Miller/Janson DD? 3 3

[J.Sid]

Yes, a bunch of the OA pages from the "Child's Play" storyline actually have "167" written on the tops. They also feature some re-scripted word balloons where Miller altered the dialogue.

 

Would be interesting to hear from Frank. See if his story corroborates Klaus' story.

 

But in all reality, there's a good chance neither one of them remembers correctly. (Can YOU remember the details of your workday from a job 30 years ago?)

[delekkerste]

I suppose it's already been brought up, but if you just compare the linework of #185-190, to #184, #183, #180, there is a clear difference. The previous issues still show a classic Miller line (though he was even this early starting to develop the more delicate pencils that would be seen in Ronin), and it's clear from #185-190 that the work is all Klaus. So, even if Miller was only doing basic layouts from #179 on, he was either doing a little bit more linework than just outlines, or Klaus was doing a very good job of mimicking Miller by this point (and probably a mix of the two.)

 

I'm not going to name names, but there are some big collectors who believe that Miller did on-board layouts on #181 due to some stylistic cues they see. I looked myself and, frankly, I can't tell one way or another. Between Miller's signature being stamped on the layout and story flow and Klaus mimicking Frank's style, I think it's very difficult to tell definitively just from looking at the art. I'm willing to keep an open mind that separate sheet layouts were done as far back as #179 (I think it's tough to say definitively from that interview posted earlier exactly what "at some point in the last year" means - who knows when exactly that interview was done or whether Frank was thinking "within the last year" but it was actually longer, etc.).

 

My feeling is that the best interiors from the entire run are the Bullseye vs. Elektra pages from #181 and the Daredevil vs. Elektra pages from #179. And now, both of these are allegedly all-Janson? Even if that's the case, are we really going to devalue these pages to being worth less than some lesser pages which allegedly were touched by Miller? I just don't think that's going to happen. At the end of the day, it was Miller's idea, vision and plan that Klaus executed. Would I take a DD #177 page over my great #181 page just because Miller touched the former? Of course not. At the end of the day, #181 is one of the greatest comics of all-time and pages from that issue would be worth a premium even if a far lesser artist than Klaus had drawn it.

 

I think market resistance to the separate sheet layout issues has been fading for a while now, anyway, starting with the relatively healthy prices those #190 pages fetched as they came up for sale over the past few years. And, the market hasn't really seemed to mind that Miller drew "loose squiggles" when giving Rubinstein the layouts for the Wolverine Limited Series (does it really matter that it was on-board when they were less detailed than the separate sheet layouts that Miller did for DD?) At the end of the day, whether Miller was doing loose layouts on the board or on separate sheets of paper, the art for both DD #173-#190 and the Wolvie LS both look great and have Miller's signature (as in vision) stamped all over them. My feeling is that, at the end of the day, that is what people are going to ultimately care about.

[alxjhnsn]

On the comicart-l, we had a long conversation on the topic and this was the consensus there and I took notes and created this summary:

 

• DD #158-172: Full pencils by Miller, inks by Janson.
  
• DD #173-180: Layouts by Miller in the same sheet, embellishment by Janson.
  
• DD #181: Layouts by Miller in a DIFFERENT smaller sheet, embellishment by Janson. Miller didn't touch the original art.
  
• DD #182-184: Layouts by Miller in the same sheet, embellishment by Janson.
  Notes:
  
  • Theory: Issues 182-184 (Punisher arc) were originally intended for an earlier publication and probably have a mix of (Miller pencils/Janson inks) and all Jansen pages from Miller layouts. It might be difficult to know who actually did what as the story was altered for the revised publication and changed situation.
    
  • MikeyO, the proposer of the theory in the note above, later wrote:
    

    My theory is logical but needs support from other sources. Some one could counter and say the previous art drawn by Miller a year and a half or so ago may have been used as a complete issue (perhaps issue 183?). My guess is that other pages were inserted but I still think verification is necessary.
     
    Mitch [itkowitz] had responded that your previous supposition was correct (that Miller went to breakdowns and Janson finished on the same page for 182 to 184), but if you think about the possible rationalization that Mitch is using to assume this you can determine he may be coming to an erroneous conclusion. As Mitch said he got the whole issue of 181 from Janson to sell because he essentially drew the issue, so Mitch would assume any issue he received the complete book would be done in this method and any book where Mitch received only partial pages to an issue would indicate that Miller did breakdowns on the page and Janson finished. The problem with that logic is that as we have discussed that some pages to issues 182-4 would have been done by Miller more than a year ago and obviously returned to him and Janson could still be working the procedure of following Miller layouts on 8 by 11 paper that was instituted with issue 181 on the pages that were added to issues 182-4. Therefore, Mitch would not get a complete book as Miller would get his pages back even though they were done many months ago but Janson could still be the only person that added anything new.
     
    Others have said that the Punisher storyline was meant for issue 167 as a one part story. As said, my rationale is that they added pages to make up a two part story. Evidence to lend credence to my theory is given by Grand Comic Book Database that credits Roger McKenzie as the co writer for issue 183 and 184. Roger's last story on DD was issue 167 and after that he was done with the title, so they are obviously crediting him with both issues as they broke up the one issue and expanded into two. Now, the question is was the new art done by the process started in 181 or did Miller work on the same sheet as Janson? It's bending a little towards the former, but not a dunk yet.

  [*]DD #185-190: Layouts by Miller in a DIFFERENT smaller sheet, embellishment by Janson. Miller didn't touch the original art.

  [*]DD #191: Full pencils by Miller, inks by Austin

 

[Yes, this might make my head explode. All I know is it was great reading off the stands way back when. ]

 

 

Should I revise this or annotate it differently?

[DocR]

On the comicart-l, we had a long conversation on the topic and this was the consensus there and I took notes and created this summary:

 

• DD #158-172: Full pencils by Miller, inks by Janson.
  
• DD #173-180: Layouts by Miller in the same sheet, embellishment by Janson.
  
• DD #181: Layouts by Miller in a DIFFERENT smaller sheet, embellishment by Janson. Miller didn't touch the original art.
  
• DD #182-184: Layouts by Miller in the same sheet, embellishment by Janson.
  Notes:
  
  • Theory: Issues 182-184 (Punisher arc) were originally intended for an earlier publication and probably have a mix of (Miller pencils/Janson inks) and all Jansen pages from Miller layouts. It might be difficult to know who actually did what as the story was altered for the revised publication and changed situation.
    
  • MikeyO, the proposer of the theory in the note above, later wrote:
    

    My theory is logical but needs support from other sources. Some one could counter and say the previous art drawn by Miller a year and a half or so ago may have been used as a complete issue (perhaps issue 183?). My guess is that other pages were inserted but I still think verification is necessary.
     
    Mitch [itkowitz] had responded that your previous supposition was correct (that Miller went to breakdowns and Janson finished on the same page for 182 to 184), but if you think about the possible rationalization that Mitch is using to assume this you can determine he may be coming to an erroneous conclusion. As Mitch said he got the whole issue of 181 from Janson to sell because he essentially drew the issue, so Mitch would assume any issue he received the complete book would be done in this method and any book where Mitch received only partial pages to an issue would indicate that Miller did breakdowns on the page and Janson finished. The problem with that logic is that as we have discussed that some pages to issues 182-4 would have been done by Miller more than a year ago and obviously returned to him and Janson could still be working the procedure of following Miller layouts on 8 by 11 paper that was instituted with issue 181 on the pages that were added to issues 182-4. Therefore, Mitch would not get a complete book as Miller would get his pages back even though they were done many months ago but Janson could still be the only person that added anything new.
     
    Others have said that the Punisher storyline was meant for issue 167 as a one part story. As said, my rationale is that they added pages to make up a two part story. Evidence to lend credence to my theory is given by Grand Comic Book Database that credits Roger McKenzie as the co writer for issue 183 and 184. Roger's last story on DD was issue 167 and after that he was done with the title, so they are obviously crediting him with both issues as they broke up the one issue and expanded into two. Now, the question is was the new art done by the process started in 181 or did Miller work on the same sheet as Janson? It's bending a little towards the former, but not a dunk yet.

  [*]DD #185-190: Layouts by Miller in a DIFFERENT smaller sheet, embellishment by Janson. Miller didn't touch the original art.

  [*]DD #191: Full pencils by Miller, inks by Austin

 

[Yes, this might make my head explode. All I know is it was great reading off the stands way back when. ]

 

 

Should I revise this or annotate it differently?

 

This has been my understanding of the consensus as well.

[Speedy-D]

An excellent summary Alex, thanks!

[delekkerste]

DD #158-172: Full pencils by Miller, inks by Janson.

 

While we're clearing things up, I might as well note that Rubinstein was the inker for #158, was the co-inker (with Janson) for #163 and Ditko of course did all the art for #162.

