Best Cover????

[october]

this is the Best Cover. Every time I see it I cant take my eyes off it. The colors, the angle, the detail and the power of it. WOW.

 

That cover is so underated it's sick. One of the best Adams covers out there. I absolutely love it, mostly because of the innovative perspective and angle. You have good taste.

[october]

I say this with all sincerity - as much as I appreciate the skill and talent of John Romita - no Romita cover is better than any Steranko cover.

 

You said it perfectly. Romita is quite possibly the most overrated Silver Age artist. If he hadn't worked on Spider-Man, and only did work on Daredevil or some second or third tier character, I highly doubt he'd have the recognition he has today.

 

And Steranko was able to build his reputation by working mainly on a third tier character, Nick Fury, and a handful (2 X-Men issues, 3 Cap issues, a horror story and a romance story) of other work for Marvel. If Steranko had illustrated Spider-Man for twenty issues instead of Nick Fury, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

Romita's covers are good, sometimes great, but his interiors are a bit of a snore. After hearing his panel pages taked up again and again I finally took a look. I honestly don't understand what the fuss is all about. Simplistic, undetailed images, stock angles and perspectives, ok action and movement...what's the big deal? Check out some Adams interiors. Now THERE is some drawing. They just scream movement and his attention to detail in unbelievable. Let me show everyone what I mean. Coincidentally, I got both an Adams and a Romita reprint trade in today and I scanned two "action" pages for comparison. Can a JR fan explain to me how this one is better, or even significantly above average?

 

 

[heartened]

I say this with all sincerity - as much as I appreciate the skill and talent of John Romita - no Romita cover is better than any Steranko cover.

 

You said it perfectly. Romita is quite possibly the most overrated Silver Age artist. If he hadn't worked on Spider-Man, and only did work on Daredevil or some second or third tier character, I highly doubt he'd have the recognition he has today.

 

And Steranko was able to build his reputation by working mainly on a third tier character, Nick Fury, and a handful (2 X-Men issues, 3 Cap issues, a horror story and a romance story) of other work for Marvel. If Steranko had illustrated Spider-Man for twenty issues instead of Nick Fury, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

Romita's covers are good, sometimes great, but his interiors are a bit of a snore. After hearing his panel pages taked up again and again I finally took a look. I honestly don't understand what the fuss is all about. Simplistic, undetailed images, stock angles and perspectives, ok action and movement...what's the big deal? Check out some Adams interiors. Now THERE is some drawing. They just scream movement and his attention to detail in unbelievable. Let me show everyone what I mean. Coincidentally, I got both an Adams and a Romita reprint trade in today and I scanned two "action" pages for comparison. Can a JR fan explain to me how this one is better, or even significantly above average?

 

 

 

Likes and dislikes cannot be explained, and for my part I do like both artists very much. Romita has a clean, simple linework that is beautiful in that simplicity. I don't think anyone else does the less-is-more style better. Adams is very different, experimenting with angles and panel design, and thinking/drawing "outside the panels."

 

Believe it or not, many people don't like Kirby's style when they first get into this hobby. I know I didn't! Younger collectors were never raised with that style and will see it (like Romita) as terribly simplistic; almost childlike. But, Kirby's style is unmistakeable and truly unique, and quite powerful, and no one has been able to duplicate it. It too me about three years to finally realize his genius. The same, I think, may be true for Romita. His Spidey is the classic Spidey for me, even though I started reading only in the early-mid 80s.

[october]

 

Likes and dislikes cannot be explained, and for my part I do like both artists very much. Romita has a clean, simple linework that is beautiful in that simplicity. I don't think anyone else does the less-is-more style better. Adams is very different, experimenting with angles and panel design, and thinking/drawing "outside the panels."

 

Believe it or not, many people don't like Kirby's style when they first get into this hobby. I know I didn't! Younger collectors were never raised with that style and will see it (like Romita) as terribly simplistic; almost childlike. But, Kirby's style is unmistakeable and truly unique, and quite powerful, and no one has been able to duplicate it. It too me about three years to finally realize his genius. The same, I think, may be true for Romita. His Spidey is the classic Spidey for me, even though I started reading only in the early-mid 80s.

