quote:Originally posted by ChrisW: Exactly. Whose history? The history of creator-owned comics from the 1970s on and Sim is one of the main characters but in the History of Comics of all time, then maybe a footnote, if he's lucky.[/b]
Um, no, Lee/Kirby's record on Fantastic Four and Claremont's record on X-Men have been milestones for a long time. This may not seem like much nowadays when six issues on a title is a cause for celebration, but that says more about the low standards. If Schulz or Trudeau had only lastes six months, their strips would have been nothing, would have meant nothing to anyone. Long-term work means more to the creators and the audience than skipping from project to project in the creator's own time. It's not even comics-specific. Paul McCartney has been a solo artist for almost as long as John Lennon lived, but both of them are forever tied to the two albums-and-three singles a year productivity of the Beatles. Context is important, but so is their productive capabilities.
2) 300 issues is impressive as a feat in itself but 300 issues says nothing about the quality of the work. It was an interesting book especially early on (I came on board roundabout issue 50 and got all the back issues from 25 onwards and Swords of Cerebus). It really lost me round Jaka's story and Melmoth. I remember when Weisshaupt died and what a great issue that was, and then we got two really crappy issues. It appeared we were going to find stuff out and I couldn't wait to get the next issue and then ugh! I also didn't particularly like the way Sim drew faces, the eyes were generally too high in the face.
But that's not a real complaint. I mean, I can agree about how Sim draws faces, but that's a "surface" complaint as opposed to a "substance" complaint. "These two issues were crappy", I thought the same thing about a number of issues of Cerebus, and when I read the completed story, never noticed it. I wrote (and I think) mailed a letter to Sim about just that when I was 16 and read "Melmoth" for the first time.
If that's what you think about Cerebus and Sim's work, fine, it's your opinion and you are very much entitled to it. But, as the saying goes, that's analagous to an asshole.
3) It's not snarky to ask, just a bit of pressure though. Gaiman's Sandman is probably my favourite comic of all time. I liked Preacher but it did have a nasty side to it that sometimes grated. Animal Man by Morrison was cool. And of course, there's the old stuff like Lee & Dikto Spider-Man/Dr Strange and Lee & Kirby FF & Thor. Miller's Daredevil, y'know, the usual stuff.
But why do those stories stick out? Let's see, Sandman, Animal Man and Preacher were all extended self-contained stories specific to their particular creators. No one but Morrison could have written that Animal Man story, and it was barely over two years in the telling. The seeds were all planted by #5 (c/f Cerebus #5, "The Idol") and what remained was the playing out of everything foretold. Even Lee/Kirby/Ditko Spider-Man/FF/Dr. Strange had those extended narratives. The Peter Parker that Steve Ditko left was a natural progression from the character first appearing in Amazing Fantasy #15, the Fantastic Four are only surpassed by Cerebus as an on-going narrative of the main characters' lives and times, and hell, Dr. Strange went for a couple years obsessing over Clea without even knowing her name. [I can't imagine what it must have been like to be eagerly awaiting new Marvel comics as a youngster back then; woulda driven me insane].
But in all these cases, the main elements are "creators", "creation", "reliable schedule" and "quality". Cerebus stands with all the other titles you list in that regard.
I don't know if any of these are worthy. At the end of the day, these are entertainments, something to pass some time, not really important in the grand scheme of things. (But then what is?) One cool book I would recommend is Paul Auster's Book of Illusions, not my usual type of book but very nice.
No one knows what will be important in the grand scheme of things. Marvel at least had to maintain a Fantastic Four comic book whether or not Lee or Kirby had anything to do with it. But Sim at least thought out and articulated what made for a success. If around #150, he'd taken the same approach to productivity that, well, Marvel and DC (and everybody else) has taken, would Cerebus be finished even now, or would it maybe be around #220, if we were lucky?
