• 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.

blue lines and their value
0

46 posts in this topic

Since I know nothing about what sort of limitations there are, I will assume something primitive. Just the title of the book, with columns for the inker and penciller. In each column, the artist/rep/owner enters the website or contact where the page can be found. Then perhaps a third column stating the percentage of discount, if any, if a buyer buys both pieces. The website can collect a buck or two for each sale to support the website’s infrastructure. It can also include the name of each inker and penciller for each book, but leave it to to potential buyer to find pages he/ she likes. So, it would act more like the appendix for a book, not an independent sales agent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

Not every ink job over blue lines is based on a pencil. I have one where “pencil” work was on the computer, and only the original was actually inked.

 

 

That's something I hadn't considered. So it was drawn on a computer, printed out, and then inked by hand? Interesting. Did the artist ink his own work or did someone else do it?

Comic art is different than fine art in that most of it is done by 2 artists: the penciller and the inker. It's a neat dynamic that I'm just barely starting to really think about and appreciate. I didn't used to ever look at the inker's name in a book, and before recently, didn't care. I just attributed all of the work to the artist, but that's simply not the case. Pencils are still the most important part of a piece to me, but the inks make a huge difference that I'm barely beginning to understand.

Then you have the letterers and colorists, too, though it's not often that a piece has all of those original elements on the same board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a recent former owner of a Skottie Young interior page, it’s my understanding that he did loose, digital thumbnails, printed that out, and finished the drawing with ink. 
 

On the page, I can clearly see what looked like blue pencil until I decided one day to try to erase a speck of it to be certain...and nothing. Turned out it was digital indeed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, BuraddoRun said:

That's something I hadn't considered. So it was drawn on a computer, printed out, and then inked by hand? Interesting. Did the artist ink his own work or did someone else do it?

Comic art is different than fine art in that most of it is done by 2 artists: the penciller and the inker. It's a neat dynamic that I'm just barely starting to really think about and appreciate. I didn't used to ever look at the inker's name in a book, and before recently, didn't care. I just attributed all of the work to the artist, but that's simply not the case. Pencils are still the most important part of a piece to me, but the inks make a huge difference that I'm barely beginning to understand.

Then you have the letterers and colorists, too, though it's not often that a piece has all of those original elements on the same board.

That it was. Tom Fowler, Books of Magic, 2nd Series. He does the initial drawing on his computer, prints it and then inks the copy. You can see blue lines all over the inked page. The blue lines make it appear that he made some adjustments to the final page since some of them are different than the actual ink job. 

Pencils are more important to the overall design of the page, but inks give the impact and adjust the final product. I like to think of it in building terms. The inking is like the facade (brick, stucco, etc.) and the detailing (trim pieces, window styles). The pencils are the structure (foundation, columns, walls). You can make a well built building look like cr*p with bad facade/detailing work. You can cover up a mediocre construction job with great facade/detailing work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

 You can make a well built building look like cr*p with bad facade/detailing work. You can cover up a mediocre construction job with great facade/detailing work.

the first statement is very true. The second one, I’d add a qualifier to. It depends.

A great inker can really save a bad pencil job if they are inclined to. I think guys like K. Nowlan and PC Russell have really saved more than their share of jobs over the years.

But way more often than not, many (MANY!!!!!!) comic artists over render what is essentially a lousy drawing underneath, and it’s gotten worse over the decades. And not just over rendering in link, but with the colorist, etc. Everyone trying to polish turds.
 

cough...90s Image...cough

 

But then there are folks that strip it back. Not every 80s Paul Smith X-Men page is a home run, but he damn sure nailed a lot of them. Keith Pollard knew what was up.  Just a couple of “lesser” known names that worked without a big net, gave up great anatomy, and beautifully composed panels. Every line carefully considered, and placed where it belongs. But what happens more often than not is people without a terribly strong grasp of observation will ooh and ahh over the vast number of lines, and crosshatching, and shading and “polish” that get heaped onto a drawing. Seeing the surface, and not the bones of what is actually there.

 

And circling back to digital drawn blue lines, vs pencils scanned and reproduced as blue lines... and also the inking saving the job. Skottie Young was mentioned above. I’ll chuck in James Harren as another. There are many more. Guys who will do loose pencils (traditionally or digitally) that are nothing more than guides to figure out a composition. All their “real” drawing takes place in the inking stage. All the adjustments, the attack, the nuance and details. 
 

I have said this many times over the years, but many artists find inking a pencil drawing can stiffen up the drawing, as they lose a certain spontaneity in their line work. The gestures are replicating gestures underneath, rather than initial and organic. Kind of like trying to trace someone’s signature. So more artists are discovering if they really just go for it with ink, they can keep a spontaneous and lively looking drawing that isn’t just frozen there, but gives off a certain devil may care kinetic energy that can’t get otherwise. In which case the pencils are nothing more than loose framework onto which they can play. And for more modern artists, many real artistic decisions are happening at the ink stage of the work. There are a lot of guys that started messing with this more and more beginning back in the 90s.
 

