Forums and Art Recent Comments

  • 2 years 46 weeks ago | Mike T
    Mike T's picture

    If you do reach out to members for assistance, I'd be honored to help out! Just sayin'. If we're talking Jack Kirby art, then I don't have 10 years to spare (if you get my drift)!.

  • 2 years 46 weeks ago | Krackles
    Krackles's picture

    Anyway, who cares about 25 000?
    For 10 grands you got me already!

    Regarding the different files per pages, is it that we potentially could get up to 10 files?

    - Published original art — Front
    - Published original art — Back
    - Unpublished original/alternate version — Front
    - Unpublished original/alternate version — Back
    - Touched up/Production version
    - Pencil xerox or photostat
    - Printed comic page
    - Recreated pencils
    - Recreation
    - Frank Fosco Forgery

  • 2 years 46 weeks ago | Tom Kraft
    Tom Kraft's picture

    Yes there will be guidelines and detailed documentation with screen shots etc. There would be some kind of confidentuality docment to sign since the files are the property of the museum.

    I image setting up a server by voluntee name for access to their folder with a bunch of pages to processed. We would enter them into the content management system since there is hidden museum data that needs to be added and we want to make sure the information is accurate as possible.

    Thanks for your offer!

  • 2 years 46 weeks ago | Tom Kraft
    Tom Kraft's picture

    No I mentioned 25 000 files. Each page has between 1 to 5 files for each page. Total pages are about 10 000 so 25 000 is a conservative estimate.

  • 2 years 46 weeks ago | Krackles
    Krackles's picture

    25 000 Kirby pages?
    That's pure madness, you guys are TOTALLY SICK!

    If needed I'll help… No way, I could wait 10 years!
    We'll you provide guidelines for consistency?

  • 2 years 46 weeks ago | Tom Kraft
    Tom Kraft's picture

    The collections section of the site, which includes comic art, comic strip, animation and commissions, will be done in the next 2-3 weeks. Then its all about uploading and processing high-res files. All together there is about 25,000 files! I did the math and if I did this by myself, processing 10 pages a day, every day, it would take me 10 years to get it all uploaded. Of course Rand and others would help, but we maybe reaching out to members to volunteer time to help as well.

    Once the collections are in place, I will design and program the homepage and landing pages. Then the 2nd level pages. The plan then is to launch the site as a BETA version while the above art is added. This most likely won't be completed until Fall. That's my best guess with my current work load and other commitments.

  • 2 years 46 weeks ago | Mike T
    Mike T's picture

    Tom, after seeing your post, I can't help feeling exactly like "Flounder" in Animal House.

    "OH BOY!"

    (Complete with drool-laden grin, rubbing my hands together as my cup runneth over in unbridled anticipation.)

    So this is going to launch next Monday, right? (I wish!)

  • 2 years 46 weeks ago | Frank Fosco
    Frank Fosco's picture

    Tom,

    This is looking awesome. When is the projected time for this to be launched off?

  • 2 years 46 weeks ago | Tom Kraft
    Tom Kraft's picture

    Guys thanks for your comments and interest. I was at comic con when these comments arrived. There, Rand and the other trustees of the museum reviewed the direction of the new site (visually and functionally) and it was all positive. I've been working on designing and building the site with help from a great developer for the code intensive stuff. The results I think you all will like. There will be full browser page zooming, much better than WIK. It will be organized by "Collections" that not only include comic art but the photocopies, animation work, commission work and more. Here are some screen grabs of the site in development.


  • 2 years 46 weeks ago | pat ford (not verified)
    Anonymous's picture

    There is absolutely no evidence Lee contributed more to the plots in the early years at Marvel. If anything the evidence points at Lee contributing less during the first five or six years. A fan who accepts Lee's authorship claims could easily say the border notes left by Kirby are based on a plot given to him by Lee, just as a fan of Kirby can say they feel the synopsis for FF #1 was written after Kirby explained the characters and plot to Lee.

    For those reasons I think it's wise to look at the characters and plots and figure out where they have antecedents.

