Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Comic Books >

the worst comic artists ever

Page: (1)2

Matthew Fluxington

14:41 / 22.03.02

Inspired by the Kordey hate-a-thon over in the NXM 124 thread... who do you think are the most pathetic and inept people to ever draw a comic?

Bring it on. Show/explain examples if possible.

14:52 / 22.03.02

well i'm sure this will be a long list largely filled with names of people whose style just doesn't do it for that particular poster, but...

Chuck Austin
I was actually astonicshed that USwarmachines was put out aas a professional comic. The sense of of anatomy, and body language was awfully ill observed and the layouts were dull. That said ithe series also showed him to have a flair for technical drawing/illustration.

He undoubtedly has talent. Those talent just don't lie in creating comics.

15:44 / 22.03.02

I wouldn't call it a 'hate-a-thon', I'd call it something like a 'disappointed-and-frustrated-and-wishing-that-Quitely-
would-draw-every-issue-and-that-barring-that-Marvel-
would-find-someone-more-suited-to-what-we-think-morrison's
-trying-to-go-for-and-yes-we-recognize-the-silliness-of-complaining-
about-this-kind-of-thing-athon'.

Perhaps they could give Kordey a bunch of drugs and lock him in a room somewhere...

Oh, and Robert Liefeld.

16:04 / 22.03.02

Hmmm...worst comic artists...it depends

I think Quitely is the worst comic artist when it comes to deadlines. For god's sake, the man draws pictures for funny books. We're not asking him to draw something like the Mona Lisa every month. I like pretty pictures for my funny books, but having to wait longer than the requisite month for the next issue kind of disappoints me. I read comics for the art AND the story, not just the art.

As for art style....that guy who drew the Cyclops mini-series...can't remember his name. Horrible, horrible style. In the first issue Beast looked like a blue blob stuffed into an x-men costume.

Matthew Fluxington

16:15 / 22.03.02

There are people in the business who are much worse with deadlines than Frank Quitely.

16:25 / 22.03.02

I'm sure there are people out there that are worse with deadlines, but I don't read those particular comics.

17:03 / 22.03.02

>>>I think Quitely is the worst comic artist when it comes to deadlines. For god's sake, the man draws pictures for funny books. We're not asking him to draw something like the Mona Lisa every month. <<<

As the token professional comic artist on the board, I must say I find this statement hugely irritating. The suggestion that comic art - GOOD comic art, anyway - is by nature easy to produce is, well, a bit ignorant.

Quitely clearly takes an enormous amount of care in his work - his storytelling is thoroughly and impeccably worked out - I don't think I've ever spotted an obvious "cheat" - and the drawings are beautifully and meticulously rendered. This takes TIME, unless you're superhumanly skilled (and there are a few, but they're very rare).

Just because it's comics - and not the Mona Lisa - doesn't mean you can just dash it off in a couple of days.

[ 22-03-2002: Message edited by: CameronStewart ]

18:58 / 22.03.02

Cameron, it seems that most people, including a great many people on this board, do not recognise comics art (or any professional visual art) as capital A Art. Or at least at the same level of creative merit that they bestow upon writing. Artists are seen as subordinates to the writers rather than collaborators. One the most common questions I'm asked by non-artists about my work is "how long did it take you to do that?" as if the quality is based somehow upon the turnaround time. It drives me nuts.

No star here laces

17:50 / 23.03.02

Big up Cameron.

As I been ranting elsewhere you can't realistically talk about script without art and vice versa. To be honest I couldn't give a shit how long there is between issues of NXM - I'd rather wait 6 months for every issue (like planetary) and get incredible, tongue hanging out Quitely art every time.

Anyway, artists whose style has irritated me at times have been primarily the ones in british anthology comics simply cos I wouldn't buy a monthly comic if I didn't like the art.

For hideous crimes committed in Deadline, I'd pick out Brett Ewins. There's something really hard on the eye about his style and the revolting geometric patterns that he splashed all over Johnny Nemo used to give me headaches. Having said that, I loved what he did on Bad Company so maybe it was just a phase.

18:28 / 23.03.02

>>>To be honest I couldn't give a shit how long there is between issues of NXM - I'd rather wait 6 months for every issue (like planetary) and get incredible, tongue hanging out Quitely art every time.<<<

Absolutely 100% agreed.

