|
Post by LovesGilKane on Jun 25, 2017 5:01:57 GMT -5
It comes down to personal aesthetics, but there are many times I felt they had the absolute wrong inker on a penciler. Not that the inker is bad, they just don't work at all with that artist's style. I was not a fan of Ernie Chau (Chan) on John Buscema for example. i love this reply, but again, must sadly disagree. Sometimes, an inker penciller simply DOES suck, simply IS bad, or at times, renders bad art. Which is what this thread is about. Which is critique. Which is what Patrick White, international best-selling art critic, made a global career of, just as is other queer brethren such as Truman Capote and Gore Vidal. Two of my fave peeps since childhood, and Patrick White was a friend of the family. Perez Hilton, on the other hand, is a lazy $$@@!!! who is to critique compared to Gore and Pat what Michael Bay is to Mario Bava. Perez Hilton can !$@@!! a #@!!! without Q&#@!!! and suffer $##@!!!! for his narcissistic non-efforts.
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Jun 25, 2017 5:11:29 GMT -5
dear james, i support this thread's topic, and your right to ask us to answer your question. However, I also respect kirby and Icc. equally to you. this means that in respect to both Icc and kirby, and having been published before in the realm of comics, and knowing how often comics-board-comments are 'whored out' for the sake of a treatise or paid-blog-post or internet-article, which I have seen many many many times before this thread cropped up (it happens often), I shall be answering/supporting this thread of yours, but out of respect to the global comics-community, be doing so in a way that cannot be used in a fashion which takes advantage of ANY member's post in this thread, or any thread i choose to reply to. I add this in observance of the fact that you, james, have not replied here, at all. Nor offered any input re your own ideas/opinions on this topic. And maybe kirby was being more polite than myself in the way he/she was gently attempting to ward you off. So as to avoid people posting for free accidentally assisting someone making a buck out of them, sans formal (legal) permission. which pseudo-journalists (with no talent) of the current digital-article age attempt to fandangle, all the time. i'm sure you are not one of the lacking-genetalia-and-spine quasi-journaistic w****** seeking to make a quid out of the comicbook-media-qoutient, via posts made by people here, but it WOULD be nice if, after I supported you here, you could affirm that. in respect to kirby and Icc. And everyone see here. Personal responsibilities and and work have kept me from really reading these posts and responding. I'm not sure if you're thinking I'm some kind of, I don't know, troll that is trying to stir up controversy in order to sell to a site with quotes out of text etc. But trust me it's just a question in response to an earlier thread from a lover of comics for the last 38 years. With my job investigating Child Abuse, I don't have time or energy to do such things. not a problem, great to hear! since this thread - in respect to analysis of art - has every right to exist and deserves heartfelt answers. 'troll that is trying to stir up controversy in order to sell to a site with quotes out of text etc.' sadly could have been a possibility; it's happened all over the net and more so now with comics because of the advent of the new Marvel Cinematic Age which 'buys beer' for ^&*&%#!!!'s such as freelancers for buzzfeed, and other places seeking to emulate that %$$@@!! pseudo-site. Again, as someone having taken paycheques from publishers for art, I'm happy to continue contributing, if you wish. Or debate (in a genteel fashion) with kirby on this topic. In any event, regardless of the replies you've received, it IS a worthy topic, and in fact one that is often a round-table discussion between pro artists over drinks and meals at conventions.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jun 25, 2017 6:43:42 GMT -5
I think I'm going to address the elephant in the room. Rob Liefeld is generally thought of as a bad artist, and yet he continues to get work and acclaim for some characters/projects that he created or had a hand in creating. I read somewhere that the issues that he does always have a sales bump. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by james on Jun 25, 2017 7:42:00 GMT -5
Personal responsibilities and and work have kept me from really reading these posts and responding. I'm not sure if you're thinking I'm some kind of, I don't know, troll that is trying to stir up controversy in order to sell to a site with quotes out of text etc. But trust me it's just a question in response to an earlier thread from a lover of comics for the last 38 years. With my job investigating Child Abuse, I don't have time or energy to do such things. not a problem, great to hear! since this thread - in respect to analysis of art - has every right to exist and deserves heartfelt answers. 'troll that is trying to stir up controversy in order to sell to a site with quotes out of text etc.' sadly could have been a possibility; it's happened all over the net and more so now with comics because of the advent of the new Marvel Cinematic Age which 'buys beer' for ^&*&%#!!!'s such as freelancers for buzzfeed, and other places seeking to emulate that %$$@@!! pseudo-site. Again, as someone having taken paycheques from publishers for art, I'm happy to continue contributing, if you wish. Or debate (in a genteel fashion) with kirby on this topic. In any event, regardless of the replies you've received, it IS a worthy topic, and in fact one that is often a round-table discussion between pro artists over drinks and meals at conventions. No problem. I understand your point. And again sorry if my "disappearance" made some think i was trying to stir up problems. I will admit to sometimes putting a thread following my train of thought and then not expounding on issues because at the time of writing thread i thought it was a pretty innocuous question and i truly couldnt think of more to say. Ill be more aware next time
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Jun 25, 2017 8:08:41 GMT -5
It comes down to personal aesthetics, but there are many times I felt they had the absolute wrong inker on a penciler. Not that the inker is bad, they just don't work at all with that artist's style. I was not a fan of Ernie Chau (Chan) on John Buscema for example. i love this reply, but again, must sadly disagree. Sometimes, an inker penciller simply DOES suck, simply IS bad, or at times, renders bad art. Which is what this thread is about. Which is critique. Which is what Patrick White, international best-selling art critic, made a global career of, just as is other queer brethren such as Truman Capote and Gore Vidal. Two of my fave peeps since childhood, and Patrick White was a friend of the family. Perez Hilton, on the other hand, is a lazy $$@@!!! who is to critique compared to Gore and Pat what Michael Bay is to Mario Bava. Perez Hilton can !$@@!! a #@!!! without Q&#@!!! and suffer $##@!!!! for his narcissistic non-efforts. Oh, I agree, there are inkers who suck. But I was just bringing up those other times when the art doesn't work because the inker and penciler don't fit.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jun 25, 2017 8:20:13 GMT -5
not a problem, great to hear! since this thread - in respect to analysis of art - has every right to exist and deserves heartfelt answers. 'troll that is trying to stir up controversy in order to sell to a site with quotes out of text etc.' sadly could have been a possibility; it's happened all over the net and more so now with comics because of the advent of the new Marvel Cinematic Age which 'buys beer' for ^&*&%#!!!'s such as freelancers for buzzfeed, and other places seeking to emulate that %$$@@!! pseudo-site. Again, as someone having taken paycheques from publishers for art, I'm happy to continue contributing, if you wish. Or debate (in a genteel fashion) with kirby on this topic. In any event, regardless of the replies you've received, it IS a worthy topic, and in fact one that is often a round-table discussion between pro artists over drinks and meals at conventions. No problem. I understand your point. And again sorry if my "disappearance" made some think i was trying to stir up problems. I will admit to sometimes putting a thread following my train of thought and then not expounding on issues because at the time of writing thread i thought it was a pretty innocuous question and i truly couldnt think of more to say. Ill be more aware next time I must be naive. I had no idea posting a thread could lead to some type of monetary gain for articles.
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Jun 25, 2017 10:10:05 GMT -5
No problem. I understand your point. And again sorry if my "disappearance" made some think i was trying to stir up problems. I will admit to sometimes putting a thread following my train of thought and then not expounding on issues because at the time of writing thread i thought it was a pretty innocuous question and i truly couldnt think of more to say. Ill be more aware next time I must be naive. I had no idea posting a thread could lead to some type of monetary gain for articles. I'm a touch skeptical that it's actually a thing. Cei-U! Then again I don't frequent the kind of websites that supposedly practice it so...
|
|
|
Post by james on Jun 25, 2017 11:34:43 GMT -5
No problem. I understand your point. And again sorry if my "disappearance" made some think i was trying to stir up problems. I will admit to sometimes putting a thread following my train of thought and then not expounding on issues because at the time of writing thread i thought it was a pretty innocuous question and i truly couldnt think of more to say. Ill be more aware next time I must be naive. I had no idea posting a thread could lead to some type of monetary gain for articles. I didnt know that either.
