|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 7, 2016 21:07:35 GMT -5
I knew he drew Spawn so I was prepared to be unimpressed but, man, Capullo just kills it issue after issue. So great! He did nice work for Marvel on Quasar before taking the money for Spawn. |
|
|
|
Post by Dizzy D on Feb 9, 2016 10:14:24 GMT -5
I knew he drew Spawn so I was prepared to be unimpressed but, man, Capullo just kills it issue after issue. So great! Hiring Capullo is probably the best business decision McFarlane ever took: a talented artist with good work ethics. |
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Feb 10, 2016 6:37:03 GMT -5
Clint Langley on 2000 AD.  |
|
|
|
Post by String on Feb 11, 2016 9:46:49 GMT -5
I like Chris Samnee, who just finished up his run on Daredevil. I started reading this run of Daredevil because the art drew me in when I was browsing through new comics. I've read some complaints that his art may be too cartoony, but I like it as well.  Oliver Coipel  Francis Manapul  |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Feb 18, 2016 7:09:14 GMT -5
Here's where we put the lie to the idea that old readers always say that things were better in their day! I think we have a very, very large pool of amazingly talented and varied artists today. For every Neal Adams or Michael Golden in the 70s and 80s, we now have several Mike Mignola, Sara Pichelli, Stuart Immonen, Fiona Staples, Chris Samnee, David Aja, Sean Philips, Chris Bachalo, Carla Speed McNeil, and so on and so forth. Some have been around for a good while, some have just started, but this is definitely a great time to be reading American comics, as far as the art is concerned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Feb 18, 2016 9:48:23 GMT -5
Here's where we put the lie to the idea that old readers always say that things were better in their day! I think we have a very, very large pool of amazingly talented and varied artists today. For every Neal Adams or Michael Golden in the 70s and 80s, we now have several Mike Mignola, Sara Pichelli, Stuart Immonen, Fiona Staples, Chris Samnee, David Aja, Sean Philips, Chris Bachalo, Carla Speed McNeil, and so on and so forth. Some have been around for a good while, some have just started, but this is definitely a great time to be reading American comics, as far as the art is concerned. I agree, but I think the best artists from the 70's and 80's, if given the time, were every bit as good as the best modern artists: Mike Kaluta, Bernie Wrightson, Barry Windsor-Smith, J. J. Muth, etc. The grind of the old monthly schedule, when most editors wanted it "now" instead of good, did a big disservice to a lot of great artists. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 9:58:27 GMT -5
Here's where we put the lie to the idea that old readers always say that things were better in their day! I think we have a very, very large pool of amazingly talented and varied artists today. For every Neal Adams or Michael Golden in the 70s and 80s, we now have several Mike Mignola, Sara Pichelli, Stuart Immonen, Fiona Staples, Chris Samnee, David Aja, Sean Philips, Chris Bachalo, Carla Speed McNeil, and so on and so forth. Some have been around for a good while, some have just started, but this is definitely a great time to be reading American comics, as far as the art is concerned. I agree, but I think the best artists from the 70's and 80's, if given the time, were every bit as good as the best modern artists: Mike Kaluta, Bernie Wrightson, Barry Windsor-Smith, J. J. Muth, etc. The grind of the old monthly schedule, when most editors wanted it "now" instead of good, did a big disservice to a lot of great artists. I agree to an extent, but there were a lot of artists working on books that were bi-monthly or 8 times a year not monthly in the 70s that still couldn't meet the deadline, they were given more time than the monthly grind, plus in the 70s books went down to 17 pages (less than even today) so the monthly grind was a lower page count in the 70s. So yes deadlines did affect quality, but the monthly grind wasn't always monthly per se and the page counts for a monthly book were less. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Feb 18, 2016 9:59:32 GMT -5
Here's where we put the lie to the idea that old readers always say that things were better in their day! I think we have a very, very large pool of amazingly talented and varied artists today. For every Neal Adams or Michael Golden in the 70s and 80s, we now have several Mike Mignola, Sara Pichelli, Stuart Immonen, Fiona Staples, Chris Samnee, David Aja, Sean Philips, Chris Bachalo, Carla Speed McNeil, and so on and so forth. Some have been around for a good while, some have just started, but this is definitely a great time to be reading American comics, as far as the art is concerned. I agree, but I think the best artists from the 70's and 80's, if given the time, were every bit as good as the best modern artists: Mike Kaluta, Bernie Wrightson, Barry Windsor-Smith, J. J. Muth, etc. The grind of the old monthly schedule, when most editors wanted it "now" instead of good, did a big disservice to a lot of great artists. Oh, agreed! I don't mean to belittle the achievements of the great artists of my time; Barry Smith, Mike Kaluta, Berni Wrightson, John Buscema, Gene Colan, Paul Gulacy, Neal Adams, Walt Simonson, Jose Luis Garcia Lopez and several others... they're still the ones I think of when someone talks about "great comic-book artists". However, while I am quite ready to speak ill of several aspects of today's comics, artwork is not among them. Back in the '70s and '80s (and the early '90s, dear God!!!), despite the presence of these giants, I would frequently get my hands on a comic with crappy art, and that rarely happens today. |
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Feb 18, 2016 10:35:27 GMT -5
Well, it's true that you still had guys like Don Perlin drawing well into the 1980's when they probably shouldn't have been. I don't see that happening today.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Feb 18, 2016 13:32:03 GMT -5