1. I think it is overexaggerated if not plain wong on how short runs are today as compared to yesteryear. Most things are short runs compared to Lee & Kirby on FF but then Lee & Kirby is a short run compared to Bendis & Bagely. I can remember from the 70s how the creative teams seemed to change almost monthly. All producing lots of issues means in of itself is that a lot of issues were produced. Neal Adams produced relatively few comics but he has been much more influential than Sim.
2. A surface complaint about the faces. Not for me, it just bugged me and took me out of the story.
3. You are right that the comics I mention are all essentially extended stories. More and more I coming to believe that comics are not best served (in an artistic sense) by having characters and books that just go on and on. I would dispute that Sim matches my list in terms of quality but it is really a matter of taste so neither you or I can be right.
I may be over exaggerating when I say Sim is but a footnote but he is certainly not a colussus bestriding the medium like Kirby, Miller, Moore and Gaiman.
Posts: 337 | From: Airdrie, Scotland | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by shjonescrk: Most things are short runs compared to Lee & Kirby on FF but then Lee & Kirby is a short run compared to Bendis & Bagely.
What? Bendis & Bagley did like *one more issue* of USM than Lee & Kirby did of FF (and Marvel's coming out with Lee & Kirby's FF #108 very soon, though) and then Bagley was gone. Coincidence? I don't think so. The Lee/Kirby run is the number they were aiming for.
And I believe Evanier & Aragonés have done more than that of Groo.
Posts: 1028 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by geedis: How the guy lives or who published him has nothing to do with it.
Oh, yes it does. His girlfriend worked for the printer. The cost of self-publishing for him was next to nothing.
The 80's were full of indy cartoonists trying to emulate his publishing model, but they lacked three basic things: 1) their girlfriends didn't get them discounts at the printer; 2) they weren't satisfied with using the cheapest paper stock available to print on; and 3) most of their ideas were geared towards entertaining more people than just themselves.
quote:geedis: It's all about the work and what he has contributed to comics. He's already more than a footnote in the independent publishing chapter of any book about the history of comics.
If that book doesn't include the details of how he made it function, it's incomplete.
quote:geedis: Someone should have to be published by the Big Two to be considered more than a footnote?
Not what I said. I said Sim couldn't get work from the major publishers. He got a couple of short assignments, but that's it. And that's a big part of what drove him to self-publish.
Posts: 1028 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The early comic publishers benefited from having their books forced onto the stands by mobsters. Does that invalidate their success?
Posts: 916 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by necrotechno: Bendis & Bagley did like *one more issue* of USM than Lee & Kirby did of FF (and Marvel's coming out with Lee & Kirby's FF #108 very soon, though) and then Bagley was gone. Coincidence? I don't think so. The Lee/Kirby run is the number they were aiming for.
Nine issues, or 3/4 of a year. Kirby/Lee did 103 issues, Bendis/Bagley did 111.
But does it really matter? It wouldn't minimize what Bendis & Bagley's accomplishment even if they did bail out the issue after passing Lee and Kirby, just as what Bendis & Bagley did does not minimize what Lee and Kirby's accomplishment.
-------------------- Member 642-A of Diabolically Evil Traitors, Ready to Act Contrarily To Overwhelming Reason Posts: 5122 | From: Not Applicable, USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by necrotechno: The 80's were full of indy cartoonists trying to emulate his publishing model, but they lacked three basic things: 1) their girlfriends didn't get them discounts at the printer;
Who you know has always been, and will always be, important in the world of publishing. Really, one could play the "it's who they knew" card with a great many comic giants (not to mention giants in other entertainment mediums). It doesn't take away from what people did when they got a chance; the greats made good of it, the rest did not. That he may have secured himself a good deal does not take away from the fact that he made good of the resources available to him.
Heck, just having vision enough to put together the phone books and keep them in print makes his story worth noting. That decision was a noteworthy step towards the big TPB/GN market we have today.
quote:2) they weren't satisfied with using the cheapest paper stock available to print on;
I don't intend to sound rude, but so what? He made what he felt was the best decision he could in order to keep publishing. Because others chose to spend their money differently should take away from his accomplishment? I would disagree.
quote:and 3) most of their ideas were geared towards entertaining more people than just themselves.
