tails of anything. I agree that the old Asterix comics are awesome. I grew up with those so I may be a bit emotionally attached but they were simple yet stunning. (They still are) It wasn't too much and not too little.
We have 3 people at work that act as editors for every project to avoid exactly that problem. I often wondered what a story might have been like if an editor hadn't said "no".
It is really important that the panel size and form fits the importance of the scene, helps the flow of the narration (so the reader doesn't get confused what to read next) and ideally even the empty spaces assist in keeping scenes together, seperating scenes from each other or give an impression of the flow of time between moments, by making them more or less wide. So drawing out a few extremely simple scetches of the page on cheap paper is a good idea for testing several possible configurations (pros do that too).
If you are interested there is a manga called "Akira Toryama's Mangaschule", that should be possible to still find in some comicstores, where he gives some helpful tips.
I already know that part - sorry for leading you on. I'm more interested in how the DA community likes their panels because I myself love a wild layout but I know that not everyone likes it too. I actually drew some short comics for clients at work.
So..... tell me what you like in a comic and tell me about your favorite kind of layout!
Amen to that. Bad writing can ruin even the most stunning artwork in a comic. But I got to admit that I like to cheat as well. I love to use borderless panels as sort of background to give situations more weight or make it clear that everything happens in one place. And lot's of overlaying tiers. Lots of them.