|
|
Post by kirby101 on Oct 29, 2024 9:43:44 GMT -5
I agree about the "pose covers" and the variants that have nothing to do with the book. But as far a different artists for the cover than the interior, that goes back to the Golden Age. As do the “pose covers.” This thing I’m going to complain is new had been a thing from the beginning of the industry. (Not aimed at you, Kirby) I agree, but I think the pose cover has gone from a minority, with most covers reflecting the interior story, to the prevalent image for covers from the Big Two today. |
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Oct 29, 2024 9:45:18 GMT -5
I agree about the "pose covers" and the variants that have nothing to do with the book. But as far a different artists for the cover than the interior, that goes back to the Golden Age. It probably goes back to caveman times. Who’s to say that the art on the inside of the cave walls was done by the same caveman who did the art on the exterior of the cave? And I doubt there were any creator credits back then! I have heard that Oomla took the credit for creating all of Ug's work.
Also, creator credits: |
|
|
|
Post by tonebone on Oct 29, 2024 12:42:01 GMT -5
There are comic book artists who's work, in both personal preference and scope of work, is better suited for covers. They most likely prefer spending a great deal of time on a single image than drawing pages and panels. I think it is a good thing that the industry was able to accommodate the art of Adam, Hughes, Arthur Adams, Brian Bolland, Alex Ross and others. I hear people bemoan that they would rather they do interior pages, but I thing the quality of their output shows they are in the niche they should be. The 'sad' thing about cover artists over the years has been the money it takes away from the interior artists- the creators who are much more important than the cover artist. Maybe their covers aren't as pretty, but it takes away the most saleable page of original art from them for every issue. They'd also probably be less included to draw endless character pin ups with covers not so generic that they could be reshuffled in any order and still apply just as well to the comic in hand. A lot of this discussion of interior artist vs. cover artist is the result of scheduling and logistics. If the interior artist is busy doing the interiors, the editor can grab a "cover artist" to do the cover simultaneously... even easier if the cover is a 'pin up" type cover with no relation to the interior, which is still under construction. Sure, the editor could WAIT until the interior artist is done and then commission the cover, but it's riskier that way. |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Oct 29, 2024 13:06:32 GMT -5
The 'sad' thing about cover artists over the years has been the money it takes away from the interior artists- the creators who are much more important than the cover artist. Maybe their covers aren't as pretty, but it takes away the most saleable page of original art from them for every issue. They'd also probably be less included to draw endless character pin ups with covers not so generic that they could be reshuffled in any order and still apply just as well to the comic in hand. A lot of this discussion of interior artist vs. cover artist is the result of scheduling and logistics. If the interior artist is busy doing the interiors, the editor can grab a "cover artist" to do the cover simultaneously... even easier if the cover is a 'pin up" type cover with no relation to the interior, which is still under construction. Sure, the editor could WAIT until the interior artist is done and then commission the cover, but it's riskier that way. For the financial reward covers bring, if the interior artist is capable of drawing 20 internal pages in a month they would undoubtedly find the time to draw one more, that is worth maybe 8 internal pages to them in $$$ terms. The reason for using a different cover artist is that their covers are seen as superior, and will improve sales. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Oct 29, 2024 13:10:15 GMT -5
I fell for the bait and switch of a Neal Adams cover to discover Dick Dillin interiors more than once.  |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Oct 29, 2024 13:15:33 GMT -5
I fell for the bait and switch of a Neal Adams cover to discover Dick Dillin interiors more than once. I've always flicked through first... but then again I don't see as much allure as most in covers. |
|
|
|
Post by tonebone on Oct 29, 2024 17:27:38 GMT -5
A lot of this discussion of interior artist vs. cover artist is the result of scheduling and logistics. If the interior artist is busy doing the interiors, the editor can grab a "cover artist" to do the cover simultaneously... even easier if the cover is a 'pin up" type cover with no relation to the interior, which is still under construction. Sure, the editor could WAIT until the interior artist is done and then commission the cover, but it's riskier that way. For the financial reward covers bring, if the interior artist is capable of drawing 20 internal pages in a month they would undoubtedly find the time to draw one more, that is worth maybe 8 internal pages to them in $$$ terms. The reason for using a different cover artist is that their covers are seen as superior, and will improve sales. The scenario I posted was told to me by an actual comics artist. Not to invalidate what you said, but both can be true. |
|
|
|
Post by MRPs_Missives on Oct 29, 2024 17:45:43 GMT -5
Also of scheduling note, since solicitations are released 3 months before a book is released, and 2 months before it goes to printer, and a cover is needed in the solicitations, often times the covers are done before any actual work (plot, script, pencils, etc.) are even begun on an issue, with only the vague editorial plan of what the issue is going to be about, so often times the covers need to be completed without a full idea of what is happening on the issue and the artist is in deadline crunch for previous issues and has not started work on the issue where the cover is needed. More often it is the solicitation which sells the book, not just the cover and those decisions are made 3 months before a book is released. The cover on a physical copy on a shelf in a shop is not a factor in selling the book. 90% of sales are to pull customers who have decided to buy the book and committed to doing so long before the book ever hits the shelf.