This makes it even more impressive that he managed to do 300 issues. If other creators wanted to entertain others, not just themselves, and still didn't manage to survive over the long haul ...
I wouldn't tell you that you must like Sim's work. Taste is taste, and if it differs, that's fine. While I may disagree about the quality of his work, that stuff is subjective. I do feel like you're reaching for ways to minimize Sim's accomplishments and career, though.
-------------------- Member 642-A of Diabolically Evil Traitors, Ready to Act Contrarily To Overwhelming Reason Posts: 5122 | From: Not Applicable, USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by shjonescrk: Most things are short runs compared to Lee & Kirby on FF but then Lee & Kirby is a short run compared to Bendis & Bagely.
What? Bendis & Bagley did like *one more issue* of USM than Lee & Kirby did of FF (and Marvel's coming out with Lee & Kirby's FF #108 very soon, though) and then Bagley was gone. Coincidence? I don't think so. The Lee/Kirby run is the number they were aiming for.
And I believe Evanier & Aragonés have done more than that of Groo.
I really should use smileys. It such an obvious joke, isn't it? Maybe not.
Posts: 337 | From: Airdrie, Scotland | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ChrisW: Exactly. Whose history? The history of creator-owned comics from the 1970s on and Sim is one of the main characters but in the History of Comics of all time, then maybe a footnote, if he's lucky.[/b]
Um, no, Lee/Kirby's record on Fantastic Four and Claremont's record on X-Men have been milestones for a long time. This may not seem like much nowadays when six issues on a title is a cause for celebration, but that says more about the low standards. If Schulz or Trudeau had only lastes six months, their strips would have been nothing, would have meant nothing to anyone. Long-term work means more to the creators and the audience than skipping from project to project in the creator's own time. It's not even comics-specific. Paul McCartney has been a solo artist for almost as long as John Lennon lived, but both of them are forever tied to the two albums-and-three singles a year productivity of the Beatles. Context is important, but so is their productive capabilities.
2) 300 issues is impressive as a feat in itself but 300 issues says nothing about the quality of the work. It was an interesting book especially early on (I came on board roundabout issue 50 and got all the back issues from 25 onwards and Swords of Cerebus). It really lost me round Jaka's story and Melmoth. I remember when Weisshaupt died and what a great issue that was, and then we got two really crappy issues. It appeared we were going to find stuff out and I couldn't wait to get the next issue and then ugh! I also didn't particularly like the way Sim drew faces, the eyes were generally too high in the face.
But that's not a real complaint. I mean, I can agree about how Sim draws faces, but that's a "surface" complaint as opposed to a "substance" complaint. "These two issues were crappy", I thought the same thing about a number of issues of Cerebus, and when I read the completed story, never noticed it. I wrote (and I think) mailed a letter to Sim about just that when I was 16 and read "Melmoth" for the first time.
If that's what you think about Cerebus and Sim's work, fine, it's your opinion and you are very much entitled to it. But, as the saying goes, that's analagous to an asshole.
3) It's not snarky to ask, just a bit of pressure though. Gaiman's Sandman is probably my favourite comic of all time. I liked Preacher but it did have a nasty side to it that sometimes grated. Animal Man by Morrison was cool. And of course, there's the old stuff like Lee & Dikto Spider-Man/Dr Strange and Lee & Kirby FF & Thor. Miller's Daredevil, y'know, the usual stuff.
But why do those stories stick out? Let's see, Sandman, Animal Man and Preacher were all extended self-contained stories specific to their particular creators. No one but Morrison could have written that Animal Man story, and it was barely over two years in the telling. The seeds were all planted by #5 (c/f Cerebus #5, "The Idol") and what remained was the playing out of everything foretold. Even Lee/Kirby/Ditko Spider-Man/FF/Dr. Strange had those extended narratives. The Peter Parker that Steve Ditko left was a natural progression from the character first appearing in Amazing Fantasy #15, the Fantastic Four are only surpassed by Cerebus as an on-going narrative of the main characters' lives and times, and hell, Dr. Strange went for a couple years obsessing over Clea without even knowing her name. [I can't imagine what it must have been like to be eagerly awaiting new Marvel comics as a youngster back then; woulda driven me insane].
