As I am read Judge Dredd The Complete Case File 22 tonight, as never read the issues of it on the date it out years ago;
I was about to read The Exterminator, the start with John Burns's was so great, then change of artist. it looks get poor with new artist, and stop read it. Will re-read it tomorrow but I do wonder if John Burns okay at the time when it was in production?
I remember there are few stories that got changes of artists, I never knew the reason as;
Samantha Slade
Book 2 and Book 3 of The Ten-Seconders
Book 2 of Judge Dredd: Mandroid
Breathing Space
I wonder if there other stories with reason?
Quote from: Goaty on 14 March, 2014, 07:58:19 PM
I remember there are few stories that got changes of artists, I never knew the reason as; Samantha Slade
Ian Gibson had been unhappy with Alan Grant's scripts for some time, and just gave up. The excellent and much missed
Grant Goggans goes into the matter in great detail here (http://thrillpoweredthursday.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/177-samantha-slade-short-goodbye.html). I'll add another Gibson story to your list, Dredd versus Dog Deever in
Full Mental Jacket (578-582), which was finished off by Steve Parkhouse.
Well I don't blame Ian Gibson, as Samantha Slade last story was so confused, as in the prison, but with the scarf help her escape... ok.
There's only one slade..SAMUEL C...
Quote from: Emp on 14 March, 2014, 08:50:07 PM
There's only one slade..SAMUEL C...
The
C stands for
Change-of-artist.
The uber talented Glenn Fabry was allowed three ice ages to complete Slaine: Demon Killer.
Unfortunately, he didn't think it too many, and Tharg had to step in with assistance from the mighty Dermot Power for the conclusion to Book 1 and entirety of Book 2.
As much as I dug Power's take on the Woad Warrior, I don't think I've ever seen anything approaching Fabry's work on those first few episodes outside of, say, an Italian Renaissance museum.
Quote from: sauchie on 14 March, 2014, 08:17:44 PM
I'll add another Gibson story to your list, Dredd versus Dog Deever in Full Mental Jacket (578-582), which was finished off by Steve Parkhouse.
The redoubtable Parkhouse does a great job of keeping Gibson's designs going, in a character-heavy (and rather brilliant) story, to the point that I'd actually forgotten that he'd taken over until you mentioned it...
Quote from: Link Prime on 14 March, 2014, 10:08:49 PM
As much as I dug Power's take on the Woad Warrior, I don't think I've ever seen anything approaching Fabry's work on those first few episodes outside of, say, an Italian Renaissance museum.
I often convince myself that Fabry's colour work on Slaine was overworked and too static, but then I open Demon Killer and just stare and stare at the Angelsea sequence. Holeee shit, that is something you just don't see. Which is not to say that Power's stuff isn't damn good too. But still...
Quote from: Link Prime on 14 March, 2014, 10:08:49 PM
The uber talented Glenn Fabry was allowed three ice ages to complete Slaine: Demon Killer. Unfortunately, he didn't think it too many, and Tharg had to step in with assistance from the mighty Dermot Power for the conclusion to Book 1 and entirety of Book 2. As much as I dug Power's take on the Woad Warrior, I don't think I've ever seen anything approaching Fabry's work on those first few episodes outside of, say, an Italian Renaissance museum.
I think Dermot Power's a phenomenally talented artist, but his
Slaine work falls uncomfortably between the stools recently vacated by Bisley and Fabry. Fabry gave some interviews prior to
Demon Killer saying he'd been freaked out by how good Bisley was and felt he had to regain his crown, which astonished me. I absolutely love Bisley's stuff, but what Fabry achieved with
Slaine The King means his take on the character and his world will always be definitive, for me.
Demon Killer isn't the only instance of Fabry supplying the starter but needing someone else to provide the main course; apart from sharing
Slaine with the great David Pugh, he went twos-up on
Judgement On Gotham 4: Die laughing. Murray and Brashill are usually credited with the art for Book Two of that story, but they finish off the last few pages of Book One as well. Both upped the quality of their finish on that book, and their sections have an energy Fabry's perfect panels lack.
I agree that Murray stepped up to the plate for Die Laughing. A fantastic artist, with huge potential.
His last work for Tharg if I recall?
One of the interesting ones was Henry stepping in for Carlos on Helter Skelter, and actually improving matters. Was this the famous 'house collapsing around his ears' period for Ezquerra?
One more for the evening; SMS contributing some episodes to my personal fave: The Black Hole.
Despite having a vastly different style than Biz, I think it worked very well.
Couldn't imagine the story without his contribution now.
