|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2018 14:27:29 GMT -5
I don't know if I'm the only one who thinks this way, but it's worth a shot mentioning it here. Ross Andru's work on Spider-Man always looked so much better than virtually anything he did at DC. I think Frank Giacoia's inks always helped, but it wasn't like Giacoia inked Andru all the time. Most of the time it was good old Mike Esposito, his forever partner at DC. But their work at Marvel still looked better than their DC work. I'm wondering if having John Romita as his Art Director helped, with layouts especially, which always seemed to me to be much more dynamic than the the work he did at DC. I'd read his Spider-Man and be asking, "Why can't DC get guys like this?" Anybody else feel that way? The pairing of John Romita as Art Director and Ross Andru work on Spider-Man is one of the better comics that I've seen in Marvel. Remember, Ross Andru did Wonder Woman and I like his work on her too. The pairing of Romita/Andru is one of the best and I've always enjoyed it very much. I do feel the same way like you too. The feeling is mutual.
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on May 23, 2018 15:59:38 GMT -5
And how man uniterrupted runs without fill ins or dreaded deadline doom reprints did Perez have while at Marvel the first time? He did better meeting deadlines once he got to DC, bue was hardly stable doing monthly books during his first stint at Marvel. I really dug Preez's first stints on Avengers but they were littered with reprints, guest artists and inventory issues to fill in missed deadlines when the comics were only 17 pages at the time, so he's hardly your poster boy for reliable monthly artists during that time. Time and nostalgia glasses make us forget about the realities during that time. -M Well, I was mainly thinking about the work Perez was doing from 1980 onward at DC, where besides working on New Teen Titans without interruption for quite a stretch, he also occasionally had guest-artist stints in other titles, most notably in JLA (and drew a ton of covers to boot). However, since you're focused on his tenure at Marvel just before that, it's worth noting that from roughly mid-1975, when he first began working on Avengers, to about mid-1980, when he basically started to work for DC full time, there was hardly a month that passed when you couldn't find Perez's art in at least one issue of a Marvel book. Remember, besides the Avengers, at various times Perez was also producing art for Fantastic Four, Creatures on the Loose, Deadly Hands of Kung Fu (the Sons of the Tiger back-up stories), the short-lived Inhumans series (the first four issues plus one later issue), Logan's Run (the first five issues) and Marvel Two-in-One, as some work in Marvel Premiere (45-46), Marvel Preview, and What If? He also drew several annuals during this period (Avengers Annuals 6 and 8, FF Annuals 14-15, and - the best one ever - X-men Annual 3). Oh, yeah: in 1978 he also produced roughly 60 pages of art for that Beatles special that Marvel published. So it seems a bit unfair to say that Perez wasn't a reliable monthly artist during this period.
By the way, from issue 141 (the first one with Perez as artist) onward, there were no reprints in the Avengers, and there were only three inventory issues, the infamous 145-146 (smack-dab in the middle of the Serpent Crown saga, which was - as I understand it - more Englehart's fault than anyone else's) and 169.
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on May 23, 2018 16:41:16 GMT -5
I don't know if I'm the only one who thinks this way, but it's worth a shot mentioning it here. Ross Andru's work on Spider-Man always looked so much better than virtually anything he did at DC. I think Frank Giacoia's inks always helped, but it wasn't like Giacoia inked Andru all the time. Most of the time it was good old Mike Esposito, his forever partner at DC. But their work at Marvel still looked better than their DC work. I'm wondering if having John Romita as his Art Director helped, with layouts especially, which always seemed to me to be much more dynamic than the the work he did at DC. I'd read his Spider-Man and be asking, "Why can't DC get guys like this?" Anybody else feel that way? The difference wasn't Romita, it was the "Marvel Method." Andru's work at Marvel was done plot first, which left him free to design his pages his way. He was a master at layout and staging, especially when he could show off his skill at creating backgrounds that included recognizable landmarks, but was rarely given the opportunity to demonstrate that mastery anywhere but at Marvel. At DC, he worked full script, which meant he had to follow the constipated panel breakdowns of old school writers like Bob Kanigher. Moving to Marvel in the mid-70s was a liberating experience for an artist who once said he stopped enjoying drawing as soon as he had to do it on deadline.
Cei-U! Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig Ross Andru fan here!