But in all these cases, the main elements are "creators", "creation", "reliable schedule" and "quality". Cerebus stands with all the other titles you list in that regard.
I don't know if any of these are worthy. At the end of the day, these are entertainments, something to pass some time, not really important in the grand scheme of things. (But then what is?) One cool book I would recommend is Paul Auster's Book of Illusions, not my usual type of book but very nice.
No one knows what will be important in the grand scheme of things. Marvel at least had to maintain a Fantastic Four comic book whether or not Lee or Kirby had anything to do with it. But Sim at least thought out and articulated what made for a success. If around #150, he'd taken the same approach to productivity that, well, Marvel and DC (and everybody else) has taken, would Cerebus be finished even now, or would it maybe be around #220, if we were lucky?
1. I think it is overexaggerated if not plain wong on how short runs are today as compared to yesteryear. Most things are short runs compared to Lee & Kirby on FF but then Lee & Kirby is a short run compared to Bendis & Bagely. I can remember from the 70s how the creative teams seemed to change almost monthly. All producing lots of issues means in of itself is that a lot of issues were produced. Neal Adams produced relatively few comics but he has been much more influential than Sim.
2. A surface complaint about the faces. Not for me, it just bugged me and took me out of the story.
3. You are right that the comics I mention are all essentially extended stories. More and more I coming to believe that comics are not best served (in an artistic sense) by having characters and books that just go on and on. I would dispute that Sim matches my list in terms of quality but it is really a matter of taste so neither you or I can be right.
I may be over exaggerating when I say Sim is but a footnote but he is certainly not a colussus bestriding the medium like Kirby, Miller, Moore and Gaiman.
1. I came into comics in the early 80's, so I don't have so much of a memory of what creative runs were short in the earlier days, but that proves my point. Even though I've never read a Gene Colan Daredevil, I know that Gene Colan was THE artist of Daredevil until Frank Miller came along. John Romita was THE artist of Spider-Man, even though they weren't the creators nor, neccesarily, the most important people involved with the characters. If someone did Thor or The Flash for three issues, it doesn't mean very much afterwards. Not to the audience reading and learning about the characters.
Producing a lot of issues requires an immense amount of work. Jack Kirby, Will Eisner, Alan Moore, Neal Adams, John Byrne, and others, are best remembered by the period where they wrote/drew a lot of pages regularly. Our own esteemed host, Rick Veitch, is still best known, despite all his many accomplishments, for the twenty year-old Swamp Thing stories, where he did twenty-something issues on a monthly basis. Neal Adams hasn't done anything in decades that people cared about, but he's deservedly a comic book legend based on the sixties and seventies where he was turning out pages regularly. Just being able to do a lot of work, regardless of quality, gets you farther in an artistic field than almost anything else -- two words: "Vinnie Colleta" -- and when quantity is matched with quality, that's the surest path to success.
2: I can see that. I yield to no one in my admiration for Sim's art, but considering he spent twenty years drawing nothing but people, his ability with faces didn't increase as much as every other talent he displayed. I don't like Gil Kane's work for the same reason, his faces (not just noses, but the faces in general) but I can't deny his status as a comic-book legend, and whaddya know, it's based on his prolific abilities as much as anything else.
3: As someone else pointed out, Moore, Miller and Gaiman -- Sim's co-writers on Spawn -- all see him as a titan in the medium. More importantly, can you see that dismissing him as a footnote in the medium is at least as ridiculous as lauding his greatness? At least he has 250 great issues (the non-great issues to be distributed as each individual reader sees fit) of a single series, written, drawn and published to his credit. No one else has that.
