drdroom

32 minutes ago, The Voord said:

It is pencils only  . . . isn't it? 

I'm not joking, it looks like an inked piece to me, and the Comiclink description doesn't specify. Why do we think it is a pencil piece? Has someone seen it in real life?

Really, this piece is only pencil? 

Any Caniff guys still on here? Early Terry daily, possible Sickles involvement, but no action and no gals goes for 4560? What am I missing?

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/comic-strip-art/milton-caniff-terry-and-the-pirates-daily-comic-strip-original-art-dated-12-31-35-chicago-tribune-/a/7229-95047.s

23 minutes ago, Peter G said:

https://comics.ha.com/itm/memorabilia/miscellaneous/dave-cockrum-giant-size-x-men-1-splash-page-1-all-stat-production-page-marvel-1975-/a/7229-94143.s?ic2=mybidspage-lotlinks-12202013&tab=MyBids-101116

 

This is certifiably bonkers, right?

On 4/22/2020 at 12:24 PM, Buzzetta said:

 

The main point of reference (I believe) is a photograph of Mulberry Street in NYC from Jacob Riis circa 1890 form "How the Other Half Lives"

While this is not the Great Depression per se, there are other parts of the Romita Jr splash (and now that I see it, Kirby) that borrowed from or were influenced by certain historical images.  I've seen them before when having to go through records or historical information about the time period.   There are elements of those other photos from historical accounts that we have of the 1930's that you can see made their way into the image as well as a few scenes from the Godfather parts 1 and 2. 

 

EDIT: As I compare, Kirby seems to take more cues from Riis than Romita Jr does...  

 

 

 

Kirby grew up in the scene that Riis photographed. My guess is he drew that splash without needing any reference at all.

Bought for 300. on Heritage ten years ago and still probably worth 300

I grew up on the Oregon coast and this evocation of a winter storm just takes me back.

I'd like to know more about the development of the Kublak character. It seems very composite-y, like the arms of the Thing with the legs of Triton, and a sort of Asgardian shoulder fur situation. I wonder if this was a case of Kirby's assistants or the young Image artists who were around helping Jack along or something. I'd have thought the Kublak was earlier than the Rahmin, but as you say, the Rahmin makes sense in a way the Kublak doesn't, which suggests it came first.

On 4/11/2020 at 11:32 AM, RBerman said:

Update: A user on CAF saw the sketch on my wall and pointed out this very similar sketch which appeared in Kirby Collector #21. It's a character named Rahmin described as a concept drawing for some animation project. The pose is the same as my Kublak piece. The lines are essentially identical from the ankles down, and the face as well, minus the Kublak mask. Would Kirby have copied himself in this way, or is it more likely to be someone else lifting different details from different Kirby drawings to make a new forged composite?

Here is the Kublak sketch again for easy comparison of the lines.

Huh. Up to now I had no doubts about the Kublak sketch being authentic, but that apparent copy of the leg fade seems troubling. Jack almost never repeated a pose, certainly not as exactly as this.

I see what you mean. I have no knowledge of the artist, but, for example, the upper teeth seem like a tracing of the whole squiggly row of teeth, i.e. working across the top then back along the bottom, rather than, as I think almost any artist would do it, drawing one tooth at a time.

Hmm. With all that Kim Deitch forever off the market, should we be scooping up the scarce examples in the wild?

I'm leaning toward young Barda and Granny.

Another version of the concept was done all the time in the Sci-Fi digests of the '50s and '60s. I have this one by William Terry, illustrating a story called "Time Armada." I forget the author, but it somewhat anticipates the themes of Enders' Game. 

On 10/11/2019 at 12:00 PM, lobrac said:

MASTER OF KUNG FU #111 pages 26-27 by Gene Day and Rick Magyar (Marvel, 1982)

The DC war comics DPS (pages 2-3 title pages) were some of the coolest in all of comics. Here are two: OUR ARMY AT WAR #236 page 2-3 (DC, 1971) and OUR ARMY AT WAR #253 page 2-3 (DC, 1973), both by Russ Heath!

