Yeah, must be a shock for Colletta lovers… Isn't it sweet when an inker respect Kirby's pencils?
Not as slick as Sinnott, not as faithful as Royer or as bold as Giacoia but rock solid inking with a vintage feeling from Chic Stone!
So much praising Mike, you'd make me blush but, really, I don't deserve half of it since Vinnie made it so easy for most of us!
What a great page! Every panel is a treat!
WHAT AN "AMAZING" JOB CHIC DID ON BLACK BOLT! So crisp, so bold, so... "adventurous!" This run was far too brief!
You gotta admire a man who has the special talent of taking a conversation or thread--any conversation or any thread--and turning it into a platform for bashing Valorous Vinnie. It's a talent so very few of us even have an "inkling" of.
I was at a convention and heard Gil talking to a group of people. He told them that Vince Colletta was his second favorite inker. Someone from the group asked, "Who then is your favorite inker?" Gil replied, "Anyone else." True story. Must have been part of Gil's shtick.
Claude, you were supposed to ask:
Who's Gil Kane's favorite inker?
As for my personal opinion on Colletta, I would not say he had no inking skills, but he clearly chose a path that led him to slaughter art on a regular basis and he was a total mismatch for Kirby's explosive and very stylized art.
At Dallas Fantasy Fair back in the mid 80's, I got to discuss Colletta with Gil Kane. I prefaced by comment with the apologetic phrase "Vinnie Colletta may be a nice guy, but..."
Kane cut me off. He was seated at a table, doing sketches for $20 a pop. He looked up at me over his glasses and said, "Vinnie Colletta is NOT a nice guy!"
Now, I don't know if that had anything to do with what Kane thought of VC's inking abilities, but he clearly didn't hold him in high regard.
I was going to tell Mr. Kane that Colletta seemed to have no talent and very little in the way of skills except for tracing over pencil drawings.
We had a brief discussion about inkers and he told me that one of his favorite inkers was Rudy Nebres. This kind of shocked me because I thought Nebres got rid of any trace of Kane's style with his inking.
But I was left with no doubt that Colletta was not exactly a favorite anything of Gil Kane's.
Obsession? More like an agression from Vinnie…
… I just received the Jack Kirby's Mighty Thor Omnibus Vol. 2 and, each time I turn a page, I feel like I'm on the receiving end of an eye gouging by courtesy of Crapletta!
Besides, I need to practice before meeting Erik Larsen, Vinnie's most prominent proponent, next july in Paris. I eagerly anticipate a nice insightful discussion in debating Gil Kane's viewpoint when he said that "Vinnie Colletta was his second favorite inker".
Good God man! Again with the Colletta-bashing?!?!?!? Shouldn't you be seeing a doctor about this obsession of yours with Vinnie?
Blasted! Can't get use to the finger pad on my notebook!
Should post by logging in, in that way I will not lose any of my previous posts.
Yeah, I'd say Royer did a wonderful. We forget too that works like these ardone under a deadline. He could have plowed through this stuff, but it's detailed and carefully administered work. The decisions and techniques of penmanship and brushwork takes a hell of lot of experience that most e people could only dream of doing.
…I'll trade Royer's Stratospheric Point of View against Crapletta's Exospheric Perspective anytime!
See you in Paris next july, Erik :-P
Brilliant, really. When I look at this I see good old fashion color theory applied. Dark colors advance while light colors recede. https://sites.google.com/site/scienceofcolour/how-colors-advance-and-rec...
Excellent, atmospheric spread. Though I will say a wee bit atypical for the bombastic Mr. Kirby! He could be incredibly subtle about somethings. Not usually when it came to stuff like this.
It's called aerial perspective. I think's cool.
The likelihood is that it is exactly as you suggest. However, I don't recall ever seeing Jack capture an atmospheric effect in his pencils.
Royer did say about this particular Kamandi issue that Kirby's pencils were perfect and pristine, some of the best he'd ever seen Jack do--and that he went out of his way to do a good job inking them. I don't know if Jack lightened up his linework, or if this was Royer's interpretation, but I love it. It reminds me of a similar depth effect seen when Harvey Kurtzman inked John Severin on a story in the first issue of Frontline Combat, and likewise of the brilliant inking on Michael Golden's first 'Nam story in the first issue of the black and white Savage Tales magazine (vol 2)
Jack's pencils were pretty full and Mike would ink those pencils quite faithfully. He would go as far as inking the individual lines in a shadow even if Jack was meaning for it to be a solid black. I would go as far as saying Jack would even do the line weights in pencil and Mike would mostly ink what's there. It's not so much conjecture when we have seen Jack's pencils during this time because of The Jack Kirby Collector and this site and then seeing the final result of the inks by Mike. However, it would be nice if there were a copy of the pencils to this piece.
I think the fact that Royer went with a finer line to provide an atmospheric effect to the bridge and other items in the distance is the best aspect of his inking on this 2-page spread. I'd like to know whether the original pencils were like this, or if Mike did it on his own (rather than conjecture).
Let's not totally give credit (or blame) to Mike here. He probably followed very close to what Jack had drawn. We do know Mike was the most faithful to Jack's pencils, correct?
Haha, well, holy mackerel, note to self: watch out because some unverified peoples DO NOT LIKE well-done depth techniques in inking!!!
well it is what it is; personally I DO NOT LIKE IT; DO NOT LIKE THE TECHNIQUE; we can agree to disagree...no flames no nastiness. That is all ;-)
I agree with James. That technique by Royer from foreground to background is spot on. It's just not the bridge but the water has the same line weight as well. What you may be having a problem with, kc, is the erraticness of the line which is deliberately done to give the look of decay. Open line shadow and no solid blacks to add to the distance/depth. As a whole, this works.
Hmm, you asked a question, I provided a sensible explanation and you choose to just ignore it and still plead incomprehension. That makes a lot of sense