Tweet
JH Williams work on Batwoman, Detective Comics is brilliant! However, that is my first experience with his work and I don't know how his style would translate to other books/characters.
-
The pertinent comparative question in regards to the Relativity is... "How much would it cost in labourious production methodology to reproduce images in the same clarity and resolution and high quality paperstock we have today on a mass scale, back in the era encompassing the 1940's through to the 70's". Note we need to selectivity edit back in "Truer now than ever before now that imaging technology in the publishing field (both traditional print and digital) can reproduce just about anything..." to tack onto the front of... "at a RELATIVELY LOW COST to consumers". For this to be sensical and in context.
But, to your other point... Yes, it is cheap in comparison. $2.99 is pocket change these days. A loonie and a toonie. $2.99 is a ride on a subway, or a coffee and donut, maybe a bag of chips and a pop. A Whopper or a Big Mac alone cost more. Compare it to other forms of entertainment and account for inflation... particularly taking into consideration how much movies were compared to comics back in the 40's. Comics are no longer disposable entertainment and are made to last. Compare the glossy paperstock vs newsprint and the production value technology now allows, plus full bleed color... imagine what a master like Alex Raymond's stuff would reproduce like now! You wouldn't need to see the original art to appreciate it, because they are easily capable of reproducing those brush-strokes and fine-lines in detail now if the consumer demands it.
Compare the price of comics to magazines, particularly specialty magazines with lower circulations than things like People or Entertainment Weekly... they run up to ten bucks now! Compare the price of books in general. A paperback averages ten bucks. Trade paperback $15-25. Hardcovers $30+. Movies $10-14 bucks. $2.99 is what.... 2-3 songs on itunes or a TV show or two? The latest video game is $50+. Movie and Game rentals are around five bucks. What do board games run for... $25-50?Last edited by samurainoir; Nov 6, '09, 11:52 PM.Comment
-
-
But look up above! He's scanned it into a computer, it's been published and reproduced and scattered all over the internet for everyone to enjoy! Buyer of original art beware aside, it's served it's purpose and the image itself has been published and preserved for an audience and posterity (or do I mean Posterior?
)
I think your point about ballpoint pens was...
Just pointing out a good artist can get results with a ball point pen, weight as well. Check out what Adam Hughes can do with the lazy Man's tool... the marker!
My point is, it's not the medium they choose to use, and it's no use harping on the tools over and over again. It's the artist. There are artists out there doing incredibly things that are purely digital. And it does them a disservice to call them lazy because the media they choose is pixel based, or that they use markers, or driftwood or whatever. Particularly if we are talking about primarily illustrative and commercially driven artwork that is reproduced en-masse. Once it's published, it's out there serving it's main purpose. The original art market for comics is gravy for the privileged few that can scare up much more than $2.99 a pop.
The field of comic book illustration was full of sub-par artists and tracers even before the advent of computers. Whether we're talking Buckler making a career out of redrawing Kirby or any number of artists that have lightboxed Photos or used photo-references since the turn of the last century. For every "Great" that we've elevated like Alex Raymond or Milton Caniff, history has forgotten a hundred more cartoonists easily. I believe the same will apply looking back at today more than a half century later. I have no doubt that a guy like George Perez will live on, while many more (deservedly or not) will fall by the wayside. It's just the way things work. It wasn't necessarily "better" back in the old days, it's just that history has chosen the preserve certain artists and forgotten many many more, and more often than not the ones that are remembered are the top talents or most commercially successful.Comment
-
But very few buy just one comic............so you buy 10 comics and your spending 30 bucks ...don't seem cheap to me........
Oh and maybe I'm in the minority here but, I like Old school comics......when comics looked and smelled like comics not High glossy mini mags that people put in
comic bags and think they have Gold.......Last edited by kingdom warrior; Nov 7, '09, 12:39 AM.Comment
-
Minimum Wage here is like 8 bucks an hr...
When comics were like 65 cents..., Minimum Wage was like 2.50
If Minimum Wage was still 2.50 ..., comics would still be 65 Cents.
It's all the Economy's Fault imo.... The Original Knight ..., Often Imitated, However Never Duplicated. The 1st Knight in Customs.
always trading for Hot Toys Figures .
Comment
-
Man I grew up in the 70's and money was tight when I was a kid but I was always given 2 bucks every Saturday and comics were 20 cents at one time. I bought 10 comics for that price and I got classic stuff.......now all i see is mostly garbage with a few gems here and there......it's like a crap shoot nowLast edited by kingdom warrior; Nov 7, '09, 12:59 AM.Comment
-
No fair you used Adam Hughes a Master IllustratorBut look up above! He's scanned it into a computer, it's been published and reproduced and scattered all over the internet for everyone to enjoy! Buyer of original art beware aside, it's served it's purpose and the image itself has been published and preserved for an audience and posterity (or do I mean Posterior?)
I think your point about ballpoint pens was...
Just pointing out a good artist can get results with a ball point pen, weight as well. Check out what Adam Hughes can do with the lazy Man's tool... the marker!
My point is, it's not the medium they choose to use, and it's no use harping on the tools over and over again. It's the artist. There are artists out there doing incredibly things that are purely digital. And it does them a disservice to call them lazy because the media they choose is pixel based, or that they use markers, or driftwood or whatever. Particularly if we are talking about primarily illustrative and commercially driven artwork that is reproduced en-masse. Once it's published, it's out there serving it's main purpose. The original art market for comics is gravy for the privileged few that can scare up much more than $2.99 a pop.
The field of comic book illustration was full of sub-par artists and tracers even before the advent of computers. Whether we're talking Buckler making a career out of redrawing Kirby or any number of artists that have lightboxed Photos or used photo-references since the turn of the last century. For every "Great" that we've elevated like Alex Raymond or Milton Caniff, history has forgotten a hundred more cartoonists easily. I believe the same will apply looking back at today more than a half century later. I have no doubt that a guy like George Perez will live on, while many more (deservedly or not) will fall by the wayside. It's just the way things work. It wasn't necessarily "better" back in the old days, it's just that history has chosen the preserve certain artists and forgotten many many more, and more often than not the ones that are remembered are the top talents or most commercially successful......and I've seen a ton of his Con drawings...but he's not whom I'm speaking of. There are new guys out there who do what I call Tinny drawings relying on computer enhancements to finish the drawing.....sorry it's just me. I've been an Illustrator for twenty years and don't rely on the computer. I learned the old ways everything by hand......
Comment
-
>How did David Mazzuchelli, Alex Ross, or even Frank Miller(to a certain extent)get to be those guys?
....Luck....?
>They got to be those guys because their work stood out above all the others.
....AND luck. Most call it “right place/right time” but it’s the same thing, really.
>I also think part of the problem is that these guys depend way too much on computers.
Well.... I’d kind of agree. I think they’re used WAY ineffectively for colouring on most books: everything has the same sheen, and looks plastic. It doesn’t HAVE to be that way; a lot of Japanese and European cartoonists use ‘em to great effect. Our stuff has a habit of getting standardized though, hence the plastic look.
>i see a lot of nothing relying too much on color to carry the Illustration
I’d kinda quibble here, too. Inking and colouring are two different skills and a lot of cartoonists are better at one or the other. It’s a handicap, but not one I’d necessarily attribute to laziness or hack-itude. Not everyone’s gonna be good at everything.
>I see them using markers???
....there’s nothing wrong with markers! It’s all about the destination, not how you get there.
>I bought 10 comics for that price and I got classic stuff.......now all i see is mostly garbage with a few gems here and there......it's like a crap shoot now
I hear that a lot; but I think it’s more you than comics. As a kid there’s a lot more novelty, ‘cos you haven’t seen so much. As an adult you’ve pretty much seen it all, especially if you’ve been following the more mainstream stuff. It’s just not that exciting any more. No matter how nice it looks, you’ve seen it before. But since you live in your own head, you’re not aware of the change, and more likely to ascribe any difference externally (“the new books, they SUCK!) Than internally. (Hey! This is just like that Batman story from ‘84!)
As a long time comic fan who was never really into the superheroes I can say that the new stuff isn’t any stupider than the old.
