johnferrigno
05-20-2009, 04:32 AM
I've noticed a trend in comics these days with delays in solicited material happening more and more frequently. Books started coming out weeks late. Then months late. Now, there are some titles that seem to come out whenever the Hell they come out. Usually, these delays seem to be art related, with the highly detailed art of people like Steve McNiven and Jim lee taking a boatload of time and these artists not being able to meet deadlines.
Does there come a point when this type of artwork is no longer worth the wait? I've recently been reading some old X-Men books from the mid 70s (Thak you Essential line!) and I remember that when i was a young comics reader in the 80s, every title came out on time. If I picked up an issue of the Avengers in February of 1985, I knew that 4 weeks later, the next issue was going to be out. Because the art was not as detailed as it is today, artists met their deadlines month in and month out. Heck, there was a time when jack kirby was drawing the equivalent of four titles a month, PLUS covers! Now we have people doing one comic every four months.
I also noticed that this less detailed art from the 60s, 70s and 80s......actually didn't do anything to diminish my love of the comics. Yeah, it's nice to see a page of art drawn by John Cassady, but at the end of the day, I think I'd rather see a book every month with a little less line work in it then a hyper detailed book every 4 months.
So my question to you all is, at what point is the artwork no longer worth the wait? How important is the amount of detail in the penciling to your comic enjoyment? If all of th characters look like they are supposed to, and the layouts tell the story visually, is that good enough? or do you want to see every single little detail the artist can cram in there and however long it takes, that's OK with you?
Does there come a point when this type of artwork is no longer worth the wait? I've recently been reading some old X-Men books from the mid 70s (Thak you Essential line!) and I remember that when i was a young comics reader in the 80s, every title came out on time. If I picked up an issue of the Avengers in February of 1985, I knew that 4 weeks later, the next issue was going to be out. Because the art was not as detailed as it is today, artists met their deadlines month in and month out. Heck, there was a time when jack kirby was drawing the equivalent of four titles a month, PLUS covers! Now we have people doing one comic every four months.
I also noticed that this less detailed art from the 60s, 70s and 80s......actually didn't do anything to diminish my love of the comics. Yeah, it's nice to see a page of art drawn by John Cassady, but at the end of the day, I think I'd rather see a book every month with a little less line work in it then a hyper detailed book every 4 months.
So my question to you all is, at what point is the artwork no longer worth the wait? How important is the amount of detail in the penciling to your comic enjoyment? If all of th characters look like they are supposed to, and the layouts tell the story visually, is that good enough? or do you want to see every single little detail the artist can cram in there and however long it takes, that's OK with you?