I like Chris Samnee, who just finished up his run on Daredevil. I started reading this run of Daredevil because the art drew me in when I was browsing through new comics. I've read some complaints that his art may be too cartoony, but I like it as well. Oliver Coipel Francis Manapul Samnee is a great comic book artist. I just re-read The Nail, his Vertigo Crime OGN, and it really delivers. Mannapul has grown from a Image/Madureira clone (remember those old Lady Death comics?) into an artist of his own, and a very intersting one as he keeps evolving. But Coipel I don't really see. It's just regular super hero stuff with its usual flaw : just look at the size of Thor's head compared to his hands on that poster! Unfathomable... |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Feb 18, 2016 20:14:57 GMT -5
I agree, but I think the best artists from the 70's and 80's, if given the time, were every bit as good as the best modern artists: Mike Kaluta, Bernie Wrightson, Barry Windsor-Smith, J. J. Muth, etc. The grind of the old monthly schedule, when most editors wanted it "now" instead of good, did a big disservice to a lot of great artists. Oh, agreed! I don't mean to belittle the achievements of the great artists of my time; Barry Smith, Mike Kaluta, Berni Wrightson, John Buscema, Gene Colan, Paul Gulacy, Neal Adams, Walt Simonson, Jose Luis Garcia Lopez and several others... they're still the ones I think of when someone talks about "great comic-book artists". However, while I am quite ready to speak ill of several aspects of today's comics, artwork is not among them. Back in the '70s and '80s (and the early '90s, dear God!!!), despite the presence of these giants, I would frequently get my hands on a comic with crappy art, and that rarely happens today. Conversely, I will argue that American Comic book art peaked in the '50s. (And I doubt that anyone will disagree with me TOO strenuously.) I generally agree with your point, but I think the switch to full-length stories really hurt the quality of art. |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Feb 19, 2016 5:30:01 GMT -5
Conversely, I will argue that American Comic book art peaked in the '50s. (And I doubt that anyone will disagree with me TOO strenuously.) I generally agree with your point, but I think the switch to full-length stories really hurt the quality of art. That's a highly conservative and restrctive view on comic book art IMHO as that would only take in account pencil work. I believe current comics can have much better design and coloring then in the 50ies by a strong margin. And while the 50ies had its Cardys, Frazettas, Shomburg etc, the storytelling is potentially much richer nowadays than it was back then, the variety of angles, POVs and stylizations is just mesmerizing compared to what the 50ies had to offer. I would rather argue that in a society where artists are free, the peak of an artform always is now and almost tomorrow. Sure those are fine and offer diveristy of philosophy :    But I don't see the 50ies offering that level of design and craftmanship either :      And that was a 20 page monthly book.Mike Del Mundo nowadays is the artist on the ongoing Weirdworld series. Esad Ribic is another artist with a team that challenges any past level of quality IMHO :   I could go on with many many names, but as much as I love the Toth, Wood or Wolverton of the 50ies, I just find it obvious that current good artists have just expanded on those artist's achievements and make the medium still exciting, why else still bother with comics?  |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Feb 19, 2016 16:28:05 GMT -5
Conversely, I will argue that American Comic book art peaked in the '50s. (And I doubt that anyone will disagree with me TOO strenuously.) I generally agree with your point, but I think the switch to full-length stories really hurt the quality of art. That's a highly conservative and restrctive view on comic book art IMHO as that would only take in account pencil work. I believe current comics can have much better design and coloring then in the 50ies by a strong margin. And while the 50ies had its Cardys, Frazettas, Shomburg etc, the storytelling is potentially much richer nowadays than it was back then, the variety of angles, POVs and stylizations is just mesmerizing compared to what the 50ies had to offer. I would rather argue that in a society where artists are free, the peak of an artform always is now and almost tomorrow. Sure those are fine and offer diveristy of philosophy : Ok, ok, you got me. American Mainstream Comic pencilling peaked in the '50s. Everybody happy? |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Feb 19, 2016 16:45:17 GMT -5
I don't know, I think it's just nostalgia on your part : comic book artists such as Frazetta, Alex Toth or Graham Ingels are a rare thing, but so are Mark Schultz, Adam Hugues or Ashley Woods. And artists such as Wrightson, Jeff Jones, Kaluta or even Fraztta actually hit their peak in the 70ies, so it just all very subjective. There will be supremely talented comic book artists in each generations, hopefully all building on the groundbreaks of their predecessors. When you watch JH Williams III's Sandman, Kevin Nowlan's various inking styles, Windsor McKay's Little Nemo, Travis Charest's late Wildcats or Toth's EC war stories, they all constitute artistic peaks on their own. Wouldn't it be sad if we cnsidered that Da Vinci's Mona Lisa was the peak of painting? |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Feb 19, 2016 17:24:27 GMT -5
This whole discussion made me think about something weird, funny, and maybe interesting. Weren't Frazetta and his likes treated as less than arists back in the 50ies, if not only for the bad image comics had with many adults? I sure remember reading Graham Ingels was considered a disgusting artist. Kevin O'Neil's early wonders were even censored due to the supposedly obscene characteristicc of the artist's style!Most 60ies pseudo comic scholars only saw the flaws in Whritson's style. Which brings me to a couple of current artists that we kind of despise, but that I can't deny have displayed a level of craftmanship and details that is yet fascinating, even if in the service of a admitedly ugly result. So I just wonder if in 30 years, we won't just appreciate the glorious aspects of their megalomanous epic pages? What vile work could I be speaking of? Well, I give you David Finch and Stephen Platt!       I mean, how batshit insane is that ?!!! :  It sure is ugly, but not for the same reasons Liefeld's art is ugly. This is impressive, I wouldn't mind being able to watch it closely. |
|
