The essential difference between SA DC and Marvel in a nutshell. 1 1

[Sweet Lou 14]

13 minutes ago, kav said:

far from lifeless-he could draw the most natural poses in the business.  What actual people look like when they move.  That is far more difficult than inventing anatomy.

That's fine.  If I recall correctly you're an artist and I respect your opinion.

All I see is a guy who gives the most powerful superhero of them all a dad bod.  (And for the record, I am not advocating for the highly exaggerated anatomy of so much comic book art, though I enjoy the best of that.)

Edited December 1, 2020 by Sweet Lou 14

[kav]

Kirby also could not draw the same costume twice unless it was one of the main established characters.  Thats why odin for example always had different outfilts.  Here's Hela from Thor 150-in every single panle her outfit is different:
    

 

     

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2020 by kav

[Buzzetta]

No

[kav]

7 minutes ago, Sweet Lou 14 said:

All I see is a guy who gives the most powerful superhero of them all a dad bod. 

If you want dad bod look no further than jack kirby.  Here's a comparison:

[kav]

Curt Swan is the most underappreciated comic artist.  His drawing was flawless and he was the main artist for the #1 comic company in his time.  No one talks much about him.  He died broke.  I am his advocate.

[Buzzetta]

39 minutes ago, kav said:

Curt Swan is the most underappreciated comic artist.  His drawing was flawless and he was the main artist for the #1 comic company in his time.  No one talks much about him.  He died broke.  I am his advocate.

 

Edited December 1, 2020 by Buzzetta

[Sweet Lou 14]

Not sure why you're slamming Kirby in response to what I said about Curt Swan.

I think all of us who know and appreciate Kirby's art have a solid understanding of his strengths and weaknesses.  He's one of those truly unique artists that broke all the rules and, by doing so, reinvented them.  It isn't hard to pick apart Kirby's art looking for unrealistic proportions, consistency errors, etc.

The examples you cite above are interesting.  You chose an image of Reed Richards, a character who's not even (necessarily) supposed to have an athletic body type, and an image of Superman that (at least to my eye) perfectly sums up what I don't like about Swan's art.  He seems to have a thing for the oversized torso.  Everything from the waist down, and from the elbows down, and from the neck up is too small to go with the torso.

In my opinion of course, which I never claimed to be worth any more than anyone else's.  Love what you love.  

Edited December 1, 2020 by Sweet Lou 14

[kav]

5 minutes ago, Sweet Lou 14 said:

Not sure why you're slamming Kirby in response to what I said about Curt Swan.

I think all of us who know and appreciate Kirby's art have a solid understanding of his strengths and weaknesses.  He's one of those truly unique artists that broke all the rules and, by doing so, reinvented them.  It isn't hard to pick apart Kirby's art looking for unrealistic proportions, consistency errors, etc.

The examples you cite above are interesting.  You chose an image of Reed Richards, a character who's not even (necessarily) supposed to have an athletic body type, and an image of Superman that (at least to my eye) perfectly sums up what I don't like about Swan's art.  He seems to have a thing for the oversized torso.  Everything from the waist down, and from the elbows down, and from the neck up is too small to go with the torso.

In my opinion of course, which I never claimed to be worth any more than anyone else's.  Love what you love.  

I love Kirby I'm just trying to prop up Swan.  In my mind they are equals.  Just like van gogh and Raphael-they just had different styles.

[kav]

9 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

Who ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curt_Swan

[HouseofComics.Com]

On 11/28/2020 at 11:55 AM, fmaz said:

Yeah, my point was... we now look back and see that Marvel clearly had found a better way... those books changed comics.  But DC didn’t change, they were the bigger seller.  So was it because they thought they were right and Marvel was wrong? Or did they just not really notice the change?

Supposedly they got together and looked at the Marvel books and thought the art was terrible and couldn't understand the appeal.

[Phicks]

5 hours ago, kav said:

Not dynamic.  But neither isRenaissance art.  That doent mean it's inferior, just different.  Frank Robbins was also 'dynamic'.

Frank Robbins ruined comics over at DC before he got hired at Marvel.  I have no idea why Marvel hired him.  The man could not draw,

I also don’t understand why Marvel hired Bob Brown away from DC.  He could draw OK like Swan, but he wasn’t terribly good.   

And in fairness there were some good hires from DC, such as Gil Kane and Neal Adams.

[kav]

3 minutes ago, Phicks said:

Frank Robbins ruined comics over at DC before he got hired at Marvel.  I have no idea why Marvel hired him.  The man could not draw,

I also don’t understand why Marvel hired Bob Brown away from DC.  He could draw OK like Swan, but he wasn’t terribly good.   

And in fairness there were some good hires from DC, such as Gil Kane and Neal Adams.

Brown was good with murphy anderson inking him otherwise pretty bland.

[kav]

Lee Elias ruined Strange Adventures at DC.
It's tough for me to even look at his stuff.

[Sweet Lou 14]

9 minutes ago, kav said:

I love Kirby I'm just trying to prop up Swan.  In my mind they are equals.  Just like van gogh and Raphael-they just had different styles.

I respect your opinion but I can't go there with you.  Kirby as a pure creative force is unmatched.  I don't see how Curt Swan would even belong in the same sentence as Kirby or Ditko in that department.

In terms of skill with the pencil?  Draftsmanship?  I guess that's entirely up to you.  Personally I would take John Buscema.  Creatively he was very much retreading in Kirby's footsteps, but in terms of the art itself I think his work is simply spectacular.

[kav]

8 minutes ago, Sweet Lou 14 said:

I respect your opinion but I can't go there with you.  Kirby as a pure creative force is unmatched.  I don't see how Curt Swan would even belong in the same sentence as Kirby or Ditko in that department.

In terms of skill with the pencil?  Draftsmanship?  I guess that's entirely up to you.  Personally I would take John Buscema.  Creatively he was very much retreading in Kirby's footsteps, but in terms of the art itself I think his work is simply spectacular.

You could say the same thing about van gogh-as a creative force he was unmatched.  doesnt mean he's better than raphael.

[Sweet Lou 14]

1 minute ago, kav said:

You could say the same thing about van gogh-as a creative force he was unmatched.  doesnt mean he's better than raphael.

Obviously you really, really like Curt Swan so I'm going to just let you have the last word on this.  High five!

[Ken Aldred]

2 minutes ago, kav said:

You could say the same thing about van gogh-as a creative force he was unmatched.  doesnt mean he's better than raphael.

Don’t start trying to provoke TMNT jokes, Kav.  

[kav]

Kirby could also be hit or miss.  Swan never missed.  You will never see him draw anything as excruciating as this-technically speaking Swan blows him away:

Edited December 1, 2020 by kav

[kav]

3 minutes ago, Sweet Lou 14 said:

Obviously you really, really like Curt Swan so I'm going to just let you have the last word on this.  High five!

Swan never gets lauded.  Kirby is a god.  He was rich.  Its unfair.

[Ken Aldred]

51 minutes ago, kav said:

 

Kirby also could not draw the same costume twice unless it was one of the main established characters.  Thats why odin for example always had different outfilts.  Here's Hela from Thor 150-in every single panle her outfit is different:

 

It is an over-complicated costume, Kav.  Not too surprising he might’ve just scribbled some random details in.