This will always be debatable. While that may not be one of JB's better Superman images of recent vintage, one can very easily find others in the same gallery where you found the above & newer than that.

Some old stuff shows better quality than some new stuff, while some new stuff shows better quality than some old stuff.

I tend to find more of the latter, myself.

Whatever the reason for the difference, to my eye the first one is much better than the second one. Perhaps it's the inking by Austin but the 2nd one looks like a boy of 14 with a man's head stuck on it.

I'm with shjonescrk on this, you can't underestimate the addition of beautifully inked finishes by Austin. That said, the slim 'normal' frame in the second drawing is so glaring, it seems like it must have been intentional by Byrne to make some kind of point.

Thanks for posting a link to Vassalo's article, Peter. Besides supplying interesting info and conjecture on Joe Maneely, it was one of the better overviews of Atlas/Timely/Marvel in a critical transition period that I've ever read.

I actually would like to hear some of the Byrne Board's commentary on Joe Maneelly. Don't compromise your standing there though, you want to have a clear conscience when JB goes full-on Sim and starts demanding loyalty pledges.

Which is better:

His old stuff:

http://www.artofjohnbyrne.com/gallery/sk...ine1988.jpg.php

or

His new stuff:


http://www.artofjohnbyrne.com/gallery/co...0533_03.jpg.php

The images are kind of a wash for me, but that is only because I really prefer the original costume of Wolverine.

There wasn't much about Maneely, just a few appreciative comments about his art, and pro and con opinions about whether he might have worked on one series or another.

In another thread about Next Men, Byrne did say that he plans to do more mini-series in the Next Men universe, at various points in the timeline. So some of the hanging plotlines that I complained about earlier may be addressed later on. I don't expect that we'll get any kind of "logical" explanation of the various time travel paradoxes, since Byrne doesn't seem to be too interested in those. I am getting more willing to accept that. If Byrne prefers to just tell a cool story with fun visuals without getting bogged down on the details, maybe that's a loosening of his nitpicky nature, which we should welcome.

If anybody's interested in Maneely and what he might have added to the early marvel mix, I found one of his Black Knight stories online. This guy has a very interesting blog too.

http://pappysgoldenage.blogspot.com/2011/02/number-897-maneelys-black-knight-in.html

One thing that's immediately noticeable is that this story is really wordy by today's standards. I guess there's really no telling how Maneely would've fared. Maybe his art would have had the same popularity of Bill Everett who had an accomplished but dated style. In that he was only 32 when he died, maybe he would have bloomed like a Barry Windsor Smith?

There's some anatomy problems with the first figure, nothing big... the second actaully seems to be better, if you forget the disproportionated head.

As we approach the landmark 6 million hits, may I remind you of my vow:

http://comicon.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=595902#Post595902

I just don't have that kind of cash laying around