2000 AD Online Forum

but I'm not a fan of Carlos Ezquerras art work on Judge Dredd. Compared to the the beautiful work of Greg Staples, or Nick Percival's incredible art work on "Good night kiss" CQ just doesn't cut it. His work on Dredd just seems so basic and cartoony. America is my favourite JD story and Colin macNeil's work again is better than anything CQ has contributed. Apologies to any CQ fans in advance.

Jesus christ.......

Good night kiss? Really?  Compared to necropolis? Or the Apocalypse War??

I think I just died a little inside.

How do you add pictures to messages on here? I just want to give an example.

Goodnight kiss is what finally drove me away from 2000ad and Dredd. It took me several years to recover from that one.

Carlos is about as good as comic art gets.

Quote from: marko10174 on 23 April, 2017, 09:52:14 PM

CQ just doesn't cut it. His work on Dredd just seems so basic and cartoony.

😭

Yes Greg Staples work is beautiful but now long does it take him to produce a story? Same with MacNeil's painted stuff, it's great but simply takes ages - and he said so himself.

There is an original Carlos Dredd page at the Cartoon Museum in London, which is painted, and frankly it is great.  Every bit as good as Staples, Bisley or MacNeil.

Overall I think you will be hard pressed to find an artist who has made a bigger overall contribution to 2000AD than Carlos.

  Creator of the most popular character - check
  Creator of the 2nd most popular character - check
  More pages than any other artist - well I haven't counted, but I should think so

Also can't think of anyone who was there at the start who is still drawing for the Prog (cameos in Prog 2000 don't count as still contributing).

I was standing right by Carlos the other week as he was sketching at the Wales comic con......I genuinely felt like I was in the presence of greatness. He is 2000ad royalty, and I would pretty much read any old rubbish if he was drawing it. Pure class.

I'll shut up now, Sunday night blues.

Ps. Absolutely no insult or disrespect intended towards Nick Percival work, goodnight kiss was just a dredd story that made me sad inside.

Honestly, don't mean to offend anyone, I just don't get it. I'm right now starring at two images on wiki images.  "Judge Dredd the complete CQ collection"  and Judge Dredd "the Brian Bolland complete collection". The difference is astounding. CQ's version of Dredd is basic to the core, where as the detail in BB's Dredd is noticeably different.

Speaking for myself only, I'm not offended. You are entitled to your opinion and I actually like discussions such as this.

I remember my brother (who used to read my Progs) telling me years ago that he didn't like Carlos' art. I was surprised but that's up to him.

Yes Bolland is better at drawing than anyone else (in my opinion) and I long to have him draw Dredd again, but a) it's probably never going to happen and b) as with Staples he is notorious slow.

So it depends what you want - a tiny amount of pages that are wonderous to look at, or a higher volume of pages that are still great, but maybe not quite at that level - as art. But Carlos is a great story teller. I can't recall any of his stories where it wasn't clear what was going on - the story flows beautifully with him.

Sadly I can't say the same for all artists.

Carlos for me over Bolland any day. Bolland's art is stunning precise draughtsmanship and I love it,  but Ezquerra's is magnificent, individually designed,  lively, characterful, powerful, comics storytelling at its finest: and he gets 'er done, page after page. I actually didn't really get Carlos when I started reading the prog: he was doing Starborn Thing, The Moses Incident and Stainless Steel Rat, and I was besotted with Ron Smith, Bellardinelli and Ewins,  but going back to read Apocalypse War ans Portrait of a Mutant sold me on him forever.

I tell you what though, the Mega Collection really opened my eyes as to the scale of Colin MacNeill's contribution to Dredd's world. I've moved him into my Top 5 Dredd artists as a result.

Strontium Dog in Hell. That was magnificent. I can remember copying those double page spreads when I was eight or Nine. Carlos gave me a lovely thumbs up when Alan Grant showed him my work at one of the last UKCAC's. He's a true master and gentleman.

But everyone's entitled to an opinion. Art is subjective.

I prefer the way Carlos Ezquerra lays-out a page and the gritty, dynamic feel of his work.

The visual energy from the interplay between the angle of composition and the alternating direction of deep black/high-contrast line work in these pages is extraordinary. You feel like you're being drawn into the black swirl of the last frame of the second page.

(http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff248/burlearth/stront%20sample_zpsmc5dobsx.jpg) (http://s240.photobucket.com/user/burlearth/media/stront%20sample_zpsmc5dobsx.jpg.html)

I don't get the same intense flow of story-action from more static, illustrative artists like Brian Bolland or Greg Staples. I also think Carlos Ezquerra has a unique feel for character design.

Very interesting...this is not a popular opinion, but it is an opinion you are entitled to. However, Carlos Ezquerra is my absolute favorite (along with Mick McMahon). The image and explanation Joe Soap posted provides an excellent reason why he is the best. I especially like his B&W artwork.

He consistently draws a mean and tough looking Dredd and is, in my opinion, the definitive Dredd artist (who also happened to co-create the character). Small nose, big chin, giant shoulder pad/eagle, awesome lawmaster - he does it all. Also, nothing makes me happier than reading Carlos Ezquerra's Strontium Dog

Come on man, this is as good as it gets!

Considering I rank Carlos at the level of Eisner, Kirby, and Tezuka.... I must disagree.

Quote from: marko10174 on 23 April, 2017, 10:28:00 PMHonestly, don't mean to offend anyone, I just don't get it. I'm right now starring at two images on wiki images.  "Judge Dredd the complete CQ collection"  and Judge Dredd "the Brian Bolland complete collection". The difference is astounding. CQ's version of Dredd is basic to the core, where as the detail in BB's Dredd is noticeably different.

I'm kind of more offended that if you're going to abbreviate Carlos Ezquerra's name to two initials you (apparently) can't be bothered to get his second initial correct. You may not like Carlos' artwork - it's your opinion and you're entitled to be wrong - but at least do him the respect of getting his name (initials) right.

But that gripe aside, I think this depends on how you're defining 'basic'. Brian Bolland has a very 'realistic' style to his art; not photo-realistic necessarily but it's clean, precise and unarguably slick. Carlos's artwork is grittier, arguably messier, but it's no less detailed than Bolland's, just different. If you don't like it, fair dos but I can think of work by other artists that appeared in 2000AD which barely passed 'basic' levels of competence (I won't name names because it doesn't seem fair) so calling Carlos' art 'basic' is a pretty below-the-belt argument. 

I've followed Carlos' artwork for 40 years now and throughout those four decades I can't think of anything Carlos has produced that, by any dispassionate assessment, doesn't demonstrate exceptional levels of draughtsmanship and storytelling. Even his early experiments with digital/computer-coloured art showed an artist willing to master new tools to add to his repertoire rather than doing the same-old same-old forever (albeit doing it very well).

It's one of the things I like about Mick McMahon and Simon Coleby; they're prepared to change their 'style' in order to up their game. I love Bolland's art - I bought 'Wonder Woman' for years solely because of his covers - but I don't think it's unfair to point out that his art hasn't really evolved since the '80s except maybe to become even slicker (although his 'Mr Mamoulian' strips did show a willingness to experiment) whereas Mick's current art is unrecognisable compared to his Carlos-inspired Dredd, his own 'classic' Dredd or even his 'Slaine' style (which was, frankly, an amazing step-up) and Coleby's current work on 'Jaegir' is worlds away from his '90s 'Rogue Trooper' stuff (and all the better for it imo).

Given all the great (and not so great) artists who have contributed to 2000AD over four decades the fact that Carlos is still working for Tharg on a regular basis is testament to his exceptional talents and accomplishments.

When it comes to Dredd, it's either Carlos Ezquerra or Ron Smith. I struggle to put one ahead of the other because their styles are so different, but they're both definitive Dredd artists (as is Mike McMahon).

Much as I also like Bolland, I'll put '80s Barry Kitson ahead of him.

Regards,

Robin

He's not called King Carlos for nowt!

I don't know why I wrote CQ instead of CE, I did have a few glasses of wine last night so that might explain the error. My apologies, no disrespect intended. Thing is, I love the original Strontium dog run, and that's all Carlos Ezquerra, I just don't like the way he draws Dredd. After reading Dark justice, I just thought to myself "oh man, could you imagine if all the Dredd stories looked like this?" I really liked the art in Day of chaos as well, PJ Maybe looked great.

Quote from: marko10174 on 24 April, 2017, 10:45:36 AM

I don't know why I wrote CQ instead of CE, I did have a few glasses of wine last night so that might explain the error. My apologies, no disrespect intended. Thing is, I love the original Strontium dog run, and that's all Carlos Ezquerra, I just don't like the way he draws Dredd. After reading Dark justice, I just thought to myself "oh man, could you imagine if all the Dredd stories looked like this?" I really liked the art in Day of chaos as well, PJ Maybe looked great.

Yeah all the Dredd stories could look like Dark Justice.

It's just that you would only get 6 episodes every two years.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 23 April, 2017, 11:07:15 PMvisual energy

Those two words are key for me in the majority of artists I place at the very top of my list. Colin MacNeil I like, but his work – like Bolland's and Fabry's – often feels a bit stiff. By comparison, Ezquerra, McMahon, Dillon (RIP) and Flint, to name but four, have that kind of dynamism that really sucks me into the story. The only time I didn't like Ezquerra much was during those periods when he initially grappled with digital colouring. I used to love his lurid slabs of colour in the painterly days, but the weird digital stuff was just off-putting. Still, that at least showcased an artist still willing to try new things, and he soon enough became a master of that particular medium as well.

But like Dave Kendall noted earlier, art is subjective, and I can see why people prefer a cleaner illustrative style. (You also have people on here who rally against McMahon's more recent work, because it's not 'realistic' enough, despite every frame having more energy and oomph than most artists manage to pack into an entire episode.)

Carlos, humble chap that he is, would probably agree with you with regards to Bolland and co. - when I met him at the 40th anniversary event, he said he wished he could draw in a cleaner style.
But Carlos' artwork is distinctive, instantly recognisable and is synonymous with Judge Dredd and has others have mentioned, he's still drawing for 2000ad 40 years later and that's one hell of an accomplishment.

Quote from: Magnetica on 23 April, 2017, 10:47:14 PM
Carlos is a great story teller. I can't recall any of his stories where it wasn't clear what was going on - the story flows beautifully with him.

Ezquerra is an acquired taste for many, but you have to admire his visual storytelling and sheer energy. Like Magnetica says, when you look at a Carlos page you immediately understand what's happening. That's pretty much the essence of a great comics artist.

Quote from: Echidna on 24 April, 2017, 12:56:22 PM

Quote from: Magnetica on 23 April, 2017, 10:47:14 PM
Carlos is a great story teller. I can't recall any of his stories where it wasn't clear what was going on - the story flows beautifully with him.

Ezquerra is an acquired taste for many, but you have to admire his visual storytelling and sheer energy. Like Magnetica says, when you look at a Carlos page you immediately understand what's happening. That's pretty much the essence of a great comics artist.

I find it easy to imagine his stuff in motion too, if you know what i mean.

Prob my fave Dredd artist.

Quote from: marko10174 on 23 April, 2017, 09:52:14 PM

but I'm not a fan of Carlos Ezquerras art work on Judge Dredd. Compared to the the beautiful work of Greg Staples, or Nick Percival's incredible art work on "Good night kiss" CQ just doesn't cut it.

Probably the most controversial statement ever on this board. I've only become vaguely familiar with Nick Percival through the Mega Collection.  He also drew Sleaze N Ryder. I'm not a fan.

I like Carlos on Dredd although I don't put him at the top of the 'Big 4' Dredd artists. With me being old I do associate Carlos more with Strontium Dog and his work on Battle (Rat Pack, Major Eazy).

Quote from: Magnetica on 23 April, 2017, 10:19:15 PM
  More pages than any other artist - well I haven't counted, but I should think so

Someone has counted, and he is the most prolific artist (http://heroesof2000ad.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/no-6-carlos-ezquerra.html).

Ohhhhh, I've been busy for a few weeks and I come back to this blasphemy!!! Z*

*mind you as Dave Kendall said, he's entitled to his opinion.

Quote from: Robin Low on 24 April, 2017, 06:49:16 AM
Much as I also like Bolland, I'll put '80s Barry Kitson ahead of him.

I can get that Carlos isn't everyone's favourite (and the ubiquitous 'King' title isn't going to endear him to non-believers!), but the Barry Kitson love expressed above (and I've seen it elsewhere) is the opinion that twists my melon  :o  Better than Brian ?!
His Megazine montage anniversary cover recently was frankly poor, the opposite of dynamic... Maybe I'm missing something.

