LOW from Image Comics by Remender, Tocchini, et al 0

[ChrisInBaltimore]

Will be tough to find 9.8's, cover has same issue that Southern Bastards had, small creases on cover.

 

Interesting… I didn't notice the creases and my store had a TON of copies. Maybe I should go back and look through their issues…

[the authority]

Will be tough to find 9.8's, cover has same issue that Southern Bastards had, small creases on cover.

 

Interesting… I didn't notice the creases and my store had a TON of copies. Maybe I should go back and look through their issues…

 

My creases were on the back covers but the fronts looked great. I just got a sweet copy of the SDCC so I'm all on

[the420kid]

The first issue was very well written but the art sure is busy. I am happy there were very little advertisements though. I think I may have gotten my $3.99 worth out of this book.

[LarrysComics]

I just can't get past the art.

i'm in the minority here as it sold cray-cray yesterday.

[Point Five]

I just can't get past the art.

i'm in the minority here as it sold cray-cray yesterday.

I had the same reaction in the store. Flipped through it but didn't pick it up....

 

 

[500Club]

The art is terrible.

 

The primary job of a comic book artist is to draw panels that flow well and tell a story. Somewhere, in the last ten years, that's been replaced by blurry, impressionistic art. A reader shouldn't have to look at a panel for an extended period of time to parse out what the image is trying to convey.

 

I don't find it a coincidence that there hasn't been a hot artist since Michael Turner burst upon the scene. Even Don Newton told a story better than your average current artist.

[the420kid]

The art is terrible.

 

The primary job of a comic book artist is to draw panels that flow well and tell a story. Somewhere, in the last ten years, that's been replaced by blurry, impressionistic art. A reader shouldn't have to look at a panel for an extended period of time to parse out what the image is trying to convey.

 

I don't find it a coincidence that there hasn't been a hot artist since Michael Turner burst upon the scene. Even Don Newton told a story better than your average current artist.

+1

Turner was amazing. This is still one of the best covers i've ever seen

[500Club]

The art is terrible.

 

The primary job of a comic book artist is to draw panels that flow well and tell a story. Somewhere, in the last ten years, that's been replaced by blurry, impressionistic art. A reader shouldn't have to look at a panel for an extended period of time to parse out what the image is trying to convey.

 

I don't find it a coincidence that there hasn't been a hot artist since Michael Turner burst upon the scene. Even Don Newton told a story better than your average current artist.

+1

Turner was amazing. This is still one of the best covers i've ever seen

I'd never seen that cover.

 

We lost a monster talent.

[jaybes]

The art is terrible.

 

The primary job of a comic book artist is to draw panels that flow well and tell a story. Somewhere, in the last ten years, that's been replaced by blurry, impressionistic art. A reader shouldn't have to look at a panel for an extended period of time to parse out what the image is trying to convey.

 

I don't find it a coincidence that there hasn't been a hot artist since Michael Turner burst upon the scene. Even Don Newton told a story better than your average current artist.

 

It's crazy how subjective art is and how different people are. I enjoy trying to figure out what's going on in a panel. I generally enjoy impressionistic art. I respect your opinion, but it think it's silly to say comics "should" be a certain way.

[G.D. Kennedy]

The art is terrible.

 

The primary job of a comic book artist is to draw panels that flow well and tell a story. Somewhere, in the last ten years, that's been replaced by blurry, impressionistic art. A reader shouldn't have to look at a panel for an extended period of time to parse out what the image is trying to convey.

 

I don't find it a coincidence that there hasn't been a hot artist since Michael Turner burst upon the scene. Even Don Newton told a story better than your average current artist.

 

It's crazy how subjective art is and how different people are. I enjoy trying to figure out what's going on in a panel. I generally enjoy impressionistic art. I respect your opinion, but it think it's silly to say comics "should" be a certain way.

 

Yeah, I really liked the art. Thought it was incredibly strong and unique, and really complemented the feel of the story very well.

[Jackhartmann]

Will be tough to find 9.8's, cover has same issue that Southern Bastards had, small creases on cover.

 

90% of SB submitted got 9.8s.

 

[the authority]

The art is terrible.

 

The primary job of a comic book artist is to draw panels that flow well and tell a story. Somewhere, in the last ten years, that's been replaced by blurry, impressionistic art. A reader shouldn't have to look at a panel for an extended period of time to parse out what the image is trying to convey.

