What contemporary artists do you forsee becoming legendary?

[mrpunch0]

What's next? Frazetta and Eisner suck? Keep 'em coming.

 

you have got to be one of the most negative guys on here. Where's KK when we need him?!

 

I think he's off scanning some art.

[Paris_Fred]

As I'm a big supporter of Travis I have to help a little bit Rob_React.

 

Travis has done great stuff in the past, now he is living one of his dreams, working with Jodorovsky. It will take the time it will take, logically the book should be finished and printed by the end of 2006. After that, nobody really knows what Travis is going to do but he loves working on comics so you will see his work again. Maybe for DC, maybe for Marvel.

Travis is not a fast Artist, on color stuff he will do a complete pencil work, then a complete inking work and then a complete color work !

How many of the mentioned above artist will do such a task and this talking about this thread.

Most of them don't know how to draw a hand or backgrounds, ink, color or paint.

So just be patient, Travis will be back.

 

To complete Robs' :

Pencils

& Inks

[Lambo]

I agree. My friend DeLiquorstore has totally missed the point of this thread. The original poster invited everyone to SPECULATE which artists will achieve that lasting fame or 'legendary' status we associate with a Jack Kirby. In addition, what some people equate as "legendary" will differ. Is it artistic achievement, or sales or how many movie deals the guy signs? By nature, such a discussion will include names that some people will deem unworthy.

 

To further tempt the gods with the "collision" between the world of sports dorkiness with the world of comic art dorkiness, this is similar to a discussion of the Hall of Fame credentials of a player in the first 5 years of his career. Sure a player may be producing at a Hall of Fame caliber (like Albert Pujols) but unless he does it over the long haul, he may or may not be a Hall of Famer. And yes, sports fans, there may be some players like Sandy Koufax whose performance over a shorter time was so dominating that by itself was a Hall of Fame career. So sure, it is probably too early to say what the future status of a Hitch, Finch, Cassaday, Van Sciver, JG Jones will be but it seems to me the point of this thread is the fun in discussing it.

 

BTW, I think Charest is brilliant. However his work in comics has been limited in comparison to his peers. Is he going to be an all-time great? I think so but I think anyone who wants to argue the counterpoint can do so just as convincingly mainly due to the small body of work.

 

Lamb

[*paull*]

Charest's current work is pretty good, but to use a sports analogy, he was batting .200 for many years and has a long way to go to make that up.

[delekkerste]

I agree. My friend DeLiquorstore has totally missed the point of this thread. The original poster invited everyone to SPECULATE which artists will achieve that lasting fame or 'legendary' status we associate with a Jack Kirby.

 

I think you guys are taking my comments too literally! The insinuation of my comments of those artists not "HOF"-worthy today was that, in many/most cases, they are unlikely to be worthy in the future, either (IMO and barring major changes/developments in the artists craft/career, of course).

 

I feel that the quality of artwork being published today is, as a whole, very poor. I'm not talking about mid-to-late 1990s poor (we're unlikely to ever plumb those kind of depths again, at least I hope not), but poor enough that I don't think a lot of legends will arise from this era. Just my opinion.

[rob_react]

Charest's current work is pretty good, but to use a sports analogy, he was batting .200 for many years and has a long way to go to make that up.

 

How familiar are you with his career? He's been good at this point a LOT longer than he was doing the derivative work you're focusing on. He first started working in comics in 1992 or so and by 1996/7 he was doing things like this:

 

http://comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=40975&GSub=3768

 

this:

 

http://comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=97486&GSub=14204

 

this:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6549199562

 

and this:

 

 

Even his earlier (94-95) WildC.A.T.S work was a lot of fun.

[*paull*]

His recent stuff is much better than his early work, but I remember hating his circa 1992-1995 work with a passion. He has improved considerably, which many of his Image contemporaries didn't do. That doesn't change the fact that during his first five seasons he hit .200 with no home runs. Maybe ten more years of good work and I'll forget about it

[COMICKINGS]

I feel that the quality of artwork being published today is, as a whole, very poor. I'm not talking about mid-to-late 1990s poor (we're unlikely to ever plumb those kind of depths again, at least I hope not), but poor enough that I don't think a lot of legends will arise from this era. Just my opinion.

 

I would not want to be an artist these days trying to break into the business...There is a load of talent out there these days. I think some of you guys are set in your ways of what you like or what you grew up on,that you aren't giving these newer guys a chance.I don't see any era as being full of legends.There have always been bad artists and a handful of standouts for every period.

[*paull*]

There's plenty of good work being done today, but little of it is for Marvel, DC or Image. Most of the best work is indy-published.

[delekkerste]

How familiar are you with his career? He's been good at this point a LOT longer than he was doing the derivative work you're focusing on. He first started working in comics in 1992 or so and by 1996/7 he was doing things like this:

 

No doubt Monsieur Charest has the requisite talent to achieve comic book art greatness, but he has all but disappeared from the comic book world's collective consciousness, while his work on such forgettable projects as "WildC.A.T.S.", "Stormwatch" and "Darkstars" will continue to fade into obscurity with each passing year. I'm not saying he can't turn it around, but as of now, his legacy will most definitely not be remembered as "legendary".

[rob_react]

How familiar are you with his career? He's been good at this point a LOT longer than he was doing the derivative work you're focusing on. He first started working in comics in 1992 or so and by 1996/7 he was doing things like this:

 

No doubt Monsieur Charest has the requisite talent to achieve comic book art greatness, but he has all but disappeared from the comic book world's collective consciousness, while his work on such forgettable projects as "WildC.A.T.S.", "Stormwatch" and "Darkstars" will continue to fade into obscurity with each passing year. I'm not saying he can't turn it around, but as of now, his legacy will most definitely not be remembered as "legendary".

 

I hate to sound like KrazyKat and bring value into these discussions, the consistently high prices that Charest's art gets means to me that he isn't really fading into obscurity in any great hurry.

 

Beyond that, there are plenty of people like me who are just happy to appreciate his art no matter what the titles were (even though I did like the titles.)

 

I will also mention (just to plug them) that his WildC.A.T.S work with Alan Moore was excellent and the Stormwatch book I posted is actually from Warren Ellis' classic pre-Authority run on the title (Charest only did the cover). For me, and anyone else fortunate enough to have read them, they're both memorable runs.

[rob_react]

 

I would not want to be an artist these days trying to break into the business...There is a load of talent out there these days. I think some of you guys are set in your ways of what you like or what you grew up on,that you aren't giving these newer guys a chance.I don't see any era as being full of legends.There have always been bad artists and a handful of standouts for every period.

 

[delekkerste]

I would not want to be an artist these days trying to break into the business...There is a load of talent out there these days. I think some of you guys are set in your ways of what you like or what you grew up on,that you aren't giving these newer guys a chance.I don't see any era as being full of legends.There have always been bad artists and a handful of standouts for every period.

 

This statement is just so, so wrong. I remember a time when there were many legends and legends in the making drawing comic books (e.g., the mid-1970s) and when there were not (e.g., the mid-1990s). And that's not just hindsight - pick up a handful of Warren mags from the '70s and read the fan letters pages - Neal Adams, Bernie Wrightson, Frank Frazetta, Richard Corben, etc. - it's very obvious they were legends and legends-in-the-making even back then. Cast the net wider to Marvel and DC around the same time period and the list of names would start getting pretty long, no?

 

As for being set in my ways and not giving the new stuff a chance, considering I pick up more new titles than most people on this Board and collect modern OA, I hardly think that has any basis in fact.

[delekkerste]

I hate to sound like KrazyKat and bring value into these discussions, the consistently high prices that Charest's art gets means to me that he isn't really fading into obscurity in any great hurry.

 

Rob, that's the proverbial canard. It only takes a handful of Charest art collectors to keep prices high. It does not mean that the average comic collector today can even pronounce the guy's name, let alone remember the work he did 10 years ago.

[rob_react]

It does not mean that the average comic collector today can even pronounce the guy's name,

 

They couldn't pronounce it then either

[COMICKINGS]

read some fan letters from the mid-'90'S....Todd McFarlane,Jim Lee,Alex Ross,etc...like'em or not..those guys ARE legends and always will be.You dogg on the mid-90's really bad. There were just as many bad artists back in the '70's.

[*paull*]

You think that McFarlane has anywhere near the admiration that he had back then? He's more scorned than praised these days. How about Liefield, Portacio, Larson and Valentino? Are they legends too?

[pkveronese]

You think that McFarlane has anywhere near the admiration that he had back then? He's more scorned than praised these days. How about Liefield, Portacio, Larson and Valentino? Are they legends too?

 

I honestly think they will all be somewhat revered, if not for their work but also because of their "infamy" (infamy especially in the case of Liefeld). Their work personified 3-5 year era in comics,regardless of whether most people liked it or not, and the people who grew up in that era will be getting older and buying OA soon.

[delekkerste]

You dogg on the mid-90's really bad. There were just as many bad artists back in the '70's.

 

 

This isn't even worth debating.

[comicartfan]

I feel that the quality of artwork being published today is, as a whole, very poor. I'm not talking about mid-to-late 1990s poor (we're unlikely to ever plumb those kind of depths again, at least I hope not), but poor enough that I don't think a lot of legends will arise from this era. Just my opinion.

 

Agreed. I don't think that any of us think that the industry is turning out "legends by the dozens". We aren't talking about a mass inclusion into this now infamous HOF. We are mearly speculating who has potential to be great.....it's just for fun.