Rob Liefeld

[500Club]

I also hate late Sal Buscema

 

 

I could never decide quite how I felt about his PPTSS run. On one hand it was clean; on the other, it was minimalist.

 

I will tell you, adult me has some appreciation for it. Teenage me hated it.

 

But I wouldn't call it clean or minimalist.

 

I would call it loose and lazy.

Clean - all figures/structures rendered distinctly, foreground contrasted well with background... You don't find that?

 

The one thing he did was use the zig-zag hatching along muscle groups popularized by the subject of this thread, Mr Liefeld. That may have made the work look loose. I think that was a company-wide mandate, though, as Saviuk did the same on Web, and I think Ryan was doing it on FF, IIRC.

[Juno Beach]

The guy that gave us 40 worst Leifeld drawings gave us 40 more. Course, I guess you could argue Leifeld gave us 40 more.

http://www.progressiveboink.com/2012/6/14/3084348/the-second-40-worst-rob-liefeld-drawings

This was a really fun read. I find it more enjoyable to look over the picture first and see if I can pick out which parts the author is going to point out for ridicule. Inevitably I miss something that is egregiously awful. Though I had little difficulty figuring out what the author would zero in on with drawing #16.

 

There is one strange thing about the 2012 list of 40 bad Rob Liefield drawings. His Bad Drawing #14 from the 2007 list is the same as his Bad Drawing #7 from the 2012 list. Why is that? Maybe it was so bad the author listed it twice?

For #16 it was for him actually drawing a vagina, instead of hinting at it in all his other drawings of women. Oh, and her hand "holding" the sword is ridiculously bad.

[Juno Beach]

The guy that gave us 40 worst Leifeld drawings gave us 40 more. Course, I guess you could argue Leifeld gave us 40 more.

http://www.progressiveboink.com/2012/6/14/3084348/the-second-40-worst-rob-liefeld-drawings

This was a really fun read. I find it more enjoyable to look over the picture first and see if I can pick out which parts the author is going to point out for ridicule. Inevitably I miss something that is egregiously awful. Though I had little difficulty figuring out what the author would zero in on with drawing #16.

 

There is one strange thing about the 2012 list of 40 bad Rob Liefield drawings. His Bad Drawing #14 from the 2007 list is the same as his Bad Drawing #7 from the 2012 list. Why is that? Maybe it was so bad the author listed it twice?

 

You know what is funny is, as I read those lists, I become some something of a contrarian/apologist. There were multiple times when the author was ripping on Leifeld for something like, "not drawing the second leg at all" and I'm sitting there thinking, "...but I can SEE a second leg."

 

Sometimes, Leifeld bashers look too deeply for Leifeld flaws, and that guy is guilty of that. Not necessary really, as there's so much bad there to find fault with.

 

 

Another thing I find odd in this thread is all the love for Liefeld's personality- I've never met him, but have heard first hand horror stories about his legendary douchieness. I'm just processing all of this for now.

Which drawing do you think was unfairly ripped?

[Logan510]

I also hate late Sal Buscema

 

 

I could never decide quite how I felt about his PPTSS run. On one hand it was clean; on the other, it was minimalist.

 

I will tell you, adult me has some appreciation for it. Teenage me hated it.

 

But I wouldn't call it clean or minimalist.

 

I would call it loose and lazy.

Clean - all figures/structures rendered distinctly, foreground contrasted well with background... You don't find that?

 

The one thing he did was use the zig-zag hatching along muscle groups popularized by the subject of this thread, Mr Liefeld. That may have made the work look loose. I think that was a company-wide mandate, though, as Saviuk did the same on Web, and I think Ryan was doing it on FF, IIRC.

 

I hated the "west coast" style at the time. It was fine for guys like Jim Lee...but it hurt to see people like Sal B and Herb Trimpe have it forced upon their work by narrow minded editors.

[Doohickamabob]

The guy that gave us 40 worst Leifeld drawings gave us 40 more. Course, I guess you could argue Leifeld gave us 40 more.

http://www.progressiveboink.com/2012/6/14/3084348/the-second-40-worst-rob-liefeld-drawings

This was a really fun read. I find it more enjoyable to look over the picture first and see if I can pick out which parts the author is going to point out for ridicule. Inevitably I miss something that is egregiously awful. Though I had little difficulty figuring out what the author would zero in on with drawing #16.

 

There is one strange thing about the 2012 list of 40 bad Rob Liefield drawings. His Bad Drawing #14 from the 2007 list is the same as his Bad Drawing #7 from the 2012 list. Why is that? Maybe it was so bad the author listed it twice?

