Was comic book super hero art better decades ago or is this an exception?

I bought the Neal Adams X-Men Sauron tp for a nephew who is into dinosaurs and it's much better drawn than what I read here for free on wednesdays.

Was this guy exceptionally good for his time or was that the standard quality back for superhero books then?

Neal helped pioneer a new stylistic approach to superheroes that draws from Kirby but is more dynamic. There were plenty of better artists, even on cape comics, but he changed the perception of how to do "standard" books. Similar to John Byrne not much later on (Except Byrne is a worse artist).

The way this progression of artists drawing from Kirby developed, however, lead into an obsession with superfluous detail. That's where the stiffer standard with silly Jim Lee lines you see today comes from. There are better artists out there than Adams, but he's talented.

Case by case basis

Remember you're reading the best of the best that came out at the time and 99% of other capeshit was just was worthless as it is now

>Case by case basis

I want to say this, but after going back and looking at things from the 60's and 70's, I think there's a professionalism in storytelling in the old stuff that new comics really could use. I say this as someone who grew up with 90's comics.

That's largely on writers, nut yes, writing and composition are generally worse these days.

I meant as in artistic storytelling (sequencing, pacing, and the like), but that too.

Even Byrne is from the Adams school. Pretty sure he's gone on rants about Adams influence on comics before.


it's weird that i keep forgetting Sauron is a Roy Thomas creation bc no one else would just straight up take a Tolkien name

if anything it's probably bc the current people all came up in comics as comic readers whereas the 60s and 70s guys mostly came into comics from other areas as writers and artists.

Roy Thomas is an exception, he got his start with a marvel fan mag iirc

>Even Byrne is from the Adams school. Pretty sure he's gone on rants about Adams influence on comics before.

He did, and yeah, if you do look closely at his work (like Doomsday +1 and all that) from the 70's you can see the Adams influences. It's just that on the surface Byrne has a more cartoony style compared to Adams.

That's what I meant by composition; a lot of cape artists got in on being able to draw just one thing, so they fear varying up the focus, experimenting for smoother transitions, using panel layout, etc.

It's very telling that you can see the sinews in Batman's neck but will rarely get a good establishing shot of an alleyway.

>if anything it's probably bc the current people all came up in comics as comic readers whereas the 60s and 70s guys mostly came into comics from other areas as writers and artists.

I think 70's was where fans started coming in. Byrne I know was one that came up in comics as a comics reader. Even then I'd still think the 70's guys had better professional ability.

my fav was reading early Sienkiewicz which is like straight Neil Adams imitation.

No I was addressing the
>That's largely on writers
part.

I mean yeah, you could say that's a fault of the writer but knowing how Marvel Style was usually done I think it would help if the artists knew how to storytell and override mediocre writers if necessary.

Yeah, he was even more obvious a Neal Adams-style artist.

They were better. Especially when you consider the nature of the medium. Obviously many modern artists are more technically skilled but Kirby drew thrilling dynamic artwork that sold comics and told stories visually and he drew more pages in a month than most current artists draw in a year. That is the function of cape comic art, it's not an anatomy lesson.

Nice page

I didn't know kirby fought in the war.

Art quality was never universally consistent across the board in any era, Neal Adams was a singular standout talent of great skill and influence.

Geoff Senior was fucking awesome.

drew maps and shit in europe. Stan was in the war too but dunno if he fought or went overseas

>Stan was in the war too but dunno if he fought or went overseas

Nah, Stan got a cushy job in the States working on propaganda films to raise morale at home.

Was ditko in the war?

He was too young during the war itself but did join in like 45 and did some post war stuff in Germany.

i'd imagine a LOT of those early comic guys were involved with the war

lol looking it up on wiki, Ditko went to the Cartoonists and Illustrators School/School of Visual Arts in New York using the GI Bill

No; he enlisted in 1945 (he'd have turned 18 that year) and did his service in postwar Germany.

Kirby kicked fucking ass in the war my dude. When they found out he was an artist he was sent ahead alone to infiltrate enemy Nazi towns and draw maps. He was awarded a Bronze Star for his service.

A lot of the ideas of his later work, particularly the Fourth Word saga which is the story of a world consuming war from each of the perspectives of the major players (New Gods: generals, Forever People: soldiers, Mister Miracle: conscientious objector, Jimmy Olsen: civilians) was informed by his experiences.

>Neal Adams drew back then and his work was stellar
>Neal Adams draws today and his work is shit

That should answer any question about which era was better.

adams work now gets fucked hard by coloring

he is in his 70s

the recent art of the guy who drew Whedon's Astonishing (Cassaday) is atrocious. people can deteriorate.

What is it about modern coloring that looks so shit on older artists?

They don't know their place and/or new readers think primary/flat colors look "retro" so there's a push from both ends of the industry to make things look as "realistic" as possible. Consequently, you get colorists that end up rendering things like muscles and shadows that don't actually correspond to the shapes established by the line work. It pushes things in to a weird uncanny valley type of stituation.

It's his own fault. When a large deal of his Batman stuff with Denny O'Neil was re-released he insisted that it was butchered with digital re-coloring like a fucking asshole.

1/2

2/2

As far as I know The Losers was the only straight up war comic he did after serving, it gets brutal at times

I genuinely hate digital coloring for superhero comics. It's just such fucking shit, it takes away so much of the personality. I have a real problem enjoying modern comics because the colors.

>What is it about modern coloring that looks so shit on older artist

I'd argue that a lot of modern coloring just looks like shit.

yeah i've avoided buying (and reading) that stuff because of it

Neal Adams was the GOAT, user. 90% of the industry couldn't get close enough to sniff his butthole.

At least he's so far left his Deadman stuff untouched. That's some prime Neal Adams

Amazing how that second panel looks like literally any standard shit I would skip right over in a modern comic despite being drawn by the GOAT