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on May 23, 2018 16:51:34 GMT -5
I don't know if I'm the only one who thinks this way, but it's worth a shot mentioning it here. Ross Andru's work on Spider-Man always looked so much better than virtually anything he did at DC. I think Frank Giacoia's inks always helped, but it wasn't like Giacoia inked Andru all the time. Most of the time it was good old Mike Esposito, his forever partner at DC. But their work at Marvel still looked better than their DC work. I'm wondering if having John Romita as his Art Director helped, with layouts especially, which always seemed to me to be much more dynamic than the the work he did at DC. I'd read his Spider-Man and be asking, "Why can't DC get guys like this?" Anybody else feel that way? I have mentioned it before that Andru's tenure on Spider-Man was when I was getting Spidey off the racks and for me the Andru Spider-Man was MY SPIDEY. He captured the big city style of New York and made it dizzyingly beautiful as a character itself within the comic. He made Spidey acrobatic and athletic without contorting Pete's body into insanely impossible positions. His ladies were all gorgeous and not a typical copycat can't tell them apart, all with their own distinct looks and styles. LOVE ME SOME ANDRU!
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on May 23, 2018 17:02:36 GMT -5
Yeah, I also began reading comics when Andru was the regular artist in ASM. I very much identify his style with the character, and yes, I think his art at Marvel is much more dynamic than his earlier work at DC - it just seems to pop off of the page in many instances. It's also kind of fresh in my mind, as I recently just got through reading the Len Wein's complete run as writer on ASM.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 23, 2018 17:06:30 GMT -5
Comics needed real pros like Dillan, Sal Buscema and Ross Andru to faithfully, if not spectacularly churn out monthly titles. I have nothing but respect for them, but they don't rise to the level of a Neal Adams, J Buscema and more of the top shelve artists. But we needed both types year?in the Silver/ Bronze Age in order to keep the industry afloat. Can you imagine if we had the artists of today who can't even turn out 8 books a year working in that era? I think there's the tendency to sort of generalize about the greater artists not staying on titles for a good run. John Buscema spent--I believe-- two straight years on The Avengers (#41 in 1967- #62 in 1969); John Romita either illustrated, inked and provided covers for The Amazing Spider-Man (from #39 in 1966 to #75 in 1969), and certainly inked and/or provided layouts for endless issues after that period--and this is the same Romita who was simultaneously illustrating other titles, creating licensing art, etc., but he was still able to become the artist most associated with the Spider-Man title during the Silver Age, with his work arguably being the defining "Spider-Man look". So, Dillin assigned JLA because he was there and would work it over a period of time is not necessarily a credit, when some of the industry's all-time greatest artists (like Romita and J. Buscema) also put in their time, and undoubtedly elevated the books they worked on. Further, Moldoff spent long years on Batman, but it can be argued (with not much difficulty) that was not to the title's credit, especially when the Infantino era rolled in (with or without Anderson or Giella) creating one, often spectacular cover after another, leading to unflattering comparisons. There's no disagreement about the fact books need artists, and if possible, continuity in art as well as the story (obviously), but the work also needs to be appealing and capture the essence of the character(s). I recall some of the 60s Batman letters pages printing more than a few letters complaining about Moldoff's art being subpar. In other words, using the reliable workman artist was not always a welcome situation.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on May 23, 2018 17:12:00 GMT -5
I don't know if I'm the only one who thinks this way, but it's worth a shot mentioning it here. Ross Andru's work on Spider-Man always looked so much better than virtually anything he did at DC. I think Frank Giacoia's inks always helped, but it wasn't like Giacoia inked Andru all the time. Most of the time it was good old Mike Esposito, his forever partner at DC. But their work at Marvel still looked better than their DC work. I'm wondering if having John Romita as his Art Director helped, with layouts especially, which always seemed to me to be much more dynamic than the the work he did at DC. I'd read his Spider-Man and be asking, "Why can't DC get guys like this?" Anybody else feel that way? The difference wasn't Romita, it was the "Marvel Method." Andru's work at Marvel was done plot first, which left him free to design his pages his way. He was a master at layout and staging, especially when he could show off his skill at creating backgrounds that included recognizable landmarks, but was rarely given the opportunity to demonstrate that mastery anywhere but at Marvel. At DC, he worked full script, which meant he had to follow the constipated panel breakdowns of old school writers like Bob Kanigher. Moving to Marvel in the mid-70s was a liberating experience for an artist who once said he stopped enjoying drawing as soon as he had to do it on deadline.
Cei-U! Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig Ross Andru fan here!
Of course! That makes perfect sense. Thanks as always, O wondrous one!
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on May 23, 2018 17:26:48 GMT -5
Eh, I liked Andru's Metal Men quite a bit better than anything he did for Marvel. Andru's greatest strength was humor and he was a cartoonist at heart. So the Metal Men was closer to his wheelhouse than any of his Marvel assignments.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2018 23:33:32 GMT -5
And how man uniterrupted runs without fill ins or dreaded deadline doom reprints did Perez have while at Marvel the first time? He did better meeting deadlines once he got to DC, bue was hardly stable doing monthly books during his first stint at Marvel. I really dug Preez's first stints on Avengers but they were littered with reprints, guest artists and inventory issues to fill in missed deadlines when the comics were only 17 pages at the time, so he's hardly your poster boy for reliable monthly artists during that time. Time and nostalgia glasses make us forget about the realities during that time. -M Well, I was mainly thinking about the work Perez was doing from 1980 onward at DC, where besides working on New Teen Titans without interruption for quite a stretch, he also occasionally had guest-artist stints in other titles, most notably in JLA (and drew a ton of covers to boot). However, since you're focused on his tenure at Marvel just before that, it's worth noting that from roughly mid-1975, when he first began working on Avengers, to about mid-1980, when he basically started to work for DC full time, there was hardly a month that passed when you couldn't find Perez's art in at least one issue of a Marvel book. Remember, besides the Avengers, at various times Perez was also producing art for Fantastic Four, Creatures on the Loose, Deadly Hands of Kung Fu (the Sons of the Tiger back-up stories), the short-lived Inhumans series (the first four issues plus one later issue), Logan's Run (the first five issues) and Marvel Two-in-One, as some work in Marvel Premiere (45-46), Marvel Preview, and What If? He also drew several annuals during this period (Avengers Annuals 6 and 8, FF Annuals 14-15, and - the best one ever - X-men Annual 3). Oh, yeah: in 1978 he also produced roughly 60 pages of art for that Beatles special that Marvel published. So it seems a bit unfair to say that Perez wasn't a reliable monthly artist during this period.
By the way, from issue 141 (the first one with Perez as artist) onward, there were no reprints in the Avengers, and there were only three inventory issues, the infamous 145-146 (smack-dab in the middle of the Serpent Crown saga, which was - as I understand it - more Englehart's fault than anyone else's) and 169.
Avengers was 150 a reprint with a few (6) pages of new framing sequences in it done because they were going to miss the deadline. 152 and 153 were fill in issues by John Buscema because Perez wasn't able to do them, 155 was Perez brreakdowns only, Pablo Marcos did all the finished art, 156 was a fill in issue by Sal Buscema, 157 by Don Heck, 158 & 159 fill ins with Sal Buscema breakdown with Marcos finishes, 163 an inventory Champions story converted into an Avengers fill in issue with Tuska art, 164-166 fill in issues by Byrne, 169 inventory issues, 172 fill in issue by Sal Buscema, 173 fill in issue with Sal Buscema and Diverse Hands jam to get it done by deadline, and then the storyline was finished by David Wenzel, so Perez at most managed 4 issues in a row at the start of the run and never more than 3 in a row after that for the time he was "the regular" artist on Avengers. If he was reliable then it was editorial's fault for not having his regular gig be a priority then, but he did not manage much of a consecutive issue run on the book and the artistic consistency at that point was much, much worse than you see on books with rotating artists today that people complain about, and today the artists usually swap out after full stories arcs rotating arcs rather than in the middle of the arc more often than not. Perez did 4 issues in a row from 141-144, and that was the most he ever managed during that Avengers stint without a fill in, inventory story or reprint. He did 147-149 (with 150 being mostly reprint), 151, 154-155 (155 only breakdowns not full pencils), 160-162, 167-168, and 170-171, so 16 full issues and one partial issue with reprints over a 32 issue span, so he did only about half the issues during his regular stint on the book an left in the middle of a major storyline. Also this was a time when a full issue was only 17/18 pages not the 20 or 22 of the modern era, so even if he was doing side gigs, it was still fewer pages needed to get done to get issues done consistently for the book he was the regular artist one. And post-80 when he did manage more consistency, he did revert to doing breakdowns a lot of the time with the inker providing full finishes, not just inking. -M