And Carlos is great. Prolific and great.

Quote from: Fungus on 24 April, 2017, 05:09:35 PM

Quote from: Robin Low on 24 April, 2017, 06:49:16 AM
Much as I also like Bolland, I'll put '80s Barry Kitson ahead of him.

I can get that Carlos isn't everyone's favourite (and the ubiquitous 'King' title isn't going to endear him to non-believers!), but the Barry Kitson love expressed above (and I've seen it elsewhere) is the opinion that twists my melon  :o  Better than Brian ?!
His Megazine montage anniversary cover recently was frankly poor, the opposite of dynamic... Maybe I'm missing something.

I did say '80s Kitson.

Regards,

Robin

While I wouldn't say he was better than Bolland, if memory serves Barry Kitson came along at a time when a lot of the big names had departed to the US.

He had a clean, anatomically correct art style which I think the prog needed then. I would definitely put him above the painted Bisley clone art that was to come.

That is dumb thread question!

And Carlos is the masterpiece, he did amazing long series such as Apocalypse War and Origins.

Quote from: marko10174 on 23 April, 2017, 09:52:14 PM

but I'm not a fan of Carlos Ezquerras art work on Judge Dredd. Compared to the the beautiful work of Greg Staples, or Nick Percival's incredible art work on "Good night kiss" CQ just doesn't cut it. His work on Dredd just seems so basic and cartoony. America is my favourite JD story and Colin macNeil's work again is better than anything CQ has contributed. Apologies to any CQ fans in advance.

My feeling is that different art styles appeal to different people.  I think it would be a bit odd to expect any one style to be universally liked.  I like Carlos Ezquerra's style quite a bit but I do find it difficult to read sometimes.  That said, I think it was Carlos who came up with the design for Judge Dredd and Mega City One - which is, for me, absolute genius!
I also really love Brian Bolland's stuff.  His art just blows me away every time.

Well, outside of that Megazine cover, 80s Kitson is the Kitson I'm familiar with. It's clean, but anatomically correct isn't how I'd describe it. I know it's subjective but the facial expressions felt weirdly flat and the anatomy sub-standard, jarring.

Could just be these comparisons feel unjudtifiable. Carlos isn't my favourite, but he's up there, and he makes drama and action look so deceptively easy...

That why he is the best;

(https://internationlcomicexpo.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/dreddandjohhnyalpha.jpg)

Quote from: Robin Low on 24 April, 2017, 06:49:16 AM
When it comes to Dredd, it's either Carlos Ezquerra or Ron Smith. I struggle to put one ahead of the other because their styles are so different, but they're both definitive Dredd artists (as is Mike McMahon).

There was a time, at the time, that I didn't much like Ron Smith's Dredd; not because it wasn't great art (although I didn't really appreciate it as such at the time) but because at the time (mid-ish '80s?) it seemed like every week had a Ron Smith Dredd strip! In hindsight I realise now what a nonscrot I was being. I think it's true what they say though: when miracles become commonplace you stop seeing them as miracles and regard them as merely mundane, but they're still bloody miracles and Ron Smith's Dredds were bloody classics.

I kind of get people not liking Ezquerra's art - it's a little idiosyncratic and rough around the edges - not for everyone. He isn't a 'showy' artist and I think he's more interested in storytelling than clean lines and polish.

I must admit, I don't always dig his stuff all of the time (I find his digitally coloured stuff a little bit hit and miss), but when he's on he's pretty hard to beat, as some of the examples in this thread show - and he's inarguably responsible for so many of the most iconic 2000ad images ever created.

I feel that way about a lot of the great 2000ad artists - say McMahon or Flint. I adore their stuff, but I can understand why others don't.

Ezquerra is up there with the very best in my opinion.
He excels at character design, storytelling and composition. He can also use body language in a way that few artists manage.
I really can't think of another artist I'd rank higher as an all-round great creator and storyteller.

By the way, MacNeil's work on America is great but for me his best work was on 'The Town That Died of Shame'. Really lovely, gritty Strontium Dog art (he did a Chopper story in a similar style too).

Jeez, McNeill on the Supersurf strip was engaging, to put it mildly, as well.  A visceral, randomised slaughter, set  to the soundtrack of a banal mid Atlantic formula one commentary. Z

It's Carlos all the way for me. He's a great artist and, having met him twice, a perfect gentleman.

Colin MacNeil's second on my list - though the work of his I like the best is his black and white Shimura stuff, which I think is just beautiful.

There's very little Ezquerra I don't like, bar that colouring period. Anatomy is occasionally a bit off (even in that otherwise iconic Alpha/Dredd pic), and he does too often have a tendency towards, shall we say, a certain type of female figure across much of his work, but otherwise the style is for me visually arresting. I really loved those massive chunky lines around foreground figures in classic Stront and Dredd. Really interesting for focussing the eye/frame.

Quote from: JamesC on 24 April, 2017, 07:01:49 PMBy the way, MacNeil's work on America is great but for me his best work was on 'The Town That Died of Shame'. Really lovely, gritty Strontium Dog art (he did a Chopper story in a similar style too).

With that Stront, it almost felt like he was channeling Ezquerra, and although I liked his colour Final Solution output, I wish that had have been in black and white.

Got to admit - I never liked the chunky dotted outline thing. I now get what the intended effect was, but imo all it did was draw attention to itself and make me wonder what the reasoning behind it was.

To focus on the foreground.

As I say, I understand what the intended result was now, but when reading his Dredd and Stront stuff as a kid me and my friends always used to think it was a really strange quirk.

QUICK! SOMEBODY SHOOT HIM, FFS!

;)

Quote from: radiator on 24 April, 2017, 08:29:39 PM
As I say, I understand what the intended result was now, but when reading his Dredd and Stront stuff as a kid me and my friends always used to think it was a really strange quirk.

Apologies - missed that bit.

Carlos Dots are like Kirby Dots. You just accept them as the man's calling card.

Carlos is the king, one of the best visual storytellers ever. That said, while I love his work, it's all personal taste, I can see why the style may not appeal to everybody.

For example, I don't like Ron Smith's style, the way he draws faces etc, just to me looks uncool. I still respect his work though, Graveyard Shift is a classic etc, and he's really good, I'm just not into Ron's art style.

For Carlos, I always liked his work, but around Necropolis to me I really felt he sort of "smoothed out" a bit and for me that is some of his best looking stuff, around that era and on. Though the different coloring styles later on vary a bit. Anyways, love ya Carlos!

One thing that has come back to me reading the case-files is that his Mega-City one is a weird looking place full of strange fashion and odd shaped materials and it feels massive!

Quote from: Goaty on 24 April, 2017, 06:28:14 PM
That why he is the best;

(https://internationlcomicexpo.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/dreddandjohhnyalpha.jpg)

In this picture, what is it that people like about the way Dredd is drawn? I mean, there is very little detail in his face, it looks very easy to replicate for anyone with out any artistic experience. By that, I mean he just looks so basic. I don't get any sense of realism from that image, no personality in Dredd's face, he just looks like a cartoon. I get people might get a bit disgruntled by my choice of words, honestly that's not my intention... to offend. I'm just trying to articulate how I personally feel about this art work.

Quote from: marko10174 link=topic=44388.msg954475#

I mean, there is very little detail in his face, it looks very easy to replicate for anyone with out any artistic experience.

Why not show us how it is done ? As you say it is very easy to replicate.

I never said it was easy, I said it looks easy, certainly compared to other versions of Dredd. Again, this is just my opinion, art is subjective after all. I don't like this version of Dredd, and I'm trying to give my honest reasons why with out causing offence.

QuoteI mean, there is very little detail in his face, it looks very easy to replicate for anyone with out any artistic experience. By that, I mean he just looks so basic. I don't get any sense of realism from that image, no personality in Dredd's face, he just looks like a cartoon.

So approximating reality is the only merit by which art should be judged?

No, I never insinuated that.

Its actually made a good talking point this as you can tell from the number of replies. I think if you don't like it then you don't like it.

Hard to put in to words but his art just has a certain look about it that is perfect for action strips. He can also draw Dredd as quite an imposing presence and you can tell what he's thinking just by the way Carlos has drawn the mouth. Kind of like a comic version of Eastwood's 'man with no name' character. Speaking of which I think Brian Bolland was sometimes guilty of exaggerating the mouth into an upturned U shape which I felt didn't always look right. 

For some people as well Carlos will always have nostalgic value. I can remember him drawing comics back in the 70's (mainly Battle as I didn't associate him with 2000AD until Strontium Dog). Really his art style hasn't changed much since then and you would know its the same guy. Bolland has still much the same style but you just don't see his art as much these days.     

Strangely for me Carlos is the only artist who can colour Dredd's uniform black and it looks better. With every other artist I can think of the uniform looks better dark blue.

Quote from: marko10174 on 24 April, 2017, 09:51:39 PM
In this picture, what is it that people like about the way Dredd is drawn? I mean, there is very little detail in his face, it looks very easy to replicate for anyone with out any artistic experience. By that, I mean he just looks so basic. I don't get any sense of realism from that image, no personality in Dredd's face, he just looks like a cartoon

Facial detail depends on how close up Dredd's face is in the frame. Dredd has experience written all over his chin on this page.

(http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff248/burlearth/07_zps2a046a2e.jpg) (http://s240.photobucket.com/user/burlearth/media/07_zps2a046a2e.jpg.html)

 I've actually enjoyed the thread. It's interesting to read peoples reasons why they love CE's version of Dredd, and has given me some useful insight. Unfortunately, I don't think CE's version of Dredd will ever be my cup of tea,. In terms of nostalgia, well the first Dredd strip I ever read was "the Exterminator" and I loved the art immediately, then there was "good night kiss" and "America" I didn't discover CE's Dredd until much later.

As controversial as this thread may be, I'm glad I started it, because I've had some good feed back.  I don't think CE is a bad artist by no means, I love his work on the original Strontium dog run, and I always noticed his absence on the strips he wasn't involved in. I just prefer Dredd when the art is handled by someone else.

Quote from: marko10174 on 24 April, 2017, 09:51:39 PM

Quote from: Goaty on 24 April, 2017, 06:28:14 PM
That why he is the best;

(https://internationlcomicexpo.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/dreddandjohhnyalpha.jpg)

he just looks like a cartoon.

All comic books look like cartoons. That's why they call it 'cartooning'.

Also, Dredd has the emotional range of a shoe.

Quote from: marko10174 on 24 April, 2017, 10:33:57 PM

I don't think CE's version of Dredd will ever be my cup of tea,. I just prefer Dredd when the art is handled by someone else.

Fair doo's each to his own, the man don't dig on Carlos's Dredd.

One of my mates has read the prog for as long as me 30 odd years and he's the same, he just doesn't get the adulation...

I loved Carlos's work when I first set eyes on it back in the 80's, there was something just so dynamic and cinnematic about his sunbaked style. I would love to see some more B&W from him at some point - just an old fanboy's wish mind...

Quote from: marko10174 on 24 April, 2017, 10:33:57 PM
I've actually enjoyed the thread....
As controversial as this thread may be, I'm glad I started it, because I've had some good feed back. 

Yes quite...I don't think you should apologise for starting the thread or expressing your opinion. This is exactly the kind of discussion I like to see on the board.

Now no-one has picked up on something else you said in the original post  - you are placing Nick Percival in the top echelon of Dredd artists.

So for me - no. Yes its all nicely painted and photo realistic, but a bit like Clint Langley's* stuff, I find myself looking at it and thinking "yes I am sure this is technically amazing, but there is just something lacking in it and I can't quite put my finger on it".

Well actually Joe Soap has explained it beautifully - it lacks "visual energy". So sorry - not for me.


* Now Clint is great at images, but story telling, not so much. I met him at the 40th - lovely chap too. So sorry for any criticism.

Quote from: The Adventurer on 24 April, 2017, 11:10:56 PM

Quote from: marko10174 on 24 April, 2017, 09:51:39 PM

Quote from: Goaty on 24 April, 2017, 06:28:14 PM
That why he is the best;

(https://internationlcomicexpo.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/dreddandjohhnyalpha.jpg)

he just looks like a cartoon.

All comic books look like cartoons. That's why they call it 'cartooning'.

Where are the 'like' buttons on this thing?!

