Better artist of that era-Byrne or Perez. 3 3

[THE_BEYONDER]

29 minutes ago, William-James88 said:

The best artist of that era is Brian Bolland. I also have a real soft spot for Sienkewicz. Perez and Byrne are good but they are very much the meat and potatoes kind, not offering a truly distinctive style. Perez could have done X-Men and Byrne could have done Teen Titans and I think the world of comics would still be pretty much the same. 

Yeah....no.

If Byrne wasn’t on X-men, Wolverine would have been written out of the book.

[William-James88]

2 hours ago, Jeffro. said:

Oh c'mon. Both Perez and Byrne had distinctive styles. That's just wrong on all levels. There was no one else drawing like them. 

To each their own

[500Club]

On ‎5‎/‎31‎/‎2020 at 12:33 PM, jjonahjameson11 said:

On ‎5‎/‎30‎/‎2020 at 7:27 AM, Dr Zen said:

Byrne is the greatest writer/artist of the era. But since we are just talking about art: Perez

Really?  I would easily take Miller over Byrne as the greatest writer/artist of that era.  By far.

I can neither endorse this or argue with it.   Miller's output was so sparse.  When he did produce though, things like his core DD run, his follow-up 'Born Again', The Dark Knight Returns, and Batman: Year One were magnificent. 

Ask Miller to do a 60 issue run like Byrne did on FF, though, and we'd see if he could provide that consistent level of excellence.

[Jeffro.]

1 hour ago, William-James88 said:

4 hours ago, Jeffro. said:

Oh c'mon. Both Perez and Byrne had distinctive styles. That's just wrong on all levels. There was no one else drawing like them. 

To each their own

I'm curious how you could say that two comic artists with distinct and unique styles, again no one else was drawing like them at the time, could have no distinctive style. Genuinely curious

[jjonahjameson11]

44 minutes ago, 500Club said:

I can neither endorse this or argue with it.   Miller's output was so sparse.  When he did produce though, things like his core DD run, his follow-up 'Born Again', The Dark Knight Returns, and Batman: Year One were magnificent. 

Ask Miller to do a 60 issue run like Byrne did on FF, though, and we'd see if he could provide that consistent level of excellence.

I think You’re making the assumption that the entire 60 issues was of “consistent level of excellence “, which it wasn’t.

[Ken Aldred]

5 hours ago, William-James88 said:

. Perez could have done X-Men and Byrne could have done Teen Titans and I think the world of comics would still be pretty much the same

Not impossible, but Byrne at his peak was also an excellent writer as well as artist, and there’s a noticeable upswing in quality on X-Men once he’s co-writer / plotter with Chris Claremont.

That’s the level that Perez would’ve needed to reach, but there’s no historical evidence to support it.  IIRC he’s written a couple of short mini-series, but nothing on the classic scale of the interlinked narrative of Savage Land / Alpha Flight / Proteus / Dark Phoenix / Days of Future Past.

 

[500Club]

4 minutes ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

1 hour ago, 500Club said:

I can neither endorse this or argue with it.   Miller's output was so sparse.  When he did produce though, things like his core DD run, his follow-up 'Born Again', The Dark Knight Returns, and Batman: Year One were magnificent. 

Ask Miller to do a 60 issue run like Byrne did on FF, though, and we'd see if he could provide that consistent level of excellence.

I think You’re making the assumption that the entire 60 issues was of “consistent level of excellence “, which it wasn’t.

I should re-word that.  I was referring to Miller providing the level of excellence that he did in the works above, consistently.

[William-James88]

29 minutes ago, Jeffro. said:

I'm curious how you could say that two comic artists with distinct and unique styles, again no one else was drawing like them at the time, could have no distinctive style. Genuinely curious

Well if it helps, I got acquainted with that art in 2010 amidst everything else that was. So their art did not appear to break free from the crowd. It just looked like standard proportions to me. Well done for sure, but nothing I could pick from a line up if they drew a scene I was unfamiliar with. Unlike Miller, Simonson, or the aforementioned Bolland. Not saying Miller is a better artist, he is not, but his style is more recognizable to me.

Also I thought Perez was picked for Superman to indicate to readers that the title was returning to a more classic and familiar feeling, that alone tells me that his art is not that distinctive when compared to other artists.

 

 

[Ken Aldred]

4 minutes ago, 500Club said:

I should re-word that.  I was referring to Miller providing the level of excellence that he did in the works above, consistently.

