John S.'s picture
Posted by: John S. | May 11, 2013

Extraordinary

A beautiful example of Kirby's absolutely masterful use of composition, lighting and perspective to tell a story visually in a way that is both subtle and dramatic. And the coloring on the printed version really enhanced the overall atmosphere of the scene. Just a tremendous cover in nearly every way.

kctobyjoe's picture
Posted by: kctobyjoe | May 11, 2013

Kirby cover

I am still a bit confused; this stat is the one 'used for production' correct?

What did Marvel (well back then) do with the original art?

I read a LOT of Kirby's stuff has been returned to his family and OBVIOUSLY many are for sale on the free market

I was surprised to see THOR #134 stat set for sale; the luck dog with $227,000 won it

MAN to have money like that to buy a piece of HISTORY!

kc

drdroom's picture
Posted by: drdroom | May 11, 2013

kctobyjoe,

Your confusion seems to involve the idea that these are stats, photographic copies, and that people are paying 100s of thousands of dollars for stats. That is not the case. Pictured above is original art with statted elements attached (lettered elements and corner box art).

As for what Marvel did with originals such as this one, that is a long, sad, and complicated story.

kctobyjoe's picture
Posted by: kctobyjoe | May 11, 2013

stats; etc

THIS picture *obviously* is what you are explaining to a dummie like me; I'll have to look at the 18 pages from THOR 134 that were sold to see exactly what the buyer got; I am SURE he didn't buy COPIES for $277k
PLEASE lead me in the direction (if possible) concerning truthful stories about the original art; URLS; anecdotes would be fine;

*I*would like to know; and I DO NOT!

AND if U do know what kind of a salary was a Jack Kirby getting 'in the day' and what is an inker like Royer or D Bruce Berry worth an hour?. I HAVEN'T A CLUE; of course Jack in 1966 a LOT different I HOPE into the 90's !!!

I worked for Uncle Sam for 30+ years as an IT guy; I made $65k but that didn't happen overnight either; as of 2012 I am 'retired'

Thanks so much

Tom Kraft's picture
Posted by: Tom Kraft | May 11, 2013

A forum entry

kctobyjoe, if you wish to continue this thread, please set up a discussion entry in the forum section of WiK. The discussions here are meant to be about the art on the page and should not deviate to far from that. Thanks, Tom

John S.'s picture
Posted by: John S. | May 11, 2013

Rates

Tom, if you'll permit me, I'll just give a quick answer to the question and then leave it at that.
From what I understand, the top rate for pencilling in the late sixties/early seventies was about fifty dollars per page. As far as inking goes, see the comments here... http://whatifkirby.com/gallery/comic-art-listings/mister-miracle-issue-7...

kctobyjoe's picture
Posted by: kctobyjoe | May 11, 2013

info

I understand fully; I need to run around this site/discussion area and see whats what; in reality I have NOT spent a lot of time here and am unfamiliar with all the rules...SRY

Thank you!

Krackles's picture
Posted by: Krackles | May 12, 2013

Power to the King!

A pride composition by Kirby but somewhat upset by the flooding copy at the top.
Another bright note: late during his run as inker on the Fantastic Four, Sinnott tried to follow Kirby's pencils more faithfully. Ever the slick one but without as much redrawing and it shows!

ken bastard's picture
Posted by: ken bastard | May 13, 2013

Mr. Sinnott

I wonder what brought on the change in Joe's approach to inking Kirby's work?

patrick ford's picture
Posted by: patrick ford | May 14, 2013

Over Powered

Ken, Here is where Sinnott commented.
http://twomorrows.com/kirby/articles/09sinnott.html

Joe Sinnott: Stan told me anytime I wanted to take any liberties with Jack's work, to do it. Originally, I thought I was "fixing" his ears, or making his women a little prettier, or a little leaner in the hips. But I realized later, that was Jack's style, I shouldn't be doing it. Even when Jack's eyes weren't on the same plane, this was Kirby. So I reverted back, but probably not soon enough. Instead of drawing my Alex Raymond ears, I'd draw Kirby ears. But there were things that I really did spruce up, like Reed's hair for example. I really got in there and made it nice, fine, wavy hair. Jack was a little heavier on his pencils. I used a little more finesse than Jack used in his pencils. I fine-tuned him, so to speak. Everything was there certainly; I just made it a little slicker.

I agree with Sinnott that he should not have been altering Kirby's artwork. As pointed out by Sinnott the alterations were by far the most evident in the faces. This was really unfortunate because I feel facial expressions were one of Kirby's strongest suits as an artist, and all that was obscured by Sinnott's inking.
Sinnott's change of heart must have been pretty fleeting, because on those occasions where in inked Kirby in the '70s Joe's inking was very heavy handed.

There are a number of interesting comments in the interview. I find it interesting that Sinnott's opinion of Wally Wood's inks on Kirby are essentially the same way I feel about Sinnott's inks on Kirby. Very slick, very skillful, perfect control. but in the end as overpowering as Murphy Anderson or Wood.

Joe Sinnott: Certainly, Wally Wood was a great inker, and a great artist. But I think he overpowered Jack too much; it came out looking too much like Wally Wood. It looked great, but it wasn't Jack Kirby.

KingK's picture
Posted by: KingK | May 18, 2013

Just noticed something I've completely missed!!

I just realized that, seeing this cover in its original, uncoloured form, the shadows on the wall to the rear right of Reed Richards, are of Dr Doom and one of his stooges!! How did I never see that?? I had another revelation like this with a Marshall Rogers Detective cover featuring the Penguin! Funny how you can look at something hundreds of times and miss an otherwise obvious detail! Love this scan!

Frank Fosco's picture
Posted by: Frank Fosco | May 19, 2013

re:Just noticed something I've completely missed!!

That's just suppose to be Doctor Doom. Looks like to me what you think is a stooge is Doom doing his Bela Lugosi/Dracula impression--raising his arm with his cloak draped on it in front of his face. It's awkwardly executed and I'm thinking someone in production worked on it and tried to make it happen around the word blurb. Not very well done but it kind of gets the effect across. Would like to see the pencils to this if there is any.

Krackles's picture
Posted by: Krackles | May 19, 2013

No Harm Done, Don't Raise Arms!

Frank, I don't get where you see a raised arm?
I only see a Doctor Doom's shadow with hood and cape.

Like you explained, it looks like the production department probably tried to make room for the copy at the top by lowering the upper part of Doom's shadow (cape's side and hood). Not particularly successful but still doing the job.

patrick ford's picture
Posted by: patrick ford | May 19, 2013

White out

Someone in production clearly carved the Dr. Doom shadow out using white-out.

Frank Fosco's picture
Posted by: Frank Fosco | May 19, 2013

re:No Harm Done, Don't Raise Arms!

What KingK took for the head of a stooge to the left next to Doom's hooded head is what I say is his arm raised with the cloak/cape draped over it done in foreshortening. Jack probably didn't draw it that way. Someone in production botched it up and it may be the shoulder part of the cape which is goofy looking in itself. But no need to split hairs over it--it's an awkward looking shadow and if Doom's cape were done right we would not see the shadow of the legs and the cape would extend onto the floor towards the dead Hauptmann.

Frank Fosco's picture
Posted by: Frank Fosco | May 19, 2013

The SHADOW of DOOM!

"...if Doom's cape were done right we would not see the shadow of the legs and the cape would extend onto the floor towards the dead Hauptmann".

At times I have messed with Jack's work which I really hate doing--but in this case I think it's some production guy so I don't have such reservations messing with what they did.

Here's what I'm talking about.
http://www.whatifkirby.com/FantasticFour_87_cover_DOOM.jpg

Thanks for the link, Tom.

Frank Fosco's picture
Posted by: Frank Fosco | June 8, 2013

At 1190

Hey, Tom--we gonna make it to 1200?--that's only 10 away. Whadda say? Put up one a week and we can get there in 10 weeks.

John S.'s picture
Posted by: John S. | June 8, 2013

That's a good idea

Or put up two a week and we can make it in 5!

Krackles's picture
Posted by: Krackles | June 8, 2013

Sorry Sore Eye

Hey guys, don't put too much pressure on Tom's shoulders.
He is probably licking his wounds after scanning a bunch of Colletta's Drippink!

patrick ford's picture
Posted by: patrick ford | June 10, 2013

Let Me Try

Frank, John, Krackles, Look Tom is really busy. Now sure you know that, and like you I'd like to see some pages added, but your approach is all wrong guys. Let me try something.
http://d1xcqlxj49e9dd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/keane001.jpg?bdeedc

Frank Fosco's picture
Posted by: Frank Fosco | June 10, 2013

re: Let Me Try

Ha!--classic!

And I thought that was only done with those kitty cat pictures.