And there are guys like Ashley Wood, George Pratt, Kim Jung Gi or Jon Muth that have honed their craft so precisely that they can just draw in ink, conjuring images out of think air eschewing pencilling altogether. Not everything is a success, but they scrap the bad and publish the incredible.

Edited by ESeffinga
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

That it was. Tom Fowler, Books of Magic, 2nd Series. He does the initial drawing on his computer, prints it and then inks the copy. You can see blue lines all over the inked page. The blue lines make it appear that he made some adjustments to the final page since some of them are different than the actual ink job. 

Pencils are more important to the overall design of the page, but inks give the impact and adjust the final product. I like to think of it in building terms. The inking is like the facade (brick, stucco, etc.) and the detailing (trim pieces, window styles). The pencils are the structure (foundation, columns, walls). You can make a well built building look like cr*p with bad facade/detailing work. You can cover up a mediocre construction job with great facade/detailing work.

I learned when I picked up a cover of his that Nick Bradshaw’s process is much the same. Loose “pencils” on a computer, then he prints it out in a faint red, and finishes with pencil and ink to find the final lines and add an insane amount of detail.

I wonder if that is the method for a lot of new comic artists nowadays?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Latverian Tourism Board said:

I learned when I picked up a cover of his that Nick Bradshaw’s process is much the same. Loose “pencils” on a computer, then he prints it out in a faint red, and finishes with pencil and ink to find the final lines and add an insane amount of detail.

I wonder if that is the method for a lot of new comic artists nowadays?

Alan Davis does that too, so not restricted to new artists.

Malvin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, malvin said:

Alan Davis does that too, so not restricted to new artists.

Malvin

Right. I’d forgotten about that, but I had heard that he liked his first pass to be on the computer.
 

Is there a thread about artists and their varying artistic processes? That could be interesting. This thread seems to be veering in that direction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Latverian Tourism Board said:

Right. I’d forgotten about that, but I had heard that he liked his first pass to be on the computer.
 

Is there a thread about artists and their varying artistic processes? That could be interesting. This thread seems to be veering in that direction. 

Why not start one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/3/2020 at 12:33 PM, Latverian Tourism Board said:

I learned when I picked up a cover of his that Nick Bradshaw’s process is much the same. Loose “pencils” on a computer, then he prints it out in a faint red, and finishes with pencil and ink to find the final lines and add an insane amount of detail.

I wonder if that is the method for a lot of new comic artists nowadays?

This is something I've encountered as well. Sometimes I wonder if this is something that should be disclosed, just as inks on blueline printouts typically are when done by separate artists.

  • Does it matter less if it is the same person doing the digital pencils, printing them out and then finishing it traditionally?
  • Does it only matter if the digital pencils are visible on the finished product?
  • Would this information deter people from buying the art?
  • Do artists feel weird about disclosing these intricacies of their process?

I'd love to hear opinions on this and if it changes for original art or commissioned art.

As the buyer, I wouldn't mind knowing if the pencils were actually done on the board or printed on. If I'm commissioning someone and it is more on the collaborative side, this is something I tend to ask because I've received some finished works with very rough and visible (dark) digital pencils printed out and then inked over. It seems like these roughs were done at a smaller size and blown up to fill the page when printed out. For me, it distracts from the piece. I'm sure I also have some artwork that has digital pencils printed out and I don't even realize it. I've also had a pencil commission that consisted of rough digital pencils printed out and then finished with tight pencils on top. I had no clue that was their process or even a thing, but I've learned that it's generally not my preference when I can see the digital pencils.

If i'm commissioning an artist for an inked piece, these are my preferences in order:

  1. Traditional graphite pencil and ink
  2. Traditional blue (or red, green, etc) pencil and ink
  3. Lightboxed traditional inks
  4. Very tight pencils printed out (preferably in the lightest grey possible) and traditional ink
  5. Rough pencils printed out and traditional ink
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/2/2020 at 7:01 PM, Rick2you2 said:

Since I know nothing about what sort of limitations there are, I will assume something primitive. Just the title of the book, with columns for the inker and penciller. In each column, the artist/rep/owner enters the website or contact where the page can be found. Then perhaps a third column stating the percentage of discount, if any, if a buyer buys both pieces. The website can collect a buck or two for each sale to support the website’s infrastructure. It can also include the name of each inker and penciller for each book, but leave it to to potential buyer to find pages he/ she likes. So, it would act more like the appendix for a book, not an independent sales agent. 

I have now confirmed that this is technologically possible. The problem is practical. It would take a lot of time and effort to do, and it is only worth doing if there is an audience for it. It certainly is not within my skill set. So, anyone have any good practical ideas how to build an audience? I’m getting a “Field of Dreams” image here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, PixelPusher said:

This is something I've encountered as well. Sometimes I wonder if this is something that should be disclosed, just as inks on blueline printouts typically are when done by separate artists.

