What is your Favorite Art,Drawing or story by Rob Liefeld? 1 1

[Darkowl]

All in all, Liefeld is an easy target, and people wont hesitate to take advantage of the bashing opportunity when it arises. Ironically, there are some mainstream artists who I personally think are disgustingly awful (much worse than Liefeld), yet they will never get the amount of dirt Liefeld does.

 

If all Rob Liefeld was guilty of creating art that most people didn't like, he would be in the same category as Humberto Ramos, and probably not be hammered on like he is. The problem is that his professional reputation has affected his work, and a great many people have a problem with what he has done to other people in the industry.

 

Which is why I said this...

 

I also don't need to take into consideration the type of person someone is, or the politics attached to that person to admire their work. There's a lot of musicians, actors, and other entertainers who I may not completely respect on a personal level, but that shouldn't necessarily get in the way of me appreciating their artistic accomplishments, though I can understand why people would feel turned off by Liefeld's work If he treated them rudely.

[Dr. Balls]

All in all, Liefeld is an easy target, and people wont hesitate to take advantage of the bashing opportunity when it arises. Ironically, there are some mainstream artists who I personally think are disgustingly awful (much worse than Liefeld), yet they will never get the amount of dirt Liefeld does.

 

If all Rob Liefeld was guilty of creating art that most people didn't like, he would be in the same category as Humberto Ramos, and probably not be hammered on like he is. The problem is that his professional reputation has affected his work, and a great many people have a problem with what he has done to other people in the industry.

 

Which is why I said this...

 

I also don't need to take into consideration the type of person someone is, or the politics attached to that person to admire their work. There's a lot of musicians, actors, and other entertainers who I may not completely respect on a personal level, but that shouldn't necessarily get in the way of me appreciating their artistic accomplishments, though I can understand why people would feel turned off by Liefeld's work If he treated them rudely.

 

Yeah, I'm not sure I could subscribe to the philosophy that people of questionable professional ethics deserve to have that separated from the work they produce.

 

But, if you're not in the same industry, you won't feel the repercussions that someone's bad behavior has - so it's much easier to look past - or even know is there. I'm sure that applies to everyone at some point.

[Logan510]

I personally like Liefelds art. I think he definitely has his own style. I think it's possible that people assume that he cannot draw anatomically correct, instead of assuming that he draws like that on purpose, because that's his style, and that's how he likes to draw. In other words, maybe the long legs, lack of detailed feet, and disproportional body parts are intentional, not because he's incapable of drawing otherwise, but because that's how he likes to draw his characters. I could be wrong about that, but just because someone chooses not to do something, doesn't mean they are incapable of doing it. Some of my favorite guitarists choose not to play difficult solos in their songs, even though they can shred like Yngwie Malmsteen.

 

Call it odd, call it bad art, call it whatever. I'm not an artist, so I cannot accurately judge Liefeld's work from an artist perspective (and maybe that why I like his art), but I am comic book fan, and I can say that I find his art to be entertaining. I also don't need to take into consideration the type of person someone is, or the politics attached to that person to admire their work. There's a lot of musicians, actors, and other entertainers who I may not completely respect on a personal level, but that shouldn't necessarily get in the way of me appreciating their artistic accomplishments, though I can understand why people would feel turned off by Liefeld's work If he treated them rudely.

 

All in all, Liefeld is an easy target, and people wont hesitate to take advantage of the bashing opportunity when it arises. Ironically, there are some mainstream artists who I personally think are disgustingly awful (much worse than Liefeld), yet they will never get the amount of dirt Liefeld does.

 

I'm going to post attach this pic again in case It was missed. I actually think this is my favorite drawing of Deadpool.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I find it interesting that your favorite Deadpool drawing by Liefeld looks the least Liefeld of anything I've seen him do. It's fairly obvious ( to me anyway ) that whoever "painted" the finished piece, fixed a lot of things along the way.

[NewWorldOrder]

I grew up in the 90's of comics with the art being very heavily focused on so I do not have a hated of Rob's work as some of you older guys. Along with Jim Lee and Todd McFarlane I actually like most of Rob's art from the early days with New Mutants, X-Force, and Youngblood. I met him a couple times since now living in SoCal, and he did in my opinion an amazing cover art recreation of NM #93 which is one of my favorite comic book covers of not just Rob's work but all time. Tied with Hulk 340 actually.