"I think ChrisW is the funniest man in entertainment still alive..." -- the perceptive Tom Spurgeon Posts: 8561 | From: Lincoln, Nebraska USA | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by geedis: How the guy lives or who published him has nothing to do with it.
Oh, yes it does. His girlfriend worked for the printer. The cost of self-publishing for him was next to nothing.
Two things on this: 1) I'm not sure where you got that Deni worked for Preney, but I've never heard of it (and I bet neither have Shoe and Zot, b/c it's never come up). Citation(s), please? 2) Even if she did, and even if the printing were next to nothing...
(and let's be fair: Sim has never made secret of the fact that without Harry Kremer's timely intervention/sponsorship, A/V never gets off the ground. So the printing must have cost *something*)
...it still has -nothing- to do with the relative artistic merits of Sim's work. It's like saying Mario Lemieux's goals weren't "real" goals b/c he didn't pay (enough?) for his sticks and skates...
quote:Originally posted by necrotechno: Not what I said. I said Sim couldn't get work from the major publishers. He got a couple of short assignments, but that's it. And that's a big part of what drove him to self-publish.
I'm still not sure what this has to do with anything...Sim's (self-publishing) motivations weren't "pure" enough for you? Really, I'm just trying to understand here...if Sim didn't/couldn't/wouldn't get work from the Big Two, and "had" to publish Cerebus on his own...
(Again, this conflicts with most of the documentation surrounding Cerebus' start (the usual stories have it that Cerebus was supposed to be a three-issue series to show other comics companies what he could do, and it just, you know, got out of control). But I'm not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to know your sources.)
...But even accepting your version as accurate, again, what does it matter? Self-publishing as self-preservation is okay with me as a reader. I really don't care which company publishes it, or if the artist is photocopying at Kinkos or whatever, as long as it's cool comics, eh? Sim got a career, we got nifty pictures, and you have a non-Kirby something to bitch about (thought I'd forgotten, didn't you ). Win-win-win, all the way around...
Posts: 1293 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Shoegaze99: I wouldn't tell you that you must like Sim's work. Taste is taste, and if it differs, that's fine. While I may disagree about the quality of his work, that stuff is subjective. I do feel like you're reaching for ways to minimize Sim's accomplishments and career, though.
Okay, I just posted a pretty lengthy response that alot of you probably skipped over (and are now reading this). Shoe was a lot more concise than me. Good show, Shoe!
Posts: 1293 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by stanleylieber: The early comic publishers benefited from having their books forced onto the stands by mobsters. Does that invalidate their success?
Well, yes and no. There are reports, seemingly verified (because I was not there), that many times the comics were not shipped as promised by the companies controlled by the "mobsters" (your word, not mine). The companies lost sales because their books never made it to market.
Many are the reports of pallets of comics being found years later. Didn't Mile High report about something like this? Also, there are reports of some titles in the 60s only being distributed every other month to some locations.
So, yes, there was some help in keeping some companies in business, but others were hampered, too.
Posts: 544 | From: Southeast Michigan | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
I posted this at TCJ.com right as you were leaving. Unfortunately you'll have to click the link for the image to see what I'm talking about since this far into the thread at Comicon.com image posting is disabled.
Out of the GLAMOURPUSS artwork I've seen so far, images like this one kind of bother me because the model is so recognizable. I'm not sure what the captions are going to say, so, it's possible the recognition factor is part of the joke. But if it's not, I'd have to say it's kind of outside the boundaries of what I deem appropriate in the sense that the recognition factor tends to cause my eye to stop in its tracks.
"That's Jessica Alba."
I'm skeptical that this particular page is about Jessica Alba.
From a purely aesthetic standpoint I think that's part of why using models as reference can be dangerous. You could end up saying something with your images that you didn't intend to say.
Posts: 916 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm still really interested to find out why a Joe Kubert font was chosen over a Ben Oda font like Odaballoon.
That would have added a really nice touch to the Leonard Starr style artwork.
Mark Wheatley used a different Ben Oda font on the new story Al Williamson did for the Al Williamson Adventures book and it looked really good. That kind of standard lettering translates surprisingly well into a computer font.
Posts: 76 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay. As promised: Rick Veitch sent me his Xmas 'o7 King Hell print -- which was a picture of the President and Mrs. Kennedy arriving at Love Field in Dallas 22 Nov 63, JFK wearing a King Hell t-shirt. So I mulled that over and thought, "There has to be a REASON he has this as his Christmas -- er Xmas -- print for '07." When I did the math, I realized that Christmas '07 was exactly 44 years and 33 days after the assassination. The assassination was Nov 22 -- 11th month 22nd day -- so it represented a kind of mathematical progression: 11 22 followed by 44 33.
Rick upped the ante by asking me, If Veitch and Bissette did 1941 (the adaptation of the Steve Spielberg movie)in 1979 and 1963 in 1993, what's the name of their next collaboration and what year will it come out in?
Well, there's 22 years difference between the title years and 24 years difference between the years of publication. So the answer would be a graphic novel called 1985 and it would come out in 2017. Of course, I had to plow on ahead on that one and calculate that the next collaboration would be...ta daaa...2007 and it would come out in 2041 (if, God willing, they both live that long).
So I would suspect that the Xmas print is actually a Veitch/Bissette collaboration, qualifying as their "2007" project published 34 years early.
Please feel free to forward the Samsonite luggage and my lovely parting gifts to Box 1674, St. C, Kitchener, ON, N2G 4R2 if I got any of that right.
quote:Originally posted by stanleylieber: Byrne's Dark Horse stuff is my favorite from him. Not everybody loves his duoshade work, but for my money, DANGER UNLIMITED is beautiful, beautiful stuff.
Danger Unlimited not so much for me, but 2112 and Next Men still rank among my favorites. Loved the work he did with Tom Palmer on X-Men Hidden Years, too.
-Jeff
For me, all of that Dark Horse stuff is just crazy good. Even BABE. He was doing his own lettering and the shapes of the word balloons were perfectly complimentary to the inking line. He had mastered the scratchy look that had always been bubbling under his own inking, and the duoshade on DANGER UNLIMITED just really sealed the deal for me. See also the artwork on his OMAC series for DC, which came out around the same time. The house style he created for those books is my absolute favorite in post- '80s super-hero comics.
I also think his writing on those Dark Horse series was imaginative. It was all still cut from the same Marvel super-hero mold, but, freed from editorial restraint, Byrne was able to nudge up against the edge of a lot of adult concepts without veering too far away from all-ages territory. When you have someone working at that level, in that milieu, the results punch all the right fanboy buttons. At least for me. I purposely avoided reading the letter columns, which turned out to be a good idea, because evidently, according to their author, my interpretations of those books were all wrong.
Anyway I like comic books.
Does anyone know if Byrne owns his Dark Horse material? i.e. is copyright and trademark in his name in the indicia? It sounds like stuff that would warrant all-in-one collections.
quote:Originally posted by madget: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Dave Sim: [qb] So I assume this distaste for drawing female flesh was come to in (relatively) recently years, unless my memory deceives me?
Also, if it's impossible to believe a doctor can't examine a sex-bomb teenager without some internal level of arousal or desire, isn't is similarly reasonable to assume that someone who claims they find the idea of semi-nude girls sprawled out in their underwear repugnant to view/draw might be bullshitting himself a bit? I don't flat-out disbelieve it, but it seems ... unlikely to me.
In a way, the idea of doing a comic about the fashion industry coupled with a wish to avoid nudity or semi-nudity seems ... like a difficult one. Maybe I missed this detail, but is this set in any particular time-frame? I remember someone noting that the fashions themselves seemed out-of-date, and 90s-ish, which makes sense to me at a glance, but I hardly know enough about high fashion to know for sure.