Quote from: Link Prime on 14 March, 2014, 11:10:26 PM
One more for the evening; SMS contributing some episodes to my personal fave: The Black Hole.
Now there's an interesting one. I always assumed that the use of both artists was intentional from the start, rather than a running change.
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 March, 2014, 10:58:11 PM
One of the interesting ones was Henry stepping in for Carlos on Helter Skelter, and actually improving matters. Was this the famous 'house collapsing around his ears' period for Ezquerra?
A case of history rhyming rather than repeating when more house woes for Carlos during Origins gave birth to
Dan Francisco by Wagner & Rufus; this time Carlos stayed with the story.
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 March, 2014, 11:28:10 PM
Quote from: Link Prime on 14 March, 2014, 11:10:26 PM
One more for the evening; SMS contributing some episodes to my personal fave: The Black Hole.
Now there's an interesting one. I always assumed that the use of both artists was intentional from the start, rather than a running change.
I believe it was the plan; SMS always had the edge for me in this story: fantastic scenery and assorted costumery.
I would love to have seen a full Biz take on the 'Black Hole', the thought of his version of Hammerstein's origin is perhaps the greatest 'what if?' in comics for me....
Tht said, I'd be curious to see a full SMS version too..
As for getting taken off a series, an old art college friend of mine was taken off a Dark Horse flagship series mid-run.
It messed him up good and damaged his industry rep....pity.
Ps: Chris Halls getting replaced by Carl critchlow on 'son of mean' was a huge disappointment for me...
Chris's genius was evident even then, I'd loved to have seen a true visionary tackle a series...
Pps: Rob Bliss getting replaced by the good (but lesser talents of) Greg staples and nick Percival on 'The Clown:book ii' sticks in my craw also...
Initial choice of artist Ian Gibson suddenly becomes available & replaces Jose Luis Ferrer on Verdus.
I would like to know what the hell was up with The Ten Seconders and it's 3 artists (of which only the last was comprehensible, sorry Dom Reardon)
QuoteThere's only one slade..SAMUEL C...
Samantha Slade is easily one of the best second generation characters 2000AD has ever produced. Sure a lot of her stories were rubbish, but her character and concept are solid. She just needs a new writer.
Another Slaine one but one of considerable differences for me. The Angie Kincaid, Belardinelli, McMahon triumvirate on the first run.
While the latter two may have been planned swaps to help with time (??? I really do need to read Thrillpower Overload to remind myself of this stuff) the impact has been significant on the strip going forward I feel. The high contrast between the three has meant the strip has had a very flexible visual style throughout its long run.
It interests me that McMahon's take while massively popular, well received and critically lauded could be said to have left its make least on the strip ... I'm no artist, nor art critic so this could go badly wrong from here. McMahon's earthy, dirty, ancient art and for many including myself the best the strip has ever had, didn't seemed to get picked up on. Where as Belardinelli's more lush, Vallejoesque work (certainly in the world he created around the characters themselves) seems to have influenced the strip more? A big part of this may of course have been the way Pat Mills took the strip always struck me as a shame.
Really looking forward to the new Simon Davis stuff as from the little I've seen this strikes me as possibly a return to this earthier look?
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 14 March, 2014, 11:51:21 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 March, 2014, 11:28:10 PM
I always assumed that the use of both artists (on The Black Hole) was intentional from the start, rather than a running change.
I believe it was the plan; SMS always had the edge for me in this story: fantastic scenery and assorted costumery.
It was always part of
Pat Mills's plan. Tharg had other ideas:
- "SMS had some serious sci-fi connections which I thought would be extremely good for 2000ad. The comic was growing up and this was yet another direction it might mature into, that's why I chose him. I didn't want the Warriors to simply be an action heavy metal story, so I gave the science-fiction episodes to SMS and they were right up his street. Editorial didn't like SMS. They didn't like his "intellectual" manner or his eccentric initials name, as they admitted to me. They couldn't see why I'd picked him. If they couldn't see it, I couldn't explain it to them. When the series ended, they got rid of him with a fair amount of glee, I believe, which was a great shame"
Pat Mills quoted in David Bishop's Thrillpower Overload, page 123
Quote from: sauchie on 15 March, 2014, 07:46:30 AM
It was always part of Pat Mills's plan. Tharg had other ideas:
I'm struck by the frequency with which the other party in editorial disagreements with Pat seem to be motivated by pettiness, vindictiveness or otherwise unprofessional behaviour. You'd be forgiven for thinking Pat was the only professional editor 2000AD ever had.