That's a basic orientation thing. Some people want everything as "real" as a film on paper. NO humor, nothing 'interpretive', 100% straight. One of the things I particularly loved about the 1980s 2000 AD is it didn't seem embarrassed to actually be a 'comic book'. Personally I feel like that's the real strength of the medium, and no movie or television adaptation is ever going to duplicate that, no matter how much money they spend.

Dredd has had a lot of good artists, and it's hard to pick just one as definitive from among so much excellent work. Sometimes when I look at the very earliest of Carlos's stories from the 1970s, it's a little hard to see it (it took a little while at first for him to grow on me), but he's just such an amazing talent that keeps getting better and better, right on up to the present. (I was just looking at the Judge Dredd/Strontium Dog story he did for Prog 2000 today.) Ezquerra has stuck with Dredd all these years, unlike some of the other early candidates for 'the definitive Dredd artist' like Bolland and McMahon. So (apart from having co-created the character, which is no mean thing), I've got to give that title to Carlos. And for Strontium Dog, there's not even any quibbling over it. Same goes for the short-lived but memorable Stainless Steel Rat. One of these days I mean to get to some of his lesser-known stuff like Fiends of the Eastern Front.

1. Ezquerra
.
.
.
2. McMahon
3. Henry Flint
4. Ron Smith
5. Cam Kennedy

Painted Dredd in the Percival / Staples style just doesn't do it for me. Hugely skillful, but just doesn't have the energy. The 'Dark Justice' GN has some penciled pages at the back which are gorgeous: it's a shame they were painted over.

A thoughtful thread. I come back to the point that Carlos makes it look effortless... which is routinely taken as the mark of a master? You pay him the highest compliment, Marko, when you say he makes it 'look very easy'.
He gets the point and attitude of his panels across so economically, it's fantastic.

Some 2000AD artist mentioned in a Megazine interview a few months back that copying 2000AD as a kid spurred them on (specifically Ewins?), but that Bolland almost made them give up. How many readers have copied some Carlos art as kids and thought 'it's just a few lines, looks a bit rough, I can do that!' and when they try they find out  :-\ 
I suspect Mr Bolland wasn't copied quite as much (basing this on nothing more than a hunch, of course).

Quote from: Andy B on 25 April, 2017, 01:27:39 AM
1. Ezquerra
.
.
.
2. McMahon
3. Henry Flint
4. Ron Smith
5. Cam Kennedy

Excellent list! This sums it up for me as well, but not necessarily in that order (Smith a little higher and and Flint slightly below Kennedy for me, otherwise a perfect list!)

For me,Ron Smith is the second definitive artist.He strikes a very good balance between realistic and cartoonish.

Quote from: Andy B on 25 April, 2017, 01:27:39 AM
Painted Dredd in the Percival / Staples style just doesn't do it for me. Hugely skillful, but just doesn't have the energy. The 'Dark Justice' GN has some penciled pages at the back which are gorgeous: it's a shame they were painted over.

There is an interesting interview with Dermot Power in this month's Megazine in which he says with painting it's very hard to do the little background details of Mega City One and you can only really get that with pencils and ink.

Quote from: positronic on 25 April, 2017, 01:08:19 AMThat's a basic orientation thing. Some people want everything as "real" as a film on paper. NO humor, nothing 'interpretive', 100% straight.

It's rather telling to read the letters pages recently in Mighty World of Marvel. Pretty much everyone is ripping into Bachalo's art, which is expressive, interesting, and gets across the weirdness of the magical layer hiding behind our own reality. It can be scratchy and messy, but it has an energy about it that's far beyond the duller 'realistic' illustrative fare elsewhere in most Marvel fare. That's of course not to say there isn't a place for such art in comics. But the medium would be a poorer place if everyone was going for something photo-realistic, rather than having fun with experimenting with style.

I will make exceptions here: style without internal consistency is usually doomed to failure; also, if you are going to go for an exaggerated style, you'd better have a strong and thorough understanding of human anatomy and – preferably – also architecture. McMahon does well here: his current style is frequently bouncers, but it nonetheless feels solid and coherent.

As for Ezquerra, I like the fact he can do a lot with a little, and brings a solidity to Dredd, along with a design aesthetic that looks otherworldly. Strontium Dog, also, works really nicely from a visual design standpoint, with its odd organic buildings, and varied bounty hunter uniforms. Funny that the posted Judgment Day pic so frequently comes up, though. I love its attitude and what it represents in the story, but Dredd just looks off, like his right shoulder has dislocated, or his head's been moved too far to the right.

Quote from: marko10174 on 24 April, 2017, 09:51:39 PM

Quote from: Goaty on 24 April, 2017, 06:28:14 PM
That why he is the best;

(https://internationlcomicexpo.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/dreddandjohhnyalpha.jpg)

In this picture, what is it that people like about the way Dredd is drawn? I mean, there is very little detail in his face, it looks very easy to replicate for anyone with out any artistic experience. By that, I mean he just looks so basic. I don't get any sense of realism from that image, no personality in Dredd's face, he just looks like a cartoon. I get people might get a bit disgruntled by my choice of words, honestly that's not my intention... to offend. I'm just trying to articulate how I personally feel about this art work.

I think what I really like about this picture is the gritty solidity of both Dredd and Alpha in the drawing.  I get the sense that they are these two strong, experienced, hard-as-nails dudes.  Given Dredd's words I think that might be intentional.  It is hard to say any more than that though.  It just looks right.  I guess there is a solid grittyness is Carlos' work which kind of fits with Dredd and Strontium Dog.

Quote from: JudgeJudi on 24 April, 2017, 09:59:36 PM

Quote from: marko10174 link=topic=44388.msg954475#

I mean, there is very little detail in his face, it looks very easy to replicate for anyone with out any artistic experience.

Why not show us how it is done ? As you say it is very easy to replicate.

I had a go at this a while back - drawing my own version of Johnny Alpha trying to follow Carlos' style.  It wasn't particularly easy.

Here's the ink...

(https://jofoxadventuresinart.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/strontium-dog-ink-fin-web.jpg)

And the colour...

(https://jofoxadventuresinart.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/strontium-dogcol-fin_web.jpg)

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 April, 2017, 09:22:50 AM
It's rather telling to read the letters pages recently in Mighty World of Marvel. Pretty much everyone is ripping into Bachalo's art, which is expressive, interesting, and gets across the weirdness of the magical layer hiding behind our own reality.

That's rather sad, given Bachalo is such an excellent artist. Many US fans seem to prefer mediocrity in their comic art.

5 pages in and no-one has suggested a place of execution, never mind a date for this firing squad. Call this justice?

Quote from: Rogue Judge on 25 April, 2017, 01:40:08 AM

Quote from: Andy B on 25 April, 2017, 01:27:39 AM
1. Ezquerra
2. McMahon
3. Henry Flint
4. Ron Smith
5. Cam Kennedy

Excellent list! This sums it up for me as well, but not necessarily in that order...

Add a place for Colin Macneil and I think that would be just about anybody's top 6 of Dredd artists!

Quote from: CalHab on 25 April, 2017, 12:04:45 PM
That's rather sad, given Bachalo is such an excellent artist. Many US fans seem to prefer mediocrity in their comic art.

Bachalo is great at design, and has a wonderful style, but I feel his storytelling skills have atrophied over the years (and were in fact superior in his Shade days.) His static images? Superb. Actually trying to follow what's going on in one of his modern comics? Not always easy. I can more than understand why some people would prefer a less 'individual' artist's work, even if said artist were less talented. To be honest, if I know Bachalo's drawing a book, I have to think twice about buying it. (Cue outrage from Pat Mills, who'd be firmly in your corner and often used to fend off similar criticisms about John Hicklenton.)

Bachalo is one of the best. The fact that you need to look again - then again - at some of his fantastical Dr Strange scenes is a positive. I don't want to flick-flick-flick through a comic, I want to enjoy the art (usually more than the story, but that's my take on it and the subject of a recent thread. I was in a minority).

Along with the recent Elektra book, the design and invention there are beautiful. It leans into illustration, but I don't mind that. Plenty of us have picked up books for the Bolland cover, I expect.

Quote from: Greg M. on 25 April, 2017, 12:49:49 PM
Bachalo is great at design, and has a wonderful style, but I feel his storytelling skills have atrophied over the years (and were in fact superior in his Shade days.) His static images? Superb. Actually trying to follow what's going on in one of his modern comics?

Although I've enjoyed his run on Dr Strange, I was struck early on by a lot of very ugly/clumsy balloon placements in the lettering. When you stop and look at why the letterer has made those choices, it quickly becomes obvious that these have been forced by Bachalo's page layout and panel composition decisions, something which is antithetical to clear storytelling.

Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 25 April, 2017, 12:44:03 PM

Quote from: Rogue Judge on 25 April, 2017, 01:40:08 AM

Quote from: Andy B on 25 April, 2017, 01:27:39 AM
1. Ezquerra
2. McMahon
3. Henry Flint
4. Ron Smith
5. Cam Kennedy

Excellent list! This sums it up for me as well, but not necessarily in that order...

Add a place for Colin Macneil and I think that would be just about anybody's top 6 of Dredd artists!

I'd move Kennedy up a bit and replace Flint with Dillon.
If it were a cover artists only list I'd make it Ezquerra, McMahon, Bolland, Robinson.

Oh hell! I completely forgot Dillon. Yeah, needs to be a top 7 really, dunnit?

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 April, 2017, 09:22:50 AM
Funny that the posted Judgment Day pic so frequently comes up, though. I love its attitude and what it represents in the story, but Dredd just looks off, like his right shoulder has dislocated, or his head's been moved too far to the right.

It's the eagle and shoulder pad. The former is resting lower on Dredd's arm while the latter is sitting on top of his shoulder, so you can see much more of the top of Dredd's shoulder on the arm where the eagle is.

I looked at the drawing again closely after you mentioned this, drawing imaginary outlines mentally of Dredd's actual shoulders underneath the eagle and pad, and it works fine anatomically. If it looks lopsided it's a visual illusion created by the mismatched angles of the eagle and shoulder pad.

A small confession here:  I remember years and years ago, when I was a wee lad, around the time I started noticing that 2000ad stories had different art styles (I started reading wayyy too young to understand the prog properly).  I saw Carlos on Dredd - he drew him much skinnier back then - and thought something like, 'That looks a bit odd.  Johnny Alpha's his character, not Dredd.'

Of course I know better now.  Also I prefer Carlos's modern, older, bulkier Dredd (and I also like the fact that John Wagner has added Dredd's weight-gain to continuity, though I can't quite remember which story it was).

On a side-note, I'd add Jock, despite his sadly short tenure, to the top whatever Dredd artists.

Quote from: marko10174 on 24 April, 2017, 09:51:39 PM

Quote from: Goaty on 24 April, 2017, 06:28:14 PM
That why he is the best;

(https://internationlcomicexpo.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/dreddandjohhnyalpha.jpg)

In this picture, what is it that people like about the way Dredd is drawn? I mean, there is very little detail in his face, it looks very easy to replicate for anyone with out any artistic experience. By that, I mean he just looks so basic. I don't get any sense of realism from that image, no personality in Dredd's face, he just looks like a cartoon. I get people might get a bit disgruntled by my choice of words, honestly that's not my intention... to offend. I'm just trying to articulate how I personally feel about this art work.

Cartooning style is a form of shorthand. Carlos has his own unique set of shorthand expressions for indicating things like eyes, noses, mouths... his own signature way of drawing those details. Mouths can often be no more than a small curved line. Noses frequently look squarish, as if carved from a small block of wood. Eyes (Johnny Alpha's in particular) can often be more square than round. It's simply Carlos' cartooning style.

Realism isn't necessarily the most important thing. It's the overall impression that drawing conveys. Many people lean towards favoring a more illustration approach than a cartooning approach, and want a more realistic 'life drawing' feeling conveyed in the artwork.

Don't mistake the number of lines as being the hallmark of a great comic artist, either. Sometimes what's left out is as important to the overall drawing as what's left in. Each artist concentrates on the details that he finds most important.

Carlos is a master at drawing textures and grit, which makes him perfectly suited for war stories and spaghetti westerns. He's a bit atypical by comparison to the type of artist usually chosen for science fiction subjects, but in a way that's one of his strengths as well, that he brings a different sensibility to the art than might be expected from most artists. His work remains interesting because he brings a fusion of genres to it.

i kind of miss his painted work. 

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 April, 2017, 03:15:13 PM
i kind of miss his painted work.

Any examples you can post? I'm trying to think if I've seen this, or merely color painted over his penciled-and-inked pages. I'm sure it does exist, I'm just trying to remember where I've seen it.