 

I don't find it a coincidence that there hasn't been a hot artist since Michael Turner burst upon the scene. Even Don Newton told a story better than your average current artist.

+1

Turner was amazing. This is still one of the best covers i've ever seen

I'd never seen that cover.

 

We lost a monster talent.

 

+1

 

I loved his stuff.

[Whizzer]

The damage on this book is weird. We ordered sufficient copies that they came all boxed together, (not mixed with any other titles) and I would estimate that maybe as high as 40% of copies had what I can only describe as small dents or impressions in the body of the cover.

 

It also wasn't limited to the copies on top of the box (which is where damaged copies are usually found) but randomly located throughout the box. I'd be interested in the cause as this is quite atypical of how we usually see damaged books.

[the authority]

Very strange indeed. I experienced the same thing with these and Southern Bastards. I know Jack pointed out that 90% of the Southern Bastards #1 that have been graded were 9.8s but I think thats because nobody would send the bad ones in to be graded. I would guess that mine were a 60/40 split. I don't have all of my Low #1s yet so time will tell.

 

I love both of these stories. I could go broke collecting Image books. I don't know if I'm getting lucky picking titles or if I'm just more open minded but there haven't I haven't tried a lot of bad stuff lately.

[Jackhartmann]

I read the first issue. Not feeling the love of the kidnapping sci-fi fantasy. Maybe one more issue.

[fastballspecial]

The art is terrible.

 

The primary job of a comic book artist is to draw panels that flow well and tell a story. Somewhere, in the last ten years, that's been replaced by blurry, impressionistic art. A reader shouldn't have to look at a panel for an extended period of time to parse out what the image is trying to convey.

 

I don't find it a coincidence that there hasn't been a hot artist since Michael Turner burst upon the scene. Even Don Newton told a story better than your average current artist.

 

 

 

The story saves the book I think. I was surprised really because I thought they would finally give him a decent artist.

 

I know art is in the eye of the beholder, but to call this great art is really a stretch.

 

Id say more about the Newbury cover, but it would get my post cut. That cover is just gross.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 1, 2014 by Fastballspecial

[Tuff Ghost]

Loved the story, loved the art I can see how it would be polarizing though.

[500Club]

The art is terrible.

 

The primary job of a comic book artist is to draw panels that flow well and tell a story. Somewhere, in the last ten years, that's been replaced by blurry, impressionistic art. A reader shouldn't have to look at a panel for an extended period of time to parse out what the image is trying to convey.

 

I don't find it a coincidence that there hasn't been a hot artist since Michael Turner burst upon the scene. Even Don Newton told a story better than your average current artist.

 

It's crazy how subjective art is and how different people are. I enjoy trying to figure out what's going on in a panel. I generally enjoy impressionistic art. I respect your opinion, but it think it's silly to say comics "should" be a certain way.

No sillier than saying a car should get you from point A to point B.

 

n.b. the bolded

[Solar]

The art is terrible.

 

The primary job of a comic book artist is to draw panels that flow well and tell a story. Somewhere, in the last ten years, that's been replaced by blurry, impressionistic art. A reader shouldn't have to look at a panel for an extended period of time to parse out what the image is trying to convey.

 

I don't find it a coincidence that there hasn't been a hot artist since Michael Turner burst upon the scene. Even Don Newton told a story better than your average current artist.

 

It's crazy how subjective art is and how different people are. I enjoy trying to figure out what's going on in a panel. I generally enjoy impressionistic art. I respect your opinion, but it think it's silly to say comics "should" be a certain way.

No sillier than saying a car should get you from point A to point B.

 

n.b. the bolded

 

If you view cars as a completely utilitarian item, then sure. But some are made for racing and others for show. Similarly, there's utilitarian comic art, which is probably perfect for the big mainstream books and then there's art where the artist has a little creative freedom and chooses to make the reader think a little bit or look at an image twice.

 

That said, I do think the interiors of Low looked rushed in places, which obviously isn't good for the artist or reader.

 

 

[500Club]

If you view cars as a completely utilitarian item, then sure. But some are made for racing and others for show. Similarly, there's utilitarian comic art, which is probably perfect for the big mainstream books and then there's art where the artist has a little creative freedom and chooses to make the reader think a little bit or look at an image twice.

 

That said, I do think the interiors of Low looked rushed in places, which obviously isn't good for the artist or reader.

 

The art doesn't have to be completely utilitarian, but it should fulfill its mandate of telling a story.

 

The great artists did both; told the story and made the reader think and look twice.