Obviously, this was Pat's strip: he was there and I wasn't. However, I can say that SMS (now Smuzz) is a formidable talent who holds himself to exacting, sometimes exhausting, standards who is never afraid to ask "But
why do we need to do it that way?" I can see why he would get on with Pat.
In an ideal world, or working on an intermittently-published creator-owned series, there is absolutely nothing wrong this. Editing a weekly anthology is not an ideal world, it's about getting the product out. In an ideal world, turning in seven pages of art from a five page script because you thought the story needed more space is admirable. On a weekly anthology with a fixed page count I can see how that might get you the label of "too much like hard work" in editorial eyes.
Cheers
Jim
The one that always 'bothered' me was the switch from John Ridgway to Steve Parkhouse on the 'Luke Kirby' stories. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Parkhouse, his art on 'The Hiding Place' was wonderful, but Ridgway captured the atmosphere of those stories so perfectly that it seemed ridiculous to replace him at all. I understand that it came as something of a shock to him too!
Ichabod Azrael book 2 switched out at some point as well.
And Day of Chaos : Chaos Day went through 3!
QuoteIchabod Azrael book 2 switched out at some point as well.
Truth be told, I didn't even notice the artist switch between Dom Reardon to Antonio Fuso until it was pointed out to me.
Quote from: hippynumber1 on 15 March, 2014, 09:14:43 AM
The one that always 'bothered' me was the switch from John Ridgway to Steve Parkhouse on the 'Luke Kirby' stories. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Parkhouse, his art on 'The Hiding Place' was wonderful, but Ridgway captured the atmosphere of those stories so perfectly that it seemed ridiculous to replace him at all. I understand that it came as something of a shock to him too!
Parkhouse is pure class, but the strip belongs to Ridgeway. I enjoy Alan McKenzie's explanation that he is the
sole creator of Luke Kirby, and therefore deserves all monies resulting from exploitation of the property, because
all Ridgeway did was draw the characters, settings, and events described in the script. Artists are basically fancy photocopiers, rather than creative individuals, according to Alan.
Other than
Stevie's great
Verdus example, without which the comic may have lost one of its signature characters, the earliest and most important art switch is surely
Blockmania. The writers' tendency to blithely type the words
thousands of citizens fight judges in flying tanks without considering the poor sod who has to draw it meant McMahon quit and readers were denied a final one-two between the two most important artists in Dredd's development.
Quote from: The Adventurer on 15 March, 2014, 09:49:50 AM
QuoteIchabod Azrael book 2 switched out at some point as well.
Truth be told, I didn't even notice the artist switch between Dom Reardon to Antonio Fuso until it was pointed out to me.
It is a very good utilisation of the two artists isn't it. I did notice the change but I assumed it was simply Reardon having drawn the first dozen chapters earlier and this was his developed style.
Quote from: sauchie on 15 March, 2014, 07:46:30 AM
It was always part of Pat Mills's plan. Tharg had other ideas:
- "SMS had some serious sci-fi connections which I thought would be extremely good for 2000ad. The comic was growing up and this was yet another direction it might mature into, that's why I chose him. I didn't want the Warriors to simply be an action heavy metal story, so I gave the science-fiction episodes to SMS and they were right up his street. Editorial didn't like SMS. They didn't like his "intellectual" manner or his eccentric initials name, as they admitted to me. They couldn't see why I'd picked him. If they couldn't see it, I couldn't explain it to them. When the series ended, they got rid of him with a fair amount of glee, I believe, which was a great shame"
Pat Mills quoted in David Bishop's Thrillpower Overload, page 123
So that's why we haven't seen SMS since.
I think 1988 Tharg may have had a frontal lobe tumour.
Quote from: The Adventurer on 15 March, 2014, 04:14:43 AM
I would like to know what the hell was up with The Ten Seconders and it's 3 artists (of which only the last was comprehensible, sorry Dom Reardon)
Quote from: Goaty on 14 March, 2014, 07:58:19 PM
Book 2 and Book 3 of The Ten-Seconders
Godsend just seemed to be the artist running behind schedule as Bagwell made it back for the finale and Willsher was clearly trying to fit in with that style. With
Make. Believe, I always assumed that it was a deliberate intention to have different artists for the three different sections of the story but that could be a lot of nonsense. For me, all three did good work on that story and, unlike The Adventurer, I thought Dom's watery colours were achingly beautiful. [Over Christmas, I reread the whole series and made notes for one of those long, verbose reviews I rarely get around to finishing. Must look those out.]
Surprised that we've got to two pages and nobody's mentioned
The Final Solution yet. I wasn't a fan of Colin MacNeil's art at the time (something which has changed over time) but I adored Simon Harrison's frantic energy (something which hasn't) so I was pretty disappointed by the switch. After the interview with him in the Meg a couple of weeks ago, it seems Harrison got every chance to finish the story but had other things on his mind.
How did I forget 'The Final Solution'!?!!
A real shame that Harrison didn't finish that one...
The move, not only of the artist, but to colour too, was jarring. Admittedly, having seen Revere, Harrison could've pulled it off too..
Love MacNeil's 'America', but I'll pass on his take of the 'final solution'.
For me, the biggest artist change shock came when I first started collecting 2000AD. The change of artists on the run of Rogue Trooper... the Friday stories. I fell in love with that Rogue Trooper not least because of Henry Flint's fantastic artwork that still remains amongst my favourites of his work. Steve Tappin taking over was cool, I still enjoyed the artwork. The Alex Ronald got his hands on Rogue Trooper.
Alex Ronald's work in the 90's was just terrible. The worst artwork I think I've seen in 2000AD. I've seen that he has improved greatly since, which is cool. His work on Rogue Trooper is certainly the worst. Which is a shame as I loved Friday and his companions, enjoyed that take on the Rogue Trooper universe (clunky continuity aside) and thoroughly miss it to this day. (I really enjoyed Sancho Panzer as well, another strip from Flint).
Quote from: pictsy on 16 March, 2014, 11:50:04 PM
For me, the biggest artist change shock came when I first started collecting 2000AD. The change of artists on the run of Rogue Trooper... the Friday stories. I fell in love with that Rogue Trooper not least because of Henry Flint's fantastic artwork that still remains amongst my favourites of his work. Steve Tappin taking over was cool, I still enjoyed the artwork. The Alex Ronald got his hands on Rogue Trooper.
Alex Ronald's work in the 90's was just terrible. The worst artwork I think I've seen in 2000AD. I've seen that he has improved greatly since, which is cool. His work on Rogue Trooper is certainly the worst. Which is a shame as I loved Friday and his companions, enjoyed that take on the Rogue Trooper universe (clunky continuity aside) and thoroughly miss it to this day. (I really enjoyed Sancho Panzer as well, another strip from Flint).
Good God man, have you lost your mind?
Alex Ronald's style has changed but he's always been a great illustrator. I loved his old style. It was atmospheric and distinctive.
Quote from: Trout on 17 March, 2014, 12:27:59 AM
Quote from: pictsy on 16 March, 2014, 11:50:04 PM
For me, the biggest artist change shock came when I first started collecting 2000AD. The change of artists on the run of Rogue Trooper... the Friday stories. I fell in love with that Rogue Trooper not least because of Henry Flint's fantastic artwork that still remains amongst my favourites of his work. Steve Tappin taking over was cool, I still enjoyed the artwork. The Alex Ronald got his hands on Rogue Trooper.
Alex Ronald's work in the 90's was just terrible. The worst artwork I think I've seen in 2000AD. I've seen that he has improved greatly since, which is cool. His work on Rogue Trooper is certainly the worst. Which is a shame as I loved Friday and his companions, enjoyed that take on the Rogue Trooper universe (clunky continuity aside) and thoroughly miss it to this day. (I really enjoyed Sancho Panzer as well, another strip from Flint).
Good God man, have you lost your mind?
Alex Ronald's style has changed but he's always been a great illustrator. I loved his old style. It was atmospheric and distinctive.
I have to say as much as I love his art now the older art does stick out as some of my least favourite. He did improve a great deal however no one ever opened their mouths!!
I used to wonder why the eyeless potato people had invaded 2000AD. His work had thrill suckers all over it.
Quote from: pictsy on 16 March, 2014, 11:50:04 PM
Alex Ronald's work in the 90's was just terrible. The worst artwork I think I've seen in 2000AD.
Ha ha ha, then you're
really not looking hard enough.
Anyway...I thoroughly disagree with this standpoint. For whatever that's worth.
I quite liked Alex Ronald's texture rich work on Sinister Dexter & Missionary Man- I even contacted him looking to buy a page or two of original art, but he'd previously sold 'em all.
These days he could be potentially considered one of the best cover artists at Tharg's disposal, and Vampire Vixens of the Wehrmacht is just superb; http://www.vampirevixens.co.uk/
Quote from: Jon on 17 March, 2014, 09:51:32 AM
Ha ha ha, then you're really not looking hard enough.
Anyway...I thoroughly disagree with this standpoint. For whatever that's worth.