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 April, 2017, 03:05:48 PMOn a side-note, I'd add Jock, despite his sadly short tenure, to the top whatever Dredd artists.

I'm not sure about that. I think the only way Jock could prove that is by illustrating a Wagner-penned 12-parter.

...

...

(Worth a try.)

Quote from: PsychoGoatee on 24 April, 2017, 09:39:23 PM


For example, I don't like Ron Smith's style, the way he draws faces etc, just to me looks uncool. I still respect his work though, Graveyard Shift is a classic etc, and he's really good, I'm just not into Ron's art style.

Smith I've liked more as I've got older - he's another artist (I realise in hindsight) who makes Mega-City one looks vast.

Quote from: JamesC on 25 April, 2017, 01:33:06 PM

Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 25 April, 2017, 12:44:03 PM

Quote from: Rogue Judge on 25 April, 2017, 01:40:08 AM

Quote from: Andy B on 25 April, 2017, 01:27:39 AM
1. Ezquerra
2. McMahon
3. Henry Flint
4. Ron Smith
5. Cam Kennedy

Excellent list! This sums it up for me as well, but not necessarily in that order...

Add a place for Colin Macneil and I think that would be just about anybody's top 6 of Dredd artists!

I'd move Kennedy up a bit and replace Flint with Dillon.
If it were a cover artists only list I'd make it Ezquerra, McMahon, Bolland, Robinson.

The big four will always be Ron Smith, Brian Bolland, Mick McMahon and Carlos Ezquerra.  Not necessarily in that order. They defined Dredd. I'd give the next place to Ian Gibson, especially his work in the early progs.

Quote from: positronic on 25 April, 2017, 03:27:37 PM

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 April, 2017, 03:15:13 PM
i kind of miss his painted work.

Any examples you can post? I'm trying to think if I've seen this, or merely color painted over his penciled-and-inked pages. I'm sure it does exist, I'm just trying to remember where I've seen it.

Well, I was referring to the painted ink drawings.  You can't have missed them.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_2D9SoIpXn8/VRUeE1MYVXI/AAAAAAAABY4/5gwz0Cg5KGs/s1600/death%2Bhorror.jpg)

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/d1/1c/44/d11c44f67a25acf5a056ee2e5a54b07d.jpg)

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 April, 2017, 09:22:50 AM
It's rather telling to read the letters pages recently in Mighty World of Marvel. Pretty much everyone is ripping into Bachalo's art, which is expressive, interesting, and gets across the weirdness of the magical layer hiding behind our own reality.

I don't particularly think of the Marvel house style as being 'realistic'.  I've also not seen any of Bachalo's artwork for quite some time (think Steampunk was the last thing I saw) so it's really about time I had a look next time I'm down the comic shop.

Marvel artwork always looked dated to me when I was younger.
In 80s Spider-Man comics the pedestrians all look like they're from the 70s (or even 60s) and then when you get to the 90s, they look like they're from the 80s!

Quote from: Smith on 25 April, 2017, 06:14:04 AM
For me,Ron Smith is the second definitive artist.He strikes a very good balance between realistic and cartoonish.

(http://i.imgur.com/xLLjkbT.png)

 :lol: JudgeJudi

Even Smiths Dredd agrees Carlos is King

Sorry for the comic sans...

Quote from: Tony Angelino on 25 April, 2017, 04:57:05 PM
The big four will always be Ron Smith, Brian Bolland, Mick McMahon and Carlos Ezquerra.  Not necessarily in that order. They defined Dredd.

I agree with that. My order would be Bolland first...then dunno lets call it a draw.

Quote from: Tony Angelino on 25 April, 2017, 04:57:05 PM
I'd give the next place to Ian Gibson, especially his work in the early progs.

I would put Gibson in a group with Brett Ewins*, Brendan McCarthy, Cam Kennedy, Steve Dillon, Cliff Robinson and John Higgins as "classic " Dredd artists after the big 4.

And I view that there is a modern "holy trinity" of Henry Flint, Colin MacNeil** and Ben Wilsher.

And of course, sitting proudly along side the modern holy trinity, as a guiding father figure if you like, we have....yeah you guessed it ....Carlos Ezquerra.

*And yes Brett actually drew very few episodes of Dredd and is probably better know for Anderson, but the stuff he did on the Day the Law Died with Brendan is just awesome (even though I can't tell which bits were Brett and which were Brendan :lol:)

**And yes #2 MacNeil has been around since the late 80's but he seems to draw loads of Dredd episodes these days

Quote from: Tony Angelino on 25 April, 2017, 04:57:05 PM
The big four will always be Ron Smith, Brian Bolland, Mick McMahon and Carlos Ezquerra.  Not necessarily in that order. They defined Dredd. I'd give the next place to Ian Gibson, especially his work in the early progs.

The thing keeping Bolland out of the top 5 for me is, he wasn't that good at drawing the City. Too often his Blocks just look like shoeboxes with windows drawn on. Obviously the guy's a genius and I'm sure he could do it... but he didn't. Maybe just not interested in drawing architecture, maybe didn't have time. (Or maybe I'm just wrong.)

As a cover artist, though, he's number 1. Those Eagle reprint covers...

For me, Carlos just has an incredible understanding of human form and the way it works. I'm not talking so much about simple proportion, more the way figures stand, how their weight distributes and the way they move in his work all seems very natural and dynamic. Even a fairly static, front on piece of two figures walking above has a sense of natural movement and the figures have poise and presence that can be hard to achieve and comes about through underpinning knowledge and talent.
I love John Burns' stuff- he's a great artist, vastly experienced and great with figure work, he's another one of my 2000ad favourites. But even he has the occasional stiff, awkward looking poses where it doesn't quite work.

Carlos' work just never gets old for me, I love his trademark 'untidiness', he's been my absolute favourite comic artist, since I first clapped eyes on Portrait of a Mutant. I love a lot of artists work a lot and for many varied and sometimes conflicting reasons; but I just love his more. :)

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 April, 2017, 05:30:13 PM

Quote from: positronic on 25 April, 2017, 03:27:37 PM

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 April, 2017, 03:15:13 PM
i kind of miss his painted work.

Any examples you can post? I'm trying to think if I've seen this, or merely color painted over his penciled-and-inked pages. I'm sure it does exist, I'm just trying to remember where I've seen it.

Well, I was referring to the painted ink drawings.  You can't have missed them.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_2D9SoIpXn8/VRUeE1MYVXI/AAAAAAAABY4/5gwz0Cg5KGs/s1600/death%2Bhorror.jpg)

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/d1/1c/44/d11c44f67a25acf5a056ee2e5a54b07d.jpg)

I think what I was trying to get at there (and I may not have been clear) is that I was thinking of pages in which Carlos himself clearly used a brush to paint the color over his original pencil lines, and thus is an integral part of the original art page.

In the first example you've shown, that seems like it could easily be the work of another artist (a colorist), working from a scanned copy of Carlos' penciled and inked original pages.

In the second example below it, it's harder to be certain. The color in that one looks more like it might well be on the original art page, although it's hard to be 100% sure. I would assume if the color is photographed from the original art page, then it's almost certainly the work of Carlos himself.

This is probably going to seem like a strange comparison to most people. When I look at Carlos Ezquerra's artwork, I am reminded of some of the best aspects of both Joe Kubert and Robert Crumb.

As for Ron Smith, well... he certainly drew a LOT of Judge Dredd. Somehow I never felt like he "fit in" with the other great Dredd artists, though (diverse though they may be). I think ultimately the most telling indictment of his work to me, was when I read in Thrill-Power Overload that he used to set himself a specific amount of time to work on each page, based on his page-rate from 2000 AD. When that time elapsed, he was done, regardless of what the page looked like at that point. Apparently it was a system that worked for him, in justifying his page-rate, but it seemed a bit mercenary to me, and hard for me to respect from the point of view of the-artist-as-craftsman.

Quote from: positronic on 26 April, 2017, 05:14:07 AMAs for Ron Smith, well... he certainly drew a LOT of Judge Dredd. Somehow I never felt like he "fit in" with the other great Dredd artists, though (diverse though they may be). I think ultimately the most telling indictment of his work to me, was when I read in Thrill-Power Overload that he used to set himself a specific amount of time to work on each page, based on his page-rate from 2000 AD. When that time elapsed, he was done, regardless of what the page looked like at that point. Apparently it was a system that worked for him, in justifying his page-rate, but it seemed a bit mercenary to me, and hard for me to respect from the point of view of the-artist-as-craftsman.

Hmmm. That will probably cause far more offence than the OP.

Ron Smith absolutely was a craftsman. He was making an honest living by producing something to order for a customer in a timely manner. The fact that he did this to a pretty consistently high standard just demonstrates he was a very good craftsman.

Was he a great artist as well as good craftsman? Well, the proof lies in the admiration people still have for his work long after he stopped crafting it.

Regards,

Robin

'Indictment of his work' ?!  :o
Sheesh.

Quote from: marko10174 on 24 April, 2017, 10:45:36 AMAfter reading Dark justice, I just thought to myself "oh man, could you imagine if all the Dredd stories looked like this?"

As nobody has really jumped in with two feet, I'll have a go: "Twelve weeks of that was boring enough, thanks very much."

Horses for courses, innit? I can see what it is that people admire about Staples art, but it's not really for me. Striving for some kind of photo "realism" is just as much of a stylistic abstraction as stick figure minimalism but, as with computer game art, I prefer things which are more obviously imaginitive [NB not intended as a dig, just struggled to express exactly what I meant there.]

On the other hand, Ezquerra wouldn't have been in my top ten when I was a kid in the 80s. I appreciate him a lot more now but, given the choice, I'd always take a Henry Flint Dredd.

Haters gonna hate.

More sacrilege!!! Don't start on Ron Smith now as well.......😭

It's not mercenary to have a time limit for your pages - the man has to eat! The draughtsmanship on those pages is incredible.

Quote from: Dog Deever on 26 April, 2017, 12:08:15 AM
For me, Carlos just has an incredible understanding of human form and the way it works. I'm not talking so much about simple proportion, more the way figures stand, how their weight distributes and the way they move in his work all seems very natural and dynamic. Even a fairly static, front on piece of two figures walking above has a sense of natural movement and the figures have poise and presence that can be hard to achieve and comes about through underpinning knowledge and talent.

I couldn't agree more Dog Deever.  It takes incredible talent to produce convincing weight and natural form. He's an absolute master at it. The fact that he makes it look so frustratingly effortless only increases his brilliance in my eyes.

Quote from: SIP on 26 April, 2017, 08:27:16 AM
More sacrilege!!! Don't start on Ron Smith now as well.......😭

It's not mercenary to have a time limit for your pages - the man has to eat! The draughtsmanship on those pages is incredible.

I was more astonished by the revelation that after a while, Smith more or less stopped pencilling and went straight into the pages with ink...!

Trying to stay out of this aesthetic willy-measuring ('mine's at least an inch more detailed than yours'), but have to strongly agree with the comments on Ezquerra's mastery of mass and pose - his figures (and vehicles) often seem like they'd fall out of the page if you gave it a slight shake: everything is just on the very edge of balance, the exact point of transition between potential and kinetic energies: it's why every panel is exciting, and believable, and leads you through the story.

And as for Ron Smith - how anyone can look at Judge Child, Black Plague, Sob Story, Shanty Town, Graveyard Shift and not just gawp open-mouthed at the insane genius of the man...

Conversely, if there was a dullness to Dark Justice, it wasn't anything to do with Staples' art, which really reached the pinnacle of the painted realism style. It's not usually my thing, but that was something special.

Quote from: positronic on 26 April, 2017, 05:14:07 AMI think ultimately the most telling indictment of his work to me, was when I read in Thrill-Power Overload that he used to set himself a specific amount of time to work on each page, based on his page-rate from 2000 AD. When that time elapsed, he was done, regardless of what the page looked like at that point. Apparently it was a system that worked for him, in justifying his page-rate, but it seemed a bit mercenary to me, and hard for me to respect from the point of view of the-artist-as-craftsman.

The fact that is true makes his level of artistry even more astonishing.

Ron Smith was doing Chronos Carnival when I first started reading the prog. It took a long time before I could disassociate him from that in my mind. I appreciate him more now, but he wouldn't be particularly near the top of my list of favourite Dredd artists.

Quote from: CalHab on 26 April, 2017, 09:06:48 AM
Ron Smith was doing Chronos Carnival when I first started reading the prog. It took a long time before I could disassociate him from that in my mind. I appreciate him more now, but he wouldn't be particularly near the top of my list of favourite Dredd artists.