Don C.Comment
-
Several of those covers weren't done by Williams.JH Williams is wonderfully versatile and changes the look of his art to suit the project. I can't believe the number of different styles and media he employed for his run on Promethia!
http://comicbookdb.com/graphics/comi...0655_large.jpgYou must try to generate happiness within yourself. If you aren't happy in one place, chances are you won't be happy anyplace. -Ernie BanksComment
-
Good points Don and Yes maybe it is me looking at the newer stuff and saying yes I've seen this before.
Here's my Take on "Markers" and Illustrations and as a Fellow artist. I'd like to hear your take on it.
I grew up in an age where markers were a big No NO when it came to Illustrations. As a College student and Art School Student. If you used a marker for your finals you would get a Big Fat zero.
If you wanted to be a Pro you had to use the tools of a Pro. Markers were used to make marker comps and used in story board drawings NEVER as a final.
I had professors in college who absolutely frowned on the use of markers for final renderings. I had one professor who went out of his way to using thinner if he suspected the use of marker.
I'm sorry this take on whatever tool necessary biz to get the job done...well ummm no if you're a Pro again use the tools of a pro. Leave the marker drawings for the kiddies. I began learning to use the dip pen when I was 14 years old with ink....I hated markers because they never gave me the look that I wanted and I wanted to be like the pros in the comics.
The Computer is a nice tool....Yes. I once had a Great conversation with one of my deans Bernard Krigstein who drew one of the greatest EC stories "Master Race" he and two other Professors had this opinion at the time.
He said what happens to you at 2:am when your computer crashes and you have a deadline that very morning? Well he said a complete artist will finish
the job an unskilled artist won't. He frowned and said there will come a day when artist will rely mostly on the computer and not learn the necessary skills to be a complete artist.
I learned to pencil, ink with a Dip pen and Brush....I also learned to color and paint. As a matter of Fact it was Dave Stevens who I met in the late 80's who told me after seeing my art to just use a brush over my work....never heard Dave go hey man use a marker.....
Adam Hughes is probably one of the most talented illustrators in the comics field a really awesome guy who I met and spoke with numerous times.
He does an enormous amount of Con drawings and yes He uses markers because it's easy to carry around.....and maybe every so often they'll print one of those drawings and enhance them.....but most of the time he uses brush and ink for his final drawings. He does use the computer for the final look of his color work but I have seen him do color guides with real paints for those drawings.......
See what happens is younger artist see Adam knock this stuff out with ease and not realizing that it took him years to get that good.....Then you'll see all of them aping him and not using the correct tools...and not bringing up their skill levels where they should be.
I know guys now who are whizzes at photoshop but ask them to do a pencil drawing and their absolutely clueless having no skills at all.
I use markers when I do marker comps and storyboards or when I doodle not for Finals.......that's just my opinion on itLast edited by kingdom warrior; Nov 7, '09, 10:38 AM.Comment
-
As an illustrator myself, I'm a fan of computers. I can remember in highschool (around 93) when my art teachers would say that computer art is not real art. It used to tick me off. It was still new, lots of room to experiment. Once upon a time photography wasn't real art but I know some very talented photographers whom I consider artists.
Computer art is real art. I can draw very well and I can do it all by hand but I'm way happier with what I can achieve using photoshop or Corel Painter. Painter is a FANTASTIC program btw and you have to work to learn to use it.
Usually I draw using non repo blue.
Then I ink that either with a brush OR marker depending on what I want to do.
Then I'll scan that in to photoshop and lay out the basic colors.
From there I'll either finish in photoshop or move it over to Painter.
I love layers and I cannot say enough good things about them. Does that make me a bad artist? Nope. Am I any less valid of an artist because I do it this way? Again no.
I had recently had a chance to meet up with my old highschool art teacher and I showed her what I do and how I do it. She was blown away and was a little embarrassed about saying computer art isn't real art back then. She doesn't believe that now.
Art will evolve as technology evolves and its wonderful to see what new things can be done. I still love doing things the old way sometimes but I wouldn't ever go back.Last edited by boynightwing; Nov 7, '09, 5:30 PM.Comment
-
-
>I had professors in college who absolutely frowned on the use of markers for final renderings.
That illustrates my problem with a lot of “educated” artists: there comes to be a “right” way of doing things; and there isn’t. It’s all about effect; of getting what’s in your head onto the page. If that involves water colours, then so be it. Markers, pencil, pastels, computers, crayons... whatever. Once you start critiquing the method, and not the result you’ve shifted the focus from the art itself, and onto something else. And you place unnecessary limits on what can be done, and swing everything a little closer to intellectual inbreeding.