For #16 it was for him actually drawing a vagina, instead of hinting at it in all his other drawings of women. Oh, and her hand "holding" the sword is ridiculously bad.

I think you misinterpreted what I wrote.

[DeliBebek]

Delibeck,

 

Thanks for posting the Aragones vid.

 

He is truly a legend and the number one living creator on my to meet list.

I remember seeing a clip of him cartooning when I was a kid and I'm still amazed at how he sees the page before he even touches it.

 

I only wanted to disassociate loose with lazy. I agree that as artists mature they tend to find the right line more easily. As a result they don't stay as tight in their initial drawings. In some cases it continues to work. I think Miller mad-career was at his best.

 

I don't believe that more lines make a better drawing, or that solid contours are better than looser forms. Probably the best example of a comics artist losing interest after so many years is Gene Colan, who in the early '80s became one of the poster boys for "hacking" in some pros' estimation. At the same time, Silver Age favorites Gil Kane and Carmine Infantino were continuing to churn out very likeable work that was distinct and advanced from their earlier work.

 

There's no doubt that those you name, as well as Colan, had tremendous drawing talent and continued to develop their skills. Liefeld is nowhere near that list. He makes lines on paper, using a small collection of tricks he stumbled on through trial and error. It's clear from the video I linked that he doesn't have a sense of structure in his drawings.

[DeliBebek]

The guy that gave us 40 worst Leifeld drawings gave us 40 more. Course, I guess you could argue Leifeld gave us 40 more.

http://www.progressiveboink.com/2012/6/14/3084348/the-second-40-worst-rob-liefeld-drawings

This was a really fun read. I find it more enjoyable to look over the picture first and see if I can pick out which parts the author is going to point out for ridicule. Inevitably I miss something that is egregiously awful. Though I had little difficulty figuring out what the author would zero in on with drawing #16.

 

There is one strange thing about the 2012 list of 40 bad Rob Liefield drawings. His Bad Drawing #14 from the 2007 list is the same as his Bad Drawing #7 from the 2012 list. Why is that? Maybe it was so bad the author listed it twice?

 

You know what is funny is, as I read those lists, I become some something of a contrarian/apologist. There were multiple times when the author was ripping on Leifeld for something like, "not drawing the second leg at all" and I'm sitting there thinking, "...but I can SEE a second leg."

 

Sometimes, Leifeld bashers look too deeply for Leifeld flaws, and that guy is guilty of that. Not necessary really, as there's so much bad there to find fault with.

 

 

Another thing I find odd in this thread is all the love for Liefeld's personality- I've never met him, but have heard first hand horror stories about his legendary douchieness. I'm just processing all of this for now.

Which drawing do you think was unfairly ripped?

The one with the second leg and the second arm was the Crisis 7 "homage." I was more concerned with exactly how Deadpool was gripping Cable's body, but Cable does have two legs and two arms.

 

Although, the gaping mouth syndrome is an interesting insight into Liefeld's visual "language."

[Juno Beach]

The guy that gave us 40 worst Leifeld drawings gave us 40 more. Course, I guess you could argue Leifeld gave us 40 more.

http://www.progressiveboink.com/2012/6/14/3084348/the-second-40-worst-rob-liefeld-drawings

This was a really fun read. I find it more enjoyable to look over the picture first and see if I can pick out which parts the author is going to point out for ridicule. Inevitably I miss something that is egregiously awful. Though I had little difficulty figuring out what the author would zero in on with drawing #16.

 

There is one strange thing about the 2012 list of 40 bad Rob Liefield drawings. His Bad Drawing #14 from the 2007 list is the same as his Bad Drawing #7 from the 2012 list. Why is that? Maybe it was so bad the author listed it twice?

For #16 it was for him actually drawing a vagina, instead of hinting at it in all his other drawings of women. Oh, and her hand "holding" the sword is ridiculously bad.

I think you misinterpreted what I wrote.

Read that line completely wrong. Nevermind!

[Juno Beach]

The guy that gave us 40 worst Leifeld drawings gave us 40 more. Course, I guess you could argue Leifeld gave us 40 more.

http://www.progressiveboink.com/2012/6/14/3084348/the-second-40-worst-rob-liefeld-drawings

This was a really fun read. I find it more enjoyable to look over the picture first and see if I can pick out which parts the author is going to point out for ridicule. Inevitably I miss something that is egregiously awful. Though I had little difficulty figuring out what the author would zero in on with drawing #16.

 

There is one strange thing about the 2012 list of 40 bad Rob Liefield drawings. His Bad Drawing #14 from the 2007 list is the same as his Bad Drawing #7 from the 2012 list. Why is that? Maybe it was so bad the author listed it twice?

 

You know what is funny is, as I read those lists, I become some something of a contrarian/apologist. There were multiple times when the author was ripping on Leifeld for something like, "not drawing the second leg at all" and I'm sitting there thinking, "...but I can SEE a second leg."

 

Sometimes, Leifeld bashers look too deeply for Leifeld flaws, and that guy is guilty of that. Not necessary really, as there's so much bad there to find fault with.

 

 

Another thing I find odd in this thread is all the love for Liefeld's personality- I've never met him, but have heard first hand horror stories about his legendary douchieness. I'm just processing all of this for now.

Which drawing do you think was unfairly ripped?

The one with the second leg and the second arm was the Crisis 7 "homage." I was more concerned with exactly how Deadpool was gripping Cable's body, but Cable does have two legs and two arms.

 

Although, the gaping mouth syndrome is an interesting insight into Liefeld's visual "language."

At first I was only seeing one arm and leg but after I zoomed in on the picture you're right. But the way it's drawn is just so awkward it's almost an optical illusion.

[flipflopfly-migration]

I started off liking, now hate Ramos.

Same for me.  Okay in the 90s- Crimson, for example.

 

I can NOT believe how many issues of Amazing Spider-Man Ramos has drawn. Absolutely pathetic.

But hey, I don't begrudge them doing their own comic, that's fine. There are several guys that should ONLY be doing their own comic and should never draw a DC or Marvel comic again: Chris Bachalo, Skottie Young, Ramos, Erik Larsen, Mike Mignola, J. Scott Campbell, Liefeld, etc. Go; go draw your own book, be a great success - but stop mutilating the good characters!

[Ogami]

I also hate late Sal Buscema

 

 

I could never decide quite how I felt about his PPTSS run. On one hand it was clean; on the other, it was minimalist.

 

I will tell you, adult me has some appreciation for it. Teenage me hated it.

 

But I wouldn't call it clean or minimalist.

 

I would call it loose and lazy.

Clean - all figures/structures rendered distinctly, foreground contrasted well with background... You don't find that?

 

The one thing he did was use the zig-zag hatching along muscle groups popularized by the subject of this thread, Mr Liefeld. That may have made the work look loose. I think that was a company-wide mandate, though, as Saviuk did the same on Web, and I think Ryan was doing it on FF, IIRC.

 

You are remembering things differently than I am, my friend, although your point about company mandates squiggles makes sense. I could see that.

 

But the work itself was simply horrid. Pick up any of his issues, especially the later issues on Spec. Trust me.

[Ogami]

The guy that gave us 40 worst Leifeld drawings gave us 40 more. Course, I guess you could argue Leifeld gave us 40 more.

http://www.progressiveboink.com/2012/6/14/3084348/the-second-40-worst-rob-liefeld-drawings

This was a really fun read. I find it more enjoyable to look over the picture first and see if I can pick out which parts the author is going to point out for ridicule. Inevitably I miss something that is egregiously awful. Though I had little difficulty figuring out what the author would zero in on with drawing #16.

 

There is one strange thing about the 2012 list of 40 bad Rob Liefield drawings. His Bad Drawing #14 from the 2007 list is the same as his Bad Drawing #7 from the 2012 list. Why is that? Maybe it was so bad the author listed it twice?

 

You know what is funny is, as I read those lists, I become some something of a contrarian/apologist. There were multiple times when the author was ripping on Leifeld for something like, "not drawing the second leg at all" and I'm sitting there thinking, "...but I can SEE a second leg."

 

Sometimes, Leifeld bashers look too deeply for Leifeld flaws, and that guy is guilty of that. Not necessary really, as there's so much bad there to find fault with.

 

 

Another thing I find odd in this thread is all the love for Liefeld's personality- I've never met him, but have heard first hand horror stories about his legendary douchieness. I'm just processing all of this for now.

Which drawing do you think was unfairly ripped?

 

It's not any one drawing. They were all fine examples of badness. It's just that the author stretched a bit on a few of them to make his already made point.

 

Simple disagreements over perspective, overlapping forms, etc.

 

I'm certainly not going back to find which sub points I disagreed with him on. Just trying to be objective, and cut Rob the slightest bit of slack.

[Ogami]

Delibeck,

 

Thanks for posting the Aragones vid.

 

He is truly a legend and the number one living creator on my to meet list.

I remember seeing a clip of him cartooning when I was a kid and I'm still amazed at how he sees the page before he even touches it.

 

I only wanted to disassociate loose with lazy. I agree that as artists mature they tend to find the right line more easily. As a result they don't stay as tight in their initial drawings. In some cases it continues to work. I think Miller mad-career was at his best.

 

I don't believe that more lines make a better drawing, or that solid contours are better than looser forms. Probably the best example of a comics artist losing interest after so many years is Gene Colan, who in the early '80s became one of the poster boys for "hacking" in some pros' estimation. At the same time, Silver Age favorites Gil Kane and Carmine Infantino were continuing to churn out very likeable work that was distinct and advanced from their earlier work.

 

There's no doubt that those you name, as well as Colan, had tremendous drawing talent and continued to develop their skills. Liefeld is nowhere near that list. He makes lines on paper, using a small collection of tricks he stumbled on through trial and error. It's clear from the video I linked that he doesn't have a sense of structure in his drawings.

 

Generally speaking, I think you and I are on the same page. (thumbs u

 

 

[500Club]

I also hate late Sal Buscema

 

 

I could never decide quite how I felt about his PPTSS run. On one hand it was clean; on the other, it was minimalist.

 

I will tell you, adult me has some appreciation for it. Teenage me hated it.

 

But I wouldn't call it clean or minimalist.

 

I would call it loose and lazy.

Clean - all figures/structures rendered distinctly, foreground contrasted well with background... You don't find that?

 

The one thing he did was use the zig-zag hatching along muscle groups popularized by the subject of this thread, Mr Liefeld. That may have made the work look loose. I think that was a company-wide mandate, though, as Saviuk did the same on Web, and I think Ryan was doing it on FF, IIRC.

 

You are remembering things differently than I am, my friend, although your point about company mandates squiggles makes sense. I could see that.

 

But the work itself was simply horrid. Pick up any of his issues, especially the later issues on Spec. Trust me.

I think I'll wander back thru some of the books...

[Doohickamabob]

The guy that gave us 40 worst Leifeld drawings gave us 40 more. Course, I guess you could argue Leifeld gave us 40 more.

http://www.progressiveboink.com/2012/6/14/3084348/the-second-40-worst-rob-liefeld-drawings

This was a really fun read. I find it more enjoyable to look over the picture first and see if I can pick out which parts the author is going to point out for ridicule. Inevitably I miss something that is egregiously awful. Though I had little difficulty figuring out what the author would zero in on with drawing #16.

 

There is one strange thing about the 2012 list of 40 bad Rob Liefield drawings. His Bad Drawing #14 from the 2007 list is the same as his Bad Drawing #7 from the 2012 list. Why is that? Maybe it was so bad the author listed it twice?

For #16 it was for him actually drawing a vagina, instead of hinting at it in all his other drawings of women. Oh, and her hand "holding" the sword is ridiculously bad.

I think you misinterpreted what I wrote.

Read that line completely wrong. Nevermind!

What a difference a single letter makes...

[buttock]

That's a horrible rug that Stan is wearing.

[NelsonAI]

Full Disclosure: I own an original art page by Rob Liefeld / Bob Wiacek in my permanent collection. It's from New Mutants and features a splash of Archangel. Yes, he drew feet. . I also have a Wolverine panel page.

 

I believe New Mutants was his best period. His anatomy wasn't bad. When he started drawing X-Force, he was simultaneously trying to launch his Image titles. With tight monthly deadlines, the quality of his art diminished and backgrounds were replaced by speedlines.

 

Now with that said, aren't the editors of the book responsible for the quality of the product? Weren't Romita Sr. and Marie Severin were on staff to do corrections? Over the years, we have seen them correct and paste over other artists' work. Why not Rob's if it were so bad? Why didn't the editors reject the art? If you are going to criticize Rob, there are certainly others to criticize as well. Was Mark Pacella's art any better? Who was buying the multiple copies of his books as speculators?

 

In all the years, I've come across Rob at shows, he has always been super nice to his fans. Even at his peak, when lines were several blocks long, he stayed to sign autographs for everyone.

 

Many of the people that bash him are usually the same people that hand him a stack of comics for autographs. If you are going to ask him to sign fifty copies of New Mutants, at least buy a $20 sketchbook from him. After all, he is paying for his booth and travel expenses. You'll make the money back flipping those comics he signed. .

 

He created Cable and Deadpool. (Louise Simonson got co-creator credit but we all know it was Rob's concept from start to finish). 2 characters that are still popular today. No one can take that away from him.

 

Cheers!

N.