Fair point, because even on Daredevil he did peter out a bit over his last year or so, with sketchier layouts and more and more detailed completion by his inker, Klaus Janson.

Edited June 1, 2020 by Ken Aldred

[William-James88]

31 minutes ago, Ken Aldred said:

Not impossible, but Byrne at his peak was also an excellent writer as well as artist, and there’s a noticeable upswing in quality on X-Men once he’s co-writer / plotter with Chris Claremont.

That’s the level that Perez would’ve needed to reach, but there’s no historical evidence to support it.  IIRC he’s written a couple of short mini-series, but nothing on the classic scale of the interlinked narrative of Savage Land / Alpha Flight / Proteus / Dark Phoenix / Days of Future Past.

 

For sure, i was just answering the topic which only referred to art. I see many people bringing up the writing, creativeness and impact on story that these different artists had but I was approaching it simply from the art standpoint where I find them rather similar. By that I mean the art is as good and helps tell the story just as well. What's memorable to me are the stories more than the art style itself. (Unlike, say, Batman Hush where that book's popularity lies mostly with the art).

Edited June 1, 2020 by William-James88

[jjonahjameson11]

34 minutes ago, 500Club said:

I should re-word that.  I was referring to Miller providing the level of excellence that he did in the works above, consistently.

Ah, that makes sense! 👍🏻

[kav]

Good thread!

[William-James88]

7 minutes ago, kav said:

Good thread!

I was hoping we could talk about Neal Adams but it looks like that would be a different era.

[JJ-4]

1 hour ago, Ken Aldred said:

Not impossible, but Byrne at his peak was also an excellent writer as well as artist, and there’s a noticeable upswing in quality on X-Men once he’s co-writer / plotter with Chris Claremont.

That’s the level that Perez would’ve needed to reach, but there’s no historical evidence to support it.  IIRC he’s written a couple of short mini-series, but nothing on the classic scale of the interlinked narrative of Savage Land / Alpha Flight / Proteus / Dark Phoenix / Days of Future Past.

 

Perez became a co-plotter or co-writer with Wolfman (and maybe even co-editor) on NTT and rolled off that very successful book to Crisis where he drew the majority of DC characters.  Both were massive hits and then we went on to re-boot Wonder Woman, where he wrote, drew and did covers.  He was THE top artist at DC for multiple years.  The NTT run was the basis of the rebirth of DC and it had a lasting impact all the way to the hit Teen Titans Go! TV show are still being felt today.

[Jeffro.]

1 hour ago, William-James88 said:

2 hours ago, Jeffro. said:

I'm curious how you could say that two comic artists with distinct and unique styles, again no one else was drawing like them at the time, could have no distinctive style. Genuinely curious

Well if it helps, I got acquainted with that art in 2010 amidst everything else that was. So their art did not appear to break free from the crowd. It just looked like standard proportions to me. Well done for sure, but nothing I could pick from a line up if they drew a scene I was unfamiliar with. Unlike Miller, Simonson, or the aforementioned Bolland. Not saying Miller is a better artist, he is not, but his style is more recognizable to me.

Also I thought Perez was picked for Superman to indicate to readers that the title was returning to a more classic and familiar feeling, that alone tells me that his art is not that distinctive when compared to other artists.

 

Maybe it comes down to you had to be there in 80s to understand how truly unique Byrne and Perez were. I can't imagine looking at their work and not immediately recognizing their distinctive styles. To each his own indeed

[Logan510]

7 hours ago, kav said:

Good thread!

We keep disagreeing.

[Chaykin Stevens]

On 5/28/2020 at 9:16 PM, kav said:

orig art for byrne can be found cheap. perez is pricey. that says it all.

The Original Art board's thread for A-level page prices seems to have Byrne and Perez in the same ballpark:

$30-40k
Byrne - X-Men

$10-20k
Perez - Infinity Gauntlet

$5-10k
Perez/Marcos - Avengers 1st run
Byrne - FF / Iron Fist / MTU / Avengers 1st run
Perez - New Teen Titans / Crisis on Infinite Earths

$3-5k
Perez - FF / JLA
Byrne - Captain America

[THE_BEYONDER]

13 hours ago, kav said:

Good thread!

 

[jjonahjameson11]

13 hours ago, William-James88 said:

I was hoping we could talk about Neal Adams but it looks like that would be a different era.

Let’s not.

Neal does a great job talking about Neal.

[bb8]

For me it's close, but I would choose Perez based solely on Future Imperfect. That book blew me away as a kid.