| Author |
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133693
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 4:56am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
It's my understanding that writers, inkers, letterers and colourists also get a portion of the original art returned to them. The article is unclear how many pages if any from the 10,000 went to Kirby co-creators.*** Inkers get 1/3rd of the pages, writers used to get a couple until Shooter decreed they should not. To the best of my knowledge, there had never been a policy of giving original art to the letterers. Colorist, who of course have no work physically on the page, get no share. (They do, however, get their color guides back -- or did when there were still hand-painted color guides to be returned.)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Matthew McCallum
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 03 July 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2711
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 10:12am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Thanks for the clarification, John!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Robotmod
Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 36132
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 11:16am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Robert Cosgrove wrote:
So you can say that Kirby was not ahead of his
time in returning original
art to artists back in the fifties, when virtually no one was doing so. What
I don't think you say is that he was a hypocrite for asking for his original
art back at a time when the companies were routinely returning original
art |
|
|
I'm not calling Kirby a hypocrite. I can't believe I have to do this here, but
if I must...I'm a HUGE fan of Kirby. Haven't always been that way, as his
style didn't "click" with me until the mid-80s, but since it "clicked" I've
gone out of my way to seek his work. He was a master and, in my book,
one of the true greats in the industry. I'm saying that, if what I've heard is
true about not returning original artwork from his own studio at the same
time taking Marvel to task for not returning his own during roughly the
same time period, then that reads as a hypocritical action to me. Whether
he created thousands of characters as opposed to an artist that only
worked on a few, return of original artwork is return of original artwork.
Like I said upthread, I'll search out Evanier's website and, if I don't find
the answers there, will email him. I'm certainly not above being corrected
on potential misinformation, as I said as much in the post where I
referenced the above, so I'd appreciate just a modicum of understanding
in that regard.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133693
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 12:02pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
asking for his original art back at a time when the companies were routinely returning original art*** Kirby's people -- I cling to the idea it was not Kirby himself -- tried to link the return of artwork to ownership of the characters. The situation was much more layered than the COMICS URINAL and other such agenda-heavy sources have tried to project.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Ian M. Palmer
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 04 May 2004
Posts: 1342
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 12:10pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
COMICS URINAL
Those Mac keyboards.
IMP.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Robotmod
Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 36132
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 1:08pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
Kurt, thanks for the suggestion about emailing Mark Evanier. I did and he
replied in an extremely timely fashion. I asked him about what I had
heard re: Kirby not returning the work of those who worked for him. Just
to be clear, I did not ask him about any specific creator not signing the
petition mentioned in the original post of this thread. Just as my
information was second and third hand, I think it best to let those directly
involved with signing or not signing the petition speak for themselves if
they so choose. I also asked if I could post his reply to me in this thread.
Mr. Evanier declined the request.
Suffice it to say, I was misinformed with regard to the return of original
artwork by Kirby to those who worked for him. There was never an
expectation to do so at the time Kirby and Simon operated a studio
together. If such a request by an artist would have been made, Mr.
Evanier said that the two would probably have done so because, at the
time, the art didn't hold any value in the aftermarket. That the two were
separated by long period of time (when Kirby/Simon operated a studio
and when the petition was circulated) was also a source of confusion for
me. I was under the impression that Kirby had hired artists to work for
him in the 80s and did not return their work at the same time a petition
was being circulated for the return of Kirby art by Marvel. That
impression was also wrong.
I'm glad I got all of this cleared up with regard to my questions on the
matter. As I said in my first post to this thread, I was happy to have
someone correct me if I was wrong. All it took was for me to ask.
Perhaps this can serve as an example to the person who originally posed
his question to Jason on another board. Don't be afraid to ask the
source, or as close to the source as you can get. Don't let others do what
you should do yourself.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Chris Hutton
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11667
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 1:12pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Mark Evanier is an all-around good guy. He's very knowledgeable, and I've enjoyed every single panel of his I've attended the past 3 Comic-Cons.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Arvid Spejare
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 April 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 1:19pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Why did Marvel keep - as opposed to throw away - pages in the first place?
