G1 Comic Art

Quote:

---

By "bold and controversial" I didn't mean to imply that there was anything wrong or 'out of touch' with your opinions

---

All good! :)
I did call Senior's art 'inferior' as opposed to the other artist so I understand your stance on that and the 'controversy'.

Quote:

---

I'm not saying that it's wrong to compare G1 and contemporary art - although that is beyond the scope of this thread as I've specified it only for 1984-92 era TF art

---

Haha...back when I was a youngling reading these (and other comics) I found all the art to be pretty good. With the digital remastering I mentioned and Paulbot's comment I would like to see the original art redone on glossy paper with modern colouring techniques.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liegeprime

Yeah He often just colored the background bot in a single sweep of colors, LAAAZZYYYYY!

---

Block colouring though was pretty common in those days in most comics, and still happens today for background characters even with the most advanced colouring. There are times though that one wishes there was more effort. One that comes to mind is the shot of the Autobots from the Ark on the moon in issue #41. That would be a nicer image if all the Autobots were coloured in and not just the Dinobots, and a few others at the front.

Yeah but it happened far more frequently in the US comics than in the UK ones. The US comics were notorious for its astonishingly poor colouring, whereas it was a rare occurence in the UK comics. Yomtov also put less effort into giving Transformers a "metallic sheen" like some UK colourists did. That was left entirely to the inker. The UK comics were also far less "pixelated" than the US ones.

Galvatron as coloured in the UK comics:
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/tr...alvatrong1.jpg

Galvatron (II) as coloured in the US comics:
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/tr...vsmegatron.jpg
...yeah, for some reason Yomtov made him blue. (-_-)

I actually like the second pic of Galvatron there but I think that's to do with the pencilling.
Also my mind interprets that blue to be metallic silver which I guess that is just from years of conditioning i.e. reading comics with shoddy colouring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheDirtyDigger

I actually like the second pic of Galvatron there but I think that's to do with the pencilling.

---

Yeah I'm purely talking about the colouring. Look at the UK image of Galvatron - you'll notice that Galvatron (and Ultra Magnus too) are coloured in a way that you can see the "light" or "sheen" streaking across the metallic surfaces of their bodies. You'll notice that the background is coloured in far more detail too - with the flames coloured in spatters of red, orange and yellow whereas the background in the US pic is just yellow. Admittedly there's not much going on back there... but Yomtov's colouring of combustion was pretty mediocre and lacklustre compared to his UK counterparts.

combustion as coloured by Yomtov--> http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/tr...basekrakow.jpg

You can also see in that image the notorious "spittle" added to Wildman's pencilling by that inker!! Eeewww! Proof that inking really isn't just tracing (Chasing Amy'd!). :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime

Proof that inking really isn't just tracing (Chasing Amy'd!). :p

---

Whats a nubian?:D

STFU! :D

"It's not tracing!" http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...nkyEdwards.jpg

For me Wildman and Senior both add something a little gritty and viscerial to the Transformers universe, although I do also appreciate the more cartoon esque Guido Guidi, and argubly the most realistic of them all EJ Su.

Although the point of this thread is 80's - 90's TF comic art so let not get distracted, mind you having seen Wildman's art in The War Within, he may have learned to draw robots cartoon style, but the energy just isn't there, nor is the detail. While yes spittle and what not may seem odd for a giant robot, the level of detail he put into those last issues of the US comic is quite impressive. The other thing I really enjoyed was the way he did battle damage, not just broken windows, and dents, but loose wires, open panels, bent anttena/guns had the comic had a beter colourist they could have added carbon scoring and it would have rocked.

I love the UK artist's brutal portrayal of damage and combat, where Transformers fight and knock bitz and pieces of each other that was so cool.

From this thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacksplatt11

Well, he can put a pen to paper so... evidently, he can draw... Perhaps, you should say, he can't draw well?

---

Putting pen to paper means he can scribe... doesn't necessarily mean he can draw. Anyone with at least one arm and hand and isn't a quadraplegic or suffering from an extremely debilitating condition like motor neuron disease can scribe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STL

I think he's an abominal human being and have nothing but contempt for him but I think that allegations that are constantly made against him that he cannot draw or is a pathetic artist are unfounded and fail to objectively view his contribution.

It's all relative as to who is a good artist and a bad artist. Different artists have different styles too and that means that one style might appeal to you and another may not. If at least 60K worth of fans warmed to him once upon time and Marvel Comics and DC comics, and Image Comics hired him he can't be a clueless hack. There's a difference between not liking a person and objectively viewing a person's achievements and I feel that that distinction by many fans cannot be made.