 

All three of those are badass!

On 10/10/2019 at 11:10 AM, davidtere said:

 

A DPS from DC Comics 1st issue Special # 5. From the same chap that Mr. GlendGold doesn't recall his name (that was my morning chuckle...thanks Glen)

Now, THATS a DPS. & Glen's one is decent as well. Kirby wasn't the first to do one, but he perfected the form.

Couldn't you just get the OA editions and have your pick of the best?

33 minutes ago, tth2 said:

Which is ironic because J cured the blind, while SB made people want to blind themselves.

On 8/6/2019 at 10:24 AM, grapeape said:

Sometimes pulling punches really means keeping one’s hands in pocket while the other fellas alive to do something about it.

 

So you're saying I'm too p*u*s*s*y to dis Jim Mooney to his woulda-been 100-year-old face? But then how to explain me going after Sal Buscema, who's a spry 83? You're saying Sal's too chicken to come out here and beat my a*s*s? Man, Grape, I thought I was harsh with Sal, but I draw the line at challenging his manhood.

7 hours ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

Yes, it was an excellent childhood, fondly remembered, and far more relatable to Calvin and Hobbes (a far superior strip over Peanuts, imho) 😎

OMFG, without Peanuts specifically, there IS no Calvin & Hobbes. 

22 hours ago, grapeape said:

"Do not speak ill of the dead"

R I P Gentleman Jim Mooney

 

For me it's when they're still alive that I pull my punches! 

22 hours ago, vodou said:

Pencil "stare eyes" -

Oh man, I've always hated that spread! Kirby's kids could be awkward. Major stare-eyes in this one all right, but not inappropriate for the gung-ho patriotic spirit of the shot.

11 minutes ago, vodou said:

Agree; Kirby had the same problem with his 1970s return to Cap (his work I'm most familiar with). I wouldn't use the word expressive, I'd use dead.

So now because we like someone we cannot critique the work? Ok (but no.)

The next time you give or get a periodic work review...see how well that flies

Disagree, somewhat. Every Kirby pencil I've seen from any period has remarkably well "acted" facial expressions. If there are expression fails in Kirby, and there are occasionally, I'd put it down to the inker.

22 minutes ago, zhamlau said:

Who might I ask than is your top 5?

Limiting to the mainstream US comic book, no strip artists, no alt/underground, no foreign, it might be something like:

Kirby, Adams, Wood, Davis, Barks (but I might switch out anyone but Kirby for Eisner, Miller, Ditko or Toth)

Global top five for me might be:

Kirby, Tezuka, Foster, Crumb, Giraud/Moebius

4 hours ago, zhamlau said:

 Made my argument, stand by it. I understand many might view average selling price per page as the standard for top 5, nothing wrong with that. I’m just not one of ya.

Wait, does anyone use average selling price as the standard? I'm curious. I had the impression most people were applying some combo of talent/influence/important runs. Where I see you differing from most is your emphasis on volume and longevity.

12 hours ago, tth2 said:

 I love it.  Reminds me of a skit from a British TV comedy show years ago where Indian tourists are visiting the UK and want an authentic British food experience, so they ask the waiter for the food to be made as bland as possible.  

Obviously I would put Sal's big bro John in the list, and Rich Buckler would be in there too.  Curt Swan also comes to mind. 

The 70s was the golden age of soul-less corporate comic art, so I'm sure there'll be a lot of candidates from this era.

John B. had real gifts and flashed them for a couple years, 1968-70ish, so I think that keeps him out of the top 5. I thought of Swan, but went with Plastino because I think Swan kind of invented what I think of as Chamber-of-Commerce Superman, so again, a level of original contribution. Rich Buckler's an interesting nominee. I'm not aware of how large his body of work is. It's important that the artist be ploddingly reliable & consistently uninteresting over decades. How about Jim Mooney? His career ran from the birth of superheroes into the 90s and includes countless forgettable pages of Batman, Supergirl, Spiderman, and many others.