• 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.

Heavy Weight Battle..STERANKO VS BARRY WINDSOR-SMITH

Started by WEBHEAD,

42 posts in this topic

goldust40

goldust40

Posted
Posted
BWS had started off as a Kirby clone and gradually drew more and more from pre-Raphaelite works (they were very fashionable at the time) and hasn't developed much since his Conan run.

 

Hasn't developed much since his Conan run? I guess if you look at just the basics of his style, but his Conan run barely looks like the same artist that was responsible for even his work later in the 70s. Once he got out of comics and turned himself into someone who takes a long time to create one image, I think the difference was like night and day. Even his later comic work (back to drawing many pictures quickly) makes much of his Conan run look crude by comparison.

 

I was only thinking in terms of his comic work and not his poster art. I thought his work on Solar for Valiant was genuinely excellent, but would you say that that (and his more average work on Archer and Armstrong) was a quantum leap from his Conan period? It's certainly slicker, and agreed more disciplined, but he did develop (like Byrne in his later work, such as Next Men) a tendency to standardize - note how most of his characters had Roman noses. Plus his work was no longer being published on old newsprint.

 

He developed a bit, certainly, but his style was still recognizably BWS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rob_react

rob_react

Posted
Posted

I was only thinking in terms of his comic work and not his poster art. I thought his work on Solar for Valiant was genuinely excellent, but would you say that that (and his more average work on Archer and Armstrong) was a quantum leap from his Conan period? It's certainly slicker, and agreed more disciplined, but he did develop (like Byrne in his later work, such as Next Men) a tendency to standardize - note how most of his characters had Roman noses. Plus his work was no longer being published on old newsprint.

 

He developed a bit, certainly, but his style was still recognizably BWS.

 

If the difference between BWS doing Conan to where he is now is developing "a bit" I'd love to see what someone has to do to qualify as having really developed in your book.

 

I've read two Valiant books, so I can't answer for those. Weapon X was done in that era and I can say without doubt that was a quantum leap from his Conan work. Even earlier (and on newsprint), the Machine Man stuff that he himself inked, Daredevil #236, Iron Man #232, X-Men #186 and #198 were all leaps and bounds ahead of his Conan work. That doesn't even get us into his more recent "Storyteller" stuff...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
goldust40

goldust40

Posted
Posted

I was only thinking in terms of his comic work and not his poster art. I thought his work on Solar for Valiant was genuinely excellent, but would you say that that (and his more average work on Archer and Armstrong) was a quantum leap from his Conan period? It's certainly slicker, and agreed more disciplined, but he did develop (like Byrne in his later work, such as Next Men) a tendency to standardize - note how most of his characters had Roman noses. Plus his work was no longer being published on old newsprint.

 

He developed a bit, certainly, but his style was still recognizably BWS.

 

If the difference between BWS doing Conan to where he is now is developing "a bit" I'd love to see what someone has to do to qualify as having really developed in your book.

 

I've read two Valiant books, so I can't answer for those. Weapon X was done in that era and I can say without doubt that was a quantum leap from his Conan work. Even earlier (and on newsprint), the Machine Man stuff that he himself inked, Daredevil #236, Iron Man #232, X-Men #186 and #198 were all leaps and bounds ahead of his Conan work. That doesn't even get us into his more recent "Storyteller" stuff...

 

I've checked a copy of Epic where he did some work, and X-Men 186 and 198 (couldn't find the other books) and an old MCP featuring Weapon X in the last hour or so, and I concur - you are right. tonofbricks.gif There's more confidence, ambition and ability there. Haven't read any Storyteller work but I've been told they're must reads.

 

Those Machine Man covers (as I recall) were excellent too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MutantKeys

MutantKeys

Posted
Posted

Wow...im seeing this thread the day after I picked a Conan #1(love the cover) and a Nick Fury Agent of Shield #1 (love the cover also). Its hard to make a desicion but i like them both.....I espically like the cover to Nick Fury AOS #7

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aardvark88

aardvark88

Posted
Posted

That 9/11 Capt America charity print looks like it came from the Capt America/ToS Marvel comic book indexes circa 1978.

I'd have to go w/ BWS. His later Epic mag cover & interiors (similiar to Pacific Comics' Pathways to Fantasy) were sublime. 893applaud-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WEBHEAD

WEBHEAD

Posted
  • Author
Posted
That 9/11 Capt America charity print looks like it came from the Capt America/ToS Marvel comic book indexes circa 1978.

I'd have to go w/ BWS. His later Epic mag cover & interiors (similiar to Pacific Comics' Pathways to Fantasy) were sublime. 893applaud-thumb.gif

 

Thanks for the info. .I picked it up at the Big Apple Con numbered print 1085 out of 3000.. copywrite date is 2000. He only had one framed at the show and it was a must have!!

893applaud-thumb.gif

WEBHEAD

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Forbush-Man

Forbush-Man

Posted
Posted

Both Sternako & Smith, I'm sure, were asked to imitate Kirby's art. That was the way things were done at Marvel at the time. Barry Smith developed his own unique style, as can be witnessed in his run of Conan the Barbarian. I don't rember Steranko's art changing all that much during his Nick Fury days (Strange Tales & Nick Fury).

 

I admire both and appreciate the work they did. Classic covers, I guess I'd have to go with Sternako. But for over all quality artwork, I'm going with BWS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timely

Timely

Posted
Posted
I'm in agreement with BWS being the better artist of the two. Somebody please post the cover to Conan the Barbarian # 24, first full Red Sonja apperance.

 

Great book!

 

607103-c24.jpg

 

This book is actually better on the inside than the outside. The splash page has Red Sonja on a table top dancing for guys in a bar, incredible art. 2 pages later she is naked with Conan frolicking around thru 1/2 the book. Very cool stuff!

 

West

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted
Steranko was a better cover artist but Smith did better internals. I own most of what they both produced and if I could only keep one set, it would be Smith's.

 

this is a tough contest... both are distinctive and talented artists and designers. But I agree wth the quote above.

Steranko's covers show off his design skills, and at the hright of his efforts and powers, were dwarn extremely well.

 

However Smiths draughtsmanship on interior pages are superior to Smith's. And many of his covers are awesome as well. If I were hiring, Id get a Steranko covewr and have Barry do the insides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing