Scans of original art are from the Kirby Museum's Original Art Digital Archive.
Scans of pencil art photocopies for the Kirby Museum's Pencil Art Photocopy Archive courtesy of the Kirby Family, with thanks to TwoMorrows Publishing.
Please do not copy any images or content from this site without permission.
One of the better Vinnie inked pieces. Wouldn't you agree, Krackles?
For your info:
I wrote my comment (below) before yours Frank but it wasn't online until I noticed I had to enter a validation code after I returned from lunch.
Honest work from Colletta.
Obviously there wasn't any need for erasing, lucky for Kirby.
That is Colletta at his best, and notice that as usual it's almost all brush. Weird Colletta is associated with pen work, because his crow-quill technique is weak, but when he makes an effort he's quite adept with a brush.
At his best for sure but let's not get carried away in the praise departement!
I mean, how could it be possible to do it wrong when Kirby served you with such a piece of cake to ink?
What manner of professional would ink it without some kind of success?
In my opinion, if he could do it, most decent inkers would have done better.
Even I, on a bad day, could do as good a job, maybe even better than Colletta.
Don't get me wrong I'm a Royer man all the way.
People used to say that Jack Kirby at his worst was better than most other guys at their best.
So I think what Krackles is trying to say here is that Vince Colletta at his best was better than most other guys at their worst.
What did I say to deserve this? What a revolting development…
Vinnie at his best was a rarity and the best would have been to keep him away from Kirby's pencils!
If you read my comment carefully, you'd see that it's not much of a compliment to Colletta, since I'm saying that ONLY Colletta's BEST work was better than most other inkers' WORST work. So even the other inkers' AVERAGE work was as good as, or better than, Colletta's best.
Having said that, let me ask you this: If you could have picked any of the inkers who were active in the sixties to ink Kirby's THOR instead of Colletta, who would you have picked?
GIACOIA of course!
With some guest inking by Klein or Sinnott given Frank tendency to slip behind schedule :-(
Why not Wallace Wood? He would certainly have given Thor a special flavor and set the serie a bit different from other regular Superheroes.
PS: I understood and was going playful!
Somehow, The Shadow KNEW you were gonna pick Giacoia. He would've been one of my choices, too. I also liked Sinnott, considering his special connection to Thor, having inked the very first story (among others) and having even pencilled a few of the early ones -- not to mention his exceptional work on the book in the seventies, over Big John Buscema's layouts and pencils. Wally Wood is a good choice, also; one I wouldn't have immediately thought of. I think if Jack had stayed at DC through the sixties instead of coming back to Marvel, he probably would have done a Thor comic for them as well, and Woody probably would've inked it, considering he was Jack's inker of choice until he (Kirby) left for Marvel. Even Klein probably would've ended up inking a bunch of Kirby's stuff at DC, since he was a mainstay there. My only other choice for THOR inking would've been Syd Shores, since he added some nice Colletta-like, fine-line details to the work without erasing any of Jack's art the way Vinnie did.
Kirby clearly penciled them in. Very odd, isn't it? (Or is it?)
Good eye spotting that.
It points up an oddity about Colletta's work. At the same time he was erasing whole figures, and inking 30's style Brownstones as modern looking glass rectangles he was applying overdone fussy line work to Kirby's penciling.
Blow the image up, and look at the tangle of lines he's used in inking the left cheekbone.
In addition to being lazy at times it would seem Colletta probably considered himself a better artist than Kirby, and thought he could make better decisions about effective images.
Stan often asked for revisions in art and this is a case where I think it helped. Galactus looks more confident, aloof and mysterious without that glassy eyes Jack drew in there. I don't agree with every artistic choice inkers and editors have made over the years but this one was a good call.
Actually, I prefer Galactus without eyes or with the stylized version from his first appearance.
My unrelated comment to this thread is that I LOVED the Galactus / Thor story-arc (to use modern lingo)! Pure Kirby at his finest! The issue with the weird bird aliens and Ego is the absolute hi-point!
And yet based on what we know the Galactus/Thor story arc as published is one of the most badly compromised stories Kirby wrote for Marvel due to Lee's rewrites, and editorial control. Very, very little of what Kirby intended remained in the printed comic book. TJKC #52 makes an attempt to reconstruct the story based on unpublished pages, and photocopies.
Rather than "wrote", let's talk about hijacking and dialogues from Stan Lee.
Whatever Kirby intended, 1% of it coming through would still be far superior than 99% of what Lee could produce on its own.
In fact, I didn't enjoy the Galactus story that much, the Ego part was much better despite Colletta's inking.
They didn't spare Kirby any infamy…
I agree, it's exactly the point I was making in an earlier comment.
Kirby writes in the top margin, "He feels waves of thought present." That's what I get from the stories after they were adulterated by Lee. Kirby's intended story is the "ghost of electricity howling through the bones of Lee's face."
did Vinnie spill a pot of coffee on Galactus's mouth or what?
...Galactus's nose was running!
Not even Joe Sinnott, who in my mind was the greatest inker who ever lived (surpassing even Wood), turned in such a fine rendition of the planet-eater.
