The Colletta Problem

[drdroom]

 

The pencils didn't get erased in this Soul Love page in Feb C-Link, and consequently it offers a great opportunity to look at the inking choices Colletta made over Kirby. Looking at the forehead, hands and jowl of the male character, and various zig-zag details and shadow indications in the backgrounds we see Colletta repeatedly avoiding the bold and abstract parts of Kirby's drawing, as well as leaving out occasional details altogether-- a pencil on the dresser in panel 2 (which would have been a reasonably valuable indication of character) and a lamp or something in the lower left of panel 3.

 

Another observation is that Colletta doesn't actually follow Kirby's lines at all in many cases-- he draws a line next to Kirby's line, with a similar curve, but it's not the same curve or the same location. The whole ink drawing is a loose approximation of Kirby, biased toward Colletta's idea of a normative romance comic style. & we have no idea how Kirby originally drew the gal's face!

 

 

[suspense39]

this would be intersting to see next to the printed page, part of the choices might be due to the fact that colleta anticipated what would be added during the printing process. Not that that wouldn't affect the look of Kirby's mark making on the original page. nice observations!

[drdroom]

this would be intersting to see next to the printed page, part of the choices might be due to the fact that colleta anticipated what would be added during the printing process. Not that that wouldn't affect the look of Kirby's mark making on the original page. nice observations!

 

I don't think it was ever published, sadly.

[Koa]

I've read stories that Vince would omit pencils just to make the drive back to long island before rush hour. Could it have been just artistic choice? he seems to use the pencils as a guide. Personally, i don't care for his inks compared to Sinnott or Royer over kirby .

[Terry Doyle]

I'm inclined to believe that Vinnie was exercising his right, as an artist, to have his own imprint on the finished art.

 

Tracing Kirby's pencils, via the application of ink, would hardly have been much of a challenge for someone who also penciled his own stuff.

[rrichards]

That’s the great thing about those pages ! I owned them at one time and unfortunately had to let them go, but they had so much Kirby pencil still visible that it seemed like Jack was going to come back into the room and resume working on them at any minute . Truly an amazing insight to the process.

As far as Colletta is concerned ,these pages were never published . Perhaps if they were ,he may have come back and erased all the pencils and tightened them up with some additional inks. In this case ,I’m glad he didn’t .

As far as Colletta is concerned we always have to remember that these guys were always on a tight , rushed schedule and they all tried to cut corners when they could .I’d like to think that if Vinnie had all the time in the world ,that he would have done a more detailed job, but again, in this case I’m glad he didn’t.

[Koa]

I'm inclined to believe that Vinnie was exercising his right, as an artist, to have his own imprint on the finished art.

 

Tracing Kirby's pencils, via the application of ink, would hardly have been much of a challenge for someone who also penciled his own stuff.

 

Yes, on that page it strikes me more as artistic choices. The bits omitted make artistic sense. However the best parts of Kirby's work were often completely nonsensical, but visually powerful.

[drdroom]

I'm inclined to believe that Vinnie was exercising his right, as an artist, to have his own imprint on the finished art.

 

Tracing Kirby's pencils, via the application of ink, would hardly have been much of a challenge for someone who also penciled his own stuff.

 

Royer also pencilled his own stuff, but was still interested in doing a faithful interpretation of the pencils. I wouldn't call what any inker does 'tracing' exactly. At the micro-level of line-by-line rendering there are still an infinite number of tiny decisions to be made. Ink, after all, is different from pencil lead.

 

With all due respect to deadline pressures, I agree that Vinnie was making artistic choices. I think he considered Kirby's actual drawing style unpalatable in its expressionism and tried to soften it so that, for example, the girl would look pretty and feminine like a romance heroine, and the guy would appear more or less normal and not like dark energies were surging through his whole being.

 

-Aaron

[Terry Doyle]

I'm inclined to believe that Vinnie was exercising his right, as an artist, to have his own imprint on the finished art.

 

Tracing Kirby's pencils, via the application of ink, would hardly have been much of a challenge for someone who also penciled his own stuff.

 

I wouldn't call what any inker does 'tracing' exactly.

 

-Aaron

 

If the inks match, exactly, the pencils, I would definitely liken it to more of a tracing job than a true collaboration (where the inker makes artistic choices to embellish).

[MB1952]

I've read stories that Vince would omit pencils just to make the drive back to long island before rush hour. Could it have been just artistic choice? he seems to use the pencils as a guide. Personally, i don't care for his inks compared to Sinnott or Royer over kirby .

 

Same thing happen to Matt Baker pencils over at Harvey only the train eye can spot pencils behind Colletta inks.

[Jeffro.]

I've read stories that Vince would omit pencils just to make the drive back to long island before rush hour. Could it have been just artistic choice? he seems to use the pencils as a guide. Personally, i don't care for his inks compared to Sinnott or Royer over kirby .

 

Colletta ruined every penciler he inked.

[Niblos!]

Anyone who hasn't read "The Thin Black Line: Perspectives on Vince Colletta, Comics' Most Controversial Inker" should grab a copy, it is superb. I totally understand Colletta had deadlines (let's face it, he wasn't getting paid very well) and I see how Kirby purists could call foul with all the erased pencils, but I also see how much beauty Colletta brought to a lot of his work such as "Thor" as well as he first issue of "In the Day of the Mob." Both of those titles are excellent examples of what Colletta did bring to the table and showcases his wonderful talent. I know I may be in the minority but I really love his work.

