What Were Your Personal Top Ten Picks?

[joe_collector]

I am sure if you sat him down in a life drawing class with a model, or gave him an anatomy drawing "test" from memory he would impress you. Did you know that Leroy Neiman who became famous for his sports themed paint dripped/splattered pieces was an incredibly realistic painter erlier in his career? Same with Mondrian who streamlined his work to "colored boxes" deciding along the way to forget the detail and search for the essential in what he saw...

 

Sure,and so was Picasso, but where are the art galleries full of Steranko's hyper-realistic paintings?

[Aman619]

straw man... where are the art galleries full of Steranko's comic book artwork?

[RickHigh]

How come Im thinking if that were spideys head in the sky that THIS would be #1...

 

I think it would look something... like... this:

 

 

Now we're definately talking about a "do-over".

 

Great work, aman.

[heartened]

I can't remember the order, but these were my top ten:

 

Cap 110

Silver Surfer 4

ASM 50

ASM 39

ASM 69

ASM 75

Showcase 34

Hulk 104

Amazing Fantasy 15

Daredevil 43

 

I still can't believe I'm the only one who chose Hulk 104. I absolutely love that cover!

[joe_collector]

straw man... where are the art galleries full of Steranko's comic book artwork?

 

If you start comparing him to other artists with a significant body of realistic work,who later changed styles, then it would seem natural that you produce said work. If Steranko is ultra-skilled at photo-realistic rendering, then give us a taste.

 

Otherwise, it's back to the Dylan comparison - great composer and lyricist, but a below-average singer.

[adamstrange]

I've made numerous positive comments about Steranko's covers, but as my eye has gotten more experienced, I've found myself enjoying his interior art less and less due to the haphazard approach to anatomy.

[Warlord]

 

 

By the way, the original calculation shown by Warlord is wrong... (Unless I entered the data into my spreadsheet incorrectly.)

 

38 1 38

29 0.9 26

79 0.8 63

71 0.7 50

37 0.6 22

55 0.5 28

86 0.4 34

50 0.3 15

45 0.2 9

97 0.1 10

 

Unweighted 587 Weighted 295

 

A spreadsheet? I didn't use no stinkin' spreadsheet! I just did a little mental math, rounding and approximating here and there. Thanks for the accurate number tho!

[Warlord]

My Top 10...

 

1. Amazing Spider-man 50

2. Nick Fury Agent of Shield 6

3. Incredible King-Size Special 1

4. Amazing Fantasy 15

5. Flash 123

6. Silver Surfer 4

7. Thor 127

8. Doctor Solar Man of the Atom 1

9. Batman 156

10. Avengers 57

 

Fanboy Weighted Score: 580

 

Jim

 

Looks like the score to beat, right? And you even had a no-pointer in your pick of Dr Solar I think.

[followtheleader]

I enjoy Hulk 104 also. It probably would have been in my top 20. Definitely Top 25.

 

Pat

[RickHigh]

Steranko was so innovative in his time. I will agree that sometimes his anatomy was a little weak, but some of the things he drew would just blow people away. Here is a two page spread from SHIELD #3 for those who may have never seen that issue...

 

[Scrooge]

Steranko was so innovative in his time.

 

Nice page spread but one could easily imagine the right hand side as part of a late 40's Eisner Spirit Sunday section. Hopefully, I'll have time soon and I can post some of those for comparison ...

[tth2]

If Steranko is ultra-skilled at photo-realistic rendering, then give us a taste.

I remember a fantastic Steranko illustration of a guy lighting up a cigarette which I think would fit your definition of photo-realistic.

[tth2]

I've made numerous positive comments about Steranko's covers, but as my eye has gotten more experienced, I've found myself enjoying his interior art less and less due to the haphazard approach to anatomy.

I don't understand the obsession people here have with anatomical correctness. Drawing a body accurately is one of the most basic skills of any professional artist, and even the most abstract artists such as Jackson Pollack could render life-like drawings with no problem (this has changed in the last 20 years or so, where some of the artists that have emerged in the world of fine art genuinely don't know how to draw). Literally every art student in the world can draw a body anatomically correct. All those guys doing sketches at malls and fairs, guess what, they can all draw "accurately". And if that's all you can do, then guess what, you spend your life drawing sketches at malls and fairs, or you grow up to become Sal or John Buscema.

 

What IS special is someone who can build on that fundamental skill and create a style that is aesthetically pleasing and unique. This may involve taking liberties with anatomical accuracy. Clearly Steranko liked to draw bodies in a sort of S-shape with legs of rubber, to the point that sometimes I wonder if he was obsessed with the Jerry West silhouette used in the NBA's logo.

[adamstrange]

I've made numerous positive comments about Steranko's covers, but as my eye has gotten more experienced, I've found myself enjoying his interior art less and less due to the haphazard approach to anatomy.

