A quick question for those far more knowledgable than myself.
Below is a page from the rogue trooper story "milli-com memories" drawn by cam Kennedy.
Does anyone know whether cam lettered his own pages? I'm pretty sure that the story has a lettering credit for someone else entirely yet the lettering is drawn straight onto the artwork and inked around, not pasted on over the top as I would have expected. Does anyone else have pages from the story and are they lettered in the same way?
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Simonipenter/image.jpg)
Any info or help appreciated!
Cheers
Simon
I don't have any of Cam's art from this story, but all the other pages I have (Dredd, Rogue, VCs) have the text and speech bubbles pasted-on in the regular manner. I know Cam did some of his own sound effects on Rogue but I don't know of any cases where he did his own lettering (especially with the speech balloons hand-drawn directly as part of the art - that's a Dave Gibbons thing). Close-up pics of your page would help - are you sure these aren't pasted on and just in minty-mint condition?
Nice page, anyway!
Hi Ming,
Definitely not stuck on, they are part of the page. It is a nice page but I seriously doubt it's authenticity. I guess if anyone sees this and also owns the page then that will resolve the matter.
There is ink on the page, but I'm wondering if someone has just overdrawn on some kind of print on card. Just an oddity.
That's definitely Bill Nuttall's lettering. I've seen scans of a couple of other original Cam pages where it looked suspiciously like he'd drawn the speech balloons into the artwork himself, even though the actual lettering was clearly by the credited letterer.
It would sort of make sense, since it means the artist wouldn't have to waste time drawing art that was going to get covered up, but Dave Gibbons' self-lettering is the only other example I can think of.
(Also, I have this suspicion that Dave didn't letter any Rogue strips after the first one because editorial were tidying up the scripts for the letterer while the art was being drawn, which would kind of mitigate against Cam drawing the balloons himself...)
I know that was no help at all. Sorry!
Cheers
Jim
I just dropped Cam a line; if he gets back to me and remembers anything I'll let you know.
Thanks both of you - really appreciate your input.
Thanks for following that up Ming, will be really interesting to see what you get back. Cheers!
Hmm... here's another Nuttall-lettered page from Milli-Com Memories:
(http://www.2000ad.org/artwork/millicom1_2.jpg)
Even in that photo, you can see that Bill's lettering is stuck down. There's also quite a lot of process white on that page, and none in evidence on the scan Simon posted originally, which makes me lean towards the idea that it's a lightbox copy from either the comic or the original.
Cheers
Jim
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 19 November, 2013, 05:04:41 PM...which makes me lean towards the idea that it's a lightbox copy from either the comic or the original.
The signature looks legit, so if it's a copy they went the extra mile...
The easy way to tell if it's a copy or an original would be to take it out of the frame and look for the date / page stamp or hand-written reproduction info on the back, I suppose.
It was professionally framed years ago and can't remember if there was any info on there. Will take it out only as a last resort though as its all taped up on the back. Maybe do that on the weekend.
......didn't last until the weekend, opened the frame up. Nothing written on the back or the page edges. Everything about the page feels wrong, there is texture on there but I feel like its just been put on the copy of the page to try and fool the layman. I've done hundreds of black and white drawings and none of them look like this on paper.
Frustrating really......i got this on ebay quite a few years back but think it was a boarder back in the day who listed it. Suppose they may have been oblivious to its authenticity .
that's a pity, when you compare it to the one Jim put up it does seem a bit too perfect.
I have owned both those pages but sold or swapped them year's ago, the second one to Wake I think but the first one I think I sold on ebay,if it is the one I owned it is definitely legit, it was the third piece of artwork I ever bought, direct from Cam, I bought about six pages from him over about a year, including the Rogue cover and the hopper title page I still own ! I can't say 100% but I do think the lettering was directly onto the artwork,though I thought it had a sticker on the back but can't be 100% on that !
Hi Steve, I wonder if I bought it off you! Must have been at least 5 or more years ago now.
Just to clarify, I am not making any accusations that anyone has knowingly ripped me off, I'm just trying to understand why the page is so unusual.
I don't think this is the original drawing though (no matter how much I want it to be).
Also, a little more info, it's on card, the correct old style 2000ad page size but the top surface is quite shiny and could be peeled away from the card.