[drdroom]

I'm inclined to believe that Vinnie was exercising his right, as an artist, to have his own imprint on the finished art.

 

Tracing Kirby's pencils, via the application of ink, would hardly have been much of a challenge for someone who also penciled his own stuff.

 

I wouldn't call what any inker does 'tracing' exactly.

 

-Aaron

 

If the inks match, exactly, the pencils, I would definitely liken it to more of a tracing job than a true collaboration (where the inker makes artistic choices to embellish).

 

In that case my opinion is that Mike Royer made the best artistic decision in comics history when he decided to ink Jack accurately!

[drdroom]

Another way of thinking about it is to consider Sinnott rather than Royer as the counter-example. Sinnott, who almost everyone loves, clearly added something of his own, but, I would say, without betraying the intentions of the penciller. On the page I posted, for example, Jack WANTED the man's brow to be clouded with energy, his hand to be black with shadow. That was how Jack wanted to tell that story. Sinnott might have smoothed his edges a little, but Colletta straight sold him out.

[Koa]

I see Terry's point but I'd say there is plenty of room for expression in inking while being faithful to the intent of the pencils. Al Williamson had some of the most distinctive inks of the past 30 years, yet every penciler he worked with looked liked whoever they were. Inkers like Kevin Nowlan can suck the life out of some pencils (John Buscema) and make others (Jon Boganove) look amazing. It's very clear to me Colletta was a talented artist but maybe not the right match for Jack, but it is what it is. Luckily Kirby has done so much work, there is something for everyone.

 

Now Joe Sinnott made Kirby look good, but man did I dislike him over Neal Adams and John buscema...

[drdroom]

Now Joe Sinnott made Kirby look good, but man did I dislike him over Neal Adams and John buscema...

 

A few inkers fell foul of Adams-- Verpoorten & Giacoia come to mind. Both, like Sinnott, with a pretty heavy line. I wonder how Colletta would have looked over Adams? I don't recall ever seeing that combination. I would certainly group Colletta more in the Giordano/ Palmer school.

[Terry Doyle]

I'm inclined to believe that Vinnie was exercising his right, as an artist, to have his own imprint on the finished art.

 

Tracing Kirby's pencils, via the application of ink, would hardly have been much of a challenge for someone who also penciled his own stuff.

 

I wouldn't call what any inker does 'tracing' exactly.

 

-Aaron

 

If the inks match, exactly, the pencils, I would definitely liken it to more of a tracing job than a true collaboration (where the inker makes artistic choices to embellish).

 

In that case my opinion is that Mike Royer made the best artistic decision in comics history when he decided to ink Jack accurately!

 

Prefer Syd Shores, Chic Stone or Joe Sinnott any day. They remained faithful to Kirby's intentions while bringing something new to the artistic mix.

 

I like Mike Royer's inking, but it hardly excites me.

 

Syd Shores' inking assignments for Kirby's work on Captain America (just after Cap was awarded his own title following on from Tales of Suspense) are exceptionally good.

 

 

[Niblos!]

"I like Mike Royer's inking, but it hardly excites me."

 

Exactly. I must admit I enjoy his lettering this most.

[stinkininkin]

I'm inclined to believe that Vinnie was exercising his right, as an artist, to have his own imprint on the finished art.

 

Tracing Kirby's pencils, via the application of ink, would hardly have been much of a challenge for someone who also penciled his own stuff.

 

I wouldn't call what any inker does 'tracing' exactly.

 

-Aaron

 

If the inks match, exactly, the pencils, I would definitely liken it to more of a tracing job than a true collaboration (where the inker makes artistic choices to embellish).

 

In that case my opinion is that Mike Royer made the best artistic decision in comics history when he decided to ink Jack accurately!

 

Prefer Syd Shores, Chic Stone or Joe Sinnott any day. They remained faithful to Kirby's intentions while bringing something new to the artistic mix.

 

I like Mike Royer's inking, but it hardly excites me.

 

Syd Shores inking assignments for Kirby's work on Captain America (just after Cap was awarded his own title following on from Tales of Suspense) are exceptionally good.

 

 

The first Kirby I ever owned was a Kirby/Sinnot. But the second one was the Syd Shores inked cover of Capt. America 108, bought at auction at Sotheby's in the early 90's. I did not own the cover very long before I realized it was not a keeper for me. The Shores inking just looked "wrong" to me and still does. At least now it is in Glen Golds collection where it is treasured and where it belongs. I love it when art ends up in the right collection.

 

For the record, my favorite Kirby inkers are Sinnot, Stone and Giacoia. And in my opinion, not EVERY Colletta/Kirby job was a bad job, but most are.

 

Scott

[delekkerste]

I'm generally not a big fan of Shores over Kirby, but, then I look at a cover like Cap #101 where he did an outstanding job. Likewise, I don't like much Colletta over Kirby, but, every now and again you see a piece that looks amazing, like that FF panel page (think the Thing is on the ground in the big bottom panel, fighting Doom maybe?) that sold for $36K-ish on Heritage a while back.