K
Well, the distaste comes from staying removed from it: a mental/spiritual view as opposed to my dick's reaction which is, of course, HUZZA-WAAHHH! GIMME GIMME GIMME! It started with getting rid of my electronic media which meant no easy access to porn, then eliminating printed porn from my environment. In my experience if you don't have something around to kick sexual desire to the upper realms of a sustained erection, friction applied to the erection and, ultimately, ejaculation those become a non-starters. I get erections, mostly in the morning when I'm sleeping and they stick around a lot longer than they did when I was in my thirties, but if I don't do anything about them -- which I don't -- they go away leaving no trace of their passing. I haven't masturbated in four years (five years in September). It's the same as the way that I used to drool when I got even a whiff of cigarette smoke when I quit in 1999, now a whiff just makes me go, "Yeccchh...cigarette smoke".
It's difficult avoiding nudity in the fashion magazines only in the sense that I usually find an average of four usable pictures in a given fashion magazine. The rest of them are in the "Skanko, glamourpuss' Evil Twin Sister" category (which I only need one of per issue). Flesh is just self-evidently flesh to me now. If I started masturbating again and kept porn around to look at, I'd soon be back to seeing female flesh as The Mystical Top of The Reality Pyramid the same as if I smoked a pack of cigarettes, I'd be back drooling over them in no time and probably smoking two packs a day inside of a week or two.
The journey of a thousand miles begins with but a single step. That's true of enlightenment and self-chosen degradation.
I do tend to prefer "classic looks" like Gucci and Chanel but all of the fashion shots in glamourpuss are from the fall of 2007. I can probably be sued for doing a comic book that is actually "SO ten months ago" that describes itself as being "SO six months ago" but wouldn't you agree that that would be more than a little nit-picky?
quote:Originally posted by Rogerson: With the newspaper strip lettering you've used on glamourpuss, why did you choose the Comicraft "Joe Kubert" font over the Ben Oda font "Odaballoon" that is also available?
Thanks.
I got Gerhard to print out the fonts they had at the Comicraft website and asked him specifically to look for Ben Oda. If Odaballoon was on there, I missed it. My real priority was a very regular typeface that I'm not personally capable of doing and the Joe Kubert font fit the bill.
I've also used it on Secret Project One.
I might get Sandeep to buy the Odaballoon and compare them on some pages in issue 2. Definitely Ben Oda is very much associated with the photorealist newspaper strip Raymond School, even though he never lettered for Raymond as far as I know.
quote:Originally posted by King of Wisdom: Whatever Dim light Dave Sim wants to portray women as I'm all for it because they are vile creatures that go into pussy panic mode for no reason except to get off on their Controlled dildo (their husbands) Marriage.
I'd consider that a very excessive misrepresentation of my views. I think women come by their opinions honestly, I just take issue with the viability of the idea that society can function with marriage as an equal partnership (my analogy being a car with two steering wheels, two brakes, two gas pedals, etc.).
I think the exploding divorce rate and the plummeting birth rate are the most obvious net effects of that secular-society-wide decision.
In the long term, of course, this will be to the benefit of the orthodox religions (and religious) because they adhere to the "be fruitful and multiply" dictum and follow the pattern of the husband and father as breadwinner and the wife and mother as homemaker. If we keep going in this direction, the United States will ultimately become a primarily Latino Roman Catholic country with a strong representation of white and black evangelical Christians. The secular humanists will just...peter out.
Personally, I don't think that's a good idea. We need a strong secular humanist presence particularly in North America to keep theocracy at bay. But as it stands now, I think secular humanism just... disappearing...in the next two decades or so is pretty much inevitable.
Well, you know, God gave free will to everyone, secular humanists included. If they want to use it to commit collective suicide, that's their choice, isn't it?
But yeah, it's a bit ironic that the guy who's supposedly such a great letterer would start using computer fonts.
I think it's just common sense. As a writer, a computer font allows me to make content changes in any text right up to the last minute. The writer's needs supersede the letterer's preferences.
Of course I still do my own "display lettering" where it's called for.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
). Win-win-win, all the way around...