General Category > Artist Spotting
Art Spotting in general
narfstar:
I only got a small fraction of art spotter gene. A few will jump out but not a lot. I think that looking at large samples of a few particular artists at a time may be a way to get good at spotting those artists. Once you get one done really well maybe move on to another. Sometimes the "I have seen that scene before" will hit me. The problem is remembering where it was seen before.
bchat:
--- Quote from: JVJ on December 08, 2011, 02:40:02 PM ---I guess I don't understand the benefit of someone studying, say, the work of Gene Colan to learn how to identify it. After all these years, how many undiscovered Gene Colan stories are there? So, yes, you could assemble scads of Colan samples and hope that someone would study them and learn what makes a Colan story. And then what?
--- End quote ---
As I see it, an "Artist Identification File" would be a teaching tool, showing the techniques and general approach a certain artist took while generating images/pages. Someone who wants to learn how to "art spot" needs a starting point, something that's already been identified that they can look at and, with a little effort, understand what other people are looking at when trying to determine who drew an uncredited story.
It's not about identifying "undiscovered stories" from any specific artist, it is about teaching people the ways they can go about identifying an uncredited story. An "Artist Identification File" could also be used to show how any given artist developed over time. The artwork of John Giunta in 1941 looks different than his work in 1944-45, which is different than the work he did in 1950. Even in Fletcher Hanks' brief career, his style changed from his first story to his last.
--- Quote from: JVJ on December 08, 2011, 02:40:02 PM ---I will only say that I prefer to see a full story. Splash pages and covers are often atypical when it comes to style (and are easily copied). I need to see the mundane work, the average efforts, not those meant to impress. That's where the real artist comes out, in my mind. It's the general crowds or the secondary characters for me - the one's that don't have stylesheets that might make it difficult to tell when one artist replaces another. The characters that don't require thought are more indicative of style. Just as the way a panel is laid out and the characters positions in that panel is more indicative to me than the contrivance of a cover.
--- End quote ---
That's why I said that an "Artist Identification File" should include examples of "Splash pages, covers, page layouts, figure drawing, backgrounds and inking." I don't feel anyone needs an entire story to see how an artist lays-out their pages, and there's more than a few covers that are unsigned and may need identification. When I put "backgrounds" into my statement, I was specifically thinking of Fletcher Hanks. Every person "out there on the internet" who has blasted the guy, calling his work "so bad it's good" has only shown me that they focus solely on the figure drawing he did for his lead characters, and totally ignored the (in my opinion) wonderful backgrounds he would draw (mostly in his early work).
--- Quote from: JVJ on December 08, 2011, 02:40:02 PM ---My experience, and I can only speak for myself, is that if you've got the art spotter's gene then all you need to do is memorize the names of the different styles. If I wanted to teach you what Clem Weisbecker or Sam Glankoff or Barbara Hall looked like, yes, I could give you a bunch of scans with their names on them and, if you had the gene, that would be enough. The next time you saw a Glankoff story, you'd know it was him. If you didn't have the gene, you probably wouldn't know. Me, I have half of the gene. I look at a Glankoff story and say, "Yeah, I KNOW that guy. He worked at Parents doing True Comics." Then I go and look through my True Comics index cards that I did with Hames Ware and as soon as I see Glankoff's name, I know who it is. There's the memory component of the connection with Parents that leads me to the answer. Perhaps others can make the direct connection. I seldom can.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: JVJ on December 08, 2011, 02:40:02 PM ---Showing a bunch of samples of a bunch of artists certainly can help (and definitely can't hurt) those looking to develop the skill of identifying unsigned comic book stories. But I don't see it as how the next generation of spotters is going to emerge. I believe that once someone finds that they have the skill, they'll find someone who knows more than they do and apprentice themselves to him. Before that, they are likely to refer to GCD to see who they think the artist might be, adding that name/style to their repertoire. Again, that is my experience. You either have it or you don't. You can learn more names but the "HOW" is in the genes. I would LOVE to be proved wrong.
--- End quote ---
I don't agree that "art spotting" is a special skill that only a select few have. Anyone can learn how to do it as long as they have the patience & motivation to learn how. Having something along the lines of an "Artist Identification File" (or a blog or other site that teaches how to do this) can only make it easier for them to learn how to go about it and what to look for.
I agree that quite a bit of memory is involved, but if someone has the desire to learn and is properly motivated, then they can learn how to identify (or least voice their opinion on) an uncredited story. If a person can tell the difference between a circle and a square, then they can learn, over time, how to tell the difference between one artist and another.
JVJ (RIP):
--- Quote from: darkmark on December 09, 2011, 09:05:17 AM ---I'm learning a *little* (and that word can't be emphasized enough) about identifying some GA writers from associating with Martin O'Hearn. Unfortunately, I've got a long ways to go, but I have learned some writers' traits enough to be able to credit them with a "?" in the GCD, and that's a start.
--- End quote ---
I am completely in AWE of anyone who can figure out who WROTE these things. Keep it up, DM.
(|:{>
JVJ (RIP):
--- Quote from: bchat on December 09, 2011, 11:11:23 AM ---I agree that quite a bit of memory is involved, but if someone has the desire to learn and is properly motivated, then they can learn how to identify (or least voice their opinion on) an uncredited story. If a person can tell the difference between a circle and a square, then they can learn, over time, how to tell the difference between one artist and another.
--- End quote ---
I would LOVE for you to be right, bchat. I rarely see any evidence of it. When I met Tilliban, he was already extrapolating the few Ace artists I'd identified for him into naming or trying to name the artists on other books. After a few hours it became evident that he didn't need me for anything except putting a name to a style. So there's the exception that proves the rule. Keep it up, Tillman!
I've been doing that for decades for all kinds of people in all kinds of venues, but I've yet to have someone tell me that my IDing, say, Warren Kremer on an Ace book has led to a mass of entries on GCD for other Kremer work in other issues or titles. It SHOULD! Studying a story by Kremer SHOULD lead to understanding his style (at least at that time) and to more attributions - IF you're right.
Go for the art files. I'd call them Art Sample Files, rather than Identification files, but that's a minor quibble of a preference. My goal would be to have people learn more and to add more positive IDs to the GCD. I truly hope that happens.
A question for anyone here who has info on what is going on behind the scenes at GCD: How many people are updating the artist IDs on pre-1960 comics? That would at least give us a base point from which we can gauge the impact of our experiment.
Peace, Jim (|:{>
Yoc:
Congrats to Tilliaban on being such a quick study!
Yes, I hope someone on the GCD staff lets them know we would welcome any artspotters to join us here.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version