T.O.G.S - '47-'49 Sans Superhero/Timely/DC

[adamstrange]

I'm really impressed by these airbrushed Schomburg covers. Being most familiar with his work on Timely's, I have to admit I haven't been a fan of his because I really dislike the cluttered style of those covers. I know this is heresy, but quite frankly, they've always reminded me of the doodlings a bored 10-year old boy would do in his notebook while listening to a lecture at school. You know the ones I'm talking about, with an airplane firing its guns from the corner and lots of people on the ground being pierced by bullets and oozing blood while people parachute down and tanks come in from the margins. Basically, no space left unfilled.

 

For the first time, it has occurred to me that perhaps they were drawn that way because the perceived audience was in fact a bunch of 10-year old boys, so that's what the editors at Timely told him to do.

 

But seeing these simpler, cleaner covers has been a revelation. Suddenly, it's clear that Schomburg DID understand things like composition, space and line control.

 

No, Schomburg knew nothing about composition, layout, negative space, design, perspective, or eye movement. Seriously, he was a complete hack hired by Timely because he was cheaper than anyone else. Bottomline: All the GA comic art is really cruddy and what you really want to do is go back to the SA Forum with all the good artists and avoid this dreck.

[adamstrange]

Here's for something different from 1949 - Joan of Arc a.k.a. A1 21 - Story by Gardner Fox and illustration by Ogden Whitney

 

Or should this be in the Atomic Age thread ?? I don't know any more??

 

Here, there, anywhere you'd like. Just so it's posted!

 

Ogden Whitney art? That should make for a fun read!

[PovertyRow]

No, Shomburg knew nothing about composition, layout, negative space, design, or eye movement. Seriously, he was a complete hack hired by Timely because he was cheaper than anyone else.

 

Please explan the often amazing xela covers I used to own many and rememebr with fondness as I review my Gerbers those which I once owned..

 

Oh yeah - why do I feel like "negative space" makes me feel like I am in a Woody Allen movie where the main characters are debating "Van-Go" vs "Van-Goff"???

 

The 50's xela airbrushes are maste works. WHERE DO YOU SEE THE DEFECTS???

[adamstrange]

I'm really impressed by these airbrushed Schomburg covers. Being most familiar with his work on Timely's, I have to admit I haven't been a fan of his because I really dislike the cluttered style of those covers. I know this is heresy, but quite frankly, they've always reminded me of the doodlings a bored 10-year old boy would do in his notebook while listening to a lecture at school. You know the ones I'm talking about, with an airplane firing its guns from the corner and lots of people on the ground being pierced by bullets and oozing blood while people parachute down and tanks come in from the margins. Basically, no space left unfilled.

 

For the first time, it has occurred to me that perhaps they were drawn that way because the perceived audience was in fact a bunch of 10-year old boys, so that's what the editors at Timely told him to do.

 

But seeing these simpler, cleaner covers has been a revelation. Suddenly, it's clear that Schomburg DID understand things like composition, space and line control.

 

No, Schomburg knew nothing about composition, layout, negative space, design, perspective, or eye movement. Seriously, he was a complete hack hired by Timely because he was cheaper than anyone else. Bottomline: All the GA comic art is really cruddy and what you really want to do is go back to the SA Forum with all the good artists and avoid this dreck.

 

 

If you look at other WWII covers from the time that Schomburg started "getting busy", you'll find examples where artists have tried to copy his style, but nearly all thse attempts are quite obviously unsuccessful. This includes attempts by good artists. To break the rules of realistic drawing and still keep the composition under control requires a level of understanding of the "traditional" rules of art that goes beyond what most artists have. I'll admit that the unusual nature of the style may make it difficult to latch on to right away. I have found this to be the case myself for a number of artists who initially puzzled me, until I found that they pleased me immensely. One of my tests for art that I consider of importance or lasting value is whether or not I continue to interested or intrigued over a period of years. The lesser material lessens it hold over time while the greater material increases its hold.