19:00 / 23.03.02

I wondered how long it'd take for somebody to call me ignorant for that mona lisa comment. I did come across as a bit ignorant, I suppose.

The thing I don't understand is why everybody seems to love Quitely's art so much. I just finished re-reading the NXM comics I currently have and quite frankly I think VanSciver's work is a great deal better than Quitely's. Maybe I've not seen Quitely at his best, but I'm not seeing any eye-popping, tongue-hanging art here.

19:39 / 23.03.02

quote:Originally posted by Trijhaos:
I wondered how long it'd take for somebody to call me ignorant for that mona lisa comment. I did come across as a bit ignorant, I suppose.

The thing I don't understand is why everybody seems to love Quitely's art so much. I just finished re-reading the NXM comics I currently have and quite frankly I think VanSciver's work is a great deal better than Quitely's. Maybe I've not seen Quitely at his best, but I'm not seeing any eye-popping, tongue-hanging art here.

i suppose i can only give my own opinion on this, but to me, quitely's art gives the most amount of information with the least amount of fuss. its there. its on the page. all the information you need to understand the action that is taking place is there for you to see without telling you too much or going overboard. no special flourishes to 'pretty things up'. it compliments grant's writing style on this book perfectly. epic/intimate/minimalism is how i would describe it. now van sciver's work on the other hand is rather busy. he just pours it all on the page to a superfluous degree. he over explains things in a sense. heh. kind of like what i am doing here. i will not even get into iggy's current artwork. ugh. to put it mildly.

[ 23-03-2002: Message edited by: krakaboom ]

Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo

19:47 / 23.03.02

Worst artist? Professional only, I hope (the people who print stuff with their lunch money don't count, IMHO).

Vince Colletta. At one point he was inking half of DC's line and all the lower selling Marvel books, and it all looked the same. He was a guy who got a low rate of pay because he didn't do very well, but he was FAST, saying he never spent more than an hour on a page. If you look at his 70's work EVERY female has the same face, and the same mouth shape no matter the expression.

You want to see a Hatchet job? Look at Colletta inking Perez on Avengers 141-150...NOT backgrounds (Colletta would erase them saying they took too long to ink) and none of the power Perez would put into his art.

Modern horrid artists? Jeez...there's no one I really go out of my way to avoid, but I think most of the "Chaos" artists are annoying bad.

20:24 / 23.03.02

quote:Originally posted by krakaboom:

i suppose i can only give my own opinion on this, but to me, quitely's art gives the most amount of information with the least amount of fuss. its there. its on the page. all the information you need to understand the action that is taking place is there for you to see without telling you too much or going overboard. no special flourishes to 'pretty things up'. it compliments grant's writing style on this book perfectly. epic/intimate/minimalism is how i would describe it. now van sciver's work on the other hand is rather busy. he just pours it all on the page to a superfluous degree. he over explains things in a sense. heh. kind of like what i am doing here. i will not even get into iggy's current artwork. ugh. to put it mildly.

So Quitely's art is elegant in its simplicity huh? That makes a good deal of sense. I hear/read people talking about how his art is so mindblowing and eye-popping and all this stuff and I just don't see it. Maybe I've been reading different comics than they are.

What's wrong with Kordey's art? Sure his faces aren't all that great, but I think there's a great deal of potential there. Of course, what do I know, I'm not an artist.

No star here laces

22:42 / 23.03.02

quote:Originally posted by Trijhaos:
What's wrong with Kordey's art? Sure his faces aren't all that great, but I think there's a great deal of potential there. Of course, what do I know, I'm not an artist.

Er, sorry, did I miss something? I mean you are posting in a comics forum aren't you? So presumably you read comics, right? How can you possibly like comics enough to want to talk about them on the internet and not have an opinion on the art? The art is what makes them comics, for fucks sakes!

22:52 / 23.03.02

You completely misread my statement. Go back and read it again. Do so S-L-O-W-L-Y if it helps.

I stated my opinion that Kordey's art isn't as bad as many people made it out to be. I then said "Of course, what do I know, I'm not an artist."

Now, if somebody else said that, I would assume they have no or little artistic background and would view the comic the way "Joe Average" would. You know, somebody with an artistic background may be able to point out that Kordey's figures are completely out of proportion with the backgrounds or some such artsy thing, I can't.

Where exactly does it say I have no opinion on the matter?

No star here laces

22:59 / 23.03.02

Well if you want to be pedantic, no you don't state that you have no opinion, but you do appear to imply that only artists can possibly have anything of value to say about art, and that as a non-artist you are incapable of judging it. Which is bullshit.

Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!

23:07 / 23.03.02

Eek. The free-for-all that is the comics forum.

I think people appreciate Quitely's technical and fluid storytelling. I'm guessing a lot of people who hang around here no a bit about comic art, and thus appreciate his talents over the likes of Kordey's latest and that "Joe average" would take such talents as Quitely's for granted, ie perhaps wouldn't spot that the simplistic attention to detail and the characters natural poses and placement etc lead to a fluid read... I don't mean to appear like a complete twat, but I think the subtle skills of someone like Quitely can easily go over the heads of someone who appreciates the "art/storytelling skills" of <insert artist here*>.

* Pick A)Todd McFarlane B)Adam Kubert C)Salvador La-wotever

But anyway, back to shite artists in general, I have a real hatred for Steve Skroce. That's all I have off the top of my head.

Murray Hamhandler

01:39 / 24.03.02

quote:Originally posted by Solitaire Rose:
Modern horrid artists? Jeez...there's no one I really go out of my way to avoid, but I think most of the "Chaos" artists are annoying bad.

Who're you talking about here, just out of curiosity?
Arthur Sudnam, II

01

03:47 / 24.03.02

The worst comic artist is that guy who blotted his way through Earth X. Puke.

04:58 / 24.03.02

Krodey is the one who needs to slow down. It seems like his art is okay when he finishes, but he wasn't even trying. Specifically with Gladiator and the Shi'ar gaurdsmen.

Quitely's elegance isn't simplicity. It's apperant simplicity. There's a huge difference. Go back to the first page, of the first NEW x MEN. There's cyclops and Wolverine, a Sentinel, obvious Sydney background, even Ugly John huddled in the corner. It's beyond perfect.

I can't think of any truly bad cw artists, because there's usually levels of technique I'm not aware of. But in the lazy catagory, I'd throw in Kubert, from Ultimate. It's like, he's fine when he actually finishes the picture, you know? And don't tell me that's style, either. Stick figures with crosses on their heads to figure out where the eyes are is crap.

So I'll wait 'til next issue to really be mad at igor and marvel.

04:58 / 24.03.02

there is a thread going on over at the www.comicon.com comic book message boards that is really taking igor to task over his latest artwork in NEW X-MEN. people are NOT happy.

12:16 / 24.03.02

Why Frank Quitely Is A Great Comic Artist

It's actually harder to describe than I thought it would be.

Someone mentioned above that he thought Quitely's artwork was minimalist, providing the reader with only the essential information to tell the story. I can't really agree - I think Quitely is extraordinarily generous with detail (and by "detail" I don't mean hundreds of tiny cross-hatch lines). Look at issue 122 when Beast sweeps away his tools in frustration - in subsequent panels we see the remaining clutter on the table, and the area that's been swept clean by the arc of his arm. It's an attention to detail that very few artists would bother themselves with, but it lends his work a tremendous sense of believability. I think the distinction is that Quitely never draws anything superfluous.

Quitely also puts that attention to detail to use on the characters - his observation of human gesture and movement is superb. Even in the most banal of situations his figures never look "posed" - they're always behaving very naturally and humanly. Comics are limited by a lack of motion, and so when drawing any action the comic artist must capture the movement at precisely the right moment that gives the greatest suggestion of motion - Quitely's ability to do this is unparalleled. There's a panel in Batman: The Scottish Connection that has me fascinated every time I look at it - Batman is dropping down from a roof in a somersault, and it's drawn so well, so convincingly, and in precisely the right pose, that I can almost literally see Batman spinning as he falls. I can feel the cool night air and hear the rustle of the trees in the wind and the barely audible "whoosh" of his cape. It maybe seems ridiculous to go on about a single small panel but that one drawing sums up so much of what I like about Frank's work - it pulls me into the story and makes me forget that it's only ink on a page. It tricks me into thinking that my other senses are being engaged also, instead of only sight.

I could go on and on about his thoroughly-planned backgrounds and his wonderfully cinematic storytelling and his use of bold shadow to evoke mood, but writing this has suddenly made me want to draw...

