Author |
|
Charles Valderrama Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 4857
|
Posted: 27 February 2008 at 11:15pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
The thing i can't understand about Rob Liefeld is that he made a great
living drawing comics while many aspiring young artists went to school to
learn the right way or were told at many conventions how they needed
to improve their skills. These portfolio reviews can be brutal and yet
Rob Liefeld got in and made a living and even rode the big wave when
Image was formed.
Isn't that a double standard?
Still, i suppose that happens in any business. i had a feeling Rob's
talents wouldn't get him far in the long haul.
-C!
Edited by Charles Valderrama on 27 February 2008 at 11:16pm
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Erik Larsen Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 February 2008 Location: United States Posts: 344
|
Posted: 27 February 2008 at 11:36pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Charles Valderrama wrote:
The thing i can't understand about Rob Liefeld is that he made a great
living drawing comics while many aspiring young artists went to school to
learn the right way or were told at many conventions how they needed
to improve their skills. These portfolio reviews can be brutal and yet
Rob Liefeld got in and made a living and even rode the big wave when
Image was formed. |
|
|
A lot of comic book artists were really resentful and outright pissed off at
Rob's climb to the top. Rob told me a story of being at a convention in
Canada, years back. Before the show opened a couple of artists took him
aside and gave him a good talking to. They went on and on about
anatomy, perspective and storytelling. They really laid it on thick--
showing him examples of their own work to help illustrate "how to do
things right." But when the doors opened the crowd went right to Rob
and the line was there for the duration of the show and those two were
all but ignored. they lobbed insults at him for the rest of the show.
I think that Rob learned the wrong lesson that day--and he has resisted
learning a lot of things that might help for fear of "losing the magic."
It would be hard for most kids to walk away from that thinking, "I want to
be more like THOSE guys."
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Andy Mokler Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 January 2006 Location: United States Posts: 2799
|
Posted: 27 February 2008 at 11:47pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Back when the swipe file was up and running, Roger Cruz displayed a real knack for swipery. Should at least be on the HOF ballot.
Edited by Andy Mokler on 27 February 2008 at 11:48pm
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
|
Robert Bradley Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 September 2006 Location: United States Posts: 4887
|
Posted: 27 February 2008 at 11:57pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Erik -
I think a lot of us would have less of a problem with Liefeld if all he did was draw in his own style without the swipes. After all, a person's taste in art is a totally subjective thing. We can argue about its technical merit, but when you get down to it the fans are going to like what they want to like.
And I can't blame Liefeld for not wanting to mess up a good thing. It's tough enough to catch lightning in a bottle once, much less twice. Still, the blatant swiping is a bit troubling - and when your popularity is centered more on style than substance you can find yourself at the whims of an audience whose preferences can change. And Liefeld has experience this to a degree.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Roberto Melendrez Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 04 August 2006 Location: United States Posts: 377
|
Posted: 28 February 2008 at 12:13am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Can a magazine/photographer/model sue an artist or company if some one traces photos/cover and uses it in a comic? A couple of shots from Martin's post above look like lawsuits waiting to happen... Some of these covers go beyond what most on the board have acknowledged as acceptable/regular (?) types of swipes!
Writers sue when some one copies their work and makes money by passing it off as their own, right? IIRC, didn't Amy Grant sue when her image from album cover was used as the cover of an issue of Dr. Strange? I realize that she had an issue (given her spirituality) over her image being used to sell a comic about the "occult" (represented by Dr. Strange), but wasn't the basis of the suit over the use of her image being used to make money with out her permission? Those covers look like they're potentially walking into the same trap...
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Knut Robert Knutsen Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 September 2006 Posts: 7374
|
Posted: 28 February 2008 at 12:22am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
"My opinion comes from the particular panels Lichtenstein used. If we went back to the original page, or the original book, does anyone really thing Licktenstein was trying to steal the most dynamic panel he could to pass off as art? He was very conscious about his decision. They are plain, and they are meant to be that way. The panels many people would skip over in a comic, he brought out and reminded people that there is are in plainess. "
The complaint isn't that he chose the less dynamic panels. It is that his ineffectual linework made it seem MORE plain. And the argument of Pop-art wasn't "elevating the consciousness about comics being art" , however much many cartoonists wanted that to be the case. It's about re-contextualizing things that ARE NOT art into ACTUAL art. Transforming it.
