So will Alex Ross be considered the next Neal Adams?

[COI]

 

Yes, Neal Adams was a great artist, though I'm still trying to figure this cover out.

 

1) Why was batman wearing two sets of pants and over-the-pants underwear out in the desert?

 

2) How did he separate the cape from the cowl without tearing the mask or the cape?

 

3) Why did he stick the sword in the sand just short of Batman's chest? Was he trying to prove a point?

 

*Sorry to use your scan, Boozad. This is in no way a commentary on your sweet, sweet copy.

[bigfiver69]

This is a cool thread.

 

I actually don't think that Ross will be seen as a 'groundbreaker' like Adams was. And so, in 30 years time, I don't think he'll be sought after in the way that Adams is today.

 

As for Lee and MacFarlane, it's tough for me to comment, as I never bought many of the books they worked on.

 

For my money, though, there may be two artists that will grow in appeal over the next ten to fifteen years. (I know I'm going to get totally beaten up over this, but what the heck.) Both of them drew interiors, but both of them are renowned as great cover artists.

 

1. Dave Stevens. His early passing, low output and consistently high quality make Stevens an artist who already has a strong following - and that's just going to grow. His books in 9.6 to 9.8 are already fetching nice sums, and the nature of his subjects (sci-fi, horror and stunningly sexy women) will just burnish that appeal. Also, the limited output makes a total run of his covers possible, yet still a healthy challenge (owing to small press covers).

2. Brian Bolland. Bolland's DC steady output of stunning DC covers over the past 20 years have been one of the best things to enjoy about that publisher. Clean, evocative artwork accross a large number of titles give him broad appeal. He's more of a dark horse than someone like Stevens, but if you're not buying my argument, go to your local shop and pull out 10 or 20 random covers, and you'll know what I mean. He's a killer cover artist, and he's put together a very desirable body of work over the years for DC, from Camelot 3000 (pure fun) right up to his nice run of Flash covers.

 

There it is. Please let the arrows fly..

 

Shep

 

 

[bigfiver69]

Oh! One other argument for Bolland and Stevens (and perhaps for Ross as well).

 

The prices of their original art (covers especially) is very strong. I can't imagine what a sexy Dave Stevens cover would go for. Big numbers, fo' sho'.

 

Shep

 

 

[BRB-migration]

Yes, Neal Adams was a great artist, though I'm still trying to figure this cover out.

 

1) Why was batman wearing two sets of pants and over-the-pants underwear out in the desert?

 

2) How did he separate the cape from the cowl without tearing the mask or the cape?

 

3) Why did he stick the sword in the sand just short of Batman's chest? Was he trying to prove a point?

 

*Sorry to use your scan, Boozad. This is in no way a commentary on your sweet, sweet copy.

 

1. Can't find the interview, but iirc Neal said he drew Batman just in his shorts/underwear (or was it naked?), but the Higher Ups didn't like it. So instead of flesh colored legs, the Editors just had the lower half colored like his costume colors.

[kidcolt]

Comics are looked at much differently now then they were in the past. Comics were appreciated but enjoyed more for the story and artwork. Comics was once all about reading and collecting.

 

Now comics are more about business then the artwork and stories. How many comics did you buy as a kid and not read? How many do you buy now and not read? I think the times have changed and collectors look at artist and writers very differently now. I don't think there will ever be a time when a silir situation will happen as it did with Adams. I love ross but I think with the internet and companies pushing these artist and writers that nothing will be a surprise or unexpected. I think that the only hope for this is for people to get a new appreciation or renewed appreciation for older work by guys like John Byrne, guys who were popular when a lot of the new collectors first started collecting.

[nickwire]

i totally agree with bolland and stevens. i only see possibly mcfarlane out of all the image guys and i dont even think that warrented. bruce timm has defined a whole companies animated style so he has to be considered.

[Hello-migration]

If by "Neal Adams" you mean one of the best comic book artists, then yes, Alex Ross is one of the best comic book artists. If by "Neal Adams" you mean the best penciler/inker, then no, obviously. Alex Ross is a painter working with acrylics.

 

What they have most in common is the sense of realism they bestow upon their characters. Mr. Ross' realism, by working in paint, seems to have an edge over Mr. Adams' drawings.

 

Could Adam Hughes be considered the next Neal Adams? Some may consider the thought laughable. He certainly is the next Matt Baker.

 

Remember when Ken Kelly was the next Frazetta? (Whatever happened to Ken Kelly?)

 

Now, Mike Hoffman is the new Frazetta.

[Boozad]

*Sorry to use your scan, Boozad. This is in no way a commentary on your sweet, sweet copy.

 

You're welcome mate (thumbs u

[joe_collector]

what does their respective OA sell for? (let's compare paintings...)

 

Whoa! Holy Apples and Oranges, Batman!!!

[Zonker]

Yes, Neal Adams was a great artist, though I'm still trying to figure this cover out.