---

Forget style. He cannot draw. There are critical errors he always made in his "art" such as:
+ Errors in proportions. There's one poster where Optimus Prime's neck is obscured by his arm, yet his head is floatin WAY above his shoulder line. This is only possible if Prime has become decapitated or if he's done a "Go-Go-Gadget Neck!"
+ Errors in forced/linear perspective. Forced/linear perspective is a very basic and fundamental technique required for drawing in post-Renaissance three-dimensional drawing. It's only abandoned if you're trying to mimic pre-Renaissance art or creating abstract art like Picasso. Action comic art doesn't really fall into that category. There are some artists that do try to put a unique artistic twist into their style - Frank Miller is a good example... but they don't go and defy artistic "laws of science" like messing up proportions and ignoring rules of linear perspective.
+ Super El Chunko body parts - how the hell does his robots move with all their joints puffed up like that?!? Look at those hands and fingers... how can they possible form a fist or operate equipment when they're so chunky? I cannot even imagine how they could punch or hold a gun or operate a keyboard... guh. How do they bend their arms or walk? It's like he's taken a bunch of really huge cubes and smished them together to make robots.

When I say that Pat Lee can't draw, I'm not criticising his "try-hard-mecha-manga" style... that's purely a matter of personal taste and opinion (I personally don't like it, but that's beside the point). I'm criticising the fact that he, from a very technical definition, can NOT draw well.

Look at E.J. Su's art in comparison. Unlike Lee's art, Su's art:
1/ Has basically good forced/linear perspective. Hello vanishing point/horizon.
2/ Are well proportioned.
3/ Are not ridiculously chunky to the part where the Transformers don't look like they would be able to move. If you look at the way he draws fingers, hands, elbows, knees, ankles etc. you can see that they're designed in a way where parts can actually move about without occupying the same space as each other (which is of course physically impossible). Su's Transformers can far more believably do things like sit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime

Putting pen to paper means he can scribe... doesn't necessarily mean he can draw. Anyone with at least one arm and hand and isn't a quadraplegic or suffering from an extremely debilitating condition like motor neuron disease can scribe.
.

---

I don't particularly like that example there. I take the point you're making but I don't like seeing people who are disadvantaged compared to the rest of us being equalised to someone who you feel isn't very good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime

Forget style. He cannot draw.

---

Style's very important. I think ignoring that is in itself a clear misstep in your examination of Pat Lee.

And here's something I'd like to stress again:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STL

That said, you have to give him credit. He took the TF licence and was instrumental in the franchise's success as a comic series. All of his series and issues averaged around the 60K mark. The current comics don't even come close to that. I think he's an abominal human being and have nothing but contempt for him but I think that allegations that are constantly made against him that he cannot draw or is a pathetic artist are unfounded and fail to objectively view his contribution.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime

There are critical errors he always made in his "art" such as:
+ Errors in proportions. There's one poster where Optimus Prime's neck is obscured by his arm, yet his head is floatin WAY above his shoulder line. This is only possible if Prime has become decapitated or if he's done a "Go-Go-Gadget Neck!"

---

Stylistic choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime

+ Errors in forced/linear perspective. Forced/linear perspective is a very basic and fundamental technique required for drawing in post-Renaissance three-dimensional drawing. It's only abandoned if you're trying to mimic pre-Renaissance art or creating abstract art like Picasso. Action comic art doesn't really fall into that category. There are some artists that do try to put a unique artistic twist into their style - Frank Miller is a good example... but they don't go and defy artistic "laws of science" like messing up proportions and ignoring rules of linear perspective.

---

I think one thing we're missing here is that Pat Lee was a pretty damn lazy turd. He got people to put backgrounds for him for crying out loud and so that meant a lot of the time he just drew without regard for other factors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime

+ Super El Chunko body parts - how the hell does his robots move with all their joints puffed up like that?!? Look at those hands and fingers... how can they possible form a fist or operate equipment when they're so chunky? I cannot even imagine how they could punch or hold a gun or operate a keyboard... guh. How do they bend their arms or walk? It's like he's taken a bunch of really huge cubes and smished them together to make robots.

---

Stylistic choice. Think about all the artists who draw female characters with huge racks. Or with massive backsides. I mean, some of those characters should have severe health issues. Then there's just hte uber muscular guys. How do they even bend their arm.

While I'm not disagreeing with you that there is a vocal contingent that does not like Pat Lee's art, I totally disagree with your assertion that he cannot draw. Marvel, DC and Image ALL sought his services. The only reason they walked away was not b/c they didn't like his work but b/c of the bad publcity he brought with him not to mention that shabby practices he has such as duping Alex Milne. To assert he has not a clue about drawing I feel is totally unfair. His style worked, it won people over. None of us have ever done that yet so like it or not, we have to acknowledge that he was a successful artist even though we may not like him or his art.

Ashley Wood is a comic artist who springs to mind. I hate his style but I can see that it is totally art. I don't like how he stretches things but again I can see that it is art that someone does enjoy and has made him successful. I've seen some people bash Tim Sale even though I adore him despite some of his awkward and very exaggerated poses at times but he's still a highly regarded artist.

And to make the point once more, Pat Lee's art may not be too your liking but I don't think its fair to go about demeaning it and making anyone who likes his art even mildly feel as if they are supporting a artist who is absolutely incompetent. I respect your opinion that you do not like Pat lee but I cannot possibly agree w/ your assertion that he cannot draw.