When Lichtenstein made his "Panel Paintings" he was "making the profound statement" that comics were not art, but that his paintings of them were. The fact that he lacked the artistic ability to recreate the dynamics of the poses and linework helped him convince his punters that the basis of his "swipes" were NOT ART. Surely something as crude and lifeless as they believed his "models" to be could not be art. If they had shown photographic blow-ups of the work he copied from next to his paintings, I think his artistry would have been more difficult to defend.
f the fine art set had, at any point, considered the original comic book art to be actual "fine" art, they would never have accepted Lichtenstein as a genius.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Knut Robert Knutsen Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 September 2006 Posts: 7374
|
Posted: 28 February 2008 at 12:31am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
"Can a magazine/photographer/model sue an artist or company if some one traces photos/cover and uses it in a comic? A couple of shots from Martin's post above look like lawsuits waiting to happen... Some of these covers go beyond what most on the board have acknowledged as acceptable/regular (?) types of swipes!"
People own a copyright on their own likeness, and in the case of actors and models that "likeness" is legally recognized as having monetary value. If a comic book artist uses an actor's face (even in an adaptation of a movie or tv-show that he appeared in) without his approval (and beyond the scope of fair use) , he is in violation of copyright and opens himself up to a lawsuit. So does the company that employs him, as they have full editorial authority.
The same goes for photos whether they appear in commercials or magazines. The more recognizable the photo, the clearer it is that there is a violation of copyright.
Mostly comics fly under the radar, because there is too little to be gained from a lawsuit.
There have been lawsuits in the past about improper use of likenesses. The Flex Mentallo /Charles Atlas case and the one about the albino twins that sued Dc/Vertigo over the Jonah Hex mini. Possibly more.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Brad Brickley Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 29 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 8290
|
Posted: 28 February 2008 at 12:37am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
What the hell?? If I'm Marvel I say lets shitcan the artist and get a few Photoshop guys in, get some pictures from Magazines, and have the writer and editor come in and get the story put together. From what I've learned with this thread, if I have Photoshop I'm qualified to be a comic "artist". The hell with the Kubert school or practice, I can just get me a MacPro and full suite Photoshop and scanner and I'll be a comic legend!! What a crock!
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Armindo Macieira Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 October 2006 Location: Portugal Posts: 955
|
Posted: 28 February 2008 at 3:51am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
I didn't know this happened so often! Honestly, each day I come to this thread I'm more disapointed with publishers for letting this happen and even with some readers for condoning with this.. if I one day want to work for Marvel or DC I might just do as Brad said and let the swipping begin!
Edited by Armindo Macieira on 28 February 2008 at 3:51am
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Morgan Welborn Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 June 2004 Location: United States Posts: 113
|
Posted: 28 February 2008 at 4:41am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
I still contend that a lot of the appeal of Rob's work to a number of fans
is that he draws comics the way that they would draw comics if they
could draw comics. He emphasizes all of the things a lot of fan art
emphasizes--big hair, big cans, big muscles, and excessive lines in all
the wrong places.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
I think Rob's work was a marketing tool to bring in more fans, and it worked for the exact reasons you stated. Does it make it right? Sure he has artistic talents, but not at the level of the professionals back when he started or even today, how many artists have you turned away from lack of skill, Erik?
Rob was made into a cash cow that took off, I blame Marvel for that, marketing like this began the downward spiral of comics. Now it's all about the writer or artist, the characters and stories are secondary.
When I was young, artists like John Byrne inspired me as well, and I practiced my whole life to try to attain that goal. But I come to realize my artistic ability is limited so I stopped pursuing comics as a profession. But if I had the hype machines from Marvel, Image backing me, I'd be a millionaire too.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Greg Woronchak Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 04 September 2007 Location: Canada Posts: 1631
|
Posted: 28 February 2008 at 8:07am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
I think that Rob learned the wrong lesson that day--and he has resisted learning a lot of things that might help for fear of "losing the magic."
Back in that wild and wonderful era known as the 90s, I found his New Mutants work quite appealling. Consider most of the books published at that time featured similar art styles (competent and 'correct', but very boring); his approach was energetic and fun, and I can see why an editor would have given him work.
I let things like the tiny heads, giant man boobs, and weird squinty eyes slide because I didn't really care too much. I never felt 'offended' by Rob's sudden fame and popularity; as a matter of fact, his success probably inspired lots of kids to put pencil to paper and draw their own comics.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 133506
|
Posted: 28 February 2008 at 9:02am | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Back in that wild and wonderful era known as the 90s, I found his New
Mutants work quite appealling. Consider most of the books published at
that time featured similar art styles (competent and 'correct', but very
boring); his approach was energetic and fun, and I can see why an editor
would have given him work.
••
Yeah, you know, I used to flip thru books by Miller, Mignola, Sienkiewicz,
Romita Jr, Chadwick, Buscema, Gibbons, Bolland, Garcia Lopez, Simonson,
Kubert, etc, etc and think Crap! This stuff is all the same!
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|