    What do we know for certain about those early years? One thing we know is the Spiderman character and story brought to Lee by Kirby was based on The Fly, a character co-created by Kirby and Joe Simon. We also know Lee did not realize this until Steve Ditko pointed out the similarity to Lee. That is strong evidence Kirby was bringing Lee characters and stories during those seminal years.

    We also know the Fantastic Four has little or nothing in common with the JLA and a laundry list of things in common with The Challengers of the Unknown.

    According to Kirby during those early years he would bring his completed pages containing story and artwork to Lee, explain the plot to Lee, and then tell Lee what he had in mind for the next issue. Kirby later began writing the story in the borders of the pages rather than giving Lee a verbal description of the plot.

    Once Kirby began using border notes it is possible to read the story Kirby sold Lee. I believe many fans see the border notes as an indication Kirby began taking over more of the plotting, but there isn't any reason to assume that.

    One thing the border notes do tell us is that in every single instance where Kirby's border notes have been closely compared to the story in the published comic book, it is evident Lee has radically rewritten the story Kirby sold to Lee.
    In the years prior to the time Kirby began using border notes there is still evidence Lee either rejected or tampered with Kirby's intended plots. One example is the a fore mentioned rejected Spiderman story and another is the story intended the THE HULK #6.

    So on the whole it's my opinion the situation was very much the same from 1958-1963 as it was from 1964-1970.
    The only reason people say Kirby took over more of the plotting is because that is the story that has been repeated over and over again until it has been accepted as "history."

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | Mike T
    Mike T's picture

    I think Jack put up with it for as long as he did due to his working class values, ethical code, and basic heroic nature. It actually happens every day, where people work hard and give extra to their employers, who then profit from it and seldom compensate fairly. Jack did what he did because he believed in giving his best, not just giving what he was paid for.

    Eventually it got old. The "arrangement" seems even more unfair when you consider that Ditko got writing credits while Jack did the same amount of writing plus a heckuva lot more creating! I have this theory that he was waiting for Stan to give credit where credit was due without having to ask for it. If that had happened, the preceding unfairness might have been forgotten. But this was not to be, and unsurprisingly, by the time The King finally got some writing credits at Marvel it was too late for the team of "Stan and Jack."

    Earlier in the "Marvel Age," Stan did more of his share of writing and plotting. I think it was an abuse to always put his name first, but he was the boss and it was within his power. This was a relatively small abuse compared to what evolved! Probably sometime in the latter half of 1965, Stan should have started being listed as editor, co-potter (when deserved) and co-scripter. Jack should have been listed as artist, plotter, and writer, and compensated accordingly. Marvel Comics failed to be fair, failed to be proactive, and milked what they could out of The King until even his herculean patience ran out.

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | Krackles
    Krackles's picture

    Of course Jack Kirby didn't approve.
    The real question is: how could Jack accept being ripped off of his writer share for so long?
    Lee abused of his editor position to get stories from freelancers for which he received sole writer payment and credit.

    Stan Lee wasn't just an editor… He was also supposed to be a writer.

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | Krackles
    Krackles's picture

    Ahem… Must I confess that I made up the KOALA thing?
    A pun intended for Tom who's working on the long awaited Kirby Museum's OADA.

    Now, I'll have no other choice but to chew on eucalyptus leaves while waiting!

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | Mike T
    Mike T's picture

    But Stan was the editor, not Jack, so unlike Jack's soon-to-follow scripted and edited pages, these pages were tweaked. And when it gets right down to it, that's pretty much all Stan really had to do to Jack's pages anyway--tweak them and polish up a bit. The only difference I can see here is that Jack put the words in the panels rather than the margins, and Jack got the writing credit.

    It's been said that Jack didn't approve, but I think it's actually too bad that this arrangement didn't last, because Stan's tweaks were very helpful--at least for me. Having grown up on "Lee/Kirby," I have a hard time connecting to Jack's writing without Stan's input. Corny as Stan often was, he gave Jack a bit of warmth and made the dialog flow more naturally.