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on May 23, 2018 23:34:19 GMT -5
Comics needed real pros like Dillan, Sal Buscema and Ross Andru to faithfully, if not spectacularly churn out monthly titles. I have nothing but respect for them, but they don't rise to the level of a Neal Adams, J Buscema and more of the top shelve artists. But we needed both types year?in the Silver/ Bronze Age in order to keep the industry afloat. Can you imagine if we had the artists of today who can't even turn out 8 books a year working in that era? I think there's the tendency to sort of generalize about the greater artists not staying on titles for a good run. John Buscema spent--I believe-- two straight years on The Avengers (#41 in 1967- #62 in 1969); John Romita either illustrated, inked and provided covers for The Amazing Spider-Man (from #39 in 1966 to #75 in 1969), and certainly inked and/or provided layouts for endless issues after that period--and this is the same Romita who was simultanelusly illustrating other titles, creating licensing art, etc., but he was still able to become the artist most associated with the Spider-Man title during the Silver Age, wit his work arguably being the defining "Spider-Man look". So, Dillin assigned JLA because he was there and would work it over a period of time is not necessarily a credit, when some of the industry's all-time greatest artists (like Romita and J. Buscema) also put in their time, and undoubtedly elevated the books they worked on. Further, Moldoff spent long years on Batman, but it can be argued (with not much difficulty) that was not to the title's credit, especially when the Infantino era rolled in (with or without Anderson or Giella) creating one, often spectacular cover after another, leading to unflattering comparisons. There's no disagreement about the fact books need artists, and if possible, continuity in art as well as the story (obviously), but the work also needs to be appealing and capture the essence of the character(s). I recall some of the 60s Batman letters pages printing more than a few letters complaining about Moldoff's art being subpar. In other words, using the reliable workman artist was not always a welcome situation. A quick correction: Buscema didn't draw every issue of Avengers between #41 and 62. Don Heck drew the Super-Adaptoid story in #45 and George Tuska drew the debut of Dane Whitman as The Black Knight in #48.
Cei-U! [off-key singing] The more you knooooow...[/off-key singing]
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,698
|
Post by Confessor on May 24, 2018 3:33:23 GMT -5
Big fan of Russ Andru's tenure on ASM here too.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 24, 2018 5:12:35 GMT -5
Well, I was mainly thinking about the work Perez was doing from 1980 onward at DC, where besides working on New Teen Titans without interruption for quite a stretch, he also occasionally had guest-artist stints in other titles, most notably in JLA (and drew a ton of covers to boot). However, since you're focused on his tenure at Marvel just before that, it's worth noting that from roughly mid-1975, when he first began working on Avengers, to about mid-1980, when he basically started to work for DC full time, there was hardly a month that passed when you couldn't find Perez's art in at least one issue of a Marvel book. Remember, besides the Avengers, at various times Perez was also producing art for Fantastic Four, Creatures on the Loose, Deadly Hands of Kung Fu (the Sons of the Tiger back-up stories), the short-lived Inhumans series (the first four issues plus one later issue), Logan's Run (the first five issues) and Marvel Two-in-One, as some work in Marvel Premiere (45-46), Marvel Preview, and What If? He also drew several annuals during this period (Avengers Annuals 6 and 8, FF Annuals 14-15, and - the best one ever - X-men Annual 3). Oh, yeah: in 1978 he also produced roughly 60 pages of art for that Beatles special that Marvel published. So it seems a bit unfair to say that Perez wasn't a reliable monthly artist during this period.
By the way, from issue 141 (the first one with Perez as artist) onward, there were no reprints in the Avengers, and there were only three inventory issues, the infamous 145-146 (smack-dab in the middle of the Serpent Crown saga, which was - as I understand it - more Englehart's fault than anyone else's) and 169.