That sounds like the page I had, I'm sure I remember at the time about the lettering, but I had only just started collecting so didn't know any different, but it was definitely from Cam, artwork was cheap then so I am not having anyone would go to the trouble of copying it ! I think I only paid Cam £60 for it ! I turned down the chance of getting the Rogue cover he did with the snake on it at the same time because he wanted £100 for it !!!! The fool I was !!! By the time I realised my mistake it had gone, but luckily Cam found me the other Rogue that I now own so that made up for that ! But I am sure it is my page now you describe it, so it has to be genuine because it was direct from the artist !
Well now it's out of the frame, if you look at the areas of solid black (like Bagman in panel three) can you see any evidence of brushstrokes or variation in the density of application of the ink?
If it came direct from Cam, as Steve indicates, I'm sure it's legit - and if not, it's a fairly odd page choice for a reproduction. Fingers crossed you can get to the bottom of this, Simon.
If you bought it about 5 years ago of ebay I bet it must be 10 years since I bought it from Cam
Well, definitely pen marks all over the page, black has been applied, razor scratches everywhere (presumably to remove inking mistakes). No whiteout used (not conclusive though as may have been having a very good day!). But then it has this faded special quality on a lot of the line work that almost makes it look like a printout. I guess this could be an effect caused by inking onto gloss paper then erasing, taking the top layer of the ink off.
I would have to agree that it would be an awful lot of effort to create this at a time when the original wouldn't have been worth a enough to justify the work. Just wouldn't be worth the effort would it? I'm feeling slightly happier now :-)
Now, just the oddity of the lettering issue to investigate!
This may not be directly relevant, but I have several pages of John Ridgway's art from 'The Dead Man', and quite a few pieces of the lettering have just been directly written / drawn by Jack Potter onto Ridgway's panels, instead of being stuck on - so it does happen.
This is the kind of thread that keeps me addicted to this forum after so many years. Keep digging, all.
A strange one this.
Though i suspect (due to the lettering - the image that Jim posted is of a page from the same prog as this one, and yet has pasted up lettering. Plus the lack of any IPC stickers etc) that this is production art instead of original art. Any additional work on this may be just to tidy up before the next step in the process?
From Cam: The way I worked Rogue was always the same, pencil page then ink it then send it off to 2000. so, as far as I know all my Rogues were lettered after art was inked. Ask your friend to have a really good look at his page. i'd probably be safe in saying that if the lettering's actually on the artwork it's a different page from that which left my studio. to all intents and purposes it IS my artwork. tell him to take a real good look at it. Hope this helps
The more I read that, the more confused I get. However, I think Cam's saying that pasted-on lettering was the norm for his work on Rogue. Personally, I have no clue whether your page is legit or not - a few close-up, angled shots of the art (and a pic of the back of the page) would be interesting to look at, though.
Also, here's a pic of the back of one of my Cam pages (not Rogue):
(http://i.imgur.com/WMqCqpk.jpg)
The size of the page itself may vary (at least the Rogue page I have is on art board rather than the more usual thick card) but if there's no publication / reproduction info on the back of the page I'd be a bit suspicious (I'm not sure whether the IPC stamp is always there, though).
I think I am more confused now. The back of the page is definitely blank, no writing or markings at all. From what cam is saying this can't be the original drawing as the lettering is 100% part of the artwork itself, not pasted on.
There is a lot of ink on the page, brush and pen, over the base artwork. Too much for it to be touchups to the original page......if I can get some better shots this evening I will post then up.
I'm certainly no expert in this but like Judge Jack, my money would be on this being Production art - a photocopy of the original artwork that had the lettering added, hence why it is not stuck on this piece. This was a lot more common with colour work - I have one myself where the copy is then coloured by another artist and is what made it into the Prog.
I think this also explains why some linework is faded but you can clearly see parts that have been inked. The only reason I can think of doing it here would be to change something - is there anything at all that is stuck on? I can't see anything from the picture but this could even be a complete panel.
Yeah, I'm leaning towards the 'not the real deal' myself, mainly due to the comparison with the page that Jim posted from very the same episode. That has the obvious and expected characteristics of the original art, especially the pasted-on balloons with tails applied with whiteout. It seems far from likely that the text would have been dealt with in a different way on pages within the same episode. If Wake could have a look at his page (the second page from this episode) and report whether the usual sizing / publication / repro info is there, I guess that would be conclusive.
Anyway, nice of Cam to try and clear this up :)
Yeah, it was. I really appreciate everyones help on this one!
Still, as Steve remembers this page as not having pasted on word balloons, its extremely odd that cam would sell this directly to him as the original art?
Quite, can't help but think it must be legit if you can trace it back to Cam. I would also have a look at the signature tonight and see if it looks copied or inked.
Right, some images for you all. As mentioned, there are no markings on the back of the page. Have tried to shine the light on the page so you can see where ink has been applied.
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Simonipenter/image-6.jpg)
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Simonipenter/image-7.jpg)
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Simonipenter/image-8.jpg)
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Simonipenter/image-9.jpg)
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Simonipenter/image-10.jpg)
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Simonipenter/image-11.jpg)
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Simonipenter/image-12.jpg)
Ive got three pages of Dan Dare from Lion very similar to this, although my speech bubbles are drawn on like you have here, the text is def Spray-mounted on type strips of paper....most of which is yellowed and falling off!
They've also got some reworked blacks, and crosshatching adjustments, with white -out paint over some areas.
There are also pencil marks stating dates, crop marks, printer notes etc.
If I saw this for sale in person Id think it was the same thing- a proffesionally done blown up copy of an original page, hand cleaned up/ re-inked to get the blacks and depth back into the original print method this page was produced with, and posibly to be used as a master to pull new prints from ?
According to Barney, Mill-Com Memories was reprinted in Best of 2000AD Monthly 10 and Titan's Rogue Trooper Book 4, both in 1986. It's also in some Rebellion books but I think they are too recent.
It would be interesting to see if there is any difference between whats in the prog and the reprints.
Without actually handling it, I'm as sure as I can be that this is a production bromide, produced when the original artwork was camera-ed, to give a clean B&W image that could be used to generate the negatives that would be used for the printing plates.
A bit of theorising: bromides weren't cheap. If the settings were off when the bromide was produced and — say — the blacks weren't solid, it would be a lot cheaper to get someone on staff to spend a few minutes re-touching the bromide with light-fast ink than to make a new one.
(Which doesn't explain what Cam's signature is doing on it, obviously...)
Cheers
Jim
Unless it was returned to Cam as the original...
Is that possible? If these bromides were part of the normal practice of prepping pages for print (and please remember I have almost no knowledge of this) then that implies that there 'could' be a lot of them around.
A fascinating thread this.
Sounds feasible. That's a good theory Dave, maybe this was returned to cam as the original. its entirely possible that if these exist then a lot of people might think that they have original pages when they do not. I wonder where the original might be.
I have owned a couple of bromides and still own a Ian Gibson one, and they are nothing like the Rogue page !
Anyone got a scan of the original printed page to see if it is exact?
Quote from: SteveMillar on 20 November, 2013, 05:27:17 PM
I have owned a couple of bromides and still own a Ian Gibson one, and they are nothing like the Rogue page !
How so? They're just like high-quality photocopies on shiny paper.
Cheers
Jim
This is on card though with a shiny surface layer. Possible that its the shiny paper pasted onto card but if it is then its been done extremely well.
Quote from: Simon Penter on 20 November, 2013, 05:51:33 PM
This is on card though with a shiny surface layer. Possible that its the shiny paper pasted onto card but if it is then its been done extremely well.
It wasn't at all uncommon to spray-mount or wax bromides onto heavier backing to make them more durable...
Cheers
Jim
I don't know how to describe it, they were very slap dash ! No effort to make them look like a finished page ! Where as the Rogue page really does look like proper artwork, also all my bromides still had production stamps on and details where they were to be used..
Quote from: SteveMillar on 20 November, 2013, 06:18:39 PMWhere as the Rogue page really does look like proper artwork, also all my bromides still had production stamps on and details where they were to be used..
It's a weird case, that's for sure. The balance of probabilities suggests that this is
not the original artwork as drawn by Cam, though. Just a quick comparison of the pic Jim showed of the art for the second page from this episode (from Wake's collection) is enough to raise serious doubts - for me, at least. Cam's comments also suggest that something's not right here. As I said, if Wake can comment on how the back of his page looks (IPC stamp? Prog and page details? Sizing / repro info?) compared to Simon's, I think that should be conclusive.
The whole issue of
'what the hell is this, then?' would, of course, remain. It's a bit strange to think that Cam wouldn't recognise production art (of whatever quality) as opposed to his originals, but then this appears to be signed... Then again, I've never seen any bromides or other production art for Rogue knocking about either, so it's all a bit of a mystery - and will probably remain that way!