Seriously, when I think back over the years of reading 2000AD, his work always springs to mind as my least favourite. I really am not especially fond of re-reading stories that he has illustrated because of the artwork.
Quote from: pictsy on 17 March, 2014, 10:11:51 AM
Seriously, when I think back over the years of reading 2000AD, his work always springs to mind as my least favourite. I really am not especially fond of re-reading stories that he has illustrated because of the artwork.
You may
dislike Alex' art from that period, but at the very least he's
competent! Figures are proportioned, perspectives are drawn properly, and he pays attention to lighting and 3D space. There are a significant number of artists from that period for whom none of those things is true...
I'm not sure his ink style back then showed off his drawing skills to their best advantage, and I think Alex would admit that he didn't necessarily make the best storytelling choices — I'm struck, looking back at some of his 90s work, that there are entire pages composed entirely of mid-to-long shots that are just crying out for a close-up or two, for example.
Cheers
Jim
Quote from: Link Prime on 17 March, 2014, 09:56:19 AM
I quite liked Alex Ronald's texture rich work on Sinister Dexter & Missionary Man- I even contacted him looking to buy a page or two of original art, but he'd previously sold 'em all.
These days he could be potentially considered one of the best cover artists at Tharg's disposal, and Vampire Vixens of the Wehrmacht is just superb; http://www.vampirevixens.co.uk/
I've a lot of time for Alex's work in general. I agree there's been an improvement - there's meant to be - and not just in a linear way, there's genuine innovation there, in some large to do with the route his art has taken him, or so I'd imagine. I get into the occasional debate over emerging tools and methods of production because there seems to be something of a desire, in certain areas, to hang on to "traditional ways" of doing things, for no good reason other than that's how they were done before. I think these arguments are going to mean nothing to the upcoming generation anyway, and Alex is pioneering in an approach that is going to become far more commonplace in the future, IMO. That said, it will come with all the initial bad art and mistakes of people who haven't had such a solid background in learning the craft, developing a proper eye for art and great story-telling. All of which Alex has done. And God knows there's already enough people out there who watch a couple of Feng Zhu videos, download some Photoshop brushes, scribble a bit and claim to be concept artists (and don't get me started on the term, "speed-painting".)
One of the beautiful things I've always loved about 2000AD is the privilege of seeing an artist develop and make those leaps and epiphanies that make them great.
If you want to see a really shaky start, look at Kev Walker's early stuff (which is weird because he used to produce amazing paintings for the first game's company I worked for in 95, prior to his initial AD work - but he was real shaky in certain areas and, when I asked him about it, initially admitted that he could draw anything but people in those early days - a bit of a drawback for a comic artist?) Or Carl Critchlow's very early Thrud strips in White Dwarf.
I think these guys did okay though...?
In the end.
Quote from: Jon on 17 March, 2014, 10:41:11 AM
If you want to see a really shaky start, look at Kev Walker's early stuff (which is weird because he used to produce amazing paintings for the first game's company I worked for in 95, prior to his initial AD work - but he was real shaky in certain areas and, when I asked him about it, initially admitted that he could draw anything but people in those early days - a bit of a drawback for a comic artist?)
I've mentioned this before: Steve MacManus spotted Kev as a potential front-rank talent but, recognising the weaknesses in his artistic range, got him to ink Steve Dillon for two or three years solid to help him with figure drawing and just so that he could see how Dillon approached pages from a storytelling point of view.
Cheers
Jim
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 March, 2014, 10:48:26 AM
Quote from: Jon on 17 March, 2014, 10:41:11 AM
If you want to see a really shaky start, look at Kev Walker's early stuff (which is weird because he used to produce amazing paintings for the first game's company I worked for in 95, prior to his initial AD work - but he was real shaky in certain areas and, when I asked him about it, initially admitted that he could draw anything but people in those early days - a bit of a drawback for a comic artist?)
I've mentioned this before: Steve MacManus spotted Kev as a potential front-rank talent but, recognising the weaknesses in his artistic range, got him to ink Steve Dillon for two or three years solid to help him with figure drawing and just so that he could see how Dillon approached pages from a storytelling point of view.
Cheers
Jim
Yeah, Harlem Heroes, wasn't it?
He couldn't half paint though....
I have a lot of time for Alex Ronald's work from the late 90s but there's no denying he divides option, or certainly did his current stuff seems to meet almost universal approval. Even some of his writers have said less than pleasant things here as I recall.