 

I am really happy with what I paid for it which to me was a bargain. Was offered 4x what I paid a week later from a collector. Liefeld was nice to me through the whole process and didn't charge me an arm and a leg.

 

 

 

[RabidFerret]

All you've said is that you like his work.

 

You posted what is, in your opinion, his best. We gave you reasons why we didn't like it.

 

What do you like about it? IYO, what makes it his best?

 

I posted a few covers from the era when he was at the top. Marvel launched X-Force because of him. It was his book. And he turned out those covers I posted.

 

Ok sure!

 

I read comics for a few years before what became the Image folks started to appear in the late 80s. Comics were fairly standard. Lots of 1-2-3-4 panels, the stories and villains were ok but not amazing, often being the same gallery that kept appearing, and in a lot of comics the art was interchangeable.

 

I was a Marvel guy, so reading Avengers, West Coast Avengers, Iron Man, Captain America, Fantastic Four, Web of Spider-Man, and a slew of others, you didn't see huge differences. Some had better storytelling, some got to play with better characters, but generally they were similar art. Other than a splash page you rarely saw larger images of characters.

 

Sure, there were superstar artists like Byrne and Miller and Simonson, but if you didn't happen to read Thor or whatever book Byrne was on, you didn't see them. They were the exceptions, not the rule.

 

As a teenage kid you didn't generally read some of the more interesting or adult books out there like DKR or Watchmen, or go back to the 70s guys like BWS or Moebius. You read what was on the stands, which was generally a homogenized look and feel of a studio style.

 

McFarlane was the first one I really noticed, with art that caught my eye that was unlike anything else I'd seen. It was the art, sure, but also the storytelling. The page design. It wasn't the same looking comic as what came before. The shackles had seemed to come off and McFarlane was soon followed by Lee, Portacio, Liefeld, Kieth, Keown, etc.

 

Liefeld had energy to his art. He grabbed your attention. It wasn't reading 10 panels per page of dialogue as much as a fun read. He really seemed to sling ink on there, creating really bold lines that were more organic than the sterilized perfection of plenty of other people. His current work for instance is slick and polished and lost that edge that I used to love. But when he was firing at his peak, NM98-XF4, it was some really impressive and unique art that didn't look like anything out there.

 

And as people pointed out, it was deceptively simple looking. You almost believed you could draw comics just looking at what he did. But as the herds of clones proved, it got stale quick without the actual talent behind it.

 

But then there was the whole dynamic of him as well - he was the young upstart who rose to the A-list quickly, who became a celebrity and the poster boy for comics. He created characters left and right, which was not something you really saw anymore. So many comics just rehashed the same old villains, but Liefeld just created new ones. New heroes too. Or dredging up mostly forgotten ones like Warpath. And he did it nonstop.

 

Then he started Image Comics and was willing to leave one of the top selling books to do what he wanted. It was an inspiration to see someone a handful of years older than you rise to that level, that quickly, and make the leap.

 

It was the whole package. The art, the creativity, the approach.

 

I remember watching the Comic Book Great videos as a kid, and the only two guys who really drew finished looking art were Liefeld and Lee. Most of them did standard head shots or layouts. Liefeld drew full figure after full figure and it was amazing to see.

 

So at his peak his art was quite something.

 

 

 

 

[Darkowl]

I personally like Liefelds art. I think he definitely has his own style. I think it's possible that people assume that he cannot draw anatomically correct, instead of assuming that he draws like that on purpose, because that's his style, and that's how he likes to draw. In other words, maybe the long legs, lack of detailed feet, and disproportional body parts are intentional, not because he's incapable of drawing otherwise, but because that's how he likes to draw his characters. I could be wrong about that, but just because someone chooses not to do something, doesn't mean they are incapable of doing it. Some of my favorite guitarists choose not to play difficult solos in their songs, even though they can shred like Yngwie Malmsteen.

 

Call it odd, call it bad art, call it whatever. I'm not an artist, so I cannot accurately judge Liefeld's work from an artist perspective (and maybe that why I like his art), but I am comic book fan, and I can say that I find his art to be entertaining. I also don't need to take into consideration the type of person someone is, or the politics attached to that person to admire their work. There's a lot of musicians, actors, and other entertainers who I may not completely respect on a personal level, but that shouldn't necessarily get in the way of me appreciating their artistic accomplishments, though I can understand why people would feel turned off by Liefeld's work If he treated them rudely.

 

All in all, Liefeld is an easy target, and people wont hesitate to take advantage of the bashing opportunity when it arises. Ironically, there are some mainstream artists who I personally think are disgustingly awful (much worse than Liefeld), yet they will never get the amount of dirt Liefeld does.

 

I'm going to post attach this pic again in case It was missed. I actually think this is my favorite drawing of Deadpool.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I find it interesting that your favorite Deadpool drawing by Liefeld looks the least Liefeld of anything I've seen him do. It's fairly obvious ( to me anyway ) that whoever "painted" the finished piece, fixed a lot of things along the way.

 

What can I say? This depiction of Deadpool is a major improvement from his NM 98 debut, IMHO. Btw, I didnt say It was my favorite. I said I think it's my favorite. There's some other Liefeld Deadpool drawing which I like, probably just as much, and they look much more "Liefeld-ish".

 

What do you mean, "whoever painted the finished piece"? I assume you're referring to the Colorist?

[RabidFerret]

There are a variety of people here who have plenty of published art who work under various deadlines and never felt the need to krap all over another creators rights, rip people off or act unethically just to finish the job.

 

You are in an argument that you will never, ever win because you are defending a complete assclown who is reviled by virtually every comic collector who has a tiny inkling of how he professionally conducts himself - and I'd seriously suggest reading a little more about the kind of person Rob Liefeld is.

 

If you want to know why he gets beat up on his art, read up about him. It's easy to fogive Jack Kirby or Art Adams or whomever because they are artists in the industry who don't/didn't go around people over and being an . It's that simple. When you're an assclown in your profession, you get treated like an assclown.

 

But the topic was about favorite art, not favorite person. I've heard the horror stories. I've met him in person. And what you're saying is pretty accurate. Not disputing that at all. He deserves all the negativity he gets for a lot of what he did.

 

But it's the art and comics I read and cared about. However someone acts in real life may sway opinion somewhat, but at least the art should be judged on the art, not the personality.

 

As others have said as well, we should be able to separate the art from the artist and judge them independently.

 

If it turns out Michelangelo was a complete would you really not appreciate the Sistine Chapel?

 

Yeah, that's right, I just compared Liefeld to the Sistine Chapel:)

 

 

[Logan510]

I personally like Liefelds art. I think he definitely has his own style. I think it's possible that people assume that he cannot draw anatomically correct, instead of assuming that he draws like that on purpose, because that's his style, and that's how he likes to draw. In other words, maybe the long legs, lack of detailed feet, and disproportional body parts are intentional, not because he's incapable of drawing otherwise, but because that's how he likes to draw his characters. I could be wrong about that, but just because someone chooses not to do something, doesn't mean they are incapable of doing it. Some of my favorite guitarists choose not to play difficult solos in their songs, even though they can shred like Yngwie Malmsteen.

 

Call it odd, call it bad art, call it whatever. I'm not an artist, so I cannot accurately judge Liefeld's work from an artist perspective (and maybe that why I like his art), but I am comic book fan, and I can say that I find his art to be entertaining. I also don't need to take into consideration the type of person someone is, or the politics attached to that person to admire their work. There's a lot of musicians, actors, and other entertainers who I may not completely respect on a personal level, but that shouldn't necessarily get in the way of me appreciating their artistic accomplishments, though I can understand why people would feel turned off by Liefeld's work If he treated them rudely.

 

All in all, Liefeld is an easy target, and people wont hesitate to take advantage of the bashing opportunity when it arises. Ironically, there are some mainstream artists who I personally think are disgustingly awful (much worse than Liefeld), yet they will never get the amount of dirt Liefeld does.

 

I'm going to post attach this pic again in case It was missed. I actually think this is my favorite drawing of Deadpool.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I find it interesting that your favorite Deadpool drawing by Liefeld looks the least Liefeld of anything I've seen him do. It's fairly obvious ( to me anyway ) that whoever "painted" the finished piece, fixed a lot of things along the way.

