 |
| Image copyright MARVEL COMICS |
Originally the splash page of FANTASTIC FOUR #51 (which I have), this great JACK KIRBY image of The THING now graces the cover of this new MARVEL 2 IN ONE first issue. Superb stuff! Unfortunately, there were a few fingerprints (none of them mine) on the cover which have lifted the colour, but I've digitally disguised them as much as I can. Still a great pic though, eh?
8 comments:
👍 Great stuff!!!
The colouring gives it something extra.
The colouring seems to add a bit of depth to the pic. FF51 is my all-time favourite comic story. I did own the original comic at one point but sold it for a very good price as I had two reprints of it too- not sure if that was a good move, but the money definitely came in handy at the time.
I've still got my original issue, DS, but I didn't buy it 'til many years after it was first published, having read reprints of it before then.
Can't agree, I'm afraid - I find this to be a perfect example of how digital colouring ruins the original work. It's just mud.
I'm surprised by that, BS, as I think it gives it atmosphere. However, on THIS blog, we allow - nay, encourage - all shades of opinion.
Allow me to elaborate - digital colouring has introduced a colour palette far in excess of the 64 colours once permitted using the old CMYK standard colourist's range. It forced colourists to not only be more creative in their decisions, but almost created another language for expression.
There once was a time when you might get a close-up of an enraged character's face. Once upon a time, it might have been coloured red, with the background some kind of complementary hue. These days - literal skin tones, with overdone shadows, and if you're lucky, a few highlights (everything digital is much darker than it's original counterpart).
Or the cover of a Silver Surfer collection I either saw here or on another site - shot of the Surfer against the usual generic Kirby New York. Never saw the original, but I'm betting the Surfer was plainly coloured against a background that was probably a single colour, two at the most. The new version? Every building was individually coloured....much more "realistic' but the contrast between the foreground figure and the background had disappeared completely. More real, less dramatic.
I realise I'm probably in a majority of one in this matter, and the ship has long since sailed - but I can't help feeling that comics are the poorer for missing part of their essential look (I'm still puzzling over learning that thought balloons have apparently gone the way of the dodo).
You probably saw that Surfer image here, BS - I published it about a week or so ago. I hear what you're saying and I'm sure there are many bad examples of digital colouring, but when it's done well, I think it gives the finished result (in the case of 'old' art) something extra. I have examples of the original colouring in most cases, so seeing something through 'new eyes' gives me the best of both worlds. To me, it's akin to giving the cartoon characters an extra depth in 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit', that they didn't possess in their original incarnations. I deplore many things about modern comics, but digital colouring isn't necessarily one of them (when, as I said, it's done well).
Post a Comment