Somewhere in the first few Batman stories he handled, though, I had an epiphany and came to love his artwork. By the time of The Invaders, I was a full-fledged fan and couldn’t think of anyone I’d have preferred to depict the 1940s wartime milieu. I was disappointed whenever a fill-in issue would come along without Robbins. That said, though, Marvel did sometimes put him on titles that didn’t exactly play to his strengths. Man from Atlantis or Human Fly, anyone?

Okay, now, now that he’s passed away in Mexico years ago, and I am an adult and all that, he’s great. But his art does (did) not appeal to a 13 year old.

Yeah, there is a certain joy to NOT knowing behind the scenes info. You enjoy (or avoid) comics that don’t look “good”, and don’t worry about which creator is arguing with whom.

If Frank Robbins were around today he’d have done like five Warren Ellis series in a row and become a well-established fan favorite. No one did batshit-insane looking, super-hot, strong women like 1970s Frank Robbins.

~

Coat

I mean some degree of lateness is okay… I would not complain about and extra half a month spent on research, specially if the comic books companies were more responsible and worked with a buffer. I mean they should really had at least three issues already done when launching a new title. And releasing mini-series that are already complete.

Unfortunely, since the comic book industry is so small, almost pathetic when compared to other print industries, and even more when compared to other medias, but they allege and i’m inclined to believe, that they don’t have the money to do that. Damn shame.

Not to mention his predecessor Mark Bagley, who is apparently going to be doing 16 pages a week for DC’s upcoming weekly series “Trinity.”

Stuart Immomen.

Best artist working today. No missed deadlines.

It can be done.

I’ve seen some of the so-called slowest artists (Mr. Hughes) draw incredibly fast. His sketches are incredible, and would easily pass for what the art heroes of yesteryear would consider pretty tight pencils, especially with an inker giving them a good polish. He could do a book a month no problem, if that’s what he wanted to do.

He’s not a good example, since his artistic goals are different than surviving a monthly book, and he never made any bones about how his inability to handle a monthly schedule.

The bigger issues (besides modern-day distractions, which is gigantic) are the level of ‘quality’ the fans expect, and ironically, the same movies and games that get the artists into so much trouble.

Fans want monthly books, but are the first ones to complain if the art isn’t up to where they expect it. The artist wants to please the fans, and especially ask for high prices for original pages that are loaded with detail, so they pack an issue to the brim with detail. And fans don’t want to pay top dollar for original art that is sketchy with areas the inker would fill in at the end, so each page the penciller works on is a mini masterpiece by itself. Again, I’m stunned to see penciled page where the artist has gone ahead and filled in all the black areas with his HB. How long did that take? When did the little “x” or “BWS” notes get outlawed? Because it makes the page more attractive to the art market.

Even more importantly, back in the day, comics didn’t have as many competitors for a kid’s imagination. There were no video games, and even if there was the occasional genre movie, it was no were near as dynamic as a good comic could be. Now, there’s 3 killer games and 2 awesome movies coming out every week! Comics have to compete at a much higher visual level to even try to get a piece of a kid’s entertainment dollar.

The visual design of these games and movies, along with how dynamic they have become, has suddenly made comics look very plain to the average kid. I love comics with all my heart, and will argue the subtleties of panel pacing and a perfectly positioned word balloon with anyone, but most viewers are going for the wow factor, and that’s a lot of pressure to put on an artist. If your post-apocalyptic comic is going to compete with the latest amazing post-apocolyptic game or movie, it has to be unbelievable, and that takes time. And factor in that a comic is a one-person show, and movies and video games have entire staffs to come up with cool characters and shots. That’s a lot of pressure.

I don’t know what the answer is. It’s tough on all sides.

I think the answer, as always, is to learn from history. Go back to shorter main stories and have more backups, as well as more fill in issues ready to roll if necessary. Everyone wins. The star artist gets to keep going on his book, but with fewer pages to worry about each month. The fans get their monthly fix. Up and coming artists (howdy!) might get more opportunities to do the back up stories. And editors can still collect the main storyline as a trade without inconsistent art problems.

Hopefully this new policy by DC will lead to that. /rant.

Monthly comics are a business.

If you’re an oil painter or a novelist or a poet, you can work on your own time, in your own way. If you decide to work for a company that puts out periodicals, then you have to produce your work accordingly. Even as a free lancer, working as an artist or a writer on a monthly title is a de facto staff job. Accepting the benefits of regular work (like, say, a regular pay check) has obligations in return (like, say, turning your work in on time.) Could a magazine or newspaper writer get away with this crap without getting canned? Why should a few prima donnas impair other people’s livelihoods due to their lateness? (Unless, of course, they want to reimburse publishers, printers, shippers and retailers for lost revenues due to delayed titles.)

That’s a lot of issues a month, DC should have him to all their books.

“and I understand pretty pictures dont make a good comic as well…just saying if i pick it up off the rack and it looks like crap, its a no sell for me.”

I misunderstood … my bad … and yeah, if a comic doesn’t appeal to the eye, I might pass it up as well. Good art sells the book initially … good writing AND art keep the reader/buyer coming back.

That may sound boastful, but I still don’t know if my work is up to par.

Is DC open to unsolicited submissions?

Mark Buckingham, Steve Pugh, John McCrea, Don Kramer, Howard Porter, Chris Bachalo, Barry Kitson.

Some of the above may not do 12 issues a year, but are at least sensible enough to know their limits and request fill-in for the months they’re resting and catching up (hence, very few late books).

michael lark, pia guerra, eduardo risso, sean philips, probably tony harris (i’m not quite sure about his “ex machina”-schedules), becky cloonan. six names, which gives me one false shot.

Should (or have they already?) DC (and Marvel) look at how big of a role exclusive contracts play in an artist’s capacity to turn out work? To use the Kubert brothers as an example (not to pick on them), before signing on at DC I had never heard or read of them having chronic deadline issues. But almost overnight it seemed their production just diminished drastically. What was different during their time at Marvel?

Granted there might be personal issues involved (e.g. to Terry Dodson hurting his drawing arm) that we are not nor should be privy too but can the comfort level of having a steady paycheck with benefits dull the efficiency of a contract artist? Are freelancers able to hit the 4 week period because there is an urgency that the exclusives do not have? Instead of boosting their bottom line, are the Big 2 just hurting their bottom lines with an excess of exclusive contracts?

It is also interesting to note that there was no mention of a writer’s policy. Is there one forthcoming?

And Nicola, yes, you do deserve a raise