 

What can I say? This depiction of Deadpool is a major improvement from his NM 98 debut, IMHO. Btw, I didnt say It was my favorite. I said I think it's my favorite. There's some other Liefeld Deadpool drawing which I like, probably just as much, and they look much more "Liefeld-ish".

 

What do you mean, "whoever painted the finished piece"? I assume you're referring to the Colorist?

 

Yes, it looks like the colorist fixed a lot of things on that piece.

[Dr. Balls]

What do you mean, "whoever painted the finished piece"? I assume you're referring to the Colorist?

 

Yes, it looks like the colorist fixed a lot of things on that piece.

 

FWIW, Mike Caprotti is a painter, not a colorist.

[Logan510]

There are a variety of people here who have plenty of published art who work under various deadlines and never felt the need to krap all over another creators rights, rip people off or act unethically just to finish the job.

 

You are in an argument that you will never, ever win because you are defending a complete assclown who is reviled by virtually every comic collector who has a tiny inkling of how he professionally conducts himself - and I'd seriously suggest reading a little more about the kind of person Rob Liefeld is.

 

If you want to know why he gets beat up on his art, read up about him. It's easy to fogive Jack Kirby or Art Adams or whomever because they are artists in the industry who don't/didn't go around people over and being an . It's that simple. When you're an assclown in your profession, you get treated like an assclown.

 

But the topic was about favorite art, not favorite person. I've heard the horror stories. I've met him in person. And what you're saying is pretty accurate. Not disputing that at all. He deserves all the negativity he gets for a lot of what he did.

 

But it's the art and comics I read and cared about. However someone acts in real life may sway opinion somewhat, but at least the art should be judged on the art, not the personality.

 

As others have said as well, we should be able to separate the art from the artist and judge them independently.

 

If it turns out Michelangelo was a complete would you really not appreciate the Sistine Chapel?

 

Yeah, that's right, I just compared Liefeld to the Sistine Chapel:)

 

 

I've met Rob on more than one occasion and he was very nice to me. That doesn't change my opinion on the quality of his work.

[Darkowl]

I personally like Liefelds art. I think he definitely has his own style. I think it's possible that people assume that he cannot draw anatomically correct, instead of assuming that he draws like that on purpose, because that's his style, and that's how he likes to draw. In other words, maybe the long legs, lack of detailed feet, and disproportional body parts are intentional, not because he's incapable of drawing otherwise, but because that's how he likes to draw his characters. I could be wrong about that, but just because someone chooses not to do something, doesn't mean they are incapable of doing it. Some of my favorite guitarists choose not to play difficult solos in their songs, even though they can shred like Yngwie Malmsteen.

 

Call it odd, call it bad art, call it whatever. I'm not an artist, so I cannot accurately judge Liefeld's work from an artist perspective (and maybe that why I like his art), but I am comic book fan, and I can say that I find his art to be entertaining. I also don't need to take into consideration the type of person someone is, or the politics attached to that person to admire their work. There's a lot of musicians, actors, and other entertainers who I may not completely respect on a personal level, but that shouldn't necessarily get in the way of me appreciating their artistic accomplishments, though I can understand why people would feel turned off by Liefeld's work If he treated them rudely.

 

All in all, Liefeld is an easy target, and people wont hesitate to take advantage of the bashing opportunity when it arises. Ironically, there are some mainstream artists who I personally think are disgustingly awful (much worse than Liefeld), yet they will never get the amount of dirt Liefeld does.

 

I'm going to post attach this pic again in case It was missed. I actually think this is my favorite drawing of Deadpool.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I find it interesting that your favorite Deadpool drawing by Liefeld looks the least Liefeld of anything I've seen him do. It's fairly obvious ( to me anyway ) that whoever "painted" the finished piece, fixed a lot of things along the way.

 

What can I say? This depiction of Deadpool is a major improvement from his NM 98 debut, IMHO. Btw, I didnt say It was my favorite. I said I think it's my favorite. There's some other Liefeld Deadpool drawing which I like, probably just as much, and they look much more "Liefeld-ish".

 

What do you mean, "whoever painted the finished piece"? I assume you're referring to the Colorist?

 

Yes, it looks like the colorist fixed a lot of things on that piece.

 

Weird. This info was taken from Marvel.com (in regards to this book)...