 

Just for the sake of posterity, I'm re-posting what I wrote in another thread in this one:

 

I totally agree that Miller as writer adds tremendous value and that's something you can't extrapolate across the board [to other artists who didn't carry the writing chores as well]. Aside from the Wolverine Limited Series, is there anything drawn by Miller that he drew that's as nearly as coveted as the stuff that he wrote? With Miller, it's really the totality of his storytelling ability that is prized by collectors and the cognoscenti. If he had never been a writer and had just drawn other peoples' stories, I doubt the art would be even remotely as coveted as it is today - his pre-Ronin art (i.e., the Marvel era) is nowhere near as distinctive as, say, a Sienkiewicz, nor as pretty as, say, a Byrne. Before he did Ronin and DKR, etc., his "prettiest" work was probably the Wolvie LS, and that was due largely to Rubinstein doing most of the heavy lifting regarding the art (Rubinstein described that Miller gave him "loose squiggles" to work with, and I believe it given how different it looks from his other Marvel work).

 

Regarding his DD run, let's break it down:

 

#158-#167 - full pencils by Miller, scripting by McKenzie, Semi-memorable at best.

#168-#172 - full pencils by Miller, scripting by Miller. VERY memorable.

#173-#180 - layouts by Miller, scripting by Miller. VERY memorable.

#181 - Separate layouts by Miller, scripting by Miller. EXTREMELY memorable, Greatest of All-Time candidate.

#182-#184 - layouts by Miller, Scripting by Miller. VERY memorable.

#185-#190 - Separate layouts by Miller, scripting by Miller. Semi-memorable.

#191 - full pencils by Miller, scripting by Miller. Memorable.

 

At the end of the day, I'm taking any of the VERY and EXTREMELY memorable pages over the semi-memorable ones any day of the week. Who in their right mind would value a DD #167 page over a #181 page even if the former is full Miller pencils? It's just not that memorable an issue, and, whether it's all-Klaus or not, the #181 art just looks nicer anyway!

 

If this is mind-blowing to some, here's an easy way to rationalize it - #181 gets a 100% premium for being from one of, if not the greatest Marvel keys of all-time. Then take a 50% discount for it being separate Miller layouts (if that's indeed the case). Voila! Back to being normally valued. Now, the #185-#190 separate layout pages - to me, that's another story, because the storyline is not as memorable. There, I'd take a discount to other Miller DD pages because there is no premium for the content.

[delekkerste]

I've been talking offline with someone about this issue and wrote the below, which I thought I would share:

 

At the end of the day, Miller didn't write #158-#167, so I personally discount those pages just as much as pages from issues #185-#190 (even though the former are full Miller pencils and the latter are Miller separate sheet layouts). At least with #185-#190, I somewhat care about the storyline. Pre-#168, though? Ehhhh...I don't know about you guys, but those are issues that I never/rarely go back to re-read, because it's Miller's writing that I want (whether it's drawn by himself, by Janson or by Mazzuchelli) just as much as his art.

 

Similarly, #173-#180 may have had only loose Miller breakdowns, but the art generally looks better and the story is definitely better than #168-172 taken as a whole (of course I love #168 on its own, though). And, if #181 is actually all-Janson...well, again, #181 looks and reads better, is more important, and more loved than any other issue in the run - it is the pinnacle of Miller DD, full stop (DD #227 I would say comes admirably close and is the next best single Miller DD issue...Frank's pencil never touched those boards either, though!) Maybe if Frank had wrote #181 and some hack had drawn it, those pages would trade at a discount, but between Frank's signature layouts and Klaus' consistent inks throughout, even trained eyes can't tell the difference between who drew #181 and who drew the other issues looking at the art alone.

 

To me, it's much ado about nothing - I wouldn't even think of trading my #181 page for any page from #158-#167 (actually for any non-Elektra page in the run) and there are only a handful of pages from #173-#180 I would take over it as well (and all of those because of Elektra appearances, not because it matters to me that Miller touched his pencil to those boards).

[stinkininkin]

I've been talking offline with someone about this issue and wrote the below, which I thought I would share:

 

At the end of the day, Miller didn't write #158-#167, so I personally discount those pages just as much as pages from issues #185-#190 (even though the former are full Miller pencils and the latter are Miller separate sheet layouts). At least with #185-#190, I somewhat care about the storyline. Pre-#168, though? Ehhhh...I don't know about you guys, but those are issues that I never/rarely go back to re-read, because it's Miller's writing that I want (whether it's drawn by himself, by Janson or by Mazzuchelli) just as much as his art.