[ 24-03-2002: Message edited by: CameronStewart ]

A

00:03 / 25.03.02

How did i know that this thread was inspired by NewXmen 124 before I even read it?

No one springs to mind as a hated artist at the moment, but i'm sure if i looked through my comic collection I could come up with some names. Anyway, i'll just do what everyone else is doing and talk about Quitely and Kordey.

Something I really dig about Quitely's work is it's sense of continuity. I don't mean continuity the way it's used in a comic-book sense ("Tales From Elsewhere #148 clearly shows that trouser-man is left-handed, but here he is in Nice Squad #27 using scissors with his right hand. Someone must pay for this."), but in more of a film sense. If he draws a crowd scene from a bunch of different angles, the characters will always be in the same relative place. Stuff like that. You know how all the artists on the Invisibles seemed to forget that Jack had had part of his finger cut off? I bet Quitley wouldn't have (I haven't read his Invisibles issue yet).

Something I've noticed about Kordey's artwork on NewXMen is that the colouring seems to be a lot worse than for Quitely and Van Sciver's art. Perhaps because there's such a lack of detail, the colourist/s can't get the same glossy, realistic, leaping out of the page fell as for the other artists.

In the middle of the latest issue of NewXMen, there's an ad for Marvel trading cards. Whatever you think of the actual art on them, they're all coloured beautifully, and seem to leap out of the page, then when you turn the page, and look at the colouring on Kordey's art, it just looks dull.

Maybe some of the pros here could shed some light on this...

02:26 / 25.03.02

Quitely.

Chins look funny.

Next!

Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo

02:57 / 25.03.02

I guess the main artist the style of Chaos Comics was Stephen Hughes, and all the people who work for that company kind of follow his lead. The stories are just poorly laid out, filled with pointless boob and butt shots and DON'T TELL THE STORY.

Kubert is another artist who can't seem to tell a story for all the "pin up" pages, but I don't bother with him most of the time.

yawn - thing's buddy

11:57 / 25.03.02

that spastic igor kordey - worst artist in the world.....EVER!

yawn - thing's buddy

11:59 / 25.03.02

ah mean - can you imagine the reaction when grant saw the art for this months ish.....poor cunt probably had a heart attack. my god, why is it so shit?

Why? Why?

Eh?

11:32 / 28.03.02

I hate Jill Thompson's art. Nearly deep-sixed the Invisibles, it did.

09:57 / 30.03.02

Enough of this nonsense! Jill Thompson's art rocks. If you want to dis an invisibles artist, take your aim at Chris Weston, who started off really good with the Jim Vrow story, and then just got worse all the time (not as bad as he was i Lucifer, though). Also, I don't seem to like Jiminez art as much as I did initially.

Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo

20:31 / 30.03.02

Jill's art works very well on some things, like Scary Godmother and her Sandman run, and not so well on others, like The Invisibles. I see her art is getting a lot "looser" and more sketchy.

I do think she should stay away from mainstream comics for the most part tho, since she just doesn't do that well in it for some reason.

Nelson Evergreen

22:53 / 30.03.02

Stepping back in time here so I can put in a nomination for Ron Smith (2000AD, mainly Dredd). Even when I was a mere lad his art went through me like a rancid shiver. You'd get a few episodes of McMahon, an episode or two of Bolland, and you'd be well happy. But what would you get between them? Ron. Fucking. Smith. Endlessly.

I feel bad now. He was just a bloke doing a job and doing it quickly. And what's more, you show a non-believer a page by each of the artists I've mentioned so far in this post and they won't see any difference between them whatsoever.

Who did 'Doom Patrol?' They too were useless. For such a great writer, Morrison doesn't half seem to get lumbered with them. As for Jill Thompson's 'Invisibles', yes, a child could indeed have drawn it. And not in a good way.

Nelson Evergreen

23:11 / 30.03.02

And another thing: Dilute a good penciller with a dodgy inker and the chances are you'll end up with mediocre art. A great comic artist can easily be inked into a bad one. God I'm roasting in this anorak....

16:30 / 01.04.02

to anyone in defence of jill thompson, need i remind you of the big pec/small head king mob from v.1? i almost threw up on my copy of apocalipstick. thought i was holding a 2099 title.

12:18 / 02.04.02

Are you sure this wasn't the Rob Liefeld pastiche she did for the part where KM tells Edith about his day?

Page: (1)2