 

Cover Information

 

Penciller:

Rob Liefeld

Colorist:

Rob Liefeld

 

Is that just a screw up on the Marvel website? Clearly, the cover has Caprottis name on it.

 

Anyways, could you point out some of the things that have been fixed? I really do have an untrained eye when It comes to that kind of level of artwork, but I would like to know what mistakes have been covered up. Thanks!

[RockMyAmadeus]

You are a hilariously entertaining poster, I have to admit...but you really don't understand the difference between "mocking" and "objective analysis." And I'm not sure where you are seeing the "mocking" of his fans. And "formulaic"? The late 80's/early 90's scene that Rob Liefeld entered was one of the richest, most diverse artistic periods in the entire history of the industry. You make odd, uneducated blanket statements and assumptions that are simply false. You've indicated that you don't even know what a strawman argument is.

 

So, why are you so adamant about telling everyone else that they're wrong...? What do you bring to the table?

 

If you want to take this as a personal attack on you, you're more than welcome. It is a mistake, but it is a common one.

 

But for your sake, you should learn how to disagree with people without the emotional, snarky and snide responses. It wins you nothing.

 

Or don't. Either way, you are immensely entertaining.

 

 

I have seen nothing "objective" in your postings yet:) In fact, most of what I've seen is someone who ignores half of what's written to change direction and focus on whatever supports your own next criticism.

 

I exaggerated about the depth of no backgrounds in comics and gave a variety of examples...to which you simply changed direction onto another argument:)

 

In no way am I telling people that they're wrong about their opinions - but I am challenging whether most of them truly formed them on their own, as opposed to repeating what the person next to them said in mob mentality - which it's pretty clear this thread devolved to rather quickly.

 

Treat for you:

 

 

This is just more of the same snide, snarky, emotional responses and strawman positions. If you showed any indication that you were capable of having an honest discussion, I'd answer your claims. But you're not, so I might as well be typing "gooble gobble gooble gobble." It has the same exact effect.

 

But please, by all means, continue to dig your hole. It's very entertaining.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

It just gets a bit tired when a herd of people start running around pointing at one artist and mocking him, while claiming their mess doesn't stink. I was simply pointing out(again and again and again) that the vast majority of artists make the same mistakes(bad feet), cut the same corners(minimal backgrounds), and deliver work that isn't at a professional level(bad perspective, bad deadlines, etc).

 

 

Strawman argument.

[Darkowl]

All you've said is that you like his work.

 

You posted what is, in your opinion, his best. We gave you reasons why we didn't like it.

 

What do you like about it? IYO, what makes it his best?

 

I posted a few covers from the era when he was at the top. Marvel launched X-Force because of him. It was his book. And he turned out those covers I posted.

 

Ok sure!

 

I read comics for a few years before what became the Image folks started to appear in the late 80s. Comics were fairly standard. Lots of 1-2-3-4 panels, the stories and villains were ok but not amazing, often being the same gallery that kept appearing, and in a lot of comics the art was interchangeable.

 

I was a Marvel guy, so reading Avengers, West Coast Avengers, Iron Man, Captain America, Fantastic Four, Web of Spider-Man, and a slew of others, you didn't see huge differences. Some had better storytelling, some got to play with better characters, but generally they were similar art. Other than a splash page you rarely saw larger images of characters.

 

Sure, there were superstar artists like Byrne and Miller and Simonson, but if you didn't happen to read Thor or whatever book Byrne was on, you didn't see them. They were the exceptions, not the rule.

 

As a teenage kid you didn't generally read some of the more interesting or adult books out there like DKR or Watchmen, or go back to the 70s guys like BWS or Moebius. You read what was on the stands, which was generally a homogenized look and feel of a studio style.

 

McFarlane was the first one I really noticed, with art that caught my eye that was unlike anything else I'd seen. It was the art, sure, but also the storytelling. The page design. It wasn't the same looking comic as what came before. The shackles had seemed to come off and McFarlane was soon followed by Lee, Portacio, Liefeld, Kieth, Keown, etc.

 

Liefeld had energy to his art. He grabbed your attention. It wasn't reading 10 panels per page of dialogue as much as a fun read. He really seemed to sling ink on there, creating really bold lines that were more organic than the sterilized perfection of plenty of other people. His current work for instance is slick and polished and lost that edge that I used to love. But when he was firing at his peak, NM98-XF4, it was some really impressive and unique art that didn't look like anything out there.

