Hot Topic: Styles of Comic Artwork

[penciljack]

Hey, YOU can't just add new options!

[Orphangrinder]

Image / 90s / Jim Lee Style [/was not an option but I made it so].
Its how I think a superhero comic should look. Otherwise, I like cartoons for everything else.

I contend that Image/90s/Jim Lee style is cartoony. Not in the cutesy, big-eye disney/manga sense, but those are some seriously stylized, abstracted figures. No human on earth ever looked anything like that.

[amadarwin]

I like styles with ENERGY. I want motion, exaggeration and taking realism to another level. Anyone can copy, but those artists who can twist and interpret reality and show you something different. That is where it's all at.

This is mine as well. Energy sells it for me.

[Ed]

I hope this adds to the conversation, and doesn't divert it, but I can be impressed by almos any style; what most sways me in comics is striking linear compositions and sophisticatedly orchestrated contrasts. Monotony is always the the killer in comics for me unless it's done consciously, with a specific effect in mind. By contrasts I don't mean of value necessarily.

[Matt001]

Honesty. Whatever you draw, make it honest. I want truth. Your truth.

[Orphangrinder]

Honesty. Whatever you draw, make it honest. I want truth. Your truth.

Would you mind saying a bit more about this?

[Jcatlett76]

I chose Hyper Realism but I don't really mean the new digital age of manipulation. What I meant was I like artists who produce realistic comic art as in correct anatomy and structures. I grew up with the the likes of John Byrne, Jim Aparo, George Perez, Curt Swan, Irv Novick, John Romita Sr, John Buscema, Alex Saviuk, Sal Buscema, Bob Layton, Neal Adams, Mike Zeck....These were just some of the artists that I admired growing up in the eighties. They always stood out to me because they could tell a story but keep it real at the same time. Now, while I loved these artists because of their realistic approach, I did have an affinity toward "some" of the Stylized artists. Todd McFarlane comes to mind. While a lot of people don't like him these days, the one thing I remember about him was he got the basics right and then made the drawing fun for the reader. If you look beyond the crazy poses or exaggerations...the man could draw. However, he wasn't my favorite stylized artist. That honor goes to Norm Breyfogle. He has to be the most underrated artist ever. He had just the right mix of realism and style. There are a few modern artists I really enjoy because they take it back to basics and do a heck of a job. There are some though that are a tad too basic and some that try too hard for realism. And some just try to be too stylish. Just puts me off reading a good story.

[JBFletcher]

Would you say that each script has one ideal art style, and that's the only style that could match the core of that story with any real precision?

Take Bone for example. Could you tell that story in any other style and have it feel as...*right*?

[kirpid]

what wave would you call Bill Seinkiewicz, Frank Miller, Bernie Wrightson, George Pratt, Etc. I know it sort of lasted from the late 70's to the late 80's. I guess they were Baby Boomer's. It was post Kirby and pre Jim Lee.

[Orphangrinder]

Would you say that each script has one ideal art style, and that's the only style that could match the core of that story with any real precision?

Take Bone for example. Could you tell that story in any other style and have it feel as...*right*?

I think a story certainly needs a style that matches its tone, but I don't think that means it has to be one specific style. People usually think of dark, intense stories as needing a more realistic style, but the right kind of cartoony style (think Peter Chung, perhaps) could work just as well. I could imagine any number of cartoonists doing justice to a story like Bone, even in a totally different "surface" style, as long as they had the right level of fun, humorous, kid-friendly cartooning.

I think it is an interesting question, why certain styles seem to be appropriate to certain stories, and others aren't. Why do action/adventure comics tend to be drawn fairly realistically, while both off-the-wall children's comics, and very mundane, slice-of-life indie comics tend toward highly stylized, cartoony artwork? Why couldn't Charles Schultz draw Batman? Why couldn't Jim Lee draw Blankets? (Of course, they could, and it could even work, but probably only in a way that's playing off the incongruity between the subject matter and the style.)