Rising Stars?
Jeffrey MacHott
bens...@tc.umn.edu wrote in message ...
> [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
> [ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set. ]
> [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
>
>Has anyone seen the second Rising Stars yet?
>
Hell, I haven't been able to find the first one yet!! :*)
--Ragu Leader
"To all those who said that the Babylon Project would fail...
FAITH MANAGES"
--J.M.Straczynski, "Deconstruction of Falling Stars"
Greg Corbin
> Has anyone seen the second Rising Stars yet?
Yep, but they took one look at the artwork and their heads exploded
like an outtake from "Scanners." But that don't mean I ain't buyin' it
when it comes out (which could be a while, since it operates on "Image
time", which is considerably slower than real time.)
Jms at B5
>
> Yep, but they took one look at the artwork and their heads exploded
>like an outtake from "Scanners."
Which is kind of difficult since I didn't approve the final artwork until a few
days ago.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
Greg Corbin
> >> Has anyone seen the second Rising Stars yet?
> >
> > Yep, but they took one look at the artwork and their heads
> exploded
> >like an outtake from "Scanners."
>
> Which is kind of difficult since I didn't approve the final artwork
> until a few
> days ago.
Whoa, JMS! I wasn't seriously suggesting that anyone's noggin has
been, or will be, put in jeopardy by Keu Cha's pencilling. It was a
joke--snippy, yes--but a joke nonetheless.
However, my unvarnished feelings on the subject can be summed up as
follows, take them how you will:
If the reader's eye has trouble knowing the proper sequence of
panels and moving smoothly between them, there's a problem. And if the
time period that the story takes place in isn't apparent simply in the
artwork alone, there's a problem. I noticed the artwork for issue #1
had both these problems--I mean, if you hadn't out-and-out stated that
the mysterious meteor hit Illinois in the 1970s, I would never have
guessed it from the clothing, the cars, or the houses. And the panels
did not scan as well as they should have, probably because, like a lot
of his colleagues, the artist seems to hold "gutters"--the white spaces
between panels--in serious disdain. (The ultra-slick, wall-to-wall
computer coloring, printed on that superglossy paper, didn't do wonders
for the readability either. But since that seems to be the status quo
for almost all books these days, I won't harp on it too much).
More generally, I have problems with the Image/Top Cow/Wildstorm
"house style", which seems to be aimed at preteens with raging
hormones. The women--even the middle-aged, non-superheroic ones--are
drawn as size 2's with perfect smiles and lithe bodies, and the men are
uniformly rugged and buff. The poses tend to be awkward and pinup-y,
and basic things like composition and perspective are often ignored for
the sake of flashy effect. The main problem, though--at least for
me--is simply the fact that it *is* a house style. If Keu Cha were to
sign his name as "Michael Turner", "Marc Silvestri", or the fellow who
does "Witchblade", I would never in a million years know the
difference. And I don't really cotton to that.
Finally, there's the lateness factor. This problem is hardly
confined to "Rising Stars"--it's reached practically epidemic
proportions everywhere. I'm sure it happens to different artists for
different reasons, some of which are probably justified, but the fact is
that it's killing the comics business. Readers get tired of the waiting
game and give up on the whole kit and kaboodle, and who can really blame
them? And eventually store owners themselves get sick of being strung
along and quit buying the offending book altogether.
But even with all these little annoyances piling up, I'm still going
to buy "Rising Stars" every month, simply because it's being
written--and well, I might add--by someone that I trust. And you should
pat yourself on the back for that, JMS.
Jacob
Lisa Webster
Greg Corbin <cor...@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:37E51137...@swbell.net...
> The poses tend to be awkward and pinup-y,
> and basic things like composition and perspective are
> often ignored for the sake of flashy effect.
This isn't an art project. It's a comic book, rendered as many comics are.
If it didn't obey most of the rules of anatomy etc, it wouldn't make sense
to _anyone_.
> The main problem, though--at least for me--is simply the
> fact that it *is* a house style. If Keu Cha were to sign his
> name as "Michael Turner", "Marc Silvestri", or the fellow
> who does "Witchblade", I would never in a million years
> know the difference. And I don't really cotton to that.
Is there a possibility that it could be _you_ who can't tell them apart?
Mike's pencils look nothing like Marc's, and Randy's are dramatically
different on Witchblade to the point where people object.
Why should a studio be full of different styles? They sell well, and each
artist has his own flair.
Isn't it only natural that a studio such as Top Cow where most of the
artists all work together would have similar styles? They all draw alike
because they work together. I once knew a woman who dressed exactly like her
boss-- unconsciously.
> Finally, there's the lateness factor.
The lateness factor is mainly because most comics don't have someone
approving everything at every stage. I understand why JMS is doing it that
way, but it irks me to hear the same old "Image is late" tripe when:
Image isn't Marvel or DC. Image is a bunch of independent artists and some
studios.
The lateness this time was to ensure that RS #2 was perfect and everything
that JMS wanted.
