|
Post by tartanphantom on Nov 19, 2022 1:05:04 GMT -5
I've just discovered that Terry Beatty couldn't draw a baby to save his life. Byrne is infamous for drawing grotesque children. Can anyone think of other examples of artists struggling to draw a particular thing?
You do know about the general thing with Liefeld and feet, right?
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 19, 2022 1:59:34 GMT -5
Starlin said he hates drawing cars and regular city things. I guess that’s why he usually does space opera.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Nov 19, 2022 7:53:08 GMT -5
I've just discovered that Terry Beatty couldn't draw a baby to save his life. Byrne is infamous for drawing grotesque children. Can anyone think of other examples of artists struggling to draw a particular thing? Byrne was infamous for more than his inability to draw children, such as nearly everyone with wide faces, dimples, men appearing as if they were the victims of a poor pectoral implant surgeries, strange eye design....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2022 11:02:46 GMT -5
Would you say he drew the same face for men? I mean, is this really a different face in these two panels? Put a dark wig on Reed - and I feel you have Superman. Look up various male characters in Next Men - and you have Superman. Just my view, I know others might see it differently.
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Nov 22, 2022 15:34:29 GMT -5
Would you say he drew the same face for men? I mean, is this really a different face in these two panels? Put a dark wig on Reed - and I feel you have Superman. Look up various male characters in Next Men - and you have Superman. Just my view, I know others might see it differently. No, I don't think they look alike at all. Reed's face is narrower. I'm trying to imagine switching the hair and I don't see it working.
Anyway you could probably find similarities in the way any artist draws whatever. It's their style.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2022 19:21:45 GMT -5
Would you say he drew the same face for men? I mean, is this really a different face in these two panels? Put a dark wig on Reed - and I feel you have Superman. Look up various male characters in Next Men - and you have Superman. Just my view, I know others might see it differently. Yes, there's a Byrne look he did over and over and over. It's like a software company that creates one NPC model for a game and spawns all the characters as copies...you size them a little different, change the hair, squash or stretch them a bit, but it still kind of haunts you knowing it's really the same base model.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Nov 22, 2022 19:28:23 GMT -5
I've just discovered that Terry Beatty couldn't draw a baby to save his life. Byrne is infamous for drawing grotesque children. Can anyone think of other examples of artists struggling to draw a particular thing?
You do know about the general thing with Liefeld and feet, right?
I think I still would have preferred him on Sensational She-Hulk than Byrne (obviously Liefield wasn’t working in comics then). Never really got how Byrne got jobs as an artist. He should just stick to writing as far as I am concerned.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Nov 22, 2022 19:36:05 GMT -5
You do know about the general thing with Liefeld and feet, right?
I think I still would have preferred him on Sensational She-Hulk than Byrne (obviously Liefield wasn’t working in comics then). Never really got how Byrne got jobs as an artist. He should just stick to writing as far as I am concerned. This makes no sense to me. Whatever his failings, Byrne was a very good, very popular and very successful artist. I don't see how his talent can be questioned.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2022 20:01:13 GMT -5
I think I still would have preferred him on Sensational She-Hulk than Byrne (obviously Liefield wasn’t working in comics then). Never really got how Byrne got jobs as an artist. He should just stick to writing as far as I am concerned. This makes no sense to me. Whatever his failings, Byrne was a very good, very popular and very successful artist. I don't see how his talent can be questioned. I was reflecting on this recently based on picking up an old issue of Space: 1999 he worked on for Charlton in the mid-70's. His draftsmanship and creativity were seriously excellent on it, so much so it kind of "reinstilled" some of my old respect for him purely as an artist. And it was proof he CAN draw distinctive faces when he chose to do so, because he was doing a respectable job capturing the actor likenesses as well. I feel like something did slide during the 80's, his art becoming a bit cartoony (including the very repetitive faces per my prior response) and not having the benefit of a Terry Austin like he did on X-Men to crisp everything up. I've never actually disliked his art at any point, and in fact, during the post-80's era I actually found a lot of comfort in seeing his art in the modern age because it was still rooted in the era I loved the most and was more pleasing to me than where a lot of other art was trending (this sounds kind of bad, but in a "worn pair of shoes" kind of comfortable way).
|
|
|
Post by tartanphantom on Nov 22, 2022 22:50:53 GMT -5
I think I still would have preferred him on Sensational She-Hulk than Byrne (obviously Liefield wasn’t working in comics then). Never really got how Byrne got jobs as an artist. He should just stick to writing as far as I am concerned. This makes no sense to me. Whatever his failings, Byrne was a very good, very popular and very successful artist. I don't see how his talent can be questioned.
