 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neo--
Nice tribute to Gerber. And your post also features the most unwittingly funny comic book title of all time: GIANT-SIZE MAN-THING!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who knows Fear....
B U R N S
at the Man-Thing's touch!!
Ha! Yeah, he should really have that looked at!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're dead wrong about Kirby's pencils.
Not really, if you see where I'm coming from. Look at the first issue where the FF meets the Red Ghost. It's Kirby inked by Ditko and it looks more like Ditko than Kirby. Same with Dick Ayers' stuff.
Maybe I should rephrase in that how much of the finished artwork reflects what Kirby did and how much did any specific inker have to do with it? Kirby could have detailed a pic within an inch of its life only to have an inker change the impact by imposing his own style. All you have to do is compare an inker's inking to the same inker's pencils and you can see it. Dick Ayers, however, has a fraction of the talent Kirby had.
S
|
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed something interesting about Kirby's work. He depended a great deal on his inkers. I wonder how much work he actually put into the books during the 60's, since he was penciling the majority of them.
These are the statements to which I was referring when I said you were dead wrong. Kirby didn't depend on his inkers at all--he paid very little attention to who was inking his work, and the differences in various issues simply depended on the changes made out of laziness or because of an inker's strong personal style. And when you raised the question of whether Kirby was putting less into his work because of his tremendous output, the answer was a definitive "no."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ye gads, we knew SOMETHIN' was missin' ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, Steven Old Son, if only we BOTH hadda held onta those imperishable issues in their pristine prime, we could've bought our own chateaus whereever we wanted a lonnnnnggggg time ago ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kirby didn't depend on his inkers at all--he paid very little attention to who was inking his work, and the differences in various issues simply depended on the changes made out of laziness or because of an inker's strong personal style.
Okay, actually this is probably the answer I was looking for. Thanks. Sorry for the mix-up on my part.
It just seems weird that some inkers' styles made such an impact on Jack's finished artwork. I find the Vince Coletta inked stuff to be hideous to the point of damaging the artistry of Kirby's illustrations, and Chic Stone, while much better, made it a little more over the top. However, Kirby's style exploded with the support of Joe Sinnott. THAT'S the Kirby art I like best. They made a great team.
And when you raised the question of whether Kirby was putting less into his work because of his tremendous output, the answer was a definitive "no."
His later work in the 70's got really weird. HUGE, craggy faces, swollen hands, limbs splayed in every direction. Lots of energy, but it began to seem out of place in the more "realistic" times of the era.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Would somebody be so kind as to post some illo's from his return to DC? You know, that JIMMY OLSEN/NEW GODS/FOURTH WORLD era?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