[Scrooge]

Pov,

 

you need to catch up on Adam's sense of humor. This was but a post in jest to send Tim back to the SA forum. Considering the gorgeous copies that Adam has of Schomburg's work, I'd hardly say he doesn't like the man's output.

[Scrooge]

Adam,

 

re: "I have found this to be the case myself for a number of artists who initially puzzled me, until I found that they pleased me immensely. One of my tests for art that I consider of importance or lasting value is whether or not I continue to interested or intrigued over a period of years."

 

Would you mind giving us an example or two of which artists you have in mind for whom it took you time to appreciate their output? I am really curious (because as for everyone I run into the same phenomenon).

[PovertyRow]

Pov,

 

you need to catch up on Adam's sense of humor. This was but a post in jest to send Tim back to the SA forum. Considering the gorgeous copies that Adam has of Schomburg's work, I'd hardly say he doesn't like the man's output.

 

Well, I did address Adam about xela. Hoipe to hear back.

 

But this is NOT a POST in jest. It is a whloe freaking ::heh heh - I said "freaking" topic.

 

And as a long time AA collector I have to address certain issuesl And I saw nothing to indicate humor...

 

 

But you know what? Based on your post sounds like Adam Strange should be responding.

[adamstrange]

Pov,

 

you need to catch up on Adam's sense of humor. This was but a post in jest to send Tim back to the SA forum. Considering the gorgeous copies that Adam has of Schomburg's work, I'd hardly say he doesn't like the man's output.

 

I'm sorry, Pov.

 

I love Shomburg and you'll see a few more airbrushes from me over time. I thought the little insane symbol would alert people. I'll edit my post to make it more clear. Also, I was really responding to Tim's statements about the "busy" covers as Tim said he liked the airbrush covers and, as a result, was re-thinking about the "busy" ones. :

[PovertyRow]

Pov,

 

you need to catch up on Adam's sense of humor. This was but a post in jest to send Tim back to the SA forum. Considering the gorgeous copies that Adam has of Schomburg's work, I'd hardly say he doesn't like the man's output.

 

I love Shomburg and you'll see a few more airbrushes from me over time. I thought the little insane symbol would alert people. I'll edit my post to make it more clear. Also, I was really responding to Tim's statements about the "busy" covers as Tim said he liked the airbrush covers and, as a result, was re-thinking about the "busy" ones.

 

Thanks Adam. I confess to being somewhat flummoxed about this whole ting but also enjoyiong it because such - err - controvies can really open things up! (and yeah - I kind of figured your interest in Schomburg (err - it IS "SCh as opposed ton "SHo"? Or am I wrong here?).

[adamstrange]

Pov,

 

you need to catch up on Adam's sense of humor. This was but a post in jest to send Tim back to the SA forum. Considering the gorgeous copies that Adam has of Schomburg's work, I'd hardly say he doesn't like the man's output.

 

I love Shomburg and you'll see a few more airbrushes from me over time. I thought the little insane symbol would alert people. I'll edit my post to make it more clear. Also, I was really responding to Tim's statements about the "busy" covers as Tim said he liked the airbrush covers and, as a result, was re-thinking about the "busy" ones.

 

Thanks Adam. I confess to being somewhat flummoxed about this whole ting but also enjoyiong it because such - err - controvies can really open things up! (and yeah - I kind of figured your interest in Schomburg (err - it IS "SCh as opposed ton "SHo"? Or am I wrong here?).

 

Yes, it's Sch. I think I looked it up yesterday on GCD and either read it wrong or the entry was incorrect. I checked by looking at the new Schomburg book from Vanguard. More editing I need to do!

 

Part of the problem was trying to do a series of posts and thinking that no one would be up this late on the forum to mis-interpret before I could finish the sequence. My bad. Rest assured that if you EVER see me do knock an artist, comic, board member like this it is not intentional. And if I cross the line with my humor, I will "own up" and fix it.

 

As far as Schomburg goes, two of the coolest books I own are Schomburg covers. (They won't be posted for a while.)