That is the direct market system and how it works, and how it has done so for decades now.
And covers being done before work on the actual issue begins is not a new phenomenon wither, it has been the industry standard for a long time and resulted in such wonderful things like Conan the Barbarian #22 in 1972/73 having a cover for a story that wouldn't appear until the next issue because Barry Windsor Smith missed a deadline and they had to put a reprint of issue #1 in that issue to get an issue out on time, and then having to get a different artist (Gil Kane) to do a new cover for that story for issue #23.
It's been a part of the industry forever, isn't unique to "modern comics" but fans tend to forget/ignore the issues inherent in their favorite eras of comics either through the blinding influence of nostalgia, willful ignorance or denial, or because they want to complain about modern comics and will do so for any reason even if the same issues were rampant in their preferred eras, using whatever rationalizations, mental gymnastics, or justifications they need to do so.
I'm a strong believer in Sturgeon's Law (90% of the output from any era of comics was dreck and it's the 10% that wasn't that makes it worthwhile and stand out), but I also believe it applies not just to the creative output but to the business management of the industry as well-90% of the business practices and decisions made by publishers and creators were rubbish as well, it's the other 10% that has allowed the industry to survive as long as it has. The industry wasn't better x number of years ago (whatever x needs to be to get back to your preferred era), the same kinds of shenanigans that plague comics now was happening then too. But we just never saw it because of our childhood perspectives and limitations of understanding the realities of business, and because access to behind the curtains stuff and to creators was much more limited then than it it now. What's happening isn't different in nature or even in scale, we just see a lot more of it now and understand more of it as adults than we did as kids or adolescents.
-M
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Oct 29, 2024 18:11:05 GMT -5
I fell for the bait and switch of a Neal Adams cover to discover Dick Dillin interiors more than once. I've always flicked through first... but then again I don't see as much allure as most in covers.
I love a nice cover but it would never be enough all on its own to get me to buy a comic I didn't like otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Oct 29, 2024 18:22:21 GMT -5
Also of scheduling note, since solicitations are released 3 months before a book is released, and 2 months before it goes to printer, and a cover is needed in the solicitations, often times the covers are done before any actual work (plot, script, pencils, etc.) are even begun on an issue, with only the vague editorial plan of what the issue is going to be about, so often times the covers need to be completed without a full idea of what is happening on the issue and the artist is in deadline crunch for previous issues and has not started work on the issue where the cover is needed. More often it is the solicitation which sells the book, not just the cover and those decisions are made 3 months before a book is released. The cover on a physical copy on a shelf in a shop is not a factor in selling the book. 90% of sales are to pull customers who have decided to buy the book and committed to doing so long before the book ever hits the shelf. That is the direct market system and how it works, and how it has done so for decades now. And covers being done before work on the actual issue begins is not a new phenomenon wither, it has been the industry standard for a long time and resulted in such wonderful things like Conan the Barbarian #22 in 1972/73 having a cover for a story that wouldn't appear until the next issue because Barry Windsor Smith missed a deadline and they had to put a reprint of issue #1 in that issue to get an issue out on time, and then having to get a different artist (Gil Kane) to do a new cover for that story for issue #23. It's been a part of the industry forever, isn't unique to "modern comics" but fans tend to forget/ignore the issues inherent in their favorite eras of comics either through the blinding influence of nostalgia, willful ignorance or denial, or because they want to complain about modern comics and will do so for any reason even if the same issues were rampant in their preferred eras, using whatever rationalizations, mental gymnastics, or justifications they need to do so. I'm a strong believer in Sturgeon's Law (90% of the output from any era of comics was dreck and it's the 10% that wasn't that makes it worthwhile and stand out), but I also believe it applies not just to the creative output but to the business management of the industry as well-90% of the business practices and decisions made by publishers and creators were rubbish as well, it's the other 10% that has allowed the industry to survive as long as it has. The industry wasn't better x number of years ago (whatever x needs to be to get back to your preferred era), the same kinds of shenanigans that plague comics now was happening then too. But we just never saw it because of our childhood perspectives and limitations of understanding the realities of business, and because access to behind the curtains stuff and to creators was much more limited then than it it now. What's happening isn't different in nature or even in scale, we just see a lot more of it now and understand more of it as adults than we did as kids or adolescents. -M
The bit about fans wanting to criticise modern comics is nonsense, since I was thinking as much about all those 1970s Steranko covers on mediocre comics as anything else. Or did I miss a post where someone else was specifically targeting modern comics? Could be, I've only skimmed the thread.
But obviously it's correct that the production-line structure made it necessary for most series to have covers done by another artist. Was anyone saying otherwise? Maybe I missed that too in my quick run-through.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2024 0:46:33 GMT -5
For the financial reward covers bring, if the interior artist is capable of drawing 20 internal pages in a month they would undoubtedly find the time to draw one more, that is worth maybe 8 internal pages to them in $$$ terms. The reason for using a different cover artist is that their covers are seen as superior, and will improve sales.
It seems some artists prefer doing 20 variant covers per month for 20 different books with multiple publishers, rather than 20 interior pages for one lousy book. Then they sign the covers and sell them in their online webstores for 5x-50x the price of a regular copy.
Not that I frown on that in any way, if the artist has a niche following, awesome. I still indulge in the odd variant here and there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2024 1:05:31 GMT -5
I love a nice cover but it would never be enough all on its own to get me to buy a comic I didn't like otherwise.
That's the dilemna I have with quite a number of Dave Stevens covers, especially when raw copies are $25-$250 each. I'm glad I got the pricey ones before they shot up in price ten-fold.
|
|
|
|
Post by rich on Oct 30, 2024 3:14:45 GMT -5
For the financial reward covers bring, if the interior artist is capable of drawing 20 internal pages in a month they would undoubtedly find the time to draw one more, that is worth maybe 8 internal pages to them in $$$ terms. The reason for using a different cover artist is that their covers are seen as superior, and will improve sales.
It seems some artists prefer doing 20 variant covers per month for 20 different books with multiple publishers, rather than 20 interior pages for one lousy book. Then they sign the covers and sell them in their online webstores for 5x-50x the price of a regular copy.
Not that I frown on that in any way, if the artist has a niche following, awesome. I still indulge in the odd variant here and there.
We are in agreement- the incentives to do covers instead of interiors are great! Covers are a different skill, requiring less brain power and potentially less time, while paying a lot lot more. They certainly don't even need to draw 20 a month to pay the bills either... |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Oct 30, 2024 4:34:03 GMT -5
Also of scheduling note, since solicitations are released 3 months before a book is released, and 2 months before it goes to printer, and a cover is needed in the solicitations, often times the covers are done before any actual work (plot, script, pencils, etc.) are even begun on an issue, with only the vague editorial plan of what the issue is going to be about, so often times the covers need to be completed without a full idea of what is happening on the issue and the artist is in deadline crunch for previous issues and has not started work on the issue where the cover is needed. More often it is the solicitation which sells the book, not just the cover and those decisions are made 3 months before a book is released. The cover on a physical copy on a shelf in a shop is not a factor in selling the book. 90% of sales are to pull customers who have decided to buy the book and committed to doing so long before the book ever hits the shelf. That is the direct market system and how it works, and how it has done so for decades now. And covers being done before work on the actual issue begins is not a new phenomenon wither, it has been the industry standard for a long time and resulted in such wonderful things like Conan the Barbarian #22 in 1972/73 having a cover for a story that wouldn't appear until the next issue because Barry Windsor Smith missed a deadline and they had to put a reprint of issue #1 in that issue to get an issue out on time, and then having to get a different artist (Gil Kane) to do a new cover for that story for issue #23. It's been a part of the industry forever, isn't unique to "modern comics" but fans tend to forget/ignore the issues inherent in their favorite eras of comics either through the blinding influence of nostalgia, willful ignorance or denial, or because they want to complain about modern comics and will do so for any reason even if the same issues were rampant in their preferred eras, using whatever rationalizations, mental gymnastics, or justifications they need to do so. I'm a strong believer in Sturgeon's Law (90% of the output from any era of comics was dreck and it's the 10% that wasn't that makes it worthwhile and stand out), but I also believe it applies not just to the creative output but to the business management of the industry as well-90% of the business practices and decisions made by publishers and creators were rubbish as well, it's the other 10% that has allowed the industry to survive as long as it has. The industry wasn't better x number of years ago (whatever x needs to be to get back to your preferred era), the same kinds of shenanigans that plague comics now was happening then too. But we just never saw it because of our childhood perspectives and limitations of understanding the realities of business, and because access to behind the curtains stuff and to creators was much more limited then than it it now. What's happening isn't different in nature or even in scale, we just see a lot more of it now and understand more of it as adults than we did as kids or adolescents. -M
The bit about fans wanting to criticise modern comics is nonsense, since I was thinking as much about all those 1970s Steranko covers on mediocre comics as anything else. Or did I miss a post where someone else was specifically targeting modern comics? Could be, I've only skimmed the thread.
But obviously it's correct that the production-line structure made it necessary for most series to have covers done by another artist. Was anyone saying otherwise? Maybe I missed that too in my quick run-through.
It’s true that people like Gil Kane and Steranko did many covers , but Kane was doing interiors also. In the case of Steranko, he was mostly out of comics and they loved him doing what he could. I don’t blame an artist for doing an easier gig for more money, it’s just that the fans are deprived of their talent for an entire book. Even Ross will do one shots occasionally. It would have been great to see more one shots by Bolland and the like. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Oct 30, 2024 4:41:03 GMT -5
I've always flicked through first... but then again I don't see as much allure as most in covers.
I love a nice cover but it would never be enough all on its own to get me to buy a comic I didn't like otherwise.
I'd say the same, except for a cover by Michael Golden in the '80s! (I blame my addiction). |
|