 

Similarly, #173-#180 may have had only loose Miller breakdowns, but the art generally looks better and the story is definitely better than #168-172 taken as a whole (of course I love #168 on its own, though). And, if #181 is actually all-Janson...well, again, #181 looks and reads better, is more important, and more loved than any other issue in the run - it is the pinnacle of Miller DD, full stop (DD #227 I would say comes admirably close and is the next best single Miller DD issue...Frank's pencil never touched those boards either, though!) Maybe if Frank had wrote #181 and some hack had drawn it, those pages would trade at a discount, but between Frank's signature layouts and Klaus' consistent inks throughout, even trained eyes can't tell the difference between who drew #181 and who drew the other issues looking at the art alone.

 

To me, it's much ado about nothing - I wouldn't even think of trading my #181 page for any page from #158-#167 (actually for any non-Elektra page in the run) and there are only a handful of pages from #173-#180 I would take over it as well (and all of those because of Elektra appearances, not because it matters to me that Miller touched his pencil to those boards).

 

I generally agree with this Gene, but comic nerd that I am, I'm going to disagree that DD 173-180 is DEFINITELY better than DD 168-172. Rather than talk down some of the 173-180 issues (of which there were some far more memorable than others), I prefer to sing the praises for DD 168-172, which brought us Electra for the first time in such memorable fashion, but also gave us the GANG WAR storyline, which is what really brought the whole organized crime slant to the book, and what made Kingpin the lynchpin of the whole Miller DD saga, right on up to and including the Born Again storyline. Most people remember Electra and Bullseye as being the key side characters in the Miller DD universe, but I'd argue that Kingpin is just as vital. Frankly, Kingpin had been a bit of a nothing character to me until Miller fleshed him out, making him both evil and human, and eventually (Born Again), ruthlessly cunning. And from my perspective, the GANG WAR story is kind of where I felt like the whole series began to really mature and gain it's momentum.

Again, I doubt we disagree very much here Gene, but DD 168-172 taken as a whole is just too good to be even marginally slighted.

 

Scott

Edited September 13, 2014 by stinkininkin

[stinkininkin]

I've been talking offline with someone about this issue and wrote the below, which I thought I would share:

 

At the end of the day, Miller didn't write #158-#167, so I personally discount those pages just as much as pages from issues #185-#190 (even though the former are full Miller pencils and the latter are Miller separate sheet layouts). At least with #185-#190, I somewhat care about the storyline. Pre-#168, though? Ehhhh...I don't know about you guys, but those are issues that I never/rarely go back to re-read, because it's Miller's writing that I want (whether it's drawn by himself, by Janson or by Mazzuchelli) just as much as his art.

 

Similarly, #173-#180 may have had only loose Miller breakdowns, but the art generally looks better and the story is definitely better than #168-172 taken as a whole (of course I love #168 on its own, though). And, if #181 is actually all-Janson...well, again, #181 looks and reads better, is more important, and more loved than any other issue in the run - it is the pinnacle of Miller DD, full stop (DD #227 I would say comes admirably close and is the next best single Miller DD issue...Frank's pencil never touched those boards either, though!) Maybe if Frank had wrote #181 and some hack had drawn it, those pages would trade at a discount, but between Frank's signature layouts and Klaus' consistent inks throughout, even trained eyes can't tell the difference between who drew #181 and who drew the other issues looking at the art alone.

 

To me, it's much ado about nothing - I wouldn't even think of trading my #181 page for any page from #158-#167 (actually for any non-Elektra page in the run) and there are only a handful of pages from #173-#180 I would take over it as well (and all of those because of Elektra appearances, not because it matters to me that Miller touched his pencil to those boards).

 

I generally agree with this Gene, but comic nerd that I am, I'm going to disagree that DD 173-180 is DEFINITELY better than DD 168-172. Rather than talk down some of the 173-180 issues (of which there were some far more memorable than others), I prefer to sing the praises for DD 168-172, which brought us Electra for the first time in such memorable fashion, but also gave us the GANG WAR storyline, which is what really brought the whole organized crime slant to the book, and what made Kingpin the lynchpin of the whole Miller DD saga, right on up and including the Born Again storyline. Most people remember Electra and Bullseye as being the key side characters in the Miller DD universe, but I'd argue that Kingpin is just as vital. Frankly, Kingpin had been a bit of nothing character to me until Miller fleshed him out, making him both evil and human, and eventually (Born Again), ruthlessly cunning. And from my perspective, the GANG WAR story is kind of where I felt like the whole series began to really mature and gain it's momentum.