For me he's an artist that really showed progression at an astonishing rate and by the end of his first spell with The Galaxies Greatest he's among my favourite of the period and I have a lovely Missionary Man page by him in my original art collection (good range of shots as it goes too). I'm one of those wrong headed people (I say cos we do seem to be very much in the minority) that prefers his old inking style to his new more 'painted' current work, though that is nice too.
Dragging this back on topic around the time he did Rogue Trooper there was also some changes on Dredd 'The Pit'. Now while Dredd always has a rota of artists I do wonder if this story was well served by some of the latter choices and whether they were planned or came about due to Ezquerra and MacNeill who started the story not being available to finish it? I dream of a version of that greatest (well possibly) of Dredd epics by just those two in the way Cursed Earth, that greatest (possibly) of Dredd epics has just McMahon and Bolland.
Quote from: Jon on 17 March, 2014, 10:57:29 AM
Yeah, Harlem Heroes, wasn't it?
Rogue Trooper: Cinnabar first, then Harlem Heroes.
Cheers
Jim
I honestly don't think Ronald's 2000AD work was competent. On my big re-read of 2000AD I was shocked at just how technically poor his artwork was. It really solidified my dislike of his style. I am really pleased that his new artwork doesn't resemble the old artwork in any way but it doesn't strike me as particularly original or trail blazing. From what I can see, the techniques he is using are ones that have been already well established by other artists many years ago.
I can appreciate people liking his old artwork for it being different (even if I can't understand why you would) but I am never going to be convinced that his 2000AD work was competent.
Kev Walker's start was a bit shaky but I still rate his early stuff as being of better quality than Alex Ronald's entire run. I am surprised that there are so many vocal advocates of Ronald's work, so at least he has a loyal fan base.
I think I'm done with my Ronald bashing as it's getting pretty off topic now.
I can't believe this thread is three pages in and nobody's mentioned Karl Richardson! He and Dom Reardon seem to suffer a similar problem (though what that is, whether poor time management or just really bad luck, I don't know) - with the notable exception of Caballistics, I think I'm right in saying neither of them has ever finished the artwork on an ongoing series that they started.
I'd love to know the reasons, but obviously not if it's personal issues. Just curious as to why it keeps happening to those two in particular.
Quote from: Colin_YNWA on 17 March, 2014, 10:58:31 AM
Dragging this back on topic around the time he did Rogue Trooper there was also some changes on Dredd 'The Pit'. Now while Dredd always has a rota of artists I do wonder if this story was well served by some of the latter choices and whether they were planned or came about due to Ezquerra and MacNeill who started the story not being available to finish it? I dream of a version of that greatest (well possibly) of Dredd epics by just those two in the way Cursed Earth, that greatest (possibly) of Dredd epics has just McMahon and Bolland.
Colin, you are not wrong - the artwork in The Pit does not serve the story well. It would be nice if IDW picked up this gem and created new artwork using someone like Simon Coleby. I'd rather see that then their poorly sized re-coloured classics.
I dream of a world where John Ridgway's Dead Man leads straight into Carlos Ezquerra's Necropolis without stopping by Will Simpson or Jeff Anderson on the way.
I remember talking to Steve Dillon about 'Cinnabar' back in 93-94 and him telling me:
'The inker completely killed that story...!'
I was gutted, Kev Walker was (and still is) one of my favourite 2000ad artists and 'Cinnabar' my all-time favourite Rogue story...
As for Alex Ronald, the art in 2000ad at this time was generally so ugly that I stopped buying it altogether.
I also don't really agree with perspectively correct/lit bgs and proportioned figures being the basis of good art (I'm a trained artist) as to judge art on that meter, would be to dismiss something like Picasso's 'Guernica', arguably the most powerful artistic statement in history...
Not a comic, I know, but just saying....
Quote from: Call-Me-Kenneth on 17 March, 2014, 04:17:10 PM
I remember talking to Steve Dillon about 'Cinnabar' back in 93-94 and him telling me:
'The inker completely killed that story...!'
I was gutted, Kev Walker was (and still is) one of my favourite 2000ad artists and 'Cinnabar' my all-time favourite Rogue story...
Why? Steve is clearly wrong. He, like anyone else, is perfectly entitled to
dislike Kev's inks on that story and, given that they're
his pencils he's entitled to feel more strongly about the inks than most people.
But "killed" the story? Given that it's held to be one of the few real 'classic' 2000AD stories that Rogue has, given that John Smith has gone out of his way to praise Kev's contribution? No. Sorry, but he's wrong.
QuoteI also don't really agree with perspectively correct/lit bgs and proportioned figures being the basis of good art (I'm a trained artist) as to judge art on that meter,
I didn't say that. I was observing that, at the very least, Alex' stuff from this period was
competent because he plainly knew how to draw.