Whereas i grew up with his Dredd. I miss him. Nobody did Mega-Citizens like him, and his pimply juves were as much an essential part of the city as McMahon's cactus-shaped blocks.

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 April, 2017, 09:16:48 AM

Quote from: CalHab on 26 April, 2017, 09:06:48 AM
Ron Smith was doing Chronos Carnival when I first started reading the prog. It took a long time before I could disassociate him from that in my mind. I appreciate him more now, but he wouldn't be particularly near the top of my list of favourite Dredd artists.

Whereas i grew up with his Dredd. I miss him. Nobody did Mega-Citizens like him, and his pimply juves were as much an essential part of the city as McMahon's cactus-shaped blocks.

Same. I started reading in the late 200s when there were crowds of Ron Smith muties and weirdo cits as far as the eye could see. Lovely stuff.

Carlos Ezquerra's art is like a range of red wines.
There's fine wine in there. There's a bit of table wine produced to order.
And there's some dusty bottles that few can afford to have.
But its always very good stuff.

If you're just a beer drinker that's ok but wine will come to you when your palette matures.

And Ron Smith is absinthe.

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 April, 2017, 09:03:57 AM

Quote from: positronic on 26 April, 2017, 05:14:07 AMI think ultimately the most telling indictment of his work to me, was when I read in Thrill-Power Overload that he used to set himself a specific amount of time to work on each page, based on his page-rate from 2000 AD. When that time elapsed, he was done, regardless of what the page looked like at that point. Apparently it was a system that worked for him, in justifying his page-rate, but it seemed a bit mercenary to me, and hard for me to respect from the point of view of the-artist-as-craftsman.

The fact that is true makes his level of artistry even more astonishing.

It depends on how you look at it, I guess. All I can see is an employee who cared more about making sure he got his calculated hourly wage, than an artist who cared more about what his work looked like in print -- it just seems more like a factory-worker mindset. His choice, of course. I don't know what kind of bills he had to pay every month.

While I'm staying well away from the central debate here, as its really is hard to argue against an individual's preference for one artist over another, I think its worth saying a couple of things about Ron Smith.

That he choose (by his admission) to time the amount of time he took on a page to ensure the page rate he got is neither here nor there. Why should an artist, as anyone else, not seek a decent rate for his or her work. Why is creating a system to make sure he got when he believed his time was worth something open to discussion.

Regardless of what individuals may think about his work its clear that his quality was never compromised as editors kept giving him plenty of paid work. The subjective appeal of that is for the individual to decide. His method to ensure he paid his mortgage and got what he felt his work was worth is neither here nor there. It could be said that it speaks to a professionalism that other artists have lacked and ensured he delivered on time AND the editors and people who paid him speak to the professional standard of that work.

For me personally the quality of his work was best described by I think it was Supersurfer many moons ago comparing him to Jack Kirby. He didn't get him back in the day by as he aged he (Supersurfer) really began to appreciate quite how brilliant he was. That's defo my take. I adore his work now in a way I didn't in the past - though as others have said I was always aware that he drew the citizens of Mega City One with more character than anyone else.

Quote from: Robin Low on 26 April, 2017, 07:25:16 AM

Quote from: positronic on 26 April, 2017, 05:14:07 AMAs for Ron Smith, well... he certainly drew a LOT of Judge Dredd. Somehow I never felt like he "fit in" with the other great Dredd artists, though (diverse though they may be). I think ultimately the most telling indictment of his work to me, was when I read in Thrill-Power Overload that he used to set himself a specific amount of time to work on each page, based on his page-rate from 2000 AD. When that time elapsed, he was done, regardless of what the page looked like at that point. Apparently it was a system that worked for him, in justifying his page-rate, but it seemed a bit mercenary to me, and hard for me to respect from the point of view of the-artist-as-craftsman.

Hmmm. That will probably cause far more offence than the OP.

Ron Smith absolutely was a craftsman. He was making an honest living by producing something to order for a customer in a timely manner. The fact that he did this to a pretty consistently high standard just demonstrates he was a very good craftsman.

Was he a great artist as well as good craftsman? Well, the proof lies in the admiration people still have for his work long after he stopped crafting it.

Well, perhaps what I felt odd about it is that this information was volunteered by Ron Smith when interviewed in regards to his work for 2000 AD. It's not like something most artists would have felt necessary to bring up, and he could very well have kept that aspect to himself. It just seemed like a very strange sort of attitude to take, considering that he knew that he was being interviewed and what he said for the record would be read by his fans as well as his non-fans. Almost as if he was making a point that "it was just work, that's all".

Positronic- I have to disagree completely with you here. The working method employed by Ron Smith is genius. That he was able to make it work for him for so many years is a testament to both his artistic skill and his storytelling genius.

Many artists these days would do well to learn from the life experiences of these giants of commercial art.

If you didn't like Ron Smith's work, fair enough. But I'm struggling to see why it makes a difference that he have himself time limits to do it.
I work as a commercial artist myself - when you're working to a brief with a deadline, you have to get the job done. Ron Smith was a comic illustrator, not some independently rich Bohemian lounging about till the muse struck. He had bills to pay, just like the rest of us.

Quote from: Bolt-01 on 26 April, 2017, 03:07:53 PM
Positronic- I have to disagree completely with you here. The working method employed by Ron Smith is genius. That he was able to make it work for him for so many years is a testament to both his artistic skill and his storytelling genius.

Many artists these days would do well to learn from the life experiences of these giants of commercial art.

I'm definitely fighting with Bolt Block on this one.

Ron's art never appeared rushed and it says much about his talent and professionalism that he know how long he could spend on a page without them looking like he was just churning the stuff out.  He definitely wasn't one of my favourite artists as a kid but these days I rate him right up there with the very best of 'em.

I have never looked at a Ron Smith page and thought it wasn't finished.

If one can't tell the difference what difference does it make how he does it?

And indeed without knowing more details I don't think one can say it isn't a good approach.

For all we know he might have been easily able to compete the core of a page (and I would suggest the evidence is that that is the case) and he then used the additional time to add in little extras but put a cap on it - as in "enough is enough".

Also some people tend to work better when there is a deadline. It stops you faffing about and makes you get on with. Better that than endless prevaricating over it.

Anyway I'll judge it in the end results and they have always looked mighty fine to me.

Yeah,Im with the majority here.His work process doesn't affect the final result.
You can draw with you feet,as long as your good at it.

Quote from: positronic on 26 April, 2017, 01:10:02 PMWell, perhaps what I felt odd about it is that this information was volunteered by Ron Smith when interviewed in regards to his work for 2000 AD. It's not like something most artists would have felt necessary to bring up, and he could very well have kept that aspect to himself. It just seemed like a very strange sort of attitude to take, considering that he knew that he was being interviewed and what he said for the record would be read by his fans as well as his non-fans. Almost as if he was making a point that "it was just work, that's all".

I think it was just an example of on honest man giving an insight into the realities of producing art in a commercial environment. It's practical advice for any young artist who wants to get out of the garret and put down a deposit on a mortgage.

Regards,

Robin

I'm guessing all artists eventually find a way to finish a page to a set time, with no loss in quality, than when they first started.
As they are not being paid a million quid per page, I guess money and time does - understandably - factor into the equation.

I have personally heard many artists talk about this. Same with writers - when asked by fans about a particular cherished story - have indeed said 'We'll I just made that one up on the spot, really. Just a bit of fun. No deeper meaning to it'.

They can talk openly about this, because as adults we can understand, or relate to, the process more, than we could as kids. If the story and the art is great, it matters not how it was created, really.

Ron's first published comic work was in the late 40s/early 50s wasn't it? When did he abandon pencils? 70s? Early 80s?

Quote from: Spikes on 26 April, 2017, 04:52:53 PM
Ron's first published comic work was in the late 40s/early 50s wasn't it? When did he abandon pencils? 70s? Early 80s?

I can't recall which interview I read it in, but it was definitely during his time on 2000AD — he said something about laying down a few 'gesture' lines (presumably a call-back to his origins in animation) and then basically going straight at each panel in ink.

Yes, thinking about it, I recall it being said it was quite late on in his career as well.

Not an easy trick to pull off I'd imagine, even with talent and decades of experience under your belt.
But a testament to his skill, that we are having to try to figure out a date for when he stopped.

I think we are very lucky to have had artists like Ron and Carlos work on Judge Dredd and comics in general. Never mind being Dredd artists they would both be in my top 5 artists. Their art brings back a lot of memories.

A pity DC Thomson don't reprint a lot of their earlier stuff because Ron did a lot of great work for them in comics like Warlord and the Hotspur and I think a lot of the younger generation of readers would really like them.

Quote from: positronic on 26 April, 2017, 12:55:25 PMIt depends on how you look at it, I guess. All I can see is an employee who cared more about making sure he got his calculated hourly wage, than an artist who cared more about what his work looked like in print -- it just seems more like a factory-worker mindset. His choice, of course. I don't know what kind of bills he had to pay every month.

If the art was crap or sub-par you might have a point – but it isn't. I see him as someone who mastered his craft a long time ago to a very high standard and was disciplined and confident enough to know what he could respectably achieve in a set time. We also don't know how long his days actually were before the buzzer went off compared to those of other artists.

We are so lucky that 2000AD got so many amazing artists! And writers too!

There's a lovely interview with Ron in one of the ECBT2000AD podcasts. Well worth Googling out.

I wonder what it was that, for so many of us who admire Ron's work so much now, put us off when we were younger...

I'm definitely in the camp that marvels at how good his work is now but really didn't appreciate it back then.

He's the king of the weird and wonderful Mega Citizens. So many of the memorable cits are Ron's, Otto Sump, Citizen Snork (brilliant!), Dave the Orang-Utan and his mate, the Blobs, Chopper and the Phantom and the League of  Fatties...

These and others really define Dredd's world for me. 

The citizens these days are a bit of a miserable lot (although, you can't really blame them I suppose..)   

Yup, when I think of the citizenry of Dredd's world (Cursed Earth included) it's Ron Smith's work I'm thinking of. But I also adore his OTT action shots, and his animals are amazing (even his idiosyncratic dinos). I'd say his buildings and vehicle designs are the only bits I don't care for: and maybe Anderson's hair, which never looked right.  The Agros and Black Plague sequences are probably my favourite widescreen Dredds, just incredible showcases for Ron's strengths.

While Ron was drawing for the weekly prog he was also knocking out several Daily Star strips every week for several years so I'd say his days were fairly packed.

Genuinely loved Ron's art as soon as I saw it (maybe I'm a connoisseur  :) ). His colour double-page spreads of Dredd at the start of the 80's cuddled my eyes like nothing else. Then Otto Sump, Unamerican Graffiti and that was that. His three-quarter Dredd-head is frankly the default one for me. Carlos is great too but when he got back to Dredd for the 'War, his Dredd was never as...  heroic (?) as Ron's.

Funny the way this 'Carlos' thread has meandered.

The Daily Dredd collection would be an ideal purchase for those unfamiliar with his craftsmanship.

Remember how he condensed the full Apocalypse War tale into less than a dozen panels, and it was still a thrilling read?

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 April, 2017, 03:26:09 PM
If you didn't like Ron Smith's work, fair enough. But I'm struggling to see why it makes a difference that he have himself time limits to do it.
I work as a commercial artist myself - when you're working to a brief with a deadline, you have to get the job done. Ron Smith was a comic illustrator, not some independently rich Bohemian lounging about till the muse struck. He had bills to pay, just like the rest of us.

I didn't spend a lot of time thinking about Smith's work and had no particular axe to grind with him prior to having read his own comments about in Thrill-Power Overload. Smith was one of the list of regular or main Dredd artists in the first decade of 2000 AD. We all have our own rankings of which ones we prefer over others, so everyone's list is bound to have someone's name gravitate downwards below other artists' names who they prefer, and who they personally rank higher. My subjective impression (whether true or not) at the time of being exposed to his work was that Smith seemed perhaps some years older than many of the other Dredd artists, and that his work appeared to me to be somewhat less 'contemporary' for the times by comparison. Purely a subjective opinion. Surely I'm allowed that.

I only really thought lesser of him as an artist when he made those comments about his working method, since he knew full well they'd be read by his fans. It made me think he was sort of biting the hand that feeds. I can't help feeling that way about it.

I don't believe Ron Smith was 'biting the hand that feeds'.
Again, sheesh.