 

And as people pointed out, it was deceptively simple looking. You almost believed you could draw comics just looking at what he did. But as the herds of clones proved, it got stale quick without the actual talent behind it.

 

But then there was the whole dynamic of him as well - he was the young upstart who rose to the A-list quickly, who became a celebrity and the poster boy for comics. He created characters left and right, which was not something you really saw anymore. So many comics just rehashed the same old villains, but Liefeld just created new ones. New heroes too. Or dredging up mostly forgotten ones like Warpath. And he did it nonstop.

 

Then he started Image Comics and was willing to leave one of the top selling books to do what he wanted. It was an inspiration to see someone a handful of years older than you rise to that level, that quickly, and make the leap.

 

It was the whole package. The art, the creativity, the approach.

 

I remember watching the Comic Book Great videos as a kid, and the only two guys who really drew finished looking art were Liefeld and Lee. Most of them did standard head shots or layouts. Liefeld drew full figure after full figure and it was amazing to see.

 

So at his peak his art was quite something.

 

 

 

 

I really like your angle on this! (thumbs u

[RockMyAmadeus]

PS. No one called Liefeld's work "seriously horrendous looking mess"...so why do you, and worse, right to these people's faces?

 

Hahahahahahaha, so let me make sure I'm understanding this - it's completely ok to rip someone apart if it's not to their faces and they're not there to defend themselves, but if they're on the thread I should sugar coat it it sprinkles?? Hahahahahahahahahahahah.

 

 

 

Strawman argument.

[Darkowl]

I grew up in the 90's of comics with the art being very heavily focused on so I do not have a hated of Rob's work as some of you older guys. Along with Jim Lee and Todd McFarlane I actually like most of Rob's art from the early days with New Mutants, X-Force, and Youngblood. I met him a couple times since now living in SoCal, and he did in my opinion an amazing cover art recreation of NM #93 which is one of my favorite comic book covers of not just Rob's work but all time. Tied with Hulk 340 actually.

 

I am really happy with what I paid for it which to me was a bargain. Was offered 4x what I paid a week later from a collector. Liefeld was nice to me through the whole process and didn't charge me an arm and a leg.

 

 

 

 

I really dig that!

[Dr. Balls]

I wish mods would change the rules to NO POLITICS OR ROB LIEFELD on the boards.

[Logan510]

What do you mean, "whoever painted the finished piece"? I assume you're referring to the Colorist?

 

Yes, it looks like the colorist fixed a lot of things on that piece.

 

FWIW, Mike Caprotti is a painter, not a colorist.

 

So I was right the first time

[chrisco37]

All you've said is that you like his work.

 

You posted what is, in your opinion, his best. We gave you reasons why we didn't like it.

 

What do you like about it? IYO, what makes it his best?

 

I posted a few covers from the era when he was at the top. Marvel launched X-Force because of him. It was his book. And he turned out those covers I posted.

 

Ok sure!

 

I read comics for a few years before what became the Image folks started to appear in the late 80s. Comics were fairly standard. Lots of 1-2-3-4 panels, the stories and villains were ok but not amazing, often being the same gallery that kept appearing, and in a lot of comics the art was interchangeable.

 

I was a Marvel guy, so reading Avengers, West Coast Avengers, Iron Man, Captain America, Fantastic Four, Web of Spider-Man, and a slew of others, you didn't see huge differences. Some had better storytelling, some got to play with better characters, but generally they were similar art. Other than a splash page you rarely saw larger images of characters.

 

Sure, there were superstar artists like Byrne and Miller and Simonson, but if you didn't happen to read Thor or whatever book Byrne was on, you didn't see them. They were the exceptions, not the rule.

 

As a teenage kid you didn't generally read some of the more interesting or adult books out there like DKR or Watchmen, or go back to the 70s guys like BWS or Moebius. You read what was on the stands, which was generally a homogenized look and feel of a studio style.

 

McFarlane was the first one I really noticed, with art that caught my eye that was unlike anything else I'd seen. It was the art, sure, but also the storytelling. The page design. It wasn't the same looking comic as what came before. The shackles had seemed to come off and McFarlane was soon followed by Lee, Portacio, Liefeld, Kieth, Keown, etc.