That gives posting a whole new meaning. Get it?--the kid is clinging to a post. If I gotta explain it it's not funny.

http://d1xcqlxj49e9dd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/keane001.jpg?bdeedc

Tom Kraft's picture
Posted by: Tom Kraft | June 10, 2013

re: Let Me Try

I guess this is what happens when I don't post anything new.

I hope to start posting again soon. I've had a lot on my plate doing home renovations for the past 3 weekends and I was in California before then scanning art. Next weekend I'm off to the Albany NY con to scan a collectors collection then to Hoboken NJ with Rand to scan more pencil photocopies and hopefully more art from a collector. And there we have to plan for The digital archive site and what the museum will do at the big show in San Diego next month. All good but it leaves little downtime to post art right now.

patrick ford's picture
Posted by: patrick ford | June 10, 2013

Four Armed Terror

Two men moving a mountain, or a museum anyhow.

kctobyjoe's picture
Posted by: kctobyjoe | June 10, 2013

Scanning- a bit off topic???

Is there some NATIONAL chain (OMAX; etc) that does digital scanning...other than Wal-Mart but they do it for PICTURES; MUGS; etc

I have MAYBE 1/2 dozen pix I could contribute to the cause but some are BEYOND my scanners size and I HAVE NO EXPERIENCE or software like Photoshop to 'join' them. I might hose them up anyway

SRY if off topic

kctobyjoe

Lets have it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Frank Fosco's picture
Posted by: Frank Fosco | June 10, 2013

re: re: Let Me Try

No problem, Tom. Just busting your chops--I know you're a busy fellow. I'm sure it'll be awesome and well worth the wait when the digital archive site is up and running. I'll try to be more patient and stop jonesing for some Kirby art.

Frank Fosco's picture
Posted by: Frank Fosco | June 10, 2013

Kirby by Patrick Ford?

Patrick--with your expertise and knowledge and research of history--if you ever do a book about Jack Kirby you have to let me do the cover. I'm sure I can come up with something better than the "Hand of Fire" cover.

Just the comments and essays on this site by you could almost make a book. I really enjoy what you have to say and your insight with all things Kirby. When I see your name here posting something or at "Kirby Dynamics" I take notice that something good and informative is about to be said. Thank you.

patrick ford's picture
Posted by: patrick ford | June 11, 2013

Gods And Monsters; Our Suits of Skin

Frank Fosco's picture
Posted by: Frank Fosco | June 11, 2013

The good Doctor

Drdroom aint no slouch either.

Glad to have you aboard on this site also.

drdroom's picture
Posted by: drdroom | June 11, 2013

Kind of you to say...

--I'm working on a book to refute Patrick's book.

patrick ford's picture
Posted by: patrick ford | June 11, 2013

Why would you want to take

Why would you want to take the time to deny the obvious. There is nothing exceptional about even an ordinary person having thoughts and ideas. This industry wide prejudice to depict Kirby as an moron is sad and pathetic.
Kirby was not an idiot.

drdroom's picture
Posted by: drdroom | June 11, 2013

I was just kidding P.F.

...I'm more in agreement with you than not. I'll return to our discussion of Kirby's writing soon. Actually, why don't you copy your suits-of-skin comment above into that thread? It's very good.

patrick ford's picture
Posted by: patrick ford | June 11, 2013

I get that you're kidding

I'll move it.

kctobyjoe's picture
Posted by: kctobyjoe | June 11, 2013

Jack

JACK was the BEST and I do not care what anyone says about him; my opinion will never change
I actually will be PO'd at them but what can *I* do?
I read mostly Kirby stuff all my life; OMG if I could only draw a 10th as good as him!!!
HIS (JACK) is what I collect the most; even tho some of Herb Trimpe's and Rick 'Swash' Bucklers in the 70s and 80s are what I also liked style-wise.

kc

Frank Fosco's picture
Posted by: Frank Fosco | June 11, 2013

re:Gods And Monsters; Our Suits of Skin

How ironic and appropriate that this posting you put up Patrick is in line with this Fantastic Four 87 cover. Suits of skin--even if it's a suit of armor skin. The man trying to hide the scarred monster while wearing the skin of a monster.

patrick ford's picture
Posted by: patrick ford | June 11, 2013

It's everywhere

It's all through his work. I barely touched on Machine Man, didn't get into the Demon at all. It's a common theme in art. Tezuka's books for kids and adults are constantly looking at the same themes Kirby explores. As books written for children the ASTRO BOY books are on the same level as Kirby's material. You have a fun, imaginative adventure story with a subtext which kids and adults might find thought provoking.

Comment viewing options