Im pretty much convinced this is production art now. The additional photo's plus your original description all leads to that, im afraid.
Quote from: Simon Penter on 19 November, 2013, 08:21:58 PM
Well, definitely pen marks all over the page, black has been applied, razor scratches everywhere (presumably to remove inking mistakes). No whiteout used (not conclusive though as may have been having a very good day!).
Leaving school, my first couple of jobs was in the printing industry (from about '84 to about 87), and that included a year at Leeds Poly studying Printing. We often made copies of images, and had to touch them up in the way thats been described. The smooth glossy finish made it easier to remove 'blemishes' with a sharp knife. And blacks were made more solid by filling them in. We also used to make 'negative' copies of images and touch those up - bypassing the 'postive' copy completely.
The negative copy was the last stage before creating a printing plate, if i recall.
I suspect Cam was sent this, by mistake, when his art was returned to him. And later signed and sold it on.
A few pieces of production art have been wrongly classed as original before now, so it can be an easy mistake to make, if its not checked properly. I guess this must have had enough going for it to resemble the original. Just very unfortunate that it slipped through.
Ive seen a lot of Bromides where the art has been touched up to remove faults and to darken areas which didn't come out right, so pen and razor marks can be seen on these production pages. Its very unlikely that it would have been sent to Cam at any point but could have been signed by Cam at any con here was at, it have been a much cooler item to get signed than the average book. It would not be the first time someone bought a Bromide as a real piece of art this kind of thing could happen to any of us.
It's a mystery isn't it?
Looking at those pictures, Cam's signature looks to me like a copy - if that's the case then Cam could have signed it when he originally did it and this was copied like the lettering. Plus, if this has been mounted on board then there might be a stamp there that we cannot see.
Didn't the titan reprints often have creator involvement? Could this be something that has been touched up for that, its then sent back to Cam and he has eventually passed it on.
It couldn't have been signed at a con, it was bought directly from Cam
Quote from: HaloJones on 20 November, 2013, 06:45:29 PM
Its very unlikely that it would have been sent to Cam at any point
By all accounts the IPC art vaults was a right shambles.
Many a tales been told about the art getting all mixed up and lost, stolen, damaged, or thrown into skips.
And of course someone may well have pilfered the original and slipped in the copy to cover their tracks, but I simply think it got included, for whatever reason, and now has popped up here.
Well, I guess whatever this actually is, it clearly isn't the original artwork. I'm very curious to know whether the actual artwork survived or whether this is as close as it gets.
A big disappointment for me as always wanted to own pages of work by my absolute favourites and had mostly achieved that (with the exception of bolland.....always way out of my price range). Not sure I could ever justify the money nowadays for one of cams actual vintage 2000AD pages.
Oh well, now its out of the frame I have replaced it with a nice Dom reardon caballistics page.
Quote from: ming on 20 November, 2013, 06:29:11 PMJust a quick comparison of the pic Jim showed of the art for the second page from this episode (from Wake's collection) is enough to raise serious doubts - for me, at least. Cam's comments also suggest that something's not right here. As I said, if Wake can comment on how the back of his page looks (IPC stamp? Prog and page details? Sizing / repro info?) compared to Simon's, I think that should be conclusive.
Sorry for the delay. I'm in the process of moving house and my original artwork has gone ahead. Anyway, I'm here with Milli-Com Memories from Prog 318 now. As you've already checked, the speech balloons are all pasted on, as you would expect. On the back the board is by ORAM & ROBINSON, LTD. and while there is no official IPC stamp, the following has been hand written:
2000 AD. Prog 318. Page 10
<----- 209mm ----->
28/5/83
On the front, some of the notes in the borders have been covered up with white paper: e.g. 663 in the bottom right hand corner.
It would be good to establish whether your page can direct from Steve, in which case it must have come like that from Cam himself, or whether it passed through any further hands. Personally I think the most likely explanation is that the original page was damaged and therefore a copy was made (including some touching up) for the Titan reprint, which in turn was returned to Cam with the art from the rest of the story.
Came straight from Cam, the first page I bought from him !
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 19 November, 2013, 05:04:41 PM
Hmm... here's another Nuttall-lettered page from Milli-Com Memories:
(http://www.2000ad.org/artwork/millicom1_2.jpg)
That middle panel is just utterly magnificent. It's after the firefight but you can totally see how it played out.
aye, it was pages like that that stopped me drawing all those years again