 

1) Why was batman wearing two sets of pants and over-the-pants underwear out in the desert?

 

2) How did he separate the cape from the cowl without tearing the mask or the cape?

 

3) Why did he stick the sword in the sand just short of Batman's chest? Was he trying to prove a point?

 

*Sorry to use your scan, Boozad. This is in no way a commentary on your sweet, sweet copy.

 

1. Can't find the interview, but iirc Neal said he drew Batman just in his shorts/underwear (or was it naked?), but the Higher Ups didn't like it. So instead of flesh colored legs, the Editors just had the lower half colored like his costume colors.

 

Neal himself provided that answer to The Beyonder, on these very boards a few years back.

 

Linkeroo

[Old Fashion PB and J]

The two artists are Apples and Oranges. Neither can do what the other does IMO.

 

Neal Adams did alot of really good work. But was given a HUGE boost by being the go-to-guy at DC and was the artist on some of the greatest stories ever. His artwork was very good, and groundbreaking for its time. And I would say he helped relieve DC of the "kiddie" comics and brought them on par with Marvel.

 

Alex Ross is an amazing artist and painter. His work on Kingdom Come and his cover art in general is head and shoulders above 99% of artists that come to mind. His work is just amazing and he has managed to make some of our favorite superheroes look like actual people instead of the standard comic images. The detail in his work, as wel as his originality make him one of the greatest comic artists of all time.

 

This is also all my own opinion.

[selegue]

Skateman

That was hideous, wasn't it.

 

 

 

[MutantKeys]

Alex Ross is more of an "artist" than most comic book artists. He's got real skill.

 

 

[the blob]

Originally Posted By: the blob

what does their respective OA sell for? (let's compare paintings...)

 

 

Whoa! Holy Apples and Oranges, Batman!!!

__________________________

 

I think it is a much closer comparison than whether 1st prints of Kingdom Come will be $10K in 20 years (which I assume is what some Adams book in 9.8 might be, GL 76 maybe), which you seemed to think was relevant.

 

i don't think comparing prices for illustrations makes a lot of sense as Ross doesn't have much in the way of line drawings, whereas Adams does paint (although not much in the way of published work)

[the blob]

His artwork was very good, and groundbreaking for its time.

-----------------------------------------

 

Well, let's not forget Cardy and Aparo, though Adams was the best of the three.

[BRB-migration]

Yes, Neal Adams was a great artist, though I'm still trying to figure this cover out.

 

1) Why was batman wearing two sets of pants and over-the-pants underwear out in the desert?

 

2) How did he separate the cape from the cowl without tearing the mask or the cape?

 

3) Why did he stick the sword in the sand just short of Batman's chest? Was he trying to prove a point?

 

*Sorry to use your scan, Boozad. This is in no way a commentary on your sweet, sweet copy.

 

1. Can't find the interview, but iirc Neal said he drew Batman just in his shorts/underwear (or was it naked?), but the Higher Ups didn't like it. So instead of flesh colored legs, the Editors just had the lower half colored like his costume colors.

 

Neal himself provided that answer to The Beyonder, on these very boards a few years back.

 

Linkeroo

 

Ah, thank you very much. I knew I had read something about it, but couldn't remember where.

[MR.COMICBOOK]

I thought Justice was fantastic. One of the few moderns worth picking up and collecting IMO.

 

It would be interesting to see which artist's items would be in more demand 20 yrs out...

Ross or Sudyam, both painters and primarily cover artists.

 

As a collectible, however, I see Laird/Eastman stuff worth more in the long run as time and time again, what makes a collectible valuable is partially, adults longing to recapture that part of their youth that was pop culturally iconic.

 

Justice was incredible. Kingdom Come however, lured me back into collecting.

I remember reading Marvels the first time and saying wow,who is this Ross guy?

I can`t remember the last time a modern comic artist(Ross contemporary) made me do that.Does Ross have any contemporaries like Adams had Wrightson?

[Boozad]

My copies of Kingdom Come are the ones I bought from the shelf, some of the few that survived from my original collection. They are battered as I've read them so much, Ross' art really was breathtaking.

 

Thing is I don't think he'll be an artist who will have a massive impact on the medium (as in inspiring a generation). Yes his work is phenomonal - no argument there - but he just won't inspire other artists to tackle comic books in that way. He's a one-off that should be enjoyed while he's around, but what the books he's worked on will fetch in years to come will define the importance of his contribution.

[the blob]

i dunno, painted stories are much more in vogue now and it's a format that may ultimately bring more "non-comic" readers into the fold who might not want to be caught dead reading more typical "illustration". granted, suydam has a more "artsy" feel to his work than ross, who is more rockwell on steroids.

[Scrooge]

Does Ross have any contemporaries like Adams had Wrightson?

 

Ross is not the only one providing painted interiors & covers to comic books. Off top of my head I can think of: Jon J. Muth, J.H. Williams III, John Bolton, Esad Ribic, ...