I could understand that if he left the work half done, but I doubt that's what he meant. Only that an artist (comic or otherwise) can often see more that they'd like to add if time allows, but at some point they have to draw a line under it (so to speak) and move on.

That doesn't mean that the work done does not fit the specification.

Quote from: Fungus on 27 April, 2017, 12:48:36 AM
I don't believe Ron Smith was 'biting the hand that feeds'.
Again, sheesh.

Of course all commercial artists have deadlines, and there's a point at which any one of them needs to declare the page as finished. That's understood.

Why in the world Smith should choose to focus on the time demands of the work as opposed to any other aspect (that presumably his fans would be more interested in focusing on) baffled me. He's making a distinct choice to not discuss the artistic aspects of his work, but purely the timeclock-punching involved from his perspective. It just seemed like a strange response to an interviewer with curiosity regarding the work under consideration, to be preserved for the edification of the magazine's history.

Quote from: Colin YNWA on 26 April, 2017, 01:07:19 PM
he drew the citizens of Mega City One with more character than anyone else.

I'm just re-reading Citizen Snork for the Nth time - such a great story and wonderful art - my introduction to Rons work way back when and he drew some fabulous big noses!  :)

Quote from: positronic on 27 April, 2017, 01:02:12 AM
Of course all commercial artists have deadlines, and there's a point at which any one of them needs to declare the page as finished. That's understood.

Why in the world Smith should choose to focus on the time demands of the work as opposed to any other aspect (that presumably his fans would be more interested in focusing on) baffled me. He's making a distinct choice to not discuss the artistic aspects of his work, but purely the timeclock-punching involved from his perspective. It just seemed like a strange response to an interviewer with curiosity regarding the work under consideration, to be preserved for the edification of the magazine's history.

Ron Smith is from a different generation - a modest old gentleman who flew Spitfires during World War II. He's  probably surprised people admire and are so interested in work that was considered throwaway and ephemeral back in the day. It's a testament to how great his work still is that people rate him so highly, out of so many other artists, decades later.

"Focus on the time demands of the work" ? What?!!!
I remember it was a multi-episode, interesting interview with a well-respected artist.
The time-keeping aspect is a modest, illuminating, side-bar. Can you see that?

Quote from: Fungus on 27 April, 2017, 01:24:40 AM
"Focus on the time demands of the work" ? What?!!!
I remember it was a multi-episode, interesting interview with a well-respected artist.
The time-keeping aspect is a modest, illuminating, side-bar. Can you see that?

I'd have to re-check the book for his other comments. (I'm not sure if the book has an index, that would certainly make it easier). My initial impression was that those comments were the ones that stuck in my mind as what he had say to the interviewer in summarizing memories of his work on Dredd.

The quotes may or may not have been lifted from a lengthier interview which I never read, but whether he had other comments (extracted in Thrill-Power Overload) on things which just didn't register a strong impression one way or the other, that's the characterization of his attitude towards the work which I was left with, not a "side-bar", and one which I didn't find illuminating at all, at least not in any positive way.

Quote from: Spikes on 26 April, 2017, 11:10:43 PM
The Daily Dredd collection would be an ideal purchase for those unfamiliar with his craftsmanship.

Remember how he condensed the full Apocalypse War tale into less than a dozen panels, and it was still a thrilling read?

Quote from: positronic on 27 April, 2017, 04:57:18 AMThe quotes may or may not have been lifted from a lengthier interview which I never read

Whatever the case, it would have been extracted from a longer recorded interview done by the writer, and all such comments are therefore somewhat out of context, even when framed within the narrative the writer is putting forward. This is something I've always found tricky myself – you get 5,000 words of top-notch interview and have a word count of a fifth of that. Nuance gets cut. Things get removed. Everything is condensed.

As noted, I suspect the comments were about the reality of the craft – the speed in which people have to work to get by – and balancing quality with the time available. I don't think there's any indication from Smith's work that he abandoned pages half-done – more that he was able to optimise his time carefully to create the best job within the time available.

Something went wrong,so my previous response didnt show up.Anyway,long story short,Daily Dredds are pretty good.

Quote from: marko10174 on 24 April, 2017, 10:45:36 AM

I don't know why I wrote CQ instead of CE, I did have a few glasses of wine last night so that might explain the error. My apologies, no disrespect intended. Thing is, I love the original Strontium dog run, and that's all Carlos Ezquerra,

Stevie can kindof grok where you are coming from, Marko.

Not being a huge Dredd fan at the time* this squaxx resented The Apocalypse War** for keeping Strontium Dog out of the prog.

Oh sweet folly of youth!


*Despite reading Tooth since Prog 6, it wasn't until Beyond The Wall in the 1986 Sci F Special that Stevie finally got this ludicrously dressed cop with the silly name.

**aka the second greatest war comic of all time.

Quote from: positronic on 27 April, 2017, 12:28:04 AMMy subjective impression (whether true or not) at the time of being exposed to his work was that Smith seemed perhaps some years older than many of the other Dredd artists, and that his work appeared to me to be somewhat less 'contemporary' for the times by comparison. Purely a subjective opinion. Surely I'm allowed that.

Of course you're allowed to have an opinion.  It's only about a comic art style; it's not like you're advocating genocide.  I just disagree with you about the methods - personally I wish I was skilled enough to be able to work to the kind of deadlines Ron used to set himself.

Quote from: positronic on 27 April, 2017, 01:02:12 AM


Why in the world Smith should choose to focus on the time demands of the work as opposed to any other aspect (that presumably his fans would be more interested in focusing on) baffled me. He's making a distinct choice to not discuss the artistic aspects of his work, but purely the timeclock-punching involved from his perspective. It just seemed like a strange response to an interviewer with curiosity regarding the work under consideration, to be preserved for the edification of the magazine's history.

This is no different from many of the marvel and DC creators of the same generation - being a commercial artist is a job and you treat it like a job. Although he's a rather unpopular figure, his attitude is no different to that of say John Byrne.

I think I need to stay away from this thread for the sake of my blood pressure. Artistic preference and subjectivity I understand, but the comments that aren't based on simple taste alone are really irritating me.

Deep breaths......

Quote from: positronic on 27 April, 2017, 01:02:12 AM
It just seemed like a strange response to an interviewer with curiosity regarding the work under consideration, to be preserved for the edification of the magazine's history.

But it's an honest and entirely understandable response. I can only imagine Ron wasn't earning a ton of money from his comic work. To make a living he would have needed to maintain a level of output. You would need another wage or some form of financial security to be able to afford to spend as long as you liked on a page.

The thing is, his pages are flawless......I bet most artists wish they could produce work of that quality AND maintain a deadline.

Are we to expect a comic artist to live in poverty so that he can spend as long on a page as perfection takes for the glory of the comic and it's readers? Or can the man be allowed to earn an adequate living and also hopefully spend some time with his family too?

I couldn't say what passes for shop talk among comic artists, but you'd think they'd spare the fans (who else is going to be reading Thrill-Power Overload?) the brass tacks of boiling "the art of comics" down to a fine accounting of X#-pounds per hour. I've read plenty of interviews, and I've heard artists gripe about pay rates, deadlines, etc. Not all of them were happy with the jobs they got assigned or the characters or genres they were drawing, and some of them hated editors with a burning passion, but they carried on, because they were being paid for what they loved doing.

I didn't get any sense of that at all from Smith's comments.  I get the sense that Smith had no special attachment to the work itself. It was almost as if the breakdown of accounting would have had him painting signs, if it turned out he could have gotten a better hourly rate for it. It just really offended me -- not that he can't do whatever he likes, but is that the kind of thing comic fans really want to read in an artist's interview? ... 'I'm only in it for the money' ? If that's the way you really feel, have the decency to keep it to yourself.

I remember a John Wagner interview years ago where he said that if he had the money to retire, 'comics would not see me for dust, man.'  I'm glad he, and Ron, needed the money.

I'm with Ron Smith block.

Quote from: positronic on 27 April, 2017, 04:39:51 PM
... 'I'm only in it for the money' ? If that's the way you really feel, have the decency to keep it to yourself.

I think you may well be in a minority with that opinion.

I love Ron Smith's Dredd, he always gave it a fun factor other artists couldn't. He and Carlos are chalk and cheese style wise, but Carlos IS king and I turned into a total fanboy at the 40th con - didn't happen with anyone else.

I find when I try to write 200AD scripts in my mind is a particular artists style when I visualize what I want to see from the artist (even though they tend to improve on my ideas). When I was writing some Dredd recently I kept imagining Ron Smith art, with one Steve Dillon.

Carlos has his own style, like any great comic artist should, and he's kept that style constant for over 40 years now. A master storyteller and a great man.

Nuff said

Fans eh? What are they like?

It's not enough for our idols to create the TV shows, the films, the books or the comics we love or to play for the team we love, or play the sport we love, they have to love them as well (?).

Well sorry reality check - the fans by definition do love whatever it is they are a fan of. The creators or players don't necessarily. By definition it is a job for those doing it professionally. Loving it is an optional extra. Some love it, some don't.

A few examples all by their own admission: Andre Agassi hated tennis, Patrick Stewart thought Star Trek was a load of old nonsense, Carrie Fisher and Harrision Ford thought Star Wars was silly when filming the original film. Most Premier League footballers aren't fans of the team they play for and a lot would go elsewhere if they could get more money and / or a better chance of winning a trophy.

Nothing wrong with any of that in my book. We care but have no right to expect them to. Do their best effort yes, but be a fan as well...it's too much to ask for.

Coming back to Ron Smith, I don't see anything that has been posted in this thread so far that says he didn't love comics ( it's actually not clear either way) just that he adopted a certain method to make sure he got his head down and produced the work he was being paid for.

Nothing wrong with that either.

Quote from: positronic on 27 April, 2017, 04:39:51 PM
If that's the way you really feel, have the decency to keep it to yourself.

What? Like your ridiculous opinion here, perhaps?

There was a long and hugely entertaining interview with Smith in the Megazine a while back that in no way suggested disdain for the material and part of being a professional artist is delivering the work on time. If you know when the work is due and how many pages the job is, then you know how many hours you can spend on a page if you want to deliver. You also need to assign a sensible cash value to your time in order to not starve.

As others have noted, Smith's pages never looked half-finished, so I don't believe that he literally downed tools on a page the second the allotted time was up, but rather that he was simply expressing the essential advice of "finished, not perfect" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRtV-ugIT0k) in slightly different terms.

Look: I work to a timer. I know how much work I need to do to make a living, and I know how long I want to spend on a book without having to pull all-nighters and sacrifice my quality of life. Let's call it twenty minutes (not including prep time, which is a separate process) per page.

Does that mean that I rush a page to get it done in twenty minutes? No. Does it mean that mean I stop work when I hit twenty minutes? No. What the timer does mean is that I'm conscious of how much time I'm spending on the work. If a page takes thirty minutes, that's what it takes, but the timer makes me conscious that I'm now off-schedule so, when I then get a DPS with one narrative caption and a sound effect that only takes ten minutes, rather than thinking 'Easy!' and faffing about on Facebook for a few minutes, I think 'Great, back on track!' and get on with the next page.

It's called being a professional.

As the person who wrote the multi-part interview in the Megazine and had the extraordinary privilege to have met Ron several times, I can confirm these comments are being taken wildly - nay, egregiously - out of context.

Those interviews prove beyond doubt that Ron loved his work, gained a great delight from it, and has always been astonished that he is held in such high regard by fans. But this never stopped him being upfront that it was his job. His candor and honesty has always struck me as being refreshing.

As someone who sat in Ron's living room and saw him get tearful with joy over his time at 2000 AD, don't ever tell me he didn't love his work.

Quote from: Molch-R on 27 April, 2017, 05:39:39 PM

'Nuff said. Move along.

Quote from: Bolt-01 on 27 April, 2017, 05:42:32 PM
Move along.

Pausing only briefly to nod sagely at the Molchinator's deployment of the word 'nay', however. :-)

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 27 April, 2017, 05:51:33 PM
Pausing only briefly to nod sagely at the Molchinator's deployment of the word 'nay', however. :-)

I'm between musters so have to keep in character.

Amen!

Now I can stop looking at this angst inducing thread.

Thank you, Mike.

Well said, Molch.

Me personally, I just think the 2000AD artists from the late 70s to late 90s, that refused to use digital, computer based time saving techniques in their work, clearly hate comic book fans.

Nah, it was just you they hated.  They told me.

