• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Which one would you rather have?

Started by clemso,

34 posts in this topic

Sal

Sal

Posted
Posted

The inked copy looks more like someone trying to mimic a Kirby style than actual Jack Kirby.

 

 

Another vote for the pencilled one

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted

yeah I think you guys are being way too hard on the inked piece. Its what a pure kirby AF15 cover would look like if it came out in the 35c "devil dinosaur" era instead of 1962.

 

The original published cover is not a characteristically kirby piece, really. Sure you can see his hand but when ditko inked jack's work the result was not ditko and quite kirby but kind of an amalgam style.

 

If you were able to strip the AF15 image from everyone's consciousness and you just asked 10 comic fans which piece looked like "more" kirby to them, I bet 8 or more would say the inked piece. It absolutely looks like a 70s kirby piece, even if it is inked by someone unfamiliar to most fans.

 

That's why I like the inked piece better. It looks more like the typical art of my favorite comic artist.

 

The whole question as to value is separate and should be kept separate. Clearly the pencils are more valuable because some comic nerd like us can put that on the wall and feel like he "sorta" has the AF15 cover. The inked piece doesn't do that for you, but its not trying to. Its not trying to recreate anything, its jack being jack and reinterpreting at a later date what he did before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
clemso

clemso

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Please bare in mind also, that the inked piece was drawn late 70s early 80s and the pencil recreation was done in the early 90s. Surely his drawing skills were not improving? The pencil piece is an illusion of sorts. I once owned Jack's pencil cover recreation to Hulk 2. It looked just like the cover to Hulk 2, but what really put me off it and consequently made me dump it, was that it really had Ditko all over it. Yes Jack made such a faithful line for line lightbox copy of the cover that he even put in Ditko's half as well. I think the inked piece has more merit, its a free hand (obviously Jack referenced the cover) drawing and re interpretation of this land mark cover, typical of his late period style..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing