Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,201 
|
Post by Confessor on Apr 14, 2023 2:23:21 GMT -5
I hate it when a collected edition wastes so much space with big margins, it's not like I want to scribble in some anecdotes. There, I said it.
I hate to be a smart arse, but I think you mean "annotations", which are the notes that students normally write in the margins of books. I did know what you meant though. And I'm sure your anecdotes would be charming too.  |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Apr 14, 2023 4:29:37 GMT -5
I hate it when a collected edition wastes so much space with big margins, it's not like I want to scribble in some anecdotes.
There, I said it.
I'd rather that than those collections where half the art is lost because the inner margins aren't wide enough.
Cei-U! I summon the grim alternative!
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 14, 2023 5:18:33 GMT -5
I hate it when a collected edition wastes so much space with big margins, it's not like I want to scribble in some anecdotes.
There, I said it.
Man, at this stage of the game, you would think that printing is a standard practice that can't be messed up. |
|
|
|
Post by Dr Johnny Fever on Apr 14, 2023 10:00:12 GMT -5
I hate it when a collected edition wastes so much space with big margins, it's not like I want to scribble in some anecdotes.
There, I said it.
I'm in the publishing business, and based on that image, the best I could calculate is another 2-3% possible enlargement. If you removed the title header and page number footer, you could get 12-13% enlargement. So I'd more question the design choice of having the footer waste so much space. Smaller font, shrink the box, move it up more into the comics page (without covering any artwork of course), and they would have reclaimed a lot space. Remove the "headshot" in the header and you'd gain even more. |
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Apr 14, 2023 10:29:07 GMT -5
Those are such obvious space wasters it makes me wonder if it was done deliberately to save ink? Is there that much of a cost difference?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr Johnny Fever on Apr 14, 2023 10:39:06 GMT -5
Those are such obvious space wasters it makes me wonder if it was done deliberately to save ink? Is there that much of a cost difference? I can't imagine the enlarging would move the ink cost needle enough to matter. My guesses would be... 1. Terrible graphic designer 2. Good graphic designer with a terrible supervisor (or committee) 3. There is an unknown (to us) issue with the originals causing limits on reproduction size, and the "space wasters" were created as an attempt to hide the fact. For example, the original film is most likely gone so they had to photograph existing prints, and photographing them any larger would expose flaws from the days of lesser quality printing technology. |
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Apr 14, 2023 12:08:47 GMT -5
^^^^ Without knowing the background and size of that book, the big factors may have been: 1) Reproducing the pages at their original size and 2) Finding the cheapest format that would accommodate that. The header and footer may be to remove perceived dead space at the top and bottom.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 14, 2023 13:04:10 GMT -5
Maybe this has been discussed ad nausem , but John Byrne should be regarded as an all time legend on the par with Neal Adams , Steranko and Perez. The only thing that has prevented that is his terrible personality.
|
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Apr 14, 2023 13:48:29 GMT -5
Maybe this has been discussed ad nausem , but John Byrne should be regarded as an all time legend on the par with Neal Adams , Steranko and Perez. The only thing that has prevented that is his terrible personality. He's a good artist, there's not doubt about that (even if his stuff is early McFarlane levels of cartoony), but I've kind of found his writing chops to be somewhat lacking
But on the plus side, he isn't as insane of a writer as Adams often was |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2023 13:55:46 GMT -5
Maybe this has been discussed ad nausem , but John Byrne should be regarded as an all time legend on the par with Neal Adams , Steranko and Perez. The only thing that has prevented that is his terrible personality. I fully agree. If Byrne had retired in 1987 shortly after rebooting Superman, his legacy would be completely different. You don't work on a run as significant as his time on X-Men with Claremont, and the tremendous run on FF (even with some warts here and there), and the Superman reboot (and I'm not even a post Crisis fan, but it DID reinvigorate the property), and not have a major legacy. Add in stuff like Alpha Flight, Iron First, and so on...he's on par with the names you mentioned to me. |
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Apr 14, 2023 15:01:27 GMT -5
Maybe this has been discussed ad nausem , but John Byrne should be regarded as an all time legend on the par with Neal Adams , Steranko and Perez. The only thing that has prevented that is his terrible personality. I fully agree. If Byrne had retired in 1987 shortly after rebooting Superman, his legacy would be completely different. You don't work on a run as significant as his time on X-Men with Claremont, and the tremendous run on FF (even with some warts here and there), and the Superman reboot (and I'm not even a post Crisis fan, but it DID reinvigorate the property), and not have a major legacy. Add in stuff like Alpha Flight, Iron First, and so on...he's on par with the names you mentioned to me. What screwed Byrne is that he was the first of the superstar artists during the time when fandom (and the direct market) was really growing--much bigger than just 5 years before, in terms of how big conventions were getting, the opportunities for fans to connect (no internet, but people started making weekly trips to the LCS), etc. Plus, he was working on the hottest book of the time and would soon be the only choice to revamp the biggest and most famous character in comics.
I think all of that went to his head a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 14, 2023 16:49:48 GMT -5
I have a sports comparison to the Byrne situation for those that follow sports on this forum. I could think of 2 examples of great baseball players that lost out on some rewards because of their personalities- the first is Ted Williams and the other was Steve Carlton. Ted Williams won the triple crown one year but was beat out of the AL MVP award to Joe Dimagio because The sports writers hated him. Steve Carlton was one of the greatest pitchers of his era but never gave interviews to the media. She snubbed them all his career until the end when he was washed up. The writers refused to talk to him at the end when he was begging for a job with any team. So you see, it pays to not be an ass.
|
|
|
|
Post by commond on Apr 14, 2023 17:00:58 GMT -5
I started reading comics later than most folks here, so my first introduction to Byrne was through titles like Avengers West Coast, Namor, and She-Hulk, which I doubt many would call classic Byrne but made me a fan.
Aside from his personality, which was evident in interviews long before he ever dialed up a modem, I would say the thing that soured me on Byrne was his compulsive need to revamp every book he worked on, and not with a back-to-basics approach but often a complete overhaul ala destroying Vision as a character. His Wonder Woman run was where I gave up on buying every Byrne book.
I also didn't like the fact that he rubbished the Image guys and then couldn't see his creator-owned projects through to the finish. I enjoyed his Dark Horse work when it first came out and was annoyed when he upped and bailed on it. Although, I believe he finished Next Men years later. Byrne always had this strange "us vs them" mentality for whomever he worked for. When he was still at Marvel in the 80s, he publicly rubbished everyone who had left for DC at the time (Roy Thomas, Wolfman, Colan, etc.) A few years later and lo and behold he's working for the competition.
|
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Apr 14, 2023 17:09:10 GMT -5
Maybe this has been discussed ad nausem , but John Byrne should be regarded as an all time legend on the par with Neal Adams , Steranko and Perez. The only thing that has prevented that is his terrible personality. He's nowhere near the talent of Adams (of all people listed) Steranko or Perez at the height of their ability and impact on comics. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,201
|
Post by Confessor on Apr 14, 2023 17:15:27 GMT -5
Maybe this has been discussed ad nausem , but John Byrne should be regarded as an all time legend on the par with Neal Adams , Steranko and Perez. The only thing that has prevented that is his terrible personality. I disagree, I'm afraid old friend. I like John Byrne's work a lot and it's so synonymous with 80s Marvel comics in my mind that his classic work never fails to give me that lovely warm nostalgic feeling whenever I re-visit it. But he's simply not in the same league as Steranko, Adams or Perez (or José Luis García-López for that matter), both as a draftsman or in terms of his influence on the evolution of comics as a whole. |
|