Quote from: positronic on 27 April, 2017, 04:39:51 PM
If that's the way you really feel, have the decency to keep it to yourself.

take a bit of your own advice

What I've always personally loved about tooth is the varied but quality artwork.  Personally I'm a massive fan of the old greats; Dillon, Bolland, Ezquerra, McMahon, Bellardinelli, Redondo, Kennedy, Gibbons, Wilson, Gibson ... but over the years the sheer variety has helped evolve my tastes.  Ron Smith is an artist that I've never been fussed on.  I can't quite put my finger on why.  Perhaps it's just the strips that he has done over the years outside of the tooth that I've come to associate him with.  Weird I know!  Then again, I like Haribo's and Cadbury's chocolate together so who am I to talk?

Quote from: Molch-R on 27 April, 2017, 05:39:39 PM
As the person who wrote the multi-part interview in the Megazine and had the extraordinary privilege to have met Ron several times, I can confirm these comments are being taken wildly - nay, egregiously - out of context.

That's fair. Perhaps I should be criticizing the editor of Thrill-Power Overload for choosing to print that quote out of context of the rest of a lengthy interview, which would have presented a more balanced picture. Since he didn't choose to print any counterbalancing comments in which Mr. Smith warmly expressed his appreciation of the medium or the fans of his work, without any context it tends to paint him in a negative light.

Then again, it would probably be fair to characterize TPO as somewhat of a 'warts and all' Mega-City Babylon approach to the 2000 AD history, not afraid to air the dirty laundry behind-the-scenes. For an authorized company history, that's pretty unusual, but when we get to the point where Rebellion acquired ownership of 2000 AD, things become substantially more subdued and reserved. That may or may not be truly reflective of a less-turbulent period in the magazine's history, or it may reflect the point at which David Bishop's editorial choices of whom to quote, about what, were no longer a factor.

At any rate, there's nothing to be lost in digging up dirt on tempestuous relations with former editors or publishers, and it makes for more interesting reading than the kind of carefully-vetted and tidied-up-politely histories of other comics companies. But it also does make me wonder if Bishop chose to highlight that quote of Ron Smith's specifically because it sounded so "just business; it-was-all-about-the-money", if he couldn't find anything else the least bit provocative. I did notice just a few instances in the book of creators or editors who "declined to be interviewed for this book".

I hasten to point out that I refer here to the newly-updated (by Karl Stock, with David Bishop's blessing, but without his actual participation) 2017 edition of Thrill-Power Overload. I haven't seen the prior edition from eight years earlier, so I couldn't say what might have been left out of the new edition that may have been in the previous edition, but the new expanded version contains a substantial amount of new text, including of course, all of the events covered since the first edition was written.

Quote from: positronic on 28 April, 2017, 07:51:55 PMAs for Ron Smith, well... he certainly drew a LOT of Judge Dredd. Somehow I never felt like he "fit in" with the other great Dredd artists, though (diverse though they may be). I think ultimately the most telling indictment of his work to me, was when I read in Thrill-Power Overload that he used to set himself a specific amount of time to work on each page, based on his page-rate from 2000 AD. When that time elapsed, he was done, regardless of what the page looked like at that point.

Quote from: positronic on 28 April, 2017, 07:51:55 PM
Perhaps I should be criticizing the editor of Thrill-Power Overload for choosing to print that quote out of context of the rest of a lengthy interview, which would have presented a more balanced picture. Since he didn't choose to print any counterbalancing comments in which Mr. Smith warmly expressed his appreciation of the medium or the fans of his work, without any context it tends to paint him in a negative light....it sounded so "just business; it-was-all-about-the-money", if he couldn't find anything else the least bit provocative. I did notice just a few instances in the book of creators or editors who "declined to be interviewed for this book".

Is it not really the case that Ron Smith's aesthetic is just not to your liking –perfectly fine– and that Ron's comment on his working method –even when in his own words– is just a modest anecdote rather than a valid criticism of the quality of his craftmanship as evident on the printed page?

DAMN! I looked at the thread again.......😭

FWIW when I mentioned the multi-part Ron interview a few pages back it obviously wasn't referencing TPO or Molch-R's interview, but the ECBT interview from *ages* ago. I'm sure that ran to 2 or 3 episodes, and he came across as a modest gent. The timer came up there too.
If TPO mentions the timer in isolation, you'd have to be pretty silly - and frankly blind - to think Ron wasn't devoted to his art.

Ron's complete dedication to his artwork shines through in absolutely every panel of Dredd I have ever seen him draw.

Why am I still looking at this thread?
Complaining about artists setting themselves time limits is up there with asking artists to work for 'exposure'.  It's the real world, and people have bills to pay.

Did you know that some artists use pencil sharpeners instead of a sharp knife? Satan-sucking uber-bastards!

It's not just me then? This is an infuriating thread isn't it?

As a veteran of the Political Thread I'd have to say, no, not really. It's just mildly irritating, like a pair of underpants with knackered elastic.

Oddly, in all the long years that I've been here.....this one has wound me up.

There is always the possibility that we've been feeding elaborate trolls, of course...

In real life I've yet to meet anyone who produces anything of substance who doesn't do it to a deadline, self-imposed or otherwise. It's all very well sitting there polishing your creation and waiting for the muse to give you a tug, but the folk who deliver the goods deliver the goods.

Is it wrong that maligning my childhood artistic heroes does have more impact on me than the the political thread?

Wrong? No. Healthy? Without a doubt!

Each passing day makes me want to give up on politics more and more, it just gets downright depressing.


BUT.....I still have Carlos and Ron 😊

And Mick, king of them all. Thankfully this thread hasn't had a go at him (yet), else I think I would just call it a day!

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 April, 2017, 10:50:40 PM
There is always the possibility that we've been feeding elaborate trolls, of course...

We are.

Well if that's the case, ye don't kill trolls by ignoring them. Ye have to pity them. Trolls can't stand you feeling sorry fra them

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 28 April, 2017, 08:36:14 PM

Quote from: positronic on 28 April, 2017, 07:51:55 PMAs for Ron Smith, well... he certainly drew a LOT of Judge Dredd. Somehow I never felt like he "fit in" with the other great Dredd artists, though (diverse though they may be). I think ultimately the most telling indictment of his work to me, was when I read in Thrill-Power Overload that he used to set himself a specific amount of time to work on each page, based on his page-rate from 2000 AD. When that time elapsed, he was done, regardless of what the page looked like at that point.

Quote from: positronic on 28 April, 2017, 07:51:55 PM
Perhaps I should be criticizing the editor of Thrill-Power Overload for choosing to print that quote out of context of the rest of a lengthy interview, which would have presented a more balanced picture. Since he didn't choose to print any counterbalancing comments in which Mr. Smith warmly expressed his appreciation of the medium or the fans of his work, without any context it tends to paint him in a negative light....it sounded so "just business; it-was-all-about-the-money", if he couldn't find anything else the least bit provocative. I did notice just a few instances in the book of creators or editors who "declined to be interviewed for this book".

Is it not really the case that Ron Smith's aesthetic is just not to your liking –perfectly fine– and that Ron's comment on his working method –even when in his own words– is just a modest anecdote rather than a valid criticism of the quality of his craftmanship as evident on the printed page?

What you get in Thrill-Power Overload is a history of 2000 AD the comic. It's a string of events, representing the highlights and lowlights, in which chunks of quotations are spread out and peppered through the book as they are relevant to the creation of new strips, characters, significant stories, and behind-the-scene insider information that relates to the development and growth of 2000 AD. Some creators get quoted a lot more than others (and the history tends to favor quotes from writers, and 2000 AD editors). None of the quotes by any individual, even taken together, represents a balanced profile of the person involved in the history of 2000 AD, because those quotes are selective, relative to what David Bishop thought were important events in the development and history of 2000 AD, or comments he thought illuminated some particular aspect. Choosing to highlight that particular anecdote of Ron Smith's presents him as a sort of hard-nosed, all-business Mr. Scrooge, because it doesn't say anything about what he thought about the characters, stories, people he worked with, or indeed even how he felt about the actual creation of the comics, or his own work. Taken by itself without any of the things I mention, it would make him seem like he was just knocking the stuff out, not particularly caring about any aspect other than making the deadlines and satisfying the editor and publisher.

Quote from: Mister Pops on 29 April, 2017, 12:44:08 AM
Well if that's the case, ye don't kill trolls by ignoring them. Ye have to pity them. Trolls can't stand you feeling sorry fra them

And all this time I thought fire did the job...

Quote from: Smith on 29 April, 2017, 05:34:46 AM

Quote from: Mister Pops on 29 April, 2017, 12:44:08 AM
Well if that's the case, ye don't kill trolls by ignoring them. Ye have to pity them. Trolls can't stand you feeling sorry fra them

And all this time I thought fire did the job...

Nah, that just aggravates them. The best thing is to keep them chatting until the sun comes up.
(Joking aside, I don't think 'troll' is correct in this case. I wish we'd move on now, through.)

Nah, definitely not trollery of any kind. Just different (and completely wrong) opinions.

Quote from: TordelBack on 29 April, 2017, 10:04:39 AM
Nah, definitely not trollery of any kind. Just different (and completely wrong) opinions.

Opinions aren't facts, and so they aren't subject to right or wrong by definition. Such as whether someone enjoys something or doesn't, or receives an impression gleaned from reading a quotation that might have appeared differently to another reader who read the same quote, but whose frame of reference or background context was different. Opinions are subjective, not objective.

Regurgitating the dictionary is just a hopeless way to approach the Turing Test.

If you don't think opinions can be objectively wrong, I don't know what you must make of humanity.

I say that opinions are not like facts in that they are subject to disagreement, and to change or revision.

I revised my first opinion related to the Ron Smith quote extracted in Thrill-Power Overload in acknowledgement of the existence of a larger body of interviews which presents a different overall picture of Ron Smith than that isolated anecdote does by itself.

Ron also used to draw posters for the BBC's Antiques Roadshow. In my opinion, the assumed fact that spending his time on these posters restricted the amount of Twoothy time available to him means that the BBC is evil and utterly corrosive to comicological creativity.

The BBC, therefore, must be destroyed.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2017, 10:53:33 AM
Ron also used to draw posters for the BBC's Antiques Roadshow. In my opinion, the assumed fact that spending his time on these posters restricted the amount of Twoothy time available to him means that the BBC is evil and utterly corrosive to comicological creativity.

The BBC, therefore, must be destroyed.

I'll go along with that, despite never having watched the show, based on the underlying theory that anything that takes time away from creating or reading comics is automatically somehow less good.

There is a reason I try to avoid internet arguments.In a persons life,there is maybe 5-6 people that can actually influence his/her opinion.Stranger on the internet is not one of them.

S'right.

I've been reading this thread from the start and it's like watching a car crash.

I thought it started ok - if you don't like a style then fair enough.  It only got silly over the last few pages.

I'd agree with that - but it's the kind of comedy car crash caused by ice, mud or slippy grass mixed with general buffoonery that you get on You've Been Framed with a laughter track rather than the real-life, blood and snot everywhere, sweeping up the fingers kind of car crash you get on the M62. It's the kind of car crash you can't take seriously.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2017, 11:27:43 AM
rather than the real-life, blood and snot everywhere, sweeping up the fingers kind of car crash you get on the M62.

I think we both know which thread that describes.  ;)

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 April, 2017, 11:40:10 AM

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2017, 11:27:43 AM
rather than the real-life, blood and snot everywhere, sweeping up the fingers kind of car crash you get on the M62.

I think we both know which thread that describes.  ;)

Ahh the Underware [sic] thread. How I miss it, even though (or perhaps because) it too was objectively (or objectifyingly) wrong.

Quote from: Smith on 29 April, 2017, 10:59:53 AM
There is a reason I try to avoid internet arguments.In a persons life,there is maybe 5-6 people that can actually influence his/her opinion.Stranger on the internet is not one of them.

You're entitled to that opinion. In my experience it may not always hold true.

Also, I miss Roger. He'd be all over this thread like a collapsed prostate.

Quote from: positronic on 29 April, 2017, 11:45:25 AM

Quote from: Smith on 29 April, 2017, 10:59:53 AM
There is a reason I try to avoid internet arguments.In a persons life,there is maybe 5-6 people that can actually influence his/her opinion.Stranger on the internet is not one of them.

You're entitled to that opinion. In my experience it may not always hold true.

I rest my case.

Quote from: Smith on 29 April, 2017, 12:05:26 PM

Quote from: positronic on 29 April, 2017, 11:45:25 AM

Quote from: Smith on 29 April, 2017, 10:59:53 AM
There is a reason I try to avoid internet arguments.In a persons life,there is maybe 5-6 people that can actually influence his/her opinion.Stranger on the internet is not one of them.