>I hated markers because they never gave me the look that I wanted and I wanted to be like the pros in the comics.
Like that. You changed your technique to better resemble something that already existed. You wanted to do it “right” instead of pursuing something different.
>Do you really think Alex Ross got lucky?
Definitely. He DOES have the chops, but that’s only part (albeit a BIG one) of the story. He was also recognized by a company that got him exposure, and jobs the fans liked.
>The only downside to that I see, is that your work is going to look like most of the crap that's out there now.
THAT’S what bothers me about computers; it makes it a LOT easier for everything to look the same. Computers per-se are fine; that everyone uses them the same way isn’t. Like I said; since the 90's everything has been coloured the same. Mainstream comics have only seen tweaks on that in the last 3 or 4 years. For a whole decade, everything looked like plastic.
>I'm more drawn to superheroes, so that's what's going to get my attention.
....which ges back to my “lucky Alex” point. If he had started by doing a revamp of “Lucky Luke,” or “Golgo 13" you would NEVER have cared. His SKILL hasn’t changed; and yet, the people that love his work now would have ignored him.
>I'm sure the Europeans and Japanese have a lot to offer, but is the premise and the character(s) worth the time?
Catch 22. They don’t do the same sort of stuff you like, so you never peruse them. Because you never peruse them you never find anything you like. Because you never find anything you like, they must not be good.
Don C.Comment
-
These were exactly the kind of ideological discussions we had at great length when I was at art school, in terms of "The Tools". This was during the huge paradigm shift of the nineties as Digital became requisite in most programs, and the game-changer regarding publishing... both in the new frontier of digital and traditional print.
What we need to focus on here is the "Whys" of the more traditional mediums.
Pen nibs, brushes and inks were the tools of pros for a reason. That reason is simply about clean reproduction and what could be reproduced in a cost effective manner for the consumption of the reader. In this case, we're talking comics, and that Black Plate in the printing process was crucial for readability. This of course became institutionalized and was a True-ism for the Lion's Share of the Twentieth Century, for technical reasons. I totally get why Markers were off limits, and ballpoint pens would make you a laughingstock.
This has not been true for well over a decade now. Print and Publishing technology is an entirely different world. Comics are no longer four color newsprint, and you can pretty much reproduce anything now at relatively low costs. It's been TWO DECADES since Bill Sienkiewicz and Dave McKean have produced mainstream, commercially successful projects using whatever they could get their hands on to make Daredevil: Love and War, Elektra Assassin, and Arkham Asylum. I'm not saying every project needs to take the Kitchen Sink approach, but the envelope was already pushed a generation ago, and it's only gotten easier with imaging technology where it is today. I can only imagine what a nightmare it would have been to do color separations for those projects!
As for the "What Happens when your computer crashes" at 2 in the morning argument, I'd say it's the same as if your dog ate your drawing or asking What happens if you spill your last bottle of Ink at 2 in the morning! Yes, you can start over, except for digital, you likely have backup files to revert to.
I require my designers to remote back-up to an online server as often as they can. As someone who works in a purely digital field where a computer is essential to deadlines, I can tell you that from my experience it's reached a point where it's very unlikely that you won't be able to find a computer at 2 in the morning if you're not in the backwoods, and I don't know any pro that doesn't have both a desktop and laptop machine, or run out to Kinko's or a 24 hour Web Cafe if the internet's gone down at home.
Comics is very fortunate in many ways for being one of the last havens for pen and paper guys. I've seen it on the other end here in the digital pond, and I'm a guy who absolutely loves old-school illustrators and try to throw work that way when I can, but clients don't usually want to go that route. It's heartbreaking when you encounter some of the "Greats" in the illustration field and they are struggling to find work because just about everything from book covers, packaging design, movie posters, magazines, advertising, etc has gone Photoshop/Digital. Even if they do try to adapt to the computer age, you've got kids coming out of school who are so much faster and efficient because they grew up with one hand on the mouse. It's a really really sad state of affairs.Last edited by samurainoir; Nov 10, '09, 3:28 PM.Comment
Comment