 

Thanks for the reply. I understand the "less is better approach" and its appeal, I guess I just don't see how Romita stands out from the rest. Like Ditko, I think part of Romita's draw is his association with Marvel's most popular title. I am not sure he would be so applauded if he had worked on a second tier character. I guess I was expecting Romita's interiors to stand out like Adams', Wrightson's or Barks' do. Maybe it's suffering from all the hype I heard prior to taking a close look.

 

I agree with you, I didn't much care for Kirby either when I started collecting. Now his early Thor work is some of the most impressive stuff I have seen. Still don't like his bronze DC titles though. People can only be so blocky before the eye rebels.

[Aman619]

I too didnt like Kirby way back in the early 60s. Too crude, blocky, and rough. But I much later came to recognize his unique vision and brilliant composition and power, particularly once he had inkers like Sinnott who retained Jirby's linework, and enhanced it better than Ayers and Roussos did very early on at Marvel.

 

But to compare Adams with Romita is just an insult to Neal. Romita is Marvels Curt Swan - - dependable, can draw anything, good for faces and has deceent anatomical chops. Nice, clean layouts easy to follow mostly because they dont attempt to do anything other than give teh eye one more panel of info after another. Im not saying he suucks (nobody take offense) he's a very talented artist. But Neal is (to borrow Dave Sim type convention) an 'Artist' with a capital A. No comparison other that they both drew funnybooks.

 

Neal was an INNOVATOR. Romita was a company man.

Romita was Tuna on white bread, sometimes spiced up with a slice of onion.

Adams was a hot tamale, fois gras, lobster humidor, --- exotic, rare and special, every time an EVENT!!

 

ask yourself this question: When each new Spidey came out back then, were you more interested in the story? or the art?

How about a Neal Adams book??

 

I used to buy Tomahawks off the racks because of Neals covers only to get home an dsee Thorne's interiors and go D'oh!! And Id do it again next month due to Neals Covers. I never bought Romitas romance books for HIS covers.

 

I accept the vagaries of personal choice, but I feel strongly that is an argument more suited for choosing between equals, like say Romita and Swan.

 

Adams could be compared to very few contemporarty artists, like Eisner, Toth or Steranko.

[october]

Well put. I agree with everything you just said.

 

Also, seeing your 9.4 inspired me to pull the trigger on this one, which I had been watching and debating for about a week. I got tired of waiting...

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...me=STRK:MEWN:IT

 

 

[adamstrange]

 

Likes and dislikes cannot be explained, and for my part I do like both artists very much. Romita has a clean, simple linework that is beautiful in that simplicity. I don't think anyone else does the less-is-more style better. Adams is very different, experimenting with angles and panel design, and thinking/drawing "outside the panels."

 

Believe it or not, many people don't like Kirby's style when they first get into this hobby. I know I didn't! Younger collectors were never raised with that style and will see it (like Romita) as terribly simplistic; almost childlike. But, Kirby's style is unmistakeable and truly unique, and quite powerful, and no one has been able to duplicate it. It too me about three years to finally realize his genius. The same, I think, may be true for Romita. His Spidey is the classic Spidey for me, even though I started reading only in the early-mid 80s.

 

Thanks for the reply. I understand the "less is better approach" and its appeal, I guess I just don't see how Romita stands out from the rest. Like Ditko, I think part of Romita's draw is his association with Marvel's most popular title. I am not sure he would be so applauded if he had worked on a second tier character. I guess I was expecting Romita's interiors to stand out like Adams', Wrightson's or Barks' do. Maybe it's suffering from all the hype I heard prior to taking a close look.

 

I agree with you, I didn't much care for Kirby either when I started collecting. Now his early Thor work is some of the most impressive stuff I have seen. Still don't like his bronze DC titles though. People can only be so blocky before the eye rebels.

 

I don't think that the pages October put up as examples automatically incline me toward Neal Adams -- as much as I like him. There is an awkwardness to the overall page layout that I believe Neal corrected as he grew more comfortable designing the page as a whole. I stick with my assessment of Romita as the obviously lesser artist (my opinion -- your mileage may vary), though I do really like certain covers and some interior pages of his.

 

As far as Kirby goes, I notice a big difference when he stopped drawing 2x and had to use the modern page size. I, and I'm not the only one, don't think he ever fully adjusted as he compensated for the smaller drawing area by reducing the complexity of his drawings. This produced the blockiness that gets so wearying to the eyes.

[october]

I don't think that the pages October put up as examples automatically incline me toward Neal Adams -- as much as I like him. There is an awkwardness to the overall page layout that I believe Neal corrected as he grew more comfortable designing the page as a whole.