You're entitled to that opinion. In my experience it may not always hold true.

I rest my case.

I think the key word here is "always". I was influenced to change my opinion of what that Thrill-Power Overload quote represented in regards to Ron Smith's attitude towards his work, so I rest my case.

Yeah,whatever,you win.Im too tired to read 50000 words essay you might write if this discussion continues.

Quote from: Smith on 29 April, 2017, 01:33:18 PM
Yeah,whatever,you win.Im too tired to read 50000 words essay you might write if this discussion continues.

If all you want to write is a sentence or two of sarcasm or being confrontational or reactionary, you're unlikely to influence anyone on the internet. So your rule about influencing opinions is probably true for you. Molch-R didn't do that in his post, which caused me to reconsider the Ron Smith quote in a different context.

Carlos and Ron have given pleasure to so many over the years, this thread seems very.....thoughtless. Just my opinion.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 27 April, 2017, 09:54:57 AM

Quote from: positronic on 27 April, 2017, 04:57:18 AMThe quotes may or may not have been lifted from a lengthier interview which I never read

Whatever the case, it would have been extracted from a longer recorded interview done by the writer, and all such comments are therefore somewhat out of context, even when framed within the narrative the writer is putting forward. This is something I've always found tricky myself – you get 5,000 words of top-notch interview and have a word count of a fifth of that. Nuance gets cut. Things get removed. Everything is condensed.

As noted, I suspect the comments were about the reality of the craft – the speed in which people have to work to get by – and balancing quality with the time available. I don't think there's any indication from Smith's work that he abandoned pages half-done – more that he was able to optimise his time carefully to create the best job within the time available.

I forgot to acknowledge this, IndigoPrime. That's the kind of counter-argument I respect. I have changed my opinion about the Ron Smith quote in Thrill-Power Overload -- and my opinion of the book somewhat as well, based on your points plus a couple of reviews of the book that I searched out online. I still think it's a valuable book to own (since there are none more authoritative to challenge it), but now view it as somewhat less than perfect. Perhaps I'll need to add those 2000 AD creator interview collections to my list of further reading, as well.

I've just finished reading case files six. Ron Smiths art was heavily present in that case file, and I absolutely loved his contribution to it. The art on the league of fatties was phenomenal! Not to mention the story itself had me in absolute stitches! Fattie kamikaze!!! God that strip would get so much grief from todays generation.

Quote from: Darren Stephens on 29 April, 2017, 01:47:05 PM
Carlos and Ron have given pleasure to so many over the years, this thread seems very.....thoughtless. Just my opinion.

Spot on.

(http://www.humoar.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/cant-we-all-just-get-along.jpg)

Jesus positronic, you're a right wanker and no mistake.You start with bagging king Carlos then have a go at Ron Smith. If I met you in a pub I'd belt 7 shades out of you.
And everyone here would point and laugh.

Quote from: marko10174 on 29 April, 2017, 02:01:42 PM

I've just finished reading case files six. Ron Smiths art was heavily present in that case file, and I absolutely loved his contribution to it. The art on the league of fatties was phenomenal! Not to mention the story itself had me in absolute stitches! Fattie kamikaze!!! God that strip would get so much grief from todays generation.

I'm not sure if I'm quite getting the sense of that... you mean that you feel today it would be necessary for people to defend the right of anyone to choose to bulk up to 300 or 400+ pounds? I can imagine it might be hard for anyone to take that argument seriously. The League of Fatties story surely didn't take the premise of people who choose to be "fatties" seriously. I don't think the world has changed that much in that regard, which is why I think the story is still funny. Otherwise it might be regarded as an embarrassment from an earlier, less enlightened time.

Quote from: terryworld on 29 April, 2017, 02:17:18 PM
Jesus positronic, you're a right wanker and no mistake.You start with bagging king Carlos then have a go at Ron Smith. If I met you in a pub I'd belt 7 shades out of you.
And everyone here would point and laugh.

Where did that come from? I love Carlos Ezquerra's work. I can't take your insults seriously if you're not even paying attention.

Yup, you're dead right there.
My apologies, you didnt bag Carlos, that was Marko.
So...... fuck him for that. What a twat.
You're the guy who had a go at Ron Smith.
So...... ummmmmmmm. Yeah. Fuck you.
Before you start with the whole "everyone has an opinion" stuff..... think about who you're having a go at.
Ron Smith.
70 years ago he was in a plane, fighting Nazis.
What have you done lately?

A gentle reminder that personal insults will not be tolerated on this forum. Play nicely or the admins will lock the thread and give out cooling off periods.

Quote from: positronic on 29 April, 2017, 05:13:53 AM

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 28 April, 2017, 08:36:14 PM

Is it not really the case that Ron Smith's aesthetic is just not to your liking –perfectly fine– and that Ron's comment on his working method –even when in his own words– is just a modest anecdote rather than a valid criticism of the quality of his craftmanship as evident on the printed page?

What you get in Thrill-Power Overload is a history of 2000 AD the comic....

I know what's in the book but my question was how is an anecdote an objective criticism of Ron's technique in his published work and what criticisms do you actually have of Ron's work that makes you not like his aesthetics? – because apart from a few arguably dodgy character angles I don't think his technical skill and creativity can really be faulted.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 April, 2017, 02:43:22 PM
A gentle reminder that personal insults will not be tolerated on this forum. Play nicely or the admins will lock the thread and give out cooling off periods.

My apologies. This thread has made my blood boil. But......
Everybody has a right to their opinion.

On a marginally more positive note- Apocalypse Dreadnought. Ron's work on this was the only good thing about it, and in glorious colour too. I recall desperately wanting to like it every week because I enjoyed the art. What a pity the actual story was so tediously disappointing, it's a real shame Ron got saddled with a lot of really lame strips late in his career.

Quote from: terryworld on 29 April, 2017, 03:04:21 PM

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 April, 2017, 02:43:22 PM
A gentle reminder that personal insults will not be tolerated on this forum. Play nicely or the admins will lock the thread and give out cooling off periods.

My apologies. This thread has made my blood boil. But......
Everybody has a right to their opinion.

Well apparently not according to you. Judging by your logic, anyone who disagrees with you is a twat.

Sorry quoted the wrong person

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 29 April, 2017, 02:53:44 PM

Quote from: positronic on 29 April, 2017, 05:13:53 AM

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 28 April, 2017, 08:36:14 PM

Is it not really the case that Ron Smith's aesthetic is just not to your liking –perfectly fine– and that Ron's comment on his working method –even when in his own words– is just a modest anecdote rather than a valid criticism of the quality of his craftmanship as evident on the printed page?

What you get in Thrill-Power Overload is a history of 2000 AD the comic....

I know what's in the book but my question was how is an anecdote an objective criticism of Ron's technique in his published work and what criticisms do you actually have of Ron's work that makes you not like his aesthetics? – because apart from a few arguably dodgy character angles I don't think his technical skill and creativity can really be faulted.

It's difficult to explain the aesthetics of "less preferred" in so many words, Joe. It's more of a natural 'eye-appeal' thing that resist ratiocination. I think it comes down to something that's less technical in detail, because the whole is more than the sum of it's parts. It would be easier (but far lengthier and more time-consuming) to explain what it is that I preferred about Ezquerra, Bolland, McMahon, Cam Kennedy, et. al., so whatever I tell you here is probably going to sound vague and dodgy.

Partly I think it had to do with how Smith would lay out a story in terms of panels and movement, sizes and positioning of figures, the balance of positive and negative space in the panels, and some of it I think probably had to do with how the inking looked. Another aspect would just be overall design, in instances of some new thing or character appearing in one of Smith's stories that hadn't previously appeared in another story designed by another artist. The biggest aesthetic thing I guess was that his art appeared to me (subjective, I know) to be more 'old-fashioned' (for lack of a more precise term) compared to most of the other regular Dredd artists.

As far as how the extracted quote in TPO from Ron Smith fits with that, it's more in terms of the volume of pages he contributed versus other artists whom I preferred. I guess there could be many other factors involved with the difference in how many pages any particular artist contributed to 2000 AD, like some of them could have been slower because of lack of years' experience, or maybe some had day jobs in addition to their work for 2000 AD. I mean, I can't assume that Ron Smith was forced by economic circumstance to turn out more pages because he was being paid less per page than those other artists whose work I liked better. It would seem that if he had been working in comics longer, and was deemed a reliable supplier of story art, then he ought to have been paid a little better by virtue of both his seniority of service to the company and his record for turning in work by the deadline. But if he had turned in fewer pages, would the overall aesthetics of those pages have risen? Tough to say, but possibly.

Pardon, say again.

Trolls.

O.K  clever clogs, you explain that post to me. At the end of the day the only people an artist or writer have to please is their editor and publisher.

PositRONic, if you made fewer posts would their overall quality improve?

Tough to say, but possibly.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2017, 05:46:00 PM
PositRONic, if you made fewer posts would their overall quality improve?

Tough to say, but possibly.

I hope he packed burn heal for that. :D
On a more serious note,probably best if we all let it go at this point.

Quote from: Darren Stephens on 29 April, 2017, 01:47:05 PM
Carlos and Ron have given pleasure to so many over the years, this thread seems very.....thoughtless. Just my opinion.

Wot Darren SaId.

Actually, Positronic's logic has its appeal: as someone who has never been satisfied enough with even a single panel of art to consider it finished and submit it for publication and grab all the grubby money I would surely earn, it follows that I am the greatest 2000AD artist of all time. I laugh at all these greedy quitters throwing in the towel and publishing before their art has been perfected in every particular.

Now I like to flog Clint Langley's self insertion-shopped art as much as the next guy, but making an entire thread to bemoan the hard work of someone far more talented than I? I wouldn't have the balls (or the audacity).

Quote from: Goaty on 29 April, 2017, 05:29:17 PM
Trolls.

Never trust the intentions of anyone without an avatar is my motto.

Quote from: TordelBack on 29 April, 2017, 06:29:30 PM
Actually, Positronic's logic has its appeal: as someone who has never been satisfied enough with even a single panel of art to consider it finished and submit it for publication and grab all the grubby money I would surely earn, it follows that I am the greatest 2000AD artist of all time. I laugh at all these greedy quitters throwing in the towel and publishing before their art has been perfected in every particular.

And you've clearly proven it's not possible for anyone to prefer one artist's work over another's while you're at it.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2017, 05:46:00 PM
PositRONic, if you made fewer posts would their overall quality improve?

Tough to say, but possibly.

Let's make a rule then. All posts must be 40 words or less.

Or conversely, would the quality of The Legendary Shark's posts improve if he spent more time on them?

It seems easy to tell who's posting on phones.

This thread has gone from discussion of a topic to taking pot shots at each other and it's become very tedious. Can we please treat each other with a civil tone or put a lid on the whole thing? Sadly, the thread doesn't appear to be going anywhere but downhill...

I think at this point the thread has just become a challenge to positronic to see how many of the long standing  boarders he can alienate in a single discussion. To be fair, he appears to be doing very well.

I never set out to alienate anyone, but I'm done responding to the pot-shots.

Quote from: Dog Deever on 29 April, 2017, 03:56:58 PM
Apocalypse Dreadnought. Ron's work on this was the only good thing about it, and in glorious colour too.

You know, I had to really dust off my memory on this.  Fleischer's RT run wasn't it?  Absolutely.  Much as I'm not a fan of Ron's work it was impressive under the circumstances.  Didn't he also get lumbered with Chronos Carnival?  One thing I will give him is that he can draw wonderfully bonkers aliens.  Not like Star Trek; "give the man a mask, he'll be fine!"

Ultimately I'm sticking with one, to me, unassailable truth.  As much as there are artists who's artwork is not completely to my taste, the great strength of the tooth is twofold; firstly the eclectic selection that caters to a wide taste, and secondly the sheer quality.  Whatever else you want to say about Ezquerra, Langley, Smith or any of the rest, I have never seen anything of the sort of calibre that sometimes graces the pages of the two America giants.  Exhibit A: Rob Liefeld and his 'big breasted Captain America'.  Exhibit B: Jon Bogdanove's Superman work. 

Well one thing I will say having tried to ignore this thread for so long is DAMNIT you folks have managed to sustain it when just about all relevent posts (and a few irrelevent) ones have been made a while ago.

Can we not just let this thread drift into cheesey memory?

...which of course I'm helping by posting on it again. GODDAMNIT I'm an idiot ...

please die thread, please die...