Regards,
Lisa
----------------------------------------------------------------
Read Artesia! Visit the Artesia Resources
site! www.angelfire.com/ar2/artesia
The Reverend Jacob Corbin
Lisa Webster wrote:
> Is there a possibility that it could be _you_ who can't tell them apart?
Pardon me for a moment....
BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHA.
You're talking to a guy who, in the waning years of hand-lettered
funnybooks, could tell Rick Parker from Chris Elioupoulos at a glance. The
problem doth not lie in *this* beholder's eye. But to get to your point--yes,
there are differences between these fellows' art--I was exaggerating. But the
overall effect is one of dreary, dreary sameness.
> Mike's pencils look nothing like Marc's, and Randy's are dramatically
> different on Witchblade to the point where people object.
> Why should a studio be full of different styles?
?
Okaaaaaay....this takes me completely by surprise. It's as if someone
asked, "why shouldn't comics be printed on used toilet paper"? I'm at a
complete loss to explain the obvious, but here goes anyway.
1) Artists do better work when they're not being compelled to try and emulate
some other guy's work. Paul Smith did a lot better job on X-MEN when he stopped
trying to be Dave Cockrum, for instance.
2) When a bunch of guys with radically different styles are stuck in a room
together, and they aren't completely incompatible, they will start to trade
ideas and insights that will improve all of their work. But when they're
expected to draw in more or less the same fashion, and new blood isn't
occasionally added, there's a lot less opportunity for crosspollination. They
might even start to plateau, skill wise.
And finallly...
3) DIFFERENT IS GOOD.
> Isn't it only natural that a studio such as Top Cow where most of the
> artists all work together would have similar styles? They all draw alike
> because they work together.
But guys at other companies work together too, without being completely
homogenized.
It could be that a lot of the problems I'm seeing are being imposed by the
incredibly distracting computer coloring, which I'm seriously learning to
loathe. The point of good color is to LIFT and SEPARATE the foreground from the
background, and to CLARIFY what's going on in each panel---*not* to fill in
every single square millimeter of the artwork with pigment in a futile effort to
make everything more "realistic". (And have you noticed how, since the advent
of computerized color, the old neat effects--such as coloring a whole panel
blood red when a character is murderously enraged--have gone out the window?)
I'm sure this plays a large part in smoothing out any of the differences between
the penciling.
>
>
> The lateness factor is mainly because most comics don't have someone
> approving everything at every stage. I understand why JMS is doing it that
> way, but it irks me to hear the same old "Image is late" tripe when:
> Image isn't Marvel or DC. Image is a bunch of independent artists and some
> studios.
That doesn't excuse them from standards of basic professionalism. Kirby
used to draw three or four books a month at a tiny fraction of what these guys
make now! Not that I expect that, but decent work on a regular basis is not too
much to ask. And don't give me any crap about how Image is precious cuz they're
cute fuzzy independent artists, because I'm not buying it. Maybe they (meaning
not just TC, but McFarlane, Wildstorm, etc.) should waste less time trying to
conjure up movie deals, toys, and videogame spinoffs and more time honing their
craft. I'm sure the hundreds of comic shop owners who've been burned time and
again by their immaturity and outright lying regarding solicitation would
appreciate it.
Jacob
Lisa Webster
in message news:37E84CFB...@hotmail.com...
> I'm at a complete loss to explain the obvious, but here goes > anyway.
Your response is of the kind which generally makes me not even want to try
to explain my view. Since you seem like you _might_ be open to at least
hearing my side and not rejecting it openly out of hand, as so many do, I'll
answer what I believe to be your points. I'm tempted to crosspost to
rec.arts.comics.misc but we should do fine here for the moment at least :)
> 1) Artists do better work when they're not being compelled > to try and
emulate some other guy's work
...
> But when they're expected to draw in more or less the
> same fashion,
Sure. This is one reason why Randy's work has stayed pretty different from
Turner/Finch/Silvestri. He doesn't live in CA, and doesn't go to the studio
to do his work.
However, I think you're attributing something to Top Cow (maybe Wildstorm
too. It definitely isn't applicable to TMP. Nobody should compare Capullo to
Bendis.) that isn't there. Marc doesn't hire people who draw like him. He
may have ego problems (not speaking from experience) but he's not that vain.
The people in the studio work together all the time. They usually start new
people off by doing backgrounds for someone. I'm not sure who Keu worked
with. I want to say Mike Turner, but I could be confusing him with Andy
Park. I'm pretty sure it was Keu but not 100%. At any rate, my point is that
no one at Top Cow says, "You must draw like Marc Silvestri. If you do not,
you cannot work here."
Some of the style comes from working closely together. Many of the artists
who start off working with someone (Mike with Marc, Clarence Lansang with
Mike etc) initially have a style very similar to that mentor artist. But
Mike's style is now pretty easily distinguishable from Marc's (especially
his faces even though I wish he had more faces in his arsenal.) Clarence,
the new artist on the Darkness, looked exactly like Mike when he did
Witchblade #23. Now, he looks very different. Maybe not to you, but to me.