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Jun 26, 2017 1:05:12 GMT -5
not a problem, great to hear! since this thread - in respect to analysis of art - has every right to exist and deserves heartfelt answers. 'troll that is trying to stir up controversy in order to sell to a site with quotes out of text etc.' sadly could have been a possibility; it's happened all over the net and more so now with comics because of the advent of the new Marvel Cinematic Age which 'buys beer' for ^&*&%#!!!'s such as freelancers for buzzfeed, and other places seeking to emulate that %$$@@!! pseudo-site. Again, as someone having taken paycheques from publishers for art, I'm happy to continue contributing, if you wish. Or debate (in a genteel fashion) with kirby on this topic. In any event, regardless of the replies you've received, it IS a worthy topic, and in fact one that is often a round-table discussion between pro artists over drinks and meals at conventions. No problem. I understand your point. And again sorry if my "disappearance" made some think i was trying to stir up problems. I will admit to sometimes putting a thread following my train of thought and then not expounding on issues because at the time of writing thread i thought it was a pretty innocuous question and i truly couldnt think of more to say. Ill be more aware next time It's clear you're not a sheister no worries
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Jun 26, 2017 1:12:01 GMT -5
I must be naive. I had no idea posting a thread could lead to some type of monetary gain for articles. I'm a touch skeptical that it's actually a thing. Cei-U! Then again I don't frequent the kind of websites that supposedly practice it so... It's often a 'thing' on sites that are no longer a 'thing' thinking screenwriting is still a 'thing' that can 'courtesan-out' comics as a 'thing' to attempt to be relevant to a 'non-thing' such as 'pure-screenplays' as a 'thing' which are longer a 'thing' compared to adaptions of comics for TV/Film which IS a 'thing' but 'buzz-f--d-d' (or tendered as articles in screenwriting sites) to folks whom never READ an actual 'real comic-book' but wish to get a million dollars from writing something a comics-cognisant 9-year-old whould SNEER at, which IS a 'thing'. LW: I summon the power of being unafraid of garbage-pseudo-geek-sites-including 'Nerdist!'
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Jun 26, 2017 1:49:29 GMT -5
i love this reply, but again, must sadly disagree. Sometimes, an inker penciller simply DOES suck, simply IS bad, or at times, renders bad art. Which is what this thread is about. Which is critique. Which is what Patrick White, international best-selling art critic, made a global career of, just as is other queer brethren such as Truman Capote and Gore Vidal. Two of my fave peeps since childhood, and Patrick White was a friend of the family. Perez Hilton, on the other hand, is a lazy $$@@!!! who is to critique compared to Gore and Pat what Michael Bay is to Mario Bava. Perez Hilton can !$@@!! a #@!!! without Q&#@!!! and suffer $##@!!!! for his narcissistic non-efforts. Oh, I agree, there are inkers who suck. But I was just bringing up those other times when the art doesn't work because the inker and penciler don't fit. That is an excellent reply and one which I, as an ex- freelancer, believes should be explored more deeply, no different to comparing noble directors and fab thespians whom never got along, in indie films, and thus the end result suffered! Well done, you!
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Jun 27, 2017 3:12:00 GMT -5
meanwhile, to be fair to james, this thread ain't dead yet. aside from myself and maybe 6 other freelancers of high-standing (their standing, not mine), everyone seems to consider Allred to be a 'great artist'. Utter emperor's new clothes poster boy, i.m.o. but others love him, so, some 'excrement' panels from Allred in keeping with the thread topic. and the worst offender, most pseudo-indie narcissistic, bordering on ware bile, inked like a wannabe 'banksy' with broken fingers:
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,212
|
Post by Confessor on Jun 27, 2017 6:23:32 GMT -5
^^ Not seeing the problem with those Allred panels at all. The last, black & white one, in particular, looks very nice and works precisely because I can easily and quickly identify all of the rock stars in the background, which is exactly what the artist wants. So, in that respect, I'd say it was a pretty successful panel.
If you simply don't rate Allred, that's fair enough, but it's not really what this thread's about: these should be examples of great artists producing occasional bad art -- not just artists you think suck.
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Jun 27, 2017 6:37:23 GMT -5
^^ Not seeing the problem with those Allred panels at all. The last, black & white one, in particular, looks very nice and works precisely because I can easily and quickly identify all of the rock stars in the background, which is exactly what the artist wants. So, in that respect, I'd say it was a pretty successful panel. If you simply don't rate Allred, that's fair enough, but it's not really what this thread's about: these should be examples of great artists producing occasional bad art -- not just artists you think suck. that would be fair except for the fact i don't think all or most off allred's panels suck; i think THOSE panels suck in Particular. most people rate allred as great, these days. as for the last, black & white one, i've seen work from 19 year old graffiti artists on walls that did it better. the inking here is loose and 'i'm hiding behind indie-category nonsense so you can't complain about my brushwork'. his work now is as a current marvel darling, whose previous work thumbed its nose at classic marvel. if it's uncool to say so, okay. but this is basically a critique thread of artists considered great (by many), and their panels whom we (the few) consider to suck. the allred panels suck.
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Jun 27, 2017 6:54:29 GMT -5
also, on this thread, i was the first person to give actual examples from artists i loved and love, as i directly stated in my 1st post.
so from the outset, i have not 'merely made fun of artists i personally think suck'. i HAVE spoken against bad art which is 'warholian' and therefore popular, from artists who know better. but that seems in keeping with james' question.
|
|