I don't understand the obsession people here have with anatomical correctness. Drawing a body accurately is one of the most basic skills of any professional artist, and even the most abstract artists such as Jackson Pollack could render life-like drawings with no problem (this has changed in the last 20 years or so, where some of the artists that have emerged in the world of fine art genuinely don't know how to draw). Literally every art student in the world can draw a body anatomically correct. All those guys doing sketches at malls and fairs, guess what, they can all draw "accurately". And if that's all you can do, then guess what, you spend your life drawing sketches at malls and fairs, or you grow up to become Sal or John Buscema.

 

What IS special is someone who can build on that fundamental skill and create a style that is aesthetically pleasing and unique. This may involve taking liberties with anatomical accuracy. Clearly Steranko liked to draw bodies in a sort of S-shape with legs of rubber, to the point that sometimes I wonder if he was obsessed with the Jerry West silhouette used in the NBA's logo.

 

Being a comics artist is very hard to do because, with few exceptions, you have to work like a dog to execute so many drawings so quickly. So folks who are exceptionally fine artists (e.g. Mac Raboy or Dave Stevens -- if you prefer a contemporary artist) can produce great work, but not when they are under the constraints of producing so many drawings to a comic book publication schedule. I don't think the work that Steranko did was always up to his own standards as he was having trouble hitting deadlines and disliked being "rushed." Under the circumstances, he focused more on story-telling and less on the drawing, which was, in my view, the correct call. But I'd rather him have produced fewer comics of higher quality, and I don't know that he would disagree with that.

 

As far as your comments about artists taking liberties and distorting images, I'm all for guys who, like Lou Fine and Alex Schomburg, knew how to break the rules. And, yes, Steranko knew when to do that too. Too often, though, he wasn't given time to break them right and we are the poorer for it.

[adamstrange]

Steranko was so innovative in his time. I will agree that sometimes his anatomy was a little weak, but some of the things he drew would just blow people away. Here is a two page spread from SHIELD #3 for those who may have never seen that issue...

 

 

This is a wonderful page, among many by Steranko. The guy was knocking himself out to push the medium forward.

[tth2]

But I'd rather him have produced fewer comics of higher quality

As it was, Steranko (along with Barry Smith) were probably the least productive artists that Marvel had, and that's including the Kirby-clone work that each of them produced at the beginning of their careers with Marvel!

 

Just to be clear, I agree with JC that Steranko's real genius was his lay outs and designs, but I disagree that his failure to draw correct anatomy was because he didn't know how to do so.

[Mister Trent]

Interesting mention of Steranko in Daniel Herman's SILVER AGE, THE SECOND GENERATION OF COMIC BOOK ARTISTS (Hermes Press):

 

"Jim Steranko had come on board by the end of 1966 and attempted to inject something new into the Marvel universe. Steranko, who was born in 1938 and had done a little bit of everything, including work as an escape artist, was an astute student of the comics and their history. The problem was, this was obvious by looking at his work. Steranko cribbed (Bernie) Krigstein in his panel breakdowns, he imitated Kirby in his dynamics, and he affected a pop sensibility in his design devices. It looked fresh and exciting to those who did not know better, but experienced eyes knew where he was coming from. By 1969 he was gone."

[Aman619]

Oh nonsense elitist backstabbing gossip! Everybody takes from someone else... but Steranko was "gone" because Krigstien did similar innovative work 15 years earlier? CMon! Krigstien was gone quicker than Steranko! Steranko had othert ideas, and worked as a graphic designer as well as comic and other illustration.

 

Regardless of who he emulated, copied or whatever... his work is right there on the page for all to see and judge fopr themselves. I think in a small way his showing in this little contest speaks to his talent as a cover artist.

 

He's not my favorite comics artist so I feel silly "defended him" --- but he clearly is near the top even with his meager comics output. His work is exciting to look at and innovative in an otherwise pretty boring and safe industry. He was one of the few who took chances and opened up the comics page beyond just drawing well. Hal Foster came forst. So should we look down on Buscema and others for drawing reaklistically with an emphasis on great anatomy??

[Aman619]

also what comics fans refer to as "great anatomy" is usually bulging layers of muscles... which are usually drawn as unrealistically as possible. And always portraying the human figure "anatomically" correct can lead to static layouts, like traced photographs.

[tth2]

also what comics fans refer to as "great anatomy" is usually bulging layers of muscles... which are usually drawn as unrealistically as possible. And always portraying the human figure "anatomically" correct can lead to static layouts, like traced photographs.

That's exactly right. Simon Bisley, who happened to be into body building, was the first comic artist I remember who realistically depicted what muscularly overdeveloped superheroes would really look like.