 

Liefeld had energy to his art. He grabbed your attention. It wasn't reading 10 panels per page of dialogue as much as a fun read. He really seemed to sling ink on there, creating really bold lines that were more organic than the sterilized perfection of plenty of other people. His current work for instance is slick and polished and lost that edge that I used to love. But when he was firing at his peak, NM98-XF4, it was some really impressive and unique art that didn't look like anything out there.

 

And as people pointed out, it was deceptively simple looking. You almost believed you could draw comics just looking at what he did. But as the herds of clones proved, it got stale quick without the actual talent behind it.

 

But then there was the whole dynamic of him as well - he was the young upstart who rose to the A-list quickly, who became a celebrity and the poster boy for comics. He created characters left and right, which was not something you really saw anymore. So many comics just rehashed the same old villains, but Liefeld just created new ones. New heroes too. Or dredging up mostly forgotten ones like Warpath. And he did it nonstop.

 

Then he started Image Comics and was willing to leave one of the top selling books to do what he wanted. It was an inspiration to see someone a handful of years older than you rise to that level, that quickly, and make the leap.

 

It was the whole package. The art, the creativity, the approach.

 

I remember watching the Comic Book Great videos as a kid, and the only two guys who really drew finished looking art were Liefeld and Lee. Most of them did standard head shots or layouts. Liefeld drew full figure after full figure and it was amazing to see.

 

So at his peak his art was quite something.

 

 

 

 

I really like your angle on this! (thumbs u

 

It's a good explanation of why he likes it.

[Logan510]

I personally like Liefelds art. I think he definitely has his own style. I think it's possible that people assume that he cannot draw anatomically correct, instead of assuming that he draws like that on purpose, because that's his style, and that's how he likes to draw. In other words, maybe the long legs, lack of detailed feet, and disproportional body parts are intentional, not because he's incapable of drawing otherwise, but because that's how he likes to draw his characters. I could be wrong about that, but just because someone chooses not to do something, doesn't mean they are incapable of doing it. Some of my favorite guitarists choose not to play difficult solos in their songs, even though they can shred like Yngwie Malmsteen.

 

Call it odd, call it bad art, call it whatever. I'm not an artist, so I cannot accurately judge Liefeld's work from an artist perspective (and maybe that why I like his art), but I am comic book fan, and I can say that I find his art to be entertaining. I also don't need to take into consideration the type of person someone is, or the politics attached to that person to admire their work. There's a lot of musicians, actors, and other entertainers who I may not completely respect on a personal level, but that shouldn't necessarily get in the way of me appreciating their artistic accomplishments, though I can understand why people would feel turned off by Liefeld's work If he treated them rudely.

 

All in all, Liefeld is an easy target, and people wont hesitate to take advantage of the bashing opportunity when it arises. Ironically, there are some mainstream artists who I personally think are disgustingly awful (much worse than Liefeld), yet they will never get the amount of dirt Liefeld does.

 

I'm going to post attach this pic again in case It was missed. I actually think this is my favorite drawing of Deadpool.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I find it interesting that your favorite Deadpool drawing by Liefeld looks the least Liefeld of anything I've seen him do. It's fairly obvious ( to me anyway ) that whoever "painted" the finished piece, fixed a lot of things along the way.

 

What can I say? This depiction of Deadpool is a major improvement from his NM 98 debut, IMHO. Btw, I didnt say It was my favorite. I said I think it's my favorite. There's some other Liefeld Deadpool drawing which I like, probably just as much, and they look much more "Liefeld-ish".

 

What do you mean, "whoever painted the finished piece"? I assume you're referring to the Colorist?

 

Yes, it looks like the colorist fixed a lot of things on that piece.

 

Weird. This info was taken from Marvel.com (in regards to this book)...

 

Cover Information

 

Penciller:

Rob Liefeld

Colorist:

Rob Liefeld

 

Is that just a screw up on the Marvel website? Clearly, the cover has Caprottis name on it.

 

Anyways, could you point out some of the things that have been fixed? I really do have an untrained eye when It comes to that kind of level of artwork, but I would like to know what mistakes have been covered up. Thanks!

 

The anatomy, hands and feet don't look like Liefeld.