Confused about inking.

[Peter Wolf]

I have only just started using brushes instead of pens but i have found that learning to use brushes is like learning to use hand tools which is what they are.Its like there are so many different kinds of brushstrokes that you can get just by holding it in different ways and at different angles etc wheras a pen is just a pen and you will get uniform lines no matter what you try and do with it.Theres so many subtle nuances that i am finding out all the time.

[Colin YNWA]

You fool, Wells!  

Pretty much what Dyl said, really.  The only thing I'd add to that is that one of the reasons pencils and inks get split up- apart from the obvious time advantages- is that some people are just better suited to one job or the other, or one will bring out the best in the other.  OK, so that's two things- but you get the general gist.

I think a good example of somebody who benefits from a good inker is John Byrne.  Terry Austin, IMO, really brought out the best in his work on X-Men, while some of his Fantastic Four issues that he inked himself were a bit 'blotchy'.  Obviously, not everyone agrees with this assessment- which is kind of point.

A really good place to look is Fantastic Four annual #19 and Avengers annual #14, as both are penciled by Byrne, but inked by Joe Sinnott and Kyle Baker, respectively.  As it's a crossover, with the same story being told from two different perspectives, some of the panels are identical- so you can really see what a difference the choice of inker makes.



A horribly quick google didn't yield any of the identical panels- but I bet you could find them if you looked.  I remember preferring Baker's scratchy, more 'realistic', look to Sinnott's super-polished inks at the time.  As most of my tastes have changed since then, I'd be interested to read them again now.  Unfortunately, they went in the bin years ago.

That's a great example. Have both those books and since they were done my the same penciler at the same time the 'only' difference being different inkers if you don't understand the importance an inker can have then this will sort it out.

While I think the split penciler inker role in US comics is almost certainly born from the studio system from the 'golden age' and the ability this gave the best arts to produce more and more work its become so mcu more and I truely believe is now about the artistic value, in some instances, of having two people with different skill sets working on the finished product.

[johnnystress]

Any chance of a scan?- I'd love to see them for comparison

I doubt there's a better example to be had

[pauljholden]

You've got to understand that the process of inking was initially done to help with reproduction - pencils couldn't be reproduced at all in the early (American) comic printing process, they needed a very definitive black and white line. So the whole point of inking was to enable people to see the comic.

As time and artists moved on, the yanks kept the two jobs as separate entities (and up thread are good examples of why this can be good/bad).

These days you CAN reproduce pencils - but there's still something fairly aesthetically pleasing about black inks (you can also 'digitally ink' which is the process of darkening the pencils until they're black enough to mimic inks - BUT that's never the same, as every tool in an inker's arsenal can give a different 'feel' to the work).

Look at anything inked by Kevin Nowlan - if you want to see what difference an inker can make...

(Like lettering it's easier to notice a bad job than it is to notice a good job...)

-pj

[Colin YNWA]

Unfortunately I don't have a scanner but I thought it'd be easy enough get a scan online. The Avengers Annual wasn't a problem but could I heck find a scan from FF Annual 19. So anyway instead I did manage to find an Avengers cover from about 2 years earlier with Sinnott (who's name I can now spell!) inking Byrne and though its not ideal hopefully the two will go some way to illustrating the point.

Baker: //http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3465/3307219043_2c17b04a3d_o.jpg

Sinnott: //http://www.coollinesartwork.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=241729&ArtistId=503&Details=1&From=Room

[Colin YNWA]

Excuse the double post but this is a good example as well. This blog entry (I've not read it to be honest so I'll not vouch for it) has a lot of Frank Miller inked by Klaus Janson (spelling AGAIN!). The last four pages however are inked by Terry Austin. All examples can be clicked on and expanded to a good size.

//http://blindedmewithcomics.blogspot.com/2009/04/ballet-of-violence-frank-miller-and.html

What I like about this example is that even though Miller's pencilling style and great use of Eisner inspired shadows to create drama and atmosphere in panels shines through all examples I think both inkers style is also highlighted. Janson appears to be looser but is bolder and because of that really emphasises Miller's tones. Austin for all his talent I find fussy very often and I think this comes across here. Too many lines, too much careful detail actually detracts from the storytelling. All subjective but hopefully regardless of how you read it the difference in style and the impact they have is evident?

