• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Attn: Disney & Donald Duck collectors.
0

14 posts in this topic

I found this drawing, and wanted to get your opinions on what it is, and maybe who it's by. 

Its obviously Donald Duck, and it's drawn on a card stock of some sort. 

Question is, when was it done, and by whom. I don't think it's Barks, but maybe another DD artist? Opinions welcome. 

IMG_1880.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/25/2017 at 3:50 AM, tth2 said:

Looks like someone tracing over an actual piece.

It's unlikely to be a tracing, because it's on thick card stock, and it looks pretty old. Maybe 1940's? That's the Donald era we are looking at, I thought, but others with more expertise know better, I'm sure.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all due respect the fact that it looks old is all the more reason why it's simply not by the hand of a pro.   Anybody working for them at that time knew how to draw and draw well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also has that combination of a confident pose with an execution in the details that has no confidence that you only get when an unskilled artist apes a skilled artist 2c  (If you are a pro you don't get the lines that wrong if you managed to get the pose that right).

Do you not see what we see?    Look at the head in isolation - it's a mess.   Every single line is off in some way.

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know next to nothing about Duck art, however, I wondered about the size of the piece... if it was a quite small, rushed job I could maybe see it coming out like this, but in general my immediate reaction isn't a positive one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if it was a small, rushed job, why color it?    Colored pieces are things artists typically did if they were taking their time.    (Or, presumably, if they were fans copying from a printed comic).

 

I don't mean to hate on the piece on whatever, I just strongly believe that the artist in question never received a paycheck as an artist a day in the life of.

 

I've said my bit so I'll leave it to other opinions.

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bronty said:

So, if it was a small, rushed job, why color it?    Colored pieces are things artists typically did if they were taking their time.    (Or, presumably, if they were fans copying from a printed comic).

 

I don't mean to hate on the piece on whatever, I just strongly believe that the artist in question never received a paycheck as an artist a day in the life of.

 

I've said my bit so I'll leave it to other opinions.

Does it look like the coloring took a long time to you? Anyway, I am inclined to agree with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, I'm just learning this stuff. I never thought it was by a Disney animator. Or a high level comic book artist. I thought maybe it was a quickie drawing done by someone at a fair or something. Almost like a Disneyland sketch by someone creating souvenirs, for example. 

Edited by PhilipB2k17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, the most convincing part of the drawing is the squiggle shadow under the figure. It was done without trying to be anything but what it is. A pen squiggle. It looks effortless and natural. Every other line seems to be worked on, with the strokes going over and over again.

I'm totally with Bronty on this one. Sketches look like sketches. Quick fluid lines. They can be loose. They can be "sloppy" or wonky, but they don't look pressured or belabored. This mostly looks like both of those.

The only way I see any angle of this being any kind of "pro" is if it was done by a very very old hand that has lost it's control and IS belabored to try and make the right strokes of the pen. The mind knows where they should go, but the hand can't make it happen.

...Think late retirement age comic artists doing the con circuit in their 80s & 90s.

But I think that is a very long shot, and even if it was the case, the possibility of ID-ing the piece is next to none unless a previous owner was to surface and say they witnessed so and so doing it at a show for them, etc.

And even THEN, there'd be no way to corroborate that story. And experts in said creator's art are not likely to make an ID simply because it doesn't look like that artist's known/published work.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all of your input. It basically confirms what I suspected initially, that this is probably not by a name artist; and even if it were, there is no way to give proper attribution. I didn't buy it. It is just something I saw at a flea market, in a frame. The fact that it was lovingly framed, kind of gave me a bit of pause, suggesting that maybe it was more than just a doodle. So, because I know little about this type of art, I thought I would take a photo and run it by more experienced folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

To me, the most convincing part of the drawing is the squiggle shadow under the figure. It was done without trying to be anything but what it is. A pen squiggle. It looks effortless and natural. Every other line seems to be worked on, with the strokes going over and over again.

I'm totally with Bronty on this one. Sketches look like sketches. Quick fluid lines. They can be loose. They can be "sloppy" or wonky, but they don't look pressured or belabored. This mostly looks like both of those.

The only way I see any angle of this being any kind of "pro" is if it was done by a very very old hand that has lost it's control and IS belabored to try and make the right strokes of the pen. The mind knows where they should go, but the hand can't make it happen.

...Think late retirement age comic artists doing the con circuit in their 80s & 90s.

But I think that is a very long shot, and even if it was the case, the possibility of ID-ing the piece is next to none unless a previous owner was to surface and say they witnessed so and so doing it at a show for them, etc.

And even THEN, there'd be no way to corroborate that story. And experts in said creator's art are not likely to make an ID simply because it doesn't look like that artist's known/published work.

 

 

I also think the coloring (the shading inside Donald's sleeve and under his belly) indicated it might be more than just an amateur. But, I defer to the people here with much better knowledge than mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0