Have you seen the head shot splash page of Galactus in Fantastic Four 74? Inked by Joe Sinnott. Wish there were a scan of that in the gallery--it's stunning. As nice as this piece by Vinnie is, I like the one from FF 74 better.
the link does not work from my PC.
Art is in the eye of the beholder, obviously! I assume you refer to page 15 (Galactus is not on page 1). To my eye, this head shot (Thor 160 p. 13) is several times more pleasing than that one, however, the difference is attributable in part to the pencils, naturally!
However, your mention of ish #74 causes me to consider modifying my earlier statement, because the cover of this issue is at the very pinnacle of my favorite covers of all time (all by Kirby, of course). Simply yet superbly conceived, beautifully drawn and masterfully inked, inspirationally colored with loving care, it just doesn't get any better! Kirby squiggles and crackles (as seen through Joltin' Joe's eyes and #4 brush) never came together any better than they did on this. I especially love how Galactus' feet are translucent, adding an almost godlike, omnipresent suggestion to the composition.
Okay, so here's my mod for Thor 160 p. 13: "Best Galactus ever on an interior page!" I believe that covers it. I am of course referring to the combined artwork, not specifically to either pencils or inks. Others may come close, but I don't think this Kirby/Colletta masterpiece has any equal in the (modified) category. (But then again, my memory ain't what it used to be!)
And now there's only one thing left to say: "JACK-SELSIOR!"
...joltin' Joe is still the man!
Mike T, did you try highlighting it, copy and paste into a new window?
Oh, that helps!
Okay, IMHO, it's Galctus' right cheek (or lack thereof) that detracts. The coloring isn't as good either (though coloring typically isn't given consideration in such appraisals).
Yeah--when I said splash page I probably should have said 1 page picture instead. Page 15--yes.
My opinion wasn't in an effort to make you change your mind about Vinnie's work--I just posed the one I liked better when it came to a Galactus head shot on a 1 page picture.
Yes--FF cover 74 is up there as one of the best FF covers--agreed.
Say--now that we've made comparisons of 1 page pictures of Galactus head shots...how about the 1 page pictures of Galactus, Colletta from Thor 134 page 3 vs Sinnott from FF 75 page 4? Both great pieces.
Frank, Here are my humble verdicts:
FF 75 p. 4 is quite simply a masterpiece.
Thor 134 p. 3, is great too, but only if you can overlook the coloring. Great penciling from Jack, decent inking by Vinnie, but the coloring... (cringe) Galactus is all pink and stuff! Very unbecoming. It doesn't appear to be a printing error, so I suspect that all (original $0.12) issues suffer from the same coloring that mine does.
When you say lack of his right cheek, the light source is going from left (Galactus' right) to right creating a shadow on Galactus' left side and left cheek. Just an observation.
Fantastic Four #74 cover.
High Res cleaned up scan for you to enjoy!
Really a beautiful cover, well restored by you! Thanks for sharing.
Actually, I don't know if this qualify for a restoration since I mostly cleaned up a decent scan I found online but it got me thinking… Wouldn't it be cool to scan covers for the Kirby Digital Archives, the way you do it for original art?
Great condition for covers (Mint or NM), scanned with archival quality, would make up for some great additions in the Kirby Museum!
Mebbe even interior pages!
Starting with great copies it would require minimal clean up and we could tweak these printed beauties into deadly gorgeous pieces of work!
We have talked about doing just that. The way the site is architected it can have an unlimited number of media types associated with a page in a book. First, we must get all the original art and photocopies posted then we can expand.
I know you already planned to add scans of printed pages and covers but I was wondering if you intended to scan them with archival quality? I suppose it would be possible to borrow great conditions comics for scanning during conventions?
Of course, the stupid CGC boxes may become a problem.
Yes to scanning them in archival quality. I image in some cases high quality comics could be available but at cons the owners would not want you to touch the copies and possibly lower the grade so it would most likely be from less quality books, digitally restored.
Tom, do you already have a list of original art for the covers?
I'm pretty sure you have most of these comics but it could help if we split the work and started to check which comics are available for scanning in NM or better condition. We could share a list among the possible contributors?
Lost track of individual grades in my comics collection but I'm pretty sure I have most of Kirby's 70s output for Marvel in VF/NM to NM condition.
- Many 70s DC in VF to NM
- Some of 60s Marvel in F/VF to VF/NM.
Yes we have a spreadsheet of every page scanned for the archive. I can post the covers in the forum.
Our first objective before adding printed materials to the site is to get the thousands of original art and photocopies up. After that we can go back and add the other media types etc.
… the Sheet and Spread the Word, you punk!
I already started scanning some Silver Age Kirby covers before they began to brittle and crumble to dust!
Although I can use the Index to find the covers already available on Wik, the list won't necessarily match the high grades in my Kirby comics collection.
That's only the second appearance of Galactus after the FF Galactus trilogy, Mike T. Even the colors on Galactus in that trilogy were little to be desired. Seems they were still fishing for a color scheme. Pink and orange in that issue of Thor was quite odd.