  • Does it matter less if it is the same person doing the digital pencils, printing them out and then finishing it traditionally?
  • Does it only matter if the digital pencils are visible on the finished product?
  • Would this information deter people from buying the art?
  • Do artists feel weird about disclosing these intricacies of their process?

I'd love to hear opinions on this and if it changes for original art or commissioned art.

As the buyer, I wouldn't mind knowing if the pencils were actually done on the board or printed on. If I'm commissioning someone and it is more on the collaborative side, this is something I tend to ask because I've received some finished works with very rough and visible (dark) digital pencils printed out and then inked over. It seems like these roughs were done at a smaller size and blown up to fill the page when printed out. For me, it distracts from the piece. I'm sure I also have some artwork that has digital pencils printed out and I don't even realize it. I've also had a pencil commission that consisted of rough digital pencils printed out and then finished with tight pencils on top. I had no clue that was their process or even a thing, but I've learned that it's generally not my preference when I can see the digital pencils.

If i'm commissioning an artist for an inked piece, these are my preferences in order:

  1. Traditional graphite pencil and ink
  2. Traditional blue (or red, green, etc) pencil and ink
  3. Lightboxed traditional inks
  4. Very tight pencils printed out (preferably in the lightest grey possible) and traditional ink
  5. Rough pencils printed out and traditional ink

I think full disclosure is important regardless. If someone is selling a product, they should be upfront with the buyer about what exactly they're selling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/5/2020 at 5:46 PM, BuraddoRun said:

I think full disclosure is important regardless. If someone is selling a product, they should be upfront with the buyer about what exactly they're selling.

Important yes, but not done in practice. If it’s one artist doing (digital) pencils and inks, the rep or secondary market sellers will bill it as “pencils and inks by...” Often times sellers on the secondary market don’t even know themselves that they are selling digital pencils under the inks (talking about one artist on both chores).
 

Overall, if you’re collecting modern art from the last 5 years, expect the art to have digital-something. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just paid $500 of a splash that was inked over blue line scans. It killed me but the splash was fantastic. Will the market for blue line increase...is there value in collecting them if the pencils exist? I bought this recently and if there are pencils only out there I assume it is full of x's and not near as great as this page...so this would be the preferred page of the two that exist I imagine?

s-l1600.thumb.jpg.31ab74bcfa765ad88c442dad1eb41723.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Blastaar said:

I just paid $500 of a splash that was inked over blue line scans. It killed me but the splash was fantastic. Will the market for blue line increase...is there value in collecting them if the pencils exist? I bought this recently and if there are pencils only out there I assume it is full of x's and not near as great as this page...so this would be the preferred page of the two that exist I imagine?

s-l1600.thumb.jpg.31ab74bcfa765ad88c442dad1eb41723.jpg

I found this online. 469EB5FC-5994-4FDF-A349-BF621B4F1B36.thumb.jpeg.7005d9909b43b47fb2d767de219c4a42.jpeg
 

Yes to the Xs. This one doesn’t have too many, but I’d imagine the pencils to your page would have quite a few more with all the non-character background with foliage. You got the superior page, imo. And it’s an awesome one. 

Will modern blueline work gain in value, and increase in popularity? That’s a tough question. I can see how it would, as digital work increases, and it gets harder to buy new pencil and ink pages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Blastaar said:

I just paid $500 of a splash that was inked over blue line scans. It killed me but the splash was fantastic. Will the market for blue line increase...is there value in collecting them if the pencils exist? I bought this recently and if there are pencils only out there I assume it is full of x's and not near as great as this page...so this would be the preferred page of the two that exist I imagine?

 

Nice page!

Yes, I think the market for blue lines will increase. To the point there won't be any "stigma" at some time in the future.

Sure, there's value in collecting both if pencils exist. Why not?

Most people here value the pencils as worth more and more desirable. I've usually heard a 60/40 split, where the pencils would be worth $600 and the inks would be worth $400. So in your case, maybe the pencils would be worth $900?

I agree, pencils only don't present as well as inks. But it's what the original, usually more desirable, artist created.

The inks on the other hand are the "published page" and the pencils only are almost a prelim.

28 minutes ago, Blastaar said:

What’s the going price on covers that are inked over BL? Could be an affordable way to collect covers for say $1k that would normally be 5k plus? 

I mean, it varies...look around at some newer art that you like. I don't think the spread will be 5x, like I mentioned above it might be 1.5x.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2020 at 3:44 PM, Latverian Tourism Board said:

That makes perfect sense. Of course it would be bottom dollar and production speed related. Thank you so much for explaining. 
 

And, yeah, I see how that would be much more equitable for both. Interesting stuff. There is a lot to the process that is fascinating.

It makes great sense. Though I now have at least one inked page in my collection where I'm uncertain if a pencils only version is floating around. Hardly a serious problem, but I'd of course prefer to have both!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not a fan of when the blue comes through and gives that “fuzzy” look. Must be different scan techniques. Some I’ve had to ask because I just couldn’t tell, others you could pick it up a mile away. 
 

 

Edited by Blastaar
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