Which point brings me to something else. You don't follow the misc Image
people. I don't know much about Kirby. I could _maybe_ tell Kirby from
someone else near him, but I seriously doubt it. It's not something I read
or care about etc. We have different tastes and hence we distinguish
different things. That shouldn't be a bad thing, and it shouldn't make any
of us, comic readers as a whole, marginalize any other reader.
> And finallly...
>
> 3) DIFFERENT IS GOOD.
Sure it is. Which is why I read things by Sirius, Oni, Top Cow, Slave Labor,
and other random places. But that doesn't mean that I expect Top Cow, a
studio full of artists, to be dramatically different from each other. In Oni
or Sirius's case I know that their artists on their books are different.
They don't work (play) together 20 hours a day. Many times, they're
freelancers, or creators who come to a particular company because of their
diversity.
> But guys at other companies work together too, without
> being completely homogenized.
That's natural. But I'll object to your classifying Top Cow, and especially
Image, as homogenized. Randy Green doesn't pencil like Mike Turner, and I'd
dare you to call Lea Hernandez and Todd McFarlane homogenous.
I'd also point out that people who read Top Cow's books, and who want to
break into the business, are going to go look for jobs at Top Cow. People
who want to work for Marvel go for art that they think Marvel will find
acceptable. It makes sense to me that if you look up to Mike Turner, love
his style, and pencil like him, you'd show your portfolio to Top Cow first.
Additonally, new artists often follow a style that's been established and
then branch out on their own.
The style of the Top Cow books sells well, has a following, and doesn't seem
awful to a lot of people. Hypothetically speaking, what's wrong with artists
wanting to mimic a successful style? (I don't necessarily advocate that at
all. Just asking.)
[computer coloring]
> I'm sure this plays a large part in smoothing out any of the
> differences between the penciling.
Possibly. I'd like you to read the article I've submitted to Sequential Tart
( www.sequentialtart.com) for their October issue when it comes out in a
week or so. (October 1.)
I love computer coloring. Love. I've come to realize that I don't
particularly care for pencillers, I care for the colorists. It's all a
matter of taste. Some people can't stand glossy paper, but I don't buy books
with newsprint. You say potato, I say tater. (I saw that somewhere recently
and loved it.)
[re: lateness]
> That doesn't excuse them from standards of basic
> professionalism.
Of course not. There is no excuse for that. But I think in this case, Rising
Stars #2 being late, the fault has nothing to do with professionalism, and
everything to do with the perfectionism of JMS. (That's a good thing not a
bad thing JMS!)
> Not that I expect that, but decent work on a regular basis is > not too
much to ask.
This is so true. And it's one of my complaints. To excuse some of it, I can
understand a little bit why certain artists can't get their work out. The
reasons are numerous. No editor can compel someone who thinks they're a
superstar. Superstars who can do covers for magazines and get bunches of
money want to do those. Said superstars get distracted easily by things like
playstations. I don't forgive, mind you-- but I do understand somewhat.
> And don't give me any crap about how Image is precious
> cuz they're cute fuzzy independent artists, because I'm not
> buying it.
Excuse me? I think you need to see a line-- there are studios which publish
under Image, and then there are the Image Central titles which are indeed
independent artists. All too many people ignore that Image Central has
diverse artists like Matt Wagner, Lea Hernandez, and many others.
> Maybe they (meaning not just TC, but McFarlane,
> Wildstorm, etc.) should waste less time trying to conjure up > movie
deals, toys, and videogame spinoffs and more time > honing their craft.
This is one of Top Cow's major faults. Thankfully, Marc now does that. It's
one of the things that he does. He's busy being "Hollywood" and writing
scripts and doesn't attempt to pencil a book. This means that newer, lesser
known artists, get to do books. Artists like Andy Park, Clarence Lansang,
Brian Ching, and Keu Cha. These guys often start out more in the "house
style" and break away slowly. That's what's happened with Clarence and
Brian. Brian's told me his style with Ascension #20 should be a _real_
departure.
> I'm sure the hundreds of comic shop owners who've been
> burned time and again by their immaturity and outright lying > regarding
solicitation would appreciate it.
Wow. That's such a general statement. I'm not quite sure what you mean by
it. I'll assume that you're referring to the Guaranteed Shipping practice?
Far from "burning" the retailers with the Guaranteed Shipping policy, Top
Cow has re-instated it to give the retailers confidence. In case you (or
other readers) aren't clear about the GS dates, I'll try to explain the
idea. The GSDs are a guarantee made to retailers. (Not fans. This is a
common misconception.) Retailers can avail themselves of a no penalty return
if a book doesn't make it's ship date. This is a response to the classic
under-ordering that retailers do. If a retailer is worried that a book's
lateness might cause a decrease in sales when it ships, he can return his
copies for a full refund. Thus, I hardly think that the GS policy would burn
a retailer... It's meant to be a good thing for retailers.
Sadly, the hesitancy of many publishers to deal in returnables is one thing
that has kept comics from making inroads in the book market. (This is
according to someone I know at a smaller publisher-- not one of the "big
four.") I know I'm not the only person who thinks that getting comics to the
bookstores is possibly the only way to salvage the direct market. :/
Thanks in advance for listening with an open mind,