I tend to agree. Like @jaska, I particularly like his early work with Charlton, before he really developed the "Byrne stereotype" style. Another thing to consider is that his workload in the late '80s-early'90s was so heavy that it likely affected the quality of his pencils in the long run.
|
|
|
Post by tonebone on Dec 6, 2022 14:09:52 GMT -5
Would you say he drew the same face for men? I mean, is this really a different face in these two panels? Put a dark wig on Reed - and I feel you have Superman. Look up various male characters in Next Men - and you have Superman. Just my view, I know others might see it differently. I don't think Superman looks anything like The Thing in these examples... maybe there are others where they are closer.
|
|
|
Post by tonebone on Dec 6, 2022 14:15:28 GMT -5
This makes no sense to me. Whatever his failings, Byrne was a very good, very popular and very successful artist. I don't see how his talent can be questioned.
I tend to agree. Like @jaska , I particularly like his early work with Charlton, before he really developed the "Byrne stereotype" style. Another thing to consider is that his workload in the late '80s-early'90s was so heavy that it likely affected the quality of his pencils in the long run.
Something I find interesting is those Star Trek New Visions comics, where he is basically creating a fumetti with images from hi-res images from the TOS shows... you can look at a page and tell it's Byrne's work. I think he must roughly pencil the comic first and then find the images that match his poses, etc. It's really quite uncanny. I can't imagine a more painstaking process.
|
|
|
Post by tonebone on Dec 6, 2022 14:19:02 GMT -5
This makes no sense to me. Whatever his failings, Byrne was a very good, very popular and very successful artist. I don't see how his talent can be questioned. I was reflecting on this recently based on picking up an old issue of Space: 1999 he worked on for Charlton in the mid-70's. His draftsmanship and creativity were seriously excellent on it, so much so it kind of "reinstilled" some of my old respect for him purely as an artist. And it was proof he CAN draw distinctive faces when he chose to do so, because he was doing a respectable job capturing the actor likenesses as well. I feel like something did slide during the 80's, his art becoming a bit cartoony (including the very repetitive faces per my prior response) and not having the benefit of a Terry Austin like he did on X-Men to crisp everything up. I've never actually disliked his art at any point, and in fact, during the post-80's era I actually found a lot of comfort in seeing his art in the modern age because it was still rooted in the era I loved the most and was more pleasing to me than where a lot of other art was trending (this sounds kind of bad, but in a "worn pair of shoes" kind of comfortable way). I have a feeling doing 4 monthly books concurrently for a while will have this effect on an artist. I, too, marvel at his old Charlton work. Especially in comparison to what else they were producing at the time. Don't get me wrong, they had talent, but not everyone was putting their all into it like he was. I would love to see collections of his stuff from that era. I know Doomsday +1 was reprinted several times in the 80's, but I don't think any of his other stuff has been.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Dec 6, 2022 21:45:38 GMT -5
on Byrne I'm the opposite of AdamWarlock2000: love the artwork (up to the early 1980s, at least) but can't stand him as a writer.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Dec 6, 2022 21:50:09 GMT -5
I've just discovered that Terry Beatty couldn't draw a baby to save his life. Byrne is infamous for drawing grotesque children. Can anyone think of other examples of artists struggling to draw a particular thing?
I remember Charles* Schulz saying the reason he dropped the idea of a pet cat that he briefly introduced to the Charlie Brown household was that he soon discovered that he couldn't draw cats.
*edited to change "Charlie" to Charles Schulz: no idea how I made that mistake, unless I thought I was typing "Charlie Brown", but it was striking how wrong it looked and felt when I noticed it a few hours later.
|
|