Again, I doubt we disagree very much here Gene, but DD 168-172 taken as a whole is just too good to be even marginally slighted.

 

Scott

 

Oh, and it goes without saying (for me at least), that I simply do not care who touched what on a book like DD 181. Would not affect what I would pay or sell one of those pages for in the slightest. Killer art is killer art and killer story is, well, you know...

 

Scott

 

[alxjhnsn]

Updated with notes from Gene Park on 158, 162, 163:

 

------

 

On the comicart-l and the CGC OA board, we had a long conversation on the topic and this was the consensus there and I took notes and created this summary:

 

• DD #158-161,163-172: Full pencils by Miller, inks by Janson.
  Notes:
  
  • Rubinstein was the inker for #158
    
  • Ditko did all the art for #162
    
  • Rubinstein was the co-inker (with Janson) for #163

  [*]DD #173-180: Layouts by Miller in the same sheet, embellishment by Janson.

  [*]DD #181: Layouts by Miller in a DIFFERENT smaller sheet, embellishment by Janson. Miller didn't touch the original art.

  [*]DD #182-184: Layouts by Miller in the same sheet, embellishment by Janson.

  Notes:

  • Theory: Issues 182-184 (Punisher arc) were originally intended for an earlier publication and probably have a mix of (Miller pencils/Janson inks) and all Jansen pages from Miller layouts. It might be difficult to know who actually did what as the story was altered for the revised publication and changed situation.
    
  • MikeyO, the proposer of the theory in the note above, later wrote:
    

    My theory is logical but needs support from other sources. Some one could counter and say the previous art drawn by Miller a year and a half or so ago may have been used as a complete issue (perhaps issue 183?). My guess is that other pages were inserted but I still think verification is necessary.
     
    Mitch [itkowitz] had responded that your previous supposition was correct (that Miller went to breakdowns and Janson finished on the same page for 182 to 184), but if you think about the possible rationalization that Mitch is using to assume this you can determine he may be coming to an erroneous conclusion. As Mitch said he got the whole issue of 181 from Janson to sell because he essentially drew the issue, so Mitch would assume any issue he received the complete book would be done in this method and any book where Mitch received only partial pages to an issue would indicate that Miller did breakdowns on the page and Janson finished. The problem with that logic is that as we have discussed that some pages to issues 182-4 would have been done by Miller more than a year ago and obviously returned to him and Janson could still be working the procedure of following Miller layouts on 8 by 11 paper that was instituted with issue 181 on the pages that were added to issues 182-4. Therefore, Mitch would not get a complete book as Miller would get his pages back even though they were done many months ago but Janson could still be the only person that added anything new.
     
    Others have said that the Punisher storyline was meant for issue 167 as a one part story. As said, my rationale is that they added pages to make up a two part story. Evidence to lend credence to my theory is given by Grand Comic Book Database that credits Roger McKenzie as the co writer for issue 183 and 184. Roger's last story on DD was issue 167 and after that he was done with the title, so they are obviously crediting him with both issues as they broke up the one issue and expanded into two. Now, the question is was the new art done by the process started in 181 or did Miller work on the same sheet as Janson? It's bending a little towards the former, but not a dunk yet.

  [*]DD #185-190: Layouts by Miller in a DIFFERENT smaller sheet, embellishment by Janson. Miller didn't touch the original art.

  [*]DD #191: Full pencils by Miller, inks by Austin

 

[Yes, this might make my head explode. All I know is it was great reading off the stands way back when. ]

 

 

Should I revise this or annotate it differently?

[alxjhnsn]

FWIW, 181 was amazing and I don't care who did it. I'll gladly take a page for Christmas.

 

I've got to go with Scott on 168-172. They were very good and setup so much more to follow.

 

I think Frank's entire run taken as a whole was astounding. He took a character that had become moribund and was on my pull list from habit (and the hope of something better) and blew my mind. I was shocked at how good the run was and I clearly remember picking up 158 35 years ago.

 

Yeah, it may have been the low point of his run, but the low point was pretty good.

[Koa]

I've been talking offline with someone about this issue and wrote the below, which I thought I would share:

 

At the end of the day, Miller didn't write #158-#167, so I personally discount those pages just as much as pages from issues #185-#190 (even though the former are full Miller pencils and the latter are Miller separate sheet layouts).