 

Really? I think the panel layout is one of its best points. I get tired of seeing the four/six square pages and anything that doesn't kill the narrative flow, or confuse the reader, is a welcome change for me.

[Aman619]

October, I kinda agree that the Adams page wasnt spectacular Adams work. It was a pretty early page too I think, right? But even so, you can see tthat Neal read the -script and broke the page down in a far different manner than Romita did. And keep in mind that at Marvel, under the Marvel method, Romita was FREER (working sans finished -script) to layout the page (and story!) anyway he saw fit. He just never saw the need to break up the page any differently fronm what had been done for 40 years til then.

[Aman619]

Well put. I agree with everything you just said.

 

Also, seeing your 9.4 inspired me to pull the trigger on this one, which I had been watching and debating for about a week. I got tired of waiting...

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...me=STRK:MEWN:IT

 

 

 

umm, that wasnt my 9.4. I just grabbed the scan to use in my post. Id like to get a HG run of Deadmans since mine were so well read into VGs! Its one of many books I always thought there'd be plenty of time and little incentive to re-buy HG copies of --- until now I realize its too late price-wise!!

[october]

October, I kinda agree that the Adams page wasnt spectacular Adams work. It was a pretty early page too I think, right? But even so, you can see tthat Neal read the -script and broke the page down in a far different manner than Romita did. And keep in mind that at Marvel, under the Marvel method, Romita was FREER (working sans finished -script) to layout the page (and story!) anyway he saw fit. He just never saw the need to break up the page any differently fronm what had been done for 40 years til then.

 

It's from 68. Not that early. It was one of the better fist fight scenes in the Deadman trade I had.

[Aman619]

1968? thats pretty early DC Adams work. Or middle. what issue was it? looked like SA between 206 and 210....which I was calling early. Overall its hard to pick a random page here and there to compare. Ive seen way bettr Romita pages too...!

[october]

1968? thats pretty early DC Adams work. Or middle. what issue was it? looked like SA between 206 and 210....which I was calling early. Overall its hard to pick a random page here and there to compare. Ive seen way bettr Romita pages too...!

 

I guess that was the point of the comparison. It wasn't the best Romita or Adams page I came across, just a typical fist fight scene from both. I never claimed they were the greatest effort from either artist, the point was to compare them.

[Aman619]

what issue was it from? Im curious how close I was from memory....

[october]

what issue was it from? Im curious how close I was from memory....

 

It's from issue 210.

[Aman619]

not bad eh? I hate the coloring on both too. Too many dischordant colors, like the coloris was thinking "okay, I used blue, red, orange... what havent I used yet?"

[*paull*]

I agree completely with your assessment of Romita.

 

John Buscema was another dependable "can draw anything" workhorse for Marvel, but his interiors were FAR superior to Romita's. I never understood why Buscema doesn't get the accolades that Romita does. He wasn't an innovator like Steranko and Adams, but he could draw action and tension better than anyone.

[october]

not bad eh? I hate the coloring on both too. Too many dischordant colors, like the coloris was thinking "okay, I used blue, red, orange... what havent I used yet?"

 

Have you seen the recoloring job they did for the Adams' Batman hardcovers? The new palate is MUCH better than on the original issues.

[heartened]

I agree completely with your assessment of Romita.

 

John Buscema was another dependable "can draw anything" workhorse for Marvel, but his interiors were FAR superior to Romita's. I never understood why Buscema doesn't get the accolades that Romita does. He wasn't an innovator like Steranko and Adams, but he could draw action and tension better than anyone.

 

Buscema is definitely also held in high esteem! His art is considered very sleek and beautiful with a great grasp of anatomy. His work on the Silver Surfer series is regarded as some of the finest Silver Age art out there, and garners high prices when offered for sale. Covers from that run sell in the 20-40K range, similar to Romita ASM covers (obviously the #1 and #4 would command much higher in today's market).

 

His work on ASM is quite good as well, but he did a few issues here and there, and few covers. So, he never got the recognition on ASM that he deserved. But, his art on the early ASM and Avengers issues was some of the best that Marvel was producing at the time.

 

Here's my splash page to Silver Surfer #14:

 

[*paull*]

That splash page is superb. I absolutely love Buscema's work, and he never received the recognition he deserved.