Cheers
Jim
I preferred the inking on Cinnabar to Dillon's usual work. Just seemed a bit crisper.
And I don't get the hate for Alex Ronald's 90s work either - I can see the lumpy character argument put forward, but there others I found much weaker.
Quote from: Steve Green on 17 March, 2014, 04:48:58 PMAnd I don't get the hate for Alex Ronald's 90s work either - I can see the lumpy character argument put forward, but there others I found much weaker.
His Dredd & Missionary Man strips are some of the 90's highlights.
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 March, 2014, 04:33:26 PM
Why? Steve is clearly wrong. He, like anyone else, is perfectly entitled to dislike Kev's inks on that story and, given that they're his pencils he's entitled to feel more strongly about the inks than most people.
But "killed" the story? Given that it's held to be one of the few real 'classic' 2000AD stories that Rogue has, given that John Smith has gone out of his way to praise Kev's contribution? No. Sorry, but he's wrong.
I completely agree with you on this, it was actually at a 'Preacher' signing I chatted to him about it, whereas everyone brought up their Preacher issues/TPBs to get signed, I brought up my 'Best of 2000AD Monthly' Cinnabar issue. It's my favorite Steve Dillon artwork/story in any capacity and Kev Walker's inks hugely contribute to this (as does John Smith's writing, of course!).
I was hugely disappointed to hear him say this.....but that comment apart, he was in great form.
I'd even go so far as to say that Kev inking Dillon's pencils was the only thing that made the Harlem Heroes reboot worth spending time on.
Quote from: pictsy on 17 March, 2014, 12:28:18 PM
I honestly don't think Ronald's 2000AD work was competent. On my big re-read of 2000AD I was shocked at just how technically poor his artwork was. It really solidified my dislike of his style.
Opposite way round, I think. As discussed above, the technical aspects of Ronald's work, like anatomy and perspective, were fit for print, but the bland characterisation you mention and the lack of variety in textures and shading made it a little porridge-y. Most artists working for
2000ad around that time were learning on the job, and Ronald's work shows much better basic competency than the debut work of Coleby, Weston, or Critchlow - all of whom, like Ronald, have grown into fantastic artists.
I like Kev Walker's work on
Cinnabar, but I can see where Dillon's coming from with his opinion of the inking. It's technically brilliant, but it does turn Dillon's work (and the story) into something else. Thankfully, that something else was entirely sympathetic to the mood and atmosphere of the narrative - more in sympathy with John Smith's body horror than the
much more loose inking style Dillon had developed for his bouncy, lightweight
Deadline work. Dillon's one of the very best there is, but his finish wasn't suited to that story at that time.
Quote from: pictsy on 17 March, 2014, 12:28:18 PM
I honestly don't think Ronald's 2000AD work was competent.
Ye Gods! What terrifying set of criteria are you working to? I can understand not liking someone's approach, but not competent...? Really?
:o
Really. I don't think the artwork is competent and I don't think it was of a high enough standard. The criteria I use would be the same I use on my own artwork. I could give an in depth critique on why I think that the work he produced was poor quality but there are two reasons why I won't.
1. I will have to dig out those old issues both actively and purposefully look at that artwork.
2. This thread has gone way off topic.
I realise I am contributing to the divergence with this response but felt I should reply to your comment :)
I wish I was this competent. With the right colouring Alex Ronald's art really sang– as well as Trevor Hairsine and Henry Flint's of the same era:
Headbangers prog #1098 (1998)
(http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff248/burlearth/HEADBANGERS_zps32175378.jpg)
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 17 March, 2014, 08:08:46 PM
With the right colouring Alex Ronald's art really sang
Craddockcolor (™) made
everything look cheap and nasty. Those pages above are
fantastic, stylistically and technically.
I was no fan of early Ronald, but then I didn't like Coleby and Hairsine either. I think they're all truly fantastic artists now, of course, but while I wouldn't go as far as Pictsy as saying Ronald wasn't 'competent' in any tecnhical sense, I certainly agree that his early stuff, and that of the other blokes, was lacking in many departments that I considered important, and really did nothing for me. At the time I was pretty tired of the Prog and many of the stories they were drawing, so I probably wasn't prepared to see that these were artists in progress. Thank goodness Tharg in his wisdom gave (most of) them an environment in which develop.