Similarly, #173-#180 may have had only loose Miller breakdowns, but the art generally looks better and the story is definitely better than #168-172 taken as a whole (of course I love #168 on its own, though). And, if #181 is actually all-Janson...well, again, #181 looks and reads better, is more important, and more loved than any other issue in the run - it is the pinnacle of Miller DD, full stop (DD #227 I would say comes admirably close and is the next best single Miller DD issue...Frank's pencil never touched those boards either, though!) Maybe if Frank had wrote #181 and some hack had drawn it, those pages would trade at a discount, but between Frank's signature layouts and Klaus' consistent inks throughout, even trained eyes can't tell the difference between who drew #181 and who drew the other issues looking at the art alone.

Even though frank is my favorite comic book artist/writer when it comes to the DD run I don't think whether or not he touched the art board should matter, Miller had yet to begin his definitive visual style & I think Janson has such a heavy handed inking style that he couldn't help but over power Miller's work from early on anyway.

 

that said, I completely understand why it would be important for collectors paying today's prices that Miller penciled on the original art board given his name recognition and pedigree is so much more so than Klaus Janson but when it comes to Miller's original DD run I think the more Janson contributed to the art the better it looked so I'd be inclined to think Miller didn't return to full pencils for 181.

 

 

[delekkerste]

[*]DD #173-180: Layouts by Miller in the same sheet, embellishment by Janson.

 

BTW. where did this #180 cut-off come from - shouldn't it be DD #173-#178 done on the same board and #179-181 and #185-190 done on separate sheets? Also, wouldn't the new pages from #182-#184 (those that weren't done around #167) be separate sheet layouts as well? Someone cited a 2012 post by Janson where he said that the separate sheets started with #179, not #181:

 

"Just to set the record straight, though, Frank went to 8 and a half inch by 11 inch breakdowns on issue #179, not #185."

 

I was just looking through the TPB covering DD #168-#182. I can't really detect any noticeable change between the art for #172 and #173 (when Miller supposedly went from full pencils to loose breakdowns). To the extent that I can detect any meaningful stylistic change, it's between #178 and #179 (not between #180 and #181). If #181 was a separate sheet layout issue, I would strongly suspect that #179 and #180 were too - and that is backed up by Klaus. Would love to get opinions from others after they take another look at their TPBs or back issues.

 

Not that, as I said, it matters to me, but if we're trying to set the record straight here, let's set the record straight. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I'm willing to take Klaus at his word; his recollection seems pretty clear to me from what he wrote.

[Speedy-D]

Where has he written about it?

[DocR]

[*]DD #173-180: Layouts by Miller in the same sheet, embellishment by Janson.

 

BTW. where did this #180 cut-off come from - shouldn't it be DD #173-#178 done on the same board and #179-181 and #185-190 done on separate sheets? Also, wouldn't the new pages from #182-#184 (those that weren't done around #167) be separate sheet layouts as well? Someone cited a 2012 post by Janson where he said that the separate sheets started with #179, not #181:

 

"Just to set the record straight, though, Frank went to 8 and a half inch by 11 inch breakdowns on issue #179, not #185."

 

I was just looking through the TPB covering DD #168-#182. I can't really detect any noticeable change between the art for #172 and #173 (when Miller supposedly went from full pencils to loose breakdowns). To the extent that I can detect any meaningful stylistic change, it's between #178 and #179 (not between #180 and #181). If #181 was a separate sheet layout issue, I would strongly suspect that #179 and #180 were too - and that is backed up by Klaus. Would love to get opinions from others after they take another look at their TPBs or back issues.

 

Not that, as I said, it matters to me, but if we're trying to set the record straight here, let's set the record straight. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I'm willing to take Klaus at his word; his recollection seems pretty clear to me from what he wrote.

 

I believe this was the initial thought but Ferran Delgado did a ton of research and presented some evidence, which resulted in the summary that Alex provided. I could be wrong though.

[delekkerste]

Rubinstein was the inker for #158

 

Sorry, my bad - Rubinstein only did the cover inks for #158, not the interiors. He did co-ink the #163 interiors, though.

[delekkerste]

I believe this was the initial thought but Ferran Delgado did a ton of research and presented some evidence, which resulted in the summary that Alex provided. I could be wrong though.

 

I know that Ferran posted the above article that said that separate sheet layouts started with #185, as well as an interview in which either Klaus or Frank said that separate sheets started "within the last year", though, as I mentioned, I think there's some ambiguity to that - the interview could have been some time in advance of the magazine publication date or it could just have been off (much like I might say, "oh yeah, that piece of OA sold for $X within the past year" when, in reality, it could actually have been 15 months ago).

 

This post by Klaus from Feb. 24, 2012 really leaves no ambiguity and it seems like his recollection is very clear (he says specifically #179 is when the separate sheets started, not "#179 or #180" or "around issue #179" or "sometime in the year of #181" or anything remotely debatable):

 

Let me say that I’m grateful and happy that anyone has any interest in any work that I’ve done whether it’s recent or, in the case of some of the material referred to this week, older. So thanks for the attention and comments everyone. Let me make a point about something that The Third Man said in his LOC: “…but he was never really more than an inker”. The work I did on DD has always been very meaningful to me for a variety of reasons, too many to get into here, but I’d like to point out a few things: Frank did an amazing job on the series and I would never take anything away from his writing or drawing. Just to set the record straight, though, Frank went to 8 and a half inch by 11 inch breakdowns on issue #179, not #185. And he was doing breakdowns on the boards for a handful of issues before that. It is absolutely true that the overriding characteristic of Frank’s art is his amazing storytelling, and it is absolutely true that my approach to laying out a story differs from Frank’s. But I feel strongly that my contribution as both inker (or finisher or whatever the particular credit was on any given book), combined with my coloring, made my contribution a bit more than “just an inker”. It is the synthesis of pencils, inks and colors that I believe provided some of the best looking books in the run, and indeed, gave the book it’s very distinct look. Check the credits, Third Man, take a look at the issues that I colored and the ones that I didn’t and I would think that you might agree with me on that point. And if you need further proof on this, please refer to Greg’s earlier column from this week where he talks about the first page from World War Hulk. I think that, for whatever reason, and it may have been a case of over saturation as this was still a period of time when the industry had not yet reached a level of expertise in coordinating digital coloring with the actual look of the book in print, but you can’t even see the inks under the colors. The ability to fulfill a specific, particular vision instead of having three or four disparate ideas conflicting with each other, was a rare opportunity on DD. The chance to control the art to the degree that we did provided a very specific look to the book that was unique. I’m really proud of the work that Frank and I did on DD. It stands as one of my favorite runs on a character that I loved since I bought DD #1 as a kid. It means a lot to me. Try to understand that the opportunity I had to make the contributions that I did, rises a tiny bit above being “just an inker”. There’s a reason why the material holds up 30 years later, you know.

 

Thanks for your time and really, thanks for your interest, I appreciate it enormously!

 

I think that sets the record straight as much as anything or anyone possibly can (given Miller's personal/health issues, I'd consider Klaus to be the more reliable first-hand source between the two these days). I own a #181 page, but I'm not going to be in denial about it being a separate sheet layout issue if Klaus says that they started with the process in issue #179 (like I said - go back and look at the issues; there does seem to be a slight, but noticeable, stylistic change between #178 and #179. Frankly, #179-#181 look better than #173-#178, and I say that as someone who owns one of the best pages from #173-#178). Like I said (and as Klaus indicates above), these were some of the best and best-looking books in the run and, in any case, was a synthesis of Frank and Klaus' vision, even if Klaus was the one applying pen & ink to board. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter to me, Scott, Hari and others, but people should have the correct information and decide for themselves. I'm taking Klaus at his word that #179-#181 were separate sheet layout issues - I really don't see any evidence strong enough to indicate otherwise and I think we have to be objective about this.

[stinkininkin]

I believe this was the initial thought but Ferran Delgado did a ton of research and presented some evidence, which resulted in the summary that Alex provided. I could be wrong though.

 

I know that Ferran posted the above article that said that separate sheet layouts started with #185, as well as an interview in which either Klaus or Frank said that separate sheets started "within the last year", though, as I mentioned, I think there's some ambiguity to that - the interview could have been some time in advance of the magazine publication date or it could just have been off (much like I might say, "oh yeah, that piece of OA sold for $X within the past year" when, in reality, it could actually have been 15 months ago).

 

This post by Klaus from Feb. 24, 2012 really leaves no ambiguity and it seems like his recollection is very clear (he says specifically #179 is when the separate sheets started, not "#179 or #180" or "around issue #179" or "sometime in the year of #181" or anything remotely debatable):

 

Let me say that I’m grateful and happy that anyone has any interest in any work that I’ve done whether it’s recent or, in the case of some of the material referred to this week, older. So thanks for the attention and comments everyone. Let me make a point about something that The Third Man said in his LOC: “…but he was never really more than an inker”. The work I did on DD has always been very meaningful to me for a variety of reasons, too many to get into here, but I’d like to point out a few things: Frank did an amazing job on the series and I would never take anything away from his writing or drawing. Just to set the record straight, though, Frank went to 8 and a half inch by 11 inch breakdowns on issue #179, not #185. And he was doing breakdowns on the boards for a handful of issues before that. It is absolutely true that the overriding characteristic of Frank’s art is his amazing storytelling, and it is absolutely true that my approach to laying out a story differs from Frank’s. But I feel strongly that my contribution as both inker (or finisher or whatever the particular credit was on any given book), combined with my coloring, made my contribution a bit more than “just an inker”. It is the synthesis of pencils, inks and colors that I believe provided some of the best looking books in the run, and indeed, gave the book it’s very distinct look. Check the credits, Third Man, take a look at the issues that I colored and the ones that I didn’t and I would think that you might agree with me on that point. And if you need further proof on this, please refer to Greg’s earlier column from this week where he talks about the first page from World War Hulk. I think that, for whatever reason, and it may have been a case of over saturation as this was still a period of time when the industry had not yet reached a level of expertise in coordinating digital coloring with the actual look of the book in print, but you can’t even see the inks under the colors. The ability to fulfill a specific, particular vision instead of having three or four disparate ideas conflicting with each other, was a rare opportunity on DD. The chance to control the art to the degree that we did provided a very specific look to the book that was unique. I’m really proud of the work that Frank and I did on DD. It stands as one of my favorite runs on a character that I loved since I bought DD #1 as a kid. It means a lot to me. Try to understand that the opportunity I had to make the contributions that I did, rises a tiny bit above being “just an inker”. There’s a reason why the material holds up 30 years later, you know.

 

Thanks for your time and really, thanks for your interest, I appreciate it enormously!

 

I think that sets the record straight as much as anything or anyone possibly can (given Miller's personal/health issues, I'd consider Klaus to be the more reliable first-hand source between the two these days). I own a #181 page, but I'm not going to be in denial about it being a separate sheet layout issue if Klaus says that they started with the process in issue #179 (like I said - go back and look at the issues; there does seem to be a slight, but noticeable, stylistic change between #178 and #179. Frankly, #179-#181 look better than #173-#178, and I say that as someone who owns one of the best pages from #173-#178). Like I said (and as Klaus indicates above), these were some of the best and best-looking books in the run and, in any case, was a synthesis of Frank and Klaus' vision, even if Klaus was the one applying pen & ink to board. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter to me, Scott, Hari and others, but people should have the correct information and decide for themselves. I'm taking Klaus at his word that #179-#181 were separate sheet layout issues - I really don't see any evidence strong enough to indicate otherwise and I think we have to be objective about this.

 

Hey Mitch, you made a point about the art sales for DD 181, saying that Klause got back ALL the art for 181, a strong indicator that Miller never touched the boards on that particular issue. Do you happen to remember if this was also true of DD 179-180 as well? That would be another strong indicator that Klaus's recollection was accurate of when the separation of duties took place as per Gene's post above.

 

Scott

 

 

Edited September 14, 2014 by stinkininkin

[Lago32]

I'm sure about the rest of you guys but once I finally saw the physical breakdown of who did what in the latter part of the Miller/Janson DD collaboration in the last Heritage auction (see link below), any concerns I may have had about Miller not touching the board were put to rest. It is funny that more of these 8.5x11 layout sheets haven't made it to market.

 

http://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/frank-miller-and-klaus-janson-daredevil-185-page-15-original-art-plus-sheet-of-miller-pencil-breakdowns-marv-total-2-original-art-/a/7097-92222.s

 

Mike Davis

[jjonahjameson1]

This is just an observation, but with all this talking up on DD 181 in this thread and on the Clink Featured auction thread, there has been some very strong statements by people with deep pockets.

 

Those people have said:

 

1. Miller's writing is as important as his art

 

2. DD 181 is arguably the best Bronze Age story (or even among the best single issue story ever!)

 

3. That it doesn't matter that Miller's pencil didn't touch the art board for DD 181 because of reasons 1 and 2 above.

 

So I'm just pointing out the fact that the piece did not sell for the reserve price during auction. Also, it has been available for $11K on Clink since the auction ended.

 

So perhaps, just perhaps, Miller's pencils really do matter