Created Art

Recreated Inks

Created Pencils

Recreated Pencils

Kirby Pencils

Original Pencils

Published Version

Original Cover
evanier's picture
Posted by: evanier | September 6, 2010


The original inker was Don Heck.

Tom Kraft's picture
Posted by: Tom Kraft | September 6, 2010

Original Inker

Updated the original inker to Don Heck as per Mark Evanier.

Krackles's picture
Posted by: Krackles | September 23, 2010

Don Heck ?

Wow, really not a fan of his job for that one. Not even remotely close to Kirby's original drawing.
That's weird because I fondly remember some fine inkings he did over Kirby's artwork.

As for Mr Royer, gorgeous brushwork, as usual !

kirbyditko's picture
Posted by: kirbyditko | November 3, 2010

New Gods #1 cover

I don't have the citation at the hand, but wasn't there an article sometime ago speculating that the Kirby pencils for this cover was actually done some years after the original New Gods #1 cover and that the Orion figure on the original New Gods #1 figure of Orion was taken from the 4th world character sketches done in the late '60s.

Tom Kraft's picture
Posted by: Tom Kraft | November 4, 2010

Later pencils

Yes this was drawn in 1976. See the original pencils tab. I never heard about it being based on character sketches from the late 60's. Sounds interesting. Be good to do some research on this.

John S.'s picture
Posted by: John S. (not verified) | February 20, 2011

Don Heck?!

Hi Tom,

I'm not sure who you had originally credited as the inker of the Orion drawing used on the cover of NEW GODS #1, but I'd be willing to bet it was Frank Giacoia, right? If it was, I don't think you should have changed your attribution, because that picture was clearly inked by Giacoia, not Don Heck. I know people are going to think I've got a lotta nerve for daring to disagree with Mark Evanier on this, but I know my inkers, boy, and I'd practically be willing to bet my life that that picture was inked by Giacoia, not Heck.

Tom Kraft's picture
Posted by: Tom Kraft | February 20, 2011

Re: Don Heck?!

Correct I did list the inker as Frank Giacoia. The Jack Kirby Checklist lists Giacoia and thats who I when with. The Grand Comic Book Database lists Heck. And here, Mark Evanier says its Heck, so thats what I changed it to.

I guess some decisive evidence or proof would be needed to confirm either at this point. Or more expert opinions. Right now one for and one against Giacoia...

Pete Von Sholly's picture
Posted by: Pete Von Sholly (not verified) | March 30, 2011

new gods date

I have this piece. The inscription says "To my good friend, Pete, Jack Kirby" and he added the "76" when he signed it. It was not necessarily drawn in 1976. He had a drawing like this for sale at Baycon I think which I showed up to buy too late- and Roz kindly said Jack had another version of it back home which I could buy for the same price if I wanted to. Which I did, natch.

Tom Kraft's picture
Posted by: Tom Kraft | March 30, 2011

Re: new gods date

Thanks Pete for the clarification and the background information on the piece. Can you tell me if the piece at Bay Con was exactly the same to the one you eventually got? Any idea from Roz or Jack on the date Jack actually drew the piece(s)? It would also be great to get a high res archival scan for the Kirby Museum and to share on this site.

Pete 's picture
Posted by: Pete (not verified) | June 6, 2011

kirby new gods cover

The piece they sold at Baycon was pretty much like this as I recall- it was sold to a guy named Rod Friggle and I THINK I saw it reproduced somewhere later on. I never saw them side by side of course. I will scan for you gladly someday- the piece is in a frame so it will take some doing though! No way to be sure when they were drawn but they did have a high price on the piece at Baycon, much higher than most of the other pencils for sale there. Wish I had asked more questions about it. It was a great testimonial to the generosity and kindness of the Kirby that they sold this to me for the lower price to be fair- even though the price was a mistake, as it was labled wrong. They were truly the greatest.

Tom Kraft's picture
Posted by: Tom Kraft | June 6, 2011

Thanks again

Thanks Pete for the additional detail on the original pencil piece. I'd love to get a scan someday for the archives and this site but understand the effort that goes into taking a piece of out out of a frame. If someday you can here is a link to the Kirby Museum's scanning instructions: Thank you, Tom

Chrissie_H's picture
Posted by: Chrissie_H | July 18, 2012

The original drawing from

The original drawing from which published figure is derived (although it's been fiddled with a lot) was definitely Giacoia. Heck inked some of those presentations too but the difference in the linework is enormous -- Heck is Heck even when being reasonably faithful. Kirby himself inked a couple (Darkseid and Metron).
Perusing this, you can see the two Kirby-inked ones first. The pieces down to Capt Glory are Giacoia. Sigurd to Enchantra are Heck. The last two are Giacoia again.

John S.'s picture
Posted by: John S. | July 18, 2012

Thanks for agreeing with me, Chrissie.

You're right about all of them. Too bad Tom wouldn't take MY word for it -- even if Rand Hoppe at the Kirby Museum would:

The only one I forgot about in my comment on Rand's blog was the Space Guardian -- but you forgot about Night Glider, so I guess we're even --except maybe that Night Glider wasn't part of that original series of pictures. Any idea where (or when) she came from?

Tom Kraft's picture
Posted by: Tom Kraft | July 18, 2012

Word taken

A couple of days ago Peter Koch was kind enough to have us archive the original color presentation board of Orion used for this cover. Posting it soon.

John S.'s picture
Posted by: John S. | July 18, 2012

Re: Word taken

Thanks, Tom. I love it when I win an argument (lol)! Can't wait to see the original!!

Chrissie_H's picture
Posted by: Chrissie_H | July 18, 2012

John, I think that Bombast

John, I think that Bombast thing also dates from the '60s. Wasn't it on a TJKC cover? Not sure. As to Glider/Glida, think that might have actually been a 1983 creation. Thib reinked Glory and Bombast around that time but the Glider piece was different, more detailed -- also showing her unmasked face and flying over a building -- and looks more like Kirby's early '80s work.

Chrissie_H's picture
Posted by: Chrissie_H | July 18, 2012

Interesting to wonder whether

Interesting to wonder whether or not the pencils on this piece were '76 or earlier. I seem to remember seeing the other (third) version ages ago and that looked more obviously early '70s. This one could well be '76. It has that abstract block of shading on the chin that Kirby started to use more extensively around 1975... not definitive but suggestive.

John S.'s picture
Posted by: John S. | July 19, 2012

Bombast, etc.

Yeah, Bombast is another Giacoia-inked piece from the sixties. It's on the cover of TJKC #51. I didn't know Thibodeaux re-inked those two pictures -- but looking at the cover for the Topps Comics CAPTAIN GLORY #1, it does look different. So maybe Thibodeaux's versions were traced or lightboxed off copies of the originals. Thanks for the information on the Night Glider piece. I can't recall ever seeing the original. Do you remember where it was printed?

Chrissie_H's picture
Posted by: Chrissie_H | July 19, 2012

The Topps covers were inked

The Topps covers were inked by Thib in 1983 but first two obviously were just traces of the original pieces, I guess for the purpose of having clear lineart versions. They were supposed to come out as new books (probably not by Kirby himself) but nothing came of it until a decade later. I have the scan of Glida somewhere. [pause] Here.
I guess there might be an earlier basis for it, but it looks like '83 Kirby to me. Or maybe there was an original without the face and building. Anyone know?

Krackles's picture
Posted by: Krackles | July 19, 2012

I fear…

… It doesn't look like Fearless Frank Giacoia's inks, not even remotely.

John S.'s picture
Posted by: John S. | July 19, 2012


Thanks, Chrissie. Now that I see the picture here, it makes me think I HAVE seen it somewhere before. The problem is, there have been so many books, magazines and articles published over the years on Jack's work (including your own excellent JACK KIRBY QUARTERLY), that it's often difficult to remember which pieces we've already seen (and where we've seen them) and which we haven't!

Dave Elliott's picture
Posted by: Dave Elliott | August 17, 2012

Original Penciled version

I'd love to see Joe Sinnott ink that original penciled version of the cover that was on the Kirby Museum site. It would be a look in to see what NEW GODS would have looked like if it had been a Marvel book.

John S.'s picture
Posted by: John S. | August 17, 2012


The first four issues of NEW GODS, inked by Vince Colletta, gave us a reasonably good idea of what the book would have looked like if it had been published by Marvel, since Colletta inked a ton of Kirby's THOR work at that company, and since NEW GODS was, in some ways, an extension of THOR. Beyond that, we probably would have had fairly decent lettering by someone like John Costanza (who did a great deal of work at Marvel in the early seventies and who did, in fact, letter those first four NEW GODS issues as well)...and a whole lot of forced, inappropriate, cliched angsting and lame, mannered, soap-opera dialogue from Stan Lee. Kind of makes me glad it WASN'T a Marvel book!

Dave Elliott's picture
Posted by: Dave Elliott | August 17, 2012


Agreed. Wouldn't want Stan getting his hands on it. But looking at that line work it would have been great to have seen a Silver Surfer/New Gods story by Jack.

John S.'s picture
Posted by: John S. | August 17, 2012

But why?

They're two separate universes which have nothing to do with each other -- except that Kirby created both -- and putting them together in a single story would have done absolutely nothing to enrich either one. Even if it happened, and Jack had written it, you never would have heard the end of all the complaining from the Marvel fanboys, who would have hated that Jack didn't write "Stan Lee's Silver Surfer". In other words, Kirby wouldn't have had the Surfer flying around all day talking to himself endlessly about the madness of mankind, moaning about Shalla Bal and Zenn-La, and whining about how Galactus had exiled him on Earth -- i.e., all the lame, hackneyed Stan Lee cliches that we've seen a million times, but that fanboys just can't get enough of. So why would Kirby even bother? He got screwed royally on the Surfer (and just about everything else he did for Stan in the sixties), and he was right to cut his losses and move on in the seventies. In fact, he probably shouldn't have bothered with that Silver Surfer graphic novel he did in '78, considering what a backward-looking, relatively anti-climactic letdown it was compared to the brilliant solo work he was doing for Marvel at the time.

patrick ford's picture
Posted by: patrick ford | August 18, 2012

Kind of?

Weird about Lee isn't it? His writing fits the definition of bad writing.
Like John says Colletta inked a bunch of the early Fourth World material and Frank Giacoia inked the drawing which was the basis for the cover of New Gods #1
And the cover of Forever People #1

Krackles's picture
Posted by: Krackles | August 18, 2012

Don't rewind me!

Please guys, could you stop it?
Don't remind me Frank Giacoia should have been the inker instead of Vinnie for these early Fourth World issues.

It's like torture…

Luckily, Colletta was dropped as a reward for the quality of his job and we got Mike "Royal" Royer to handle almost all of Jack's production at DC!

Comment viewing options