DC didn't. Disney didn't; I've read that when Carl Barks retired his editor came aross some pages that were on their way to the trash, saved them and sent them back to Barks as a retirement gift.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133693
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 1:31pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
There was never an expectation to do so at the time Kirby and Simon operated a studio together. If such a request by an artist would have been made, Mr. Evanier said that the two would probably have done so because, at the time, the art didn't hold any value in the aftermarket.*** But we'll never know, will we? I know of one artist who worked on newspaper strips (which were not returned), who specifically asked for his art back, and was told no, it was against policy. A few weeks later, leaving the offices after dropping off the latest work, he saw a huge bundle of trash tied up and ready to be thrown out by the elevator doors. Right there in plain view were his strips. +++ Why did Marvel keep - as opposed to throw away - pages in the first place? **** Absolutely no one knows. I have asked every living soul who might have had some knowledge, and it was just "the way it was done". Even with this, horror stories abound. The work was warehoused under the worst conditions, and there are even tales of original art being used to sop up rainwater when a storm blew a window out. It is, frankly, something very close to a miracle that any Silver Age art survives at all!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Tait
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 April 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1817
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 1:55pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
The work was warehoused under the worst
conditions, and there are even tales of original art being used to sop
up rainwater when a storm blew a window out.It is, frankly, something very close to a miracle that any Silver Age art survives at all! ************************************************************ ************************************** This so utterly blows my mind that the original artwork was thought of as worthless. I understand it was thought of as a throwaway product, but even as a kid back in the seventies I would have been in awe if I could have put my hands on an original page of art. Even as a kid I could see the talent these guys had. To me, Romita, Kirby, Kane, Kubert et al were drawing what someday would become masterpieces of modern art.
If I had the money, I would have far more art in my hands than my one measly page.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4649
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 4:08pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Dwayne Ferguson wrote:
| Also if memory serves Marvel was willing to give Kirby his artwork all
he had to do was sign something that basicly reaffirmed that the
creations he obviously did as work for hire were indeed work for hire.
It seems clear to me that if left unchecked Kirby might have pulled a
Seigal and Shuster with Marvel and they were just protecting their
interests. |
|
|
What does "pulling a Siegel and Shuster" mean? Siegel and Shuster
were not pursuing any legal action at that time, nor had they since the
Superboy lawsuit was settled in the 40s. The law which allowed
Siegel's heirs to file suit years later (the Sonny Bono copyright law)
was not even on the books until several years after Kirby had passed
away.
At any rate, Kirby was being asked to sign a four-page document which
not only acknowledged the art was done work for hire, but also
renounced all ownership of the physical art (not just the copyrights,
the art itself), gave up his right to sell it, and potentially limited
his ability to assist anyone else in pursuing copyright action against
Marvel. No other Marvel artist was asked to sign this, they
merely had to sign a brief one-paragraph statement acknowledging the
art was done work for hire. The fact that Kirby was singled out
in this manner is what many people feel was unfair. The link I
posted at the beginning of this thread gives more information on the
document Kirby was being asked to sign.
Edited by Jason Czeskleba on 16 August 2006 at 4:09pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133693
|
| Posted: 16 August 2006 at 5:05pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
...even as a kid back in the seventies I would have been in awe if I could have put my hands on an original page of art.**** By the 70s there had been a significant change in the wind. Thru the Golden and Silver Ages, no one much paid attention to the art. Most readers were just that, readers, not anything like what we would define as "fans" today, and if they thought about it at all, they probably thought comic books sprang fully formed from Zeus' head. That there was a process behind it was as alien to them as the production of movies was to most people filling the seats in theaters. I quite vividly remember the first time I was made aware of original art, in the early 60s, when DC offered a page of SUPERMAN art as the prize in a contest. Only then did the penny drop for me, and I realized there was a physical object behind each and every page of story. (There would be a second revelation, years later, when I discovered those pages were not in color.)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