Avengers was 150 a reprint with a few (6) pages of new framing sequences in it done because they were going to miss the deadline. 152 and 153 were fill in issues by John Buscema because Perez wasn't able to do them, 155 was Perez brreakdowns only, Pablo Marcos did all the finished art, 156 was a fill in issue by Sal Buscema, 157 by Don Heck, 158 & 159 fill ins with Sal Buscema breakdown with Marcos finishes, 163 an inventory Champions story converted into an Avengers fill in issue with Tuska art, 164-166 fill in issues by Byrne, 169 inventory issues, 172 fill in issue by Sal Buscema, 173 fill in issue with Sal Buscema and Diverse Hands jam to get it done by deadline, and then the storyline was finished by David Wenzel, so Perez at most managed 4 issues in a row at the start of the run and never more than 3 in a row after that for the time he was "the regular" artist on Avengers. If he was reliable then it was editorial's fault for not having his regular gig be a priority then, but he did not manage much of a consecutive issue run on the book and the artistic consistency at that point was much, much worse than you see on books with rotating artists today that people complain about, and today the artists usually swap out after full stories arcs rotating arcs rather than in the middle of the arc more often than not. Perez did 4 issues in a row from 141-144, and that was the most he ever managed during that Avengers stint without a fill in, inventory story or reprint. He did 147-149 (with 150 being mostly reprint), 151, 154-155 (155 only breakdowns not full pencils), 160-162, 167-168, and 170-171, so 16 full issues and one partial issue with reprints over a 32 issue span, so he did only about half the issues during his regular stint on the book an left in the middle of a major storyline. Also this was a time when a full issue was only 17/18 pages not the 20 or 22 of the modern era, so even if he was doing side gigs, it was still fewer pages needed to get done to get issues done consistently for the book he was the regular artist one. And post-80 when he did manage more consistency, he did revert to doing breakdowns a lot of the time with the inker providing full finishes, not just inking. -M I did a quick search on Mikes Amazing world of comics and saw that Perez had two books come out a few of those months that you site. For example, When Avengers #161 came out , FF # 184 also was drawn by him. It seems that he was being used "Kirby style" to sell books based on his name recognition.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 24, 2018 5:23:58 GMT -5
Just as an aside, I also saw that John buscema drew FF 116 and Thor 193, both giant size issues when Marvel increased their cover price to 25 for one month. I can't remember seeing an artist draw 2 books in one month in the last 10 years. Is it because they are too slow, they are getting paid well enough that they don't have to or some other reason ?
edit: I noticed that one month Sal Buscema had three books come out in one month that had his artwork- Avengers 173, Captain America 223 and Hulk 225.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2018 12:36:09 GMT -5
Just as an aside, I also saw that John buscema drew FF 116 and Thor 193, both giant size issues when Marvel increased their cover price to 25 for one month. I can't remember seeing an artist draw 2 books in one month in the last 10 years. Is it because they are too slow, they are getting paid well enough that they don't have to or some other reason ? edit: I noticed that one month Sal Buscema had three books come out in one month that had his artwork- Avengers 173, Captain America 223 and Hulk 225. Did they do full pencils or break downs? Those giant 25 cent issues were also loaded with back ups and reprints for that 1 month, I am not sure the main story was any longer than normal but I would have to check. And again, books were only 17-18 pages during that point in the 70s. If you are going to compare one era to the other make sure you are comparing a) full pencils to full pencils, not breakdowns with a finisher to full pencils. b) pages produced per month not issues since issues were of different lengths there are other factors as well, but if you are going to do any kind of valid comparison, you have to compare like to like, not different things. Then there are things you can;t really measure like audience and market expectations that affect the style of the work, editorial decisions on house styles that require certain levels of backgrounds or not, etc. etc. And how many producing multiple books in a month were doing so using the Wally Wood adage... to get things done quicker. It is far quicker to lightbox in a stock pose or panel composition than to layout/design things whole cloth. Of course that can apply to modern artists too, so unless you know exactly who is doing hat and how, any comparison of production rates is speculative at best and conclusions will be based on personal bias not actual data. -M
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on May 24, 2018 12:40:33 GMT -5
Eh, I liked Andru's Metal Men quite a bit better than anything he did for Marvel. Andru's greatest strength was humor and he was a cartoonist at heart. So the Metal Men was closer to his wheelhouse than any of his Marvel assignments. So true, now that you mention it. Maybe Kanigher didn't put as tight a rein on him there?
|
|