[Jim_Campbell]

Baker: //http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3465/3307219043_2c17b04a3d_o.jpg

That's interesting ... I have a huge amount of time for Kyle Baker, who is a fabulous artist, but I think in that example he appears to have annihilated any trace of Byrne's style which seems at odds with the job of an inker, which (I thought) was to enhance the pencils.

I've seen Sienkiewicz, for example, ink all sorts of artists and I've always been able to tell whose pencils were under Sienkiewicz's incredibly distinctive inks. I honestly think I wouldn't have known that was a Byrne page just from the artwork.

Cheers

Jim

[CraveNoir]

A comparison of some of the the Byrne Baker/Sinnot pages:
//http://www.marvel.com/blogs//entry/778

Also several inkers tackled Adam Hughes' Wonder Woman pencil in the gallery here:
//http://comicartcommunity.com/gallery/categories.php?cat_id=117

[johnnystress]

great links! nice one

they also go a little way to show what a colourists job is too

[EdBinn]

Looked at the Jack Kirby penciled panel and the Vince Colletta inked version and my preference is undoubtedly Vince's finished art. Jack Kirby put everything but the kitchen sink into his compositions and it took a really good inker to figure out what to keep and what to leave out in order to make the work understandable and appealing.

Looked at the link you provided that showed all the Kirby and Colletta examples which were beautifully done. This is an inker that people have a problem with??? Also in that link was an example of a recreation by inker Dan Adkins that is nowhere near as well done as Colletta's. Adkins inking is childish while Vince's inks are quite artistic by any standards.

Looked at the examples of the 20 great inkers that included Adkins and omitted Colletta. Enough said.

[Jim_Campbell]

A comparison of some of the the Byrne Baker/Sinnot pages:
//http://www.marvel.com/blogs//entry/778

Aha! An interesting little snippet from the accompanying text on that page, however, is the Byrne did breakdowns and not pencils. In that case, I withdraw my criticism of Kyle Baker, since breakdowns, by their nature, invite the inker to invest much more of their own style into turning the page into a finished piece of artwork than full pencils.

Cheers!

Jim

[SuperSurfer]

Great links Emperor. Would love to have a go at that reinking Thor Flickr group but have enough distractions as it is.

Also interesting link there CraveNoir. My reservation with Jo Sinnot is that I always got the impression he was drawing his own versions of faces onto Kirby's art. Looking at that FF/Avengers artwork I think I was correct. Look at how much of the final artwork is so similar, but check out the Reed Richards.

[SuperSurfer]

As I was saying, that Richards face could've almost been drawn by Buscema/Sinnott.

Got his own website //http://www.joesinnott.com

[Matt Timson]

Looked at the Jack Kirby penciled panel and the Vince Colletta inked version and my preference is undoubtedly Vince's finished art. Jack Kirby put everything but the kitchen sink into his compositions and it took a really good inker to figure out what to keep and what to leave out in order to make the work understandable and appealing.

Looked at the link you provided that showed all the Kirby and Colletta examples which were beautifully done. This is an inker that people have a problem with??? Also in that link was an example of a recreation by inker Dan Adkins that is nowhere near as well done as Colletta's. Adkins inking is childish while Vince's inks are quite artistic by any standards.

Looked at the examples of the 20 great inkers that included Adkins and omitted Colletta. Enough said.

[EdBinn]

Looked at the Jack Kirby penciled panel and the Vince Colletta inked version and my preference is undoubtedly Vince's finished art. Jack Kirby put everything but the kitchen sink into his compositions and it took a really good inker to figure out what to keep and what to leave out in order to make the work understandable and appealing.

Looked at the link you provided that showed all the Kirby and Colletta examples which were beautifully done. This is an inker that people have a problem with??? Also in that link was an example of a recreation by inker Dan Adkins that is nowhere near as well done as Colletta's. Adkins inking is childish while Vince's inks are quite artistic by any standards.

Looked at the examples of the 20 great inkers that included Adkins and omitted Colletta. Enough said.

Glanced at your web site. Typical cartooney stuff that Vinnie (or most any professional artist) could draw left-handed. I am guessing that you have a day job. Office worker, perhaps? Delivery driver? Colletta and the rest of those guys produced every day for 40 years, beat deadlines, and will always be talked about. You? Not so much. Take care, laughing loser.