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | Mike T
    Mike T's picture

    I'm not familiar with "the Kirby Original Art Lost Archive." Does this have any connection to the Kirby Museum?

    I ask this because when I first became a member of WIK, I asked Tom if there were some way to get the zoom art to fill up my widescreen monitor, rather than leaving margins on either side. (I want my Kirby AS BIG AS POSSIBLE, man!) He replied that this wouldn't be possible for this site, but that he is working for something akin to my request that would be a part of the KM. While the KM and the KOALA appear to be disparate efforts, they both seem to involve Tom (busy guy, eh?), and for all I know could be offshoots of the same effort.

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | John S.
    John S.'s picture

    But until some of those lost pages are found -- and posted! -- I guess we'll just have to grin and bear it.

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | Krackles
    Krackles's picture

    Yeah, I get your point Jostlin' John.
    In fact, I was merely teasing Tom… with no results unfortunately!

    Let's hope he's well on track with the work he is doing for the Kirby Original Art Lost Archive (so far).

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | MRE1957
    MRE1957's picture

    One thing that I find very interesting about this page is the nearly total absence of the S&K studio "picket fence" inking style—so common in the first half of the 1950s. The only place I can see where it is kind've used is in the bottom half of Bulleye's longbow in panel five.

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | MRE1957
    MRE1957's picture

    One thing that I find very interesting about this page is the nearly total absence of the S&K studio "picket fence" inking style—so common in the first half of the 1950s. The only place I can see where it is kind've used is in the bottom half of Bulleye's longbow in panel five.

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | John S.
    John S.'s picture

    …but at this point I'd even welcome a few lousy Colletta pages. Or we COULD get some GREAT pages by Royer, Sinnott, Giacoia or Verpoorten...

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | Krackles
    Krackles's picture

    … you gotta look at the bright side of things, Joltin' John.
    We are celebrating an anniversary!

    (Plus, we may have avoided the 7 sins of Crapletta!)

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | John S.
    John S.'s picture

    It's now been exactly one year since any new pages were posted on this site. I was hoping we would at least get to the 1200 page mark, since it's only 7 pages away; but it looks like that's never going to happen now. Ah well, it was fun while it lasted.

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | Mike T
    Mike T's picture

    I see your point, because when it comes to inks Wood was supreme, and you can't help but see him in the final results. There is definitely more black and more shadow than what Jack put down (based on all his other output).

    However, I'm not buying that Wood buried Jack. When you look at Woody's solo work--amazing as it tends to be (particularly the EC stuff)--it just doesn't reach the same level as Kirby/Wood. Jack's gifts/talents come through even with these high-powered inks, and these panels are just totally more interesting due to what Jack did than what would have been the case with any other penciller. Don't get me wrong, Wallace did great layouts and pencils too, but that's neither here nor there--Jack is still King, even in these panels. Neither Wood nor anybody else can ever take that away. Woody is merely a part--a superbly outstanding part--but still just a part of the Kirby Kollective.

    I stumbled across the official Wallace Wood website recently (or was it on Facebook?) and I was touched at the homage paid there to the King. There seems to have been a real bond or at least deep respect from the Wood entourage for Jack. I think one of the posts read "There's nothing like Kirby & Wood," and I have to agree. I read elsewhere (Kirby Collector I think) that Wood believed Kirby to be a genius and that's why he put so much effort into this strip. Now this I buy! And what an honor that someone like Wood thought that of another artist!

    I'd love to see the pencils of this. I'm betting they looked very much like the end result sans shadow/black.

    Here we have the greatest penciller and the legendary inker combining their talents--What's not to like?

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | MRE1957
    MRE1957's picture

    ...there isn't much of Jack left here to enjoy.

  • 2 years 48 weeks ago | John S.
    John S.'s picture

    I've never seen this page before. I actually don't mind Colletta's inks on Thor, but this is much better than what Vinnie usually turned in. In my opinion Bill Everett was one of the true Giants of comics -- a brilliant creator who could write, pencil, ink, letter and color with the best of 'em. So it's always great to see his work.