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 March, 2014, 08:35:00 PM
I certainly agree that his early stuff, and that of the other blokes, was lacking in many departments that I considered important, and really did nothing for me. At the time I was pretty tired of the Prog and many of the stories they were drawing, so I probably wasn't prepared to see that these were artists in progress
Around 1988, the art seemed to go from uniform excellence to fan art quality almost overnight. I've made this point before, but in previous times artists would have learned their trade and made all their rookie mistakes while working on juvenile titles or as art assistants. I'm sure Ian Gibson and Carlos Ezquerra made art goofs much worse than an over reliance on cross hatching and mixing their acrylics too dark, but they did so in front of more forgiving eyes.
Once the rest of the UK comics industry imploded, I suppose there was no alternative but to let fledgling artists do their growing up in public.
Quote from: sauchie on 17 March, 2014, 08:53:22 PM
Once the rest of the UK comics industry imploded, I suppose there was no alternative but to let fledgling artists do their growing up in public.
That really is the thing, plus they were effectively debuting in a comic which at that point had had a decade's worth of some of the best comics artists ever, and they were
replacing them. Terrifying.
I often think of Richard Elson when we talk about this stuff. I really liked him on
Shadows, which was just a great story anyway, but you'd be hard pressed to call that murky scrabbly technicolour work 'mature'. When he resurfaced in my awareness (I think it was
Dredd: Lawcon) he was sharp and confident, every inch a '2000AD artist'. If we hadn't had
Shadows it would be as if had sprung fully-formed from the Rosette of Sirius like a robotic Athena: even though his 'adult' style has continued to develop, we'd never have seen the larval stage.
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 March, 2014, 09:07:49 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 17 March, 2014, 08:53:22 PM
in previous times artists would have learned their trade and made all their rookie mistakes while working on juvenile titles or as art assistants
I often think of Richard Elson when we talk about this stuff. I really liked him on Shadows, which was just a great story anyway, but you'd be hard pressed to call that murky scrabbly technicolour work 'mature'. When he resurfaced in my awareness (I think it was Dredd: Lawcon) he was sharp and confident, every inch a '2000AD artist'. If we hadn't had Shadows it would be as if had sprung fully-formed from the Rosette of Sirius like a robotic Athena: even though his 'adult' style has continued to develop, we'd never have seen the larval stage.
Yep, and he spent the intervening decade honing his craft on kids' comics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Elson#Bibliography).
Quote from: pictsy on 17 March, 2014, 07:50:27 PM
Really. I don't think the artwork is competent and I don't think it was of a high enough standard. The criteria I use would be the same I use on my own artwork.
I see little evidence of this.
Quote from: pictsy on 17 March, 2014, 07:50:27 PM
2. This thread has gone way off topic.
Agreed, dropping it.
Quote from: Colin_YNWA on 15 March, 2014, 07:08:16 AM
It interests me that McMahon's take while massively popular, well received and critically lauded could be said to have left its make least on the strip ... I'm no artist, nor art critic so this could go badly wrong from here. McMahon's earthy, dirty, ancient art and for many including myself the best the strip has ever had, didn't seemed to get picked up on. Where as Belardinelli's more lush, Vallejoesque work (certainly in the world he created around the characters themselves) seems to have influenced the strip more? A big part of this may of course have been the way Pat Mills took the strip always struck me as a shame.
I think this might just be down to Mick's work being so
very distinctive*. Belardinelli drew breathtaking landscapes, and I
loved his take on the warp-spasm, but his characters were always a little stiff and generic.
But Fabry and Bisley who, I believe, eclipsed that earlier work were both working from a more classical angle - especially Fabry with his fastidious approach to anatomical detail. I think this worked well at the time in transforming the character from vagabond to king. It did seem to become the new touchstone.
The Glenn Fabry/ David Pugh double-team always intrigued me. At the time, in a similar way to Bisley/ SMS on the Black Hole, I was always disappointed when an episode was drawn by Pugh. It seems unfair judgement really as it was mostly a case of being outshone by the outstanding talent. I'm guessing those pairings largely came down to just how long it takes to produce a strip to such an exceptional standard; but it did seem to end up producing a small number of cases where you felt there was a superstar/ support act arrangement. I'd love to know if those arrangements were planned from the beginning, or if it became apparent that measures would have to be taken.
*On the one occasion I managed to have a drink with him (he worked as a concept artist in the games studio I was at for a short while), Mick told me that the distinctive style on Slaine came from a nervous desire to do an outstanding job and so he traced the inks on a separate page over the pencils. When he lifted the sheet he saw, to his horror, he'd left gaps all over the place, but there was no time to fix it. Then it turned out that people seemed to like it. By the end of his run he was wholly sick to death of the approach.
I fully accept he may well have been toying with me. :)