|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 11, 2014 5:42:39 GMT -5
I don't like the practice of multiple illustration duties passed out to multiple people. There's no reason for an accomplished artist to pass a page along to be inked by someone else. None at all. it's one of my least favorite practices in mainstream comics. I universally like comics where one illustrator is responsible start to finish, and most often when that illustrator is the writer as well. I know what you mean. I know I would feel uncomfortable passing my artwork along to someone else to be finished. I think there is one very good reason and that is time. But artistically I don't get it. If a penciller doesn't ink himself then none of his actual work makes it to the page. The penciler /Inker team is responsible for enhancing the beauty of the artwork when the team is right. If we only saw the pencilers , we would never have seen the beauty of a Kirby/Sinnott , Miller /Jansen , Colan/ Palmer, or Buscema/Palmer page. |
|
|
|
Post by the4thpip on May 11, 2014 5:59:12 GMT -5
I know what you mean. I know I would feel uncomfortable passing my artwork along to someone else to be finished. I think there is one very good reason and that is time. But artistically I don't get it. If a penciller doesn't ink himself then none of his actual work makes it to the page. The penciler /Inker team is responsible for enhancing the beauty of the artwork when the team is right. If we only saw the pencilers , we would never have seen the beauty of a Kirby/Sinnott , Miller /Jansen , Colan/ Palmer, or Buscema/Palmer page. Plus, it makes art spotting so much fun! |
|
|
|
Post by crazyoldhermit on May 11, 2014 7:37:46 GMT -5
Thats true, but if they ink their own work they get more money in their bank account AND their hard work makes it on the printed page. That depends on much, and how fast, they make money in pencils and inks. I'd like to think they can at least do that math. I know Chris Samnee does his thumbnail breakdowns, blows them up, makes adjustments in pencil and inks over that. On the other end of the spectrum, David Finch spends a lot of time drawing in meticulous detail, hatching and lineweights. If he ink himself a lot of that detail time would be redundant and could be done with a pen to get the inking rate. I've heard from various people in the industry that more pencillers are inking their own work now because they need the additional inking rate. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2014 12:05:29 GMT -5
I know what you mean. I know I would feel uncomfortable passing my artwork along to someone else to be finished. I think there is one very good reason and that is time. But artistically I don't get it. If a penciller doesn't ink himself then none of his actual work makes it to the page. The penciler /Inker team is responsible for enhancing the beauty of the artwork when the team is right. If we only saw the pencilers , we would never have seen the beauty of a Kirby/Sinnott , Miller /Jansen , Colan/ Palmer, or Buscema/Palmer page. I'm not talking about only seeing pencils, I'm talking about the inker being the same guy as the penciler. |
|
|
|
Post by MDG on May 11, 2014 17:12:50 GMT -5
The pencilled/inker division came mainly from the production line process during the golden age. Some houses, like Eisner/Iger and Binder would break it down as script, layouts, pencil figures, pencil backgrounds, ink figures, ink backgrounds, letters.
Later on, it came more from preference. Kirby didn't like inking his work because he felt it was like doing the same this twice. Plus, just having him pencil meant twice as many pages out the door.
Always found it interesting that, in their own projects, both Eisner and Adams usually had other people do the pencils and they saved the inks for themselves. Maybe so they could control the final look.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 11, 2014 17:39:55 GMT -5
And lets not forget about Byrne, who for quite some time, apparently, was inking over blank paper .
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 11, 2014 17:45:34 GMT -5
And lets not forget about Byrne, who for quite some time, apparently, was inking over blank paper . lol. He beat the system by "inking" his own work but never penciling his own work. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 11, 2014 17:53:22 GMT -5
I seem to remember he actually admitted doing that, but in any case, it sure as hell looked like he did.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 11, 2014 17:55:43 GMT -5
He was the top dog at the time. Who was gonna say boo to him ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 11, 2014 17:58:23 GMT -5
Claremont!
|
|
|
|
Post by the4thpip on May 12, 2014 4:03:42 GMT -5
He was the top dog at the time. Who was gonna say boo to him ? I think that was past his prime. During his prime, he usually had inkers or still inked his own work. But look at "Generations" (if you dare).  |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 12, 2014 6:28:38 GMT -5
I felt that Byrne eventually devolved into what we have today; a person who draws very cartoony and without many backgrounds.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 12, 2014 7:45:24 GMT -5
I felt that Byrne eventually devolved into what we have today; a person who draws very cartoony and without many backgrounds. I'm tempted to call that laziness. |
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on May 12, 2014 7:58:54 GMT -5
I still like a lot about Byrne's art (and enjoyed Generations), however I've commented to him several times on his board that his style has gotten more cartoony over the years, but he flat out states that it was his old stuff was less realistic and more cartoony! I just dropped it. He's either in denial or simply being a contrarian. I actually think his inking on FF was underrated, but it's been a LONG time since he's put that much detail in his art.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 12, 2014 8:09:07 GMT -5
He might have been at his peak during his FF/Superman period.
|
|
