• 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.

Your Predictions Please
0

132 posts in this topic

9 hours ago, vodou said:

Except that by all examples I've seen - he can't paint.

Unorthodox painting style to be sure, but I to this day I think the series of Tarzan paintings he did mid to late seventies might just be the pinnacle of his work, painted, black and white or otherwise.  Gorgeous stuff to my eye.  His Marvel mag covers are favorites of mine too (Savage Tales, Deadly Hands of Kung Fu, etc).  Neal might not paint worth a damn, but his paintings are awesome!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bronty said:
10 hours ago, vodou said:

Except that by all examples I've seen - he can't paint.

Can't paint worth a dam.   But neither can 95% of comic artists.   Great draftsmen because that's what they do, but they can't generally paint because its not what they do

Put another way, back in that era, if they were good painters, they wouldn't have become comic artists.  They would've gone into commercial art and made more money.

It's only relatively recently that comic artists have started to make more (and in some cases a lot more) than commercial artists. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, stinkininkin said:

Unorthodox painting style to be sure, but I to this day I think the series of Tarzan paintings he did mid to late seventies might just be the pinnacle of his work, painted, black and white or otherwise.  Gorgeous stuff to my eye.  His Marvel mag covers are favorites of mine too (Savage Tales, Deadly Hands of Kung Fu, etc).  Neal might not paint worth a damn, but his paintings are awesome!

I’m not familiar with the Tarzan pieces but his marvel mag covers, while awesome , yes, aren’t paintings in the traditional sense.   His method appears to have been to draw with India ink as per normal and then Color it in with watercolour or similar.    Contrast that with someone who paints traditionally like Joe Jusko :  no black lines anywhere.    The first is really just a coloured drawing and lends itself to someone whose primary skill is drawing.    The second is painting in the traditional sense of the word.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tth2 said:

Put another way, back in that era, if they were good painters, they wouldn't have become comic artists.  They would've gone into commercial art and made more money.

It's only relatively recently that comic artists have started to make more (and in some cases a lot more) than commercial artists. 

Yeah, The commercial illustration industry imploded around 95 when photoshop became the primary way all those movie posters, vhs boxes, and other reams of product were illustrated.   It drove wages way down and put a lot of people out of work.    Around the same time Image etc caused the star comic artists to really start to get paid.

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

 

Third: I'd start branching out into historical, or high brow graphic novel art. i.e. things with literary merit, or historical (not just pop culture) significance. Example: The art from March, which is the graphic autobiography of Congressman John Lewis. That graphic novel is becoming a staple in school curriculums, so the art from it will have a chance to go way outside the confines of our hobby. That's just one example. Another might be art from Fun Home, by Alison Bechdel, and so on. 

 

We'll see about March. I love the 2 pages I was able to buy, but they don't seem to gather a lot of interest. I've met Nate Powell at the Society of Illustrators and he told me there are only a few pages in the wild (and he's not planning to sell more of this series). btw SOI is doing some great and divers exhibits...
March pages here: https://www.2dgalleries.com/galleries/powell-nate-10203

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, tth2 said:

Google the covers he did for Ballantine's Tarzan paperbacks in the 1970s

same process as marvel mags. 

Draw a comic page and then fill it in with watercolor.   That's not a painter, that's a draftsman and a colorist.    (No comment on his talent; I've always been a fan.   And the work looks great.   But that's not painting, not really.   Its a different process.   Its quicker, and gets a good result with a talented draftsman, but it has limitations - an artist can't do a truly photorealistic piece with that process because real life doesn't have black lines).

 

neal-adams-15-tarzan-triumphant-cover.jp

 

 

From a process POV Adams "painted" like this - black line and color filled in

092feb85def7eaae0571898ef2a2f4dd.jpg

 

versus the traditional - layers of color; no lines.

fall-apple-print-patti-trostle.jpg

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bronty said:

same process as marvel mags. 

Draw a comic page and then fill it in with watercolor.   That's not a painter, that's a draftsman and a colorist.    (No comment on his talent; I've always been a fan.   And the work looks great.   But that's not painting, not really.   Its a different process.   Its quicker, and gets a good result with a talented draftsman, but it has limitations - an artist can't do a truly photorealistic piece with that process because real life doesn't have black lines).

 

neal-adams-15-tarzan-triumphant-cover.jp

 

 

From a process POV Adams "painted" like this - black line and color filled in

092feb85def7eaae0571898ef2a2f4dd.jpg

 

versus the traditional - layers of color; no lines.

fall-apple-print-patti-trostle.jpg

Neal Adams specific style aside, a watercolor painter is a painter who does watercolor paintings.  I do not think oil and acrylic painting techniques defines a painter, not to mention the comment that "photorealism" is not possible with with this process strikes me as odd.  Very few painters seek photorealism, hard line or not, and certainly not Adams.  With that in mind, I thought Adams perfectly played to his strength when painting his Tarzan and Marvel covers, highlighting his superb drafting and inking techniques (often with diluted ink) and then applying watercolor, gouache, and dyes to finish the painted work.  Like them or not, they were definitely paintings.

 

 

Edited by stinkininkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stinkininkin said:

Neal Adams specific style aside, a watercolor painter is a painter who does watercolor paintings.  I do not think oil and acrylic painting techniques defines a painter, not to mention the comment that "photorealism" is not possible with with this process strikes me as odd.  Very few painters seek photorealism, hard line or not, and certainly not Adams.  With that in mind, I thought Adams perfectly played to his strength when painting his Tarzan and Marvel covers, highlighting his superb drafting and inking techniques (often with diluted ink) and then applying watercolor, gouache, and dyes to finish the painted work.  Like them or not, they were definitely paintings.

 

 

As I said, I like them and as we both said they play to Neal's strengths (drawing not painting).   

But you can’t have it both ways Scott.   You can’t say he’s a painter but say drawing plays to his strengths. 

The watercolor thing is a red herring.   Watercolor artists don’t ink a a comic page and then Color it in.   They use paint only.  No hard lines.   

May not mean much to anybody ; but the point is most comic artist paint the way that suits their training.   Which is to say that they aren’t painters in the traditional sense.   

Im sure that - pick a name - Jim Aparo  - could use watercolors to Color a drawing he made.   I’d be less sure about asking him to do a landscape in oils no?   Or a watercolor landscape without black lines for that matter.    And whether or not Jim can or can’t do it is beside the point; I’m generalizing. 

At the end of the day we are saying the same thing:   "Neal might not paint worth a damn, but his paintings [well, colored drawings ;) ] are awesome!"

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, fenip said:

We'll see about March. I love the 2 pages I was able to buy, but they don't seem to gather a lot of interest. I've met Nate Powell at the Society of Illustrators and he told me there are only a few pages in the wild (and he's not planning to sell more of this series). btw SOI is doing some great and divers exhibits...
March pages here: https://www.2dgalleries.com/galleries/powell-nate-10203

 

I met Nate a few months ago as well, and he told me something similar. Although, he wasn't as against selling any pages as he may have been when you talked to him. He seemed definitely willing to listen to offers, but there are some he won't sell (any pages with MLK Jr on them, for example).

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