its definitely a mixed bag. With today's "modern" rendering and coloring techniques many of the traditional superhero artists work gets lost in translation a bit.

Mark Bagley, Tom Grummett, Dan Jurgens and even Mr. Byrne's (at times, please pardon my generalizing) work seems to lend itself more naturally to the traditional methods of inking and coloring from the 80's and into the 90's.

I compare an issue of Adventures of Superman by Grummett to a new issue of X-men Forever and I can't help but think that the Superman stuff, while on inferior paper, with less sophisticated coloring, is more appealing to the eye.

But maybe it is just nostalgia that is tainting my ability to objectively look at those books.

It is sad for me to think that a good stretch of time passed where people like Jurgens, Grummett, Breyfogle, Aparo, Paul Ryan, etc would have struggled to get work in the industry...is it is positive sign that most have found regular work again?*

**Acknowledging the passing of Mr. Aparo. I was born in 1980 and started reading comics circa 1987/1988... he is Mr. Batman to me...

Please please get your copies of Batman Confidential 17 - 21.

Kevin Maguire art. A story that is A FUN COMIC BOOK STORY in which the art is not muddied or completely dominated by computer coloring.

I implore you all to check this set out.

The Bat and the Cat.

FINE fine comic book.

I think there are websites out there that lead people to believe that stuff like what FQ puts out is good.

______________________

I'm intrigued. Which sites?

"Kevin Maguire art. A story that is A FUN COMIC BOOK STORY in which the art is not muddied or completely dominated by computer coloring."

I think you forgot the most important selling point: Batgirl and Catwoman running around Buck Nekkid at an upscale sex club.

I thought that would be really cool, but for some reason reading that just made me feel dirty, and not in the good way.