[tth2]

I'm really impressed by these airbrushed Schomburg covers. Being most familiar with his work on Timely's, I have to admit I haven't been a fan of his because I really dislike the cluttered style of those covers. I know this is heresy, but quite frankly, they've always reminded me of the doodlings a bored 10-year old boy would do in his notebook while listening to a lecture at school. You know the ones I'm talking about, with an airplane firing its guns from the corner and lots of people on the ground being pierced by bullets and oozing blood while people parachute down and tanks come in from the margins. Basically, no space left unfilled.

 

For the first time, it has occurred to me that perhaps they were drawn that way because the perceived audience was in fact a bunch of 10-year old boys, so that's what the editors at Timely told him to do.

 

But seeing these simpler, cleaner covers has been a revelation. Suddenly, it's clear that Schomburg DID understand things like composition, space and line control.

 

No, Shomburg knew nothing about composition, layout, negative space, design, perspective, or eye movement. Seriously, he was a complete hack hired by Timely because he was cheaper than anyone else. Bottomline: All the GA comic art is really cruddy and what you really want to do is go back to the SA Forum with all the good artists and avoid this dreck.

I had a feeling my statements wouldn't go unchallenged. Seriously, I don't think anyone can discern much about Schomburg's knowledge of composition, layout, negative space, and particularly perspective, from most of his Timely covers. The only thing you can discern is that prior to Sergio Aragones, he held the mantle of artist who could fit more "stuff" into a single page than anyone else. Again, it's nice to see these airbrush covers where his quality is really able to shine through. Just my opinion.

[adamstrange]

Adam,

 

re: "I have found this to be the case myself for a number of artists who initially puzzled me, until I found that they pleased me immensely. One of my tests for art that I consider of importance or lasting value is whether or not I continue to interested or intrigued over a period of years."

 

Would you mind giving us an example or two of which artists you have in mind for whom it took you time to appreciate their output? I am really curious (because as for everyone I run into the same phenomenon).

 

This was hard. The more I thought about this, the more I thought about it in terms of gaining/losing appreciation for an artist as opposed to binary didn't like/do like. Then I thought in terms of what art/artists did I just pass right by as opposed to those that I always stop to look at and appreciate. Some examples for this include Everett's 50s Sub-mariner revival (I liked his Atlas mystery covers but the Subby stories didn't initially appeal), Drucker's DC War, Novick's Shield covers for Pep, and Maurice Whitman's Fiction House covers. I'm sure that there are more and I don't mean to imply that all these are the best art/artists (that would be a different question), these are just ones that I've come to appreciate more over time. Another example would be LB Cole 1940s covers. I like most all of his work, but initially I liked the 50s better. Lately I'm leaning towards the 40s.

[Scrooge]

Adam,

 

thanks for the reply. This will give me something to think about along the lines of your comments. In the meantime, here's for yet another genre change. This is one of my top 5 Bugs cover (probably # 2)

 

[adamstrange]

These funny animal books are easy to underestimate. That's not only a beautifully drawn cover, but the costuming and scenery are carefully based on Tibetan architecture and clothing. Is the art for the the "Dangerous Adventure" story of the same quality?

 

(Scrooge: that looks like a really nice copy -- the colors are better than what I've remembered seeing on a file copy. Nice pickup!)

[Scrooge]

Re: inside art quality - I'd say so + this is one of those Dells that has story from inside page to back page - no ads. You don't feel cheated like when you buy an Atlas comics. Here's an inside page

 

 

Hey POV, could you help us out keeping the thread going?

[Forbush-Man]

Adam,

 

thanks for the reply. This will give me something to think about along the lines of your comments. In the meantime, here's for yet another genre change. This is one of my top 5 Bugs cover (probably # 2)

 

 

That's a beautiful book there, Scrooge!!!

[esquirecomics]

On the early side of the thread, but nonetheless here it is:

 

[esquirecomics]

Another Mile High book:

 

[esquirecomics]

An infamous SOTI book:

 

[Scrooge]

Thanks Fuelman. Somehow I still prefer this cover: