I remember as a kid finally getting a copy of “How to Draw Comics the Marvel Way” and having my tiny mind blown at how amazing the pencils looked compared to final Marvel books.
How to Draw Comics the Marvel Way was by Stan Lee and John Buscema. Most of the artwork in that book was Buscema's but some other artists' work was used as examples including Kirby's. Don't remember any of Ditko's work in there.
@@fredtherndmrtpstr5052 the full documentary (idk if that would be the right word for it) is on UA-cam as well and him and Stan Lee go over most, if not all, of the steps
@Crimson i'd assume its because back then letters took a long time to send and receive and correcting spelling and punctuation letters will be real tricky.
By the early 80s, George Perez famously refused to let Colletta touch his work. He went on record, calling Vinnie a "great equalizer". He lifts or brings down every artist to his level, no matter the penciller, it all ended up looking like Colletta.
Could you imagine 80s Teen Titans inked in this style. It would be awful. Thank God he stood up to editorial and got people like Romeo Tanghal to do his inks.
man, seeing some of the King's characters just chopped off in those panels was infuriating. Imagine the effect that Coletta would cause in the art of someone who is known for putting many super detailed characters on paper
@@nilus2k Perez didn't like Tanghal's inks at first, but Tanghal was able to change to fit George's requirements - and it was great for both men's careers! Neither's work ever looked better than working together at their prime!
What I got from this: - Vince Colletta was a nice, charming guy who got along with all his coworkers and no one who knew him personally had a bad word to say about him. - Vince Colletta always met his deadlines. - Vince Colletta was the only guy you could turn to and rely on to get your work to print when the penciller turned the pages in on Friday and you needed it done by Monday. - Vince Colletta took the business side of comics seriously. -Vince Colletta’s speed helped keep the lights on, kept a lot of series from losing money and being canceled, and helped to keep those artists employed. - Vince Colletta stuck up for his friends even if it cost him his job. - Vince Colletta was NOT a great inker. The bastard! _________________ Edit: Having seen the responses to this comment (both agreeing and respectfully disagreeing), I’ll end with this final thought. Isn’t it ironic that Colletta was the only one to stand up for Jim Shooter? Jim Shooter is the complete opposite of Colletta. Shooter is respected and despised for the inverse reasons; he is respected for elevating the art and despised for his strong, strict personality that rubbed people the wrong way and for his intolerance toward flaky artists. Maybe Colletta saw his own failings and respected Shooter for possessing all those qualities he lacked. In any case, none of those people who criticized Colletta (again, they had good reasons to) quit in protest over seeing Shooter - who embodied the attitude toward comices they wish Colletta had - fired. Because Colletta recognized what was good for comics. And because Colletta stuck by his friends when no one else would.
His actions definitely werent all bad, but at the end of the day his actions ruined a lot of work from other artists who put in much more talent and effort in. I highly doubt he was using the maximum amount of effort when doing these rush jobs. Its easy to meet all deadlines when you say fuck it halfway through.
I mean, I get that some artwork was rushed completely ruined, but you don't always find friends that stuck with you at bad times, and that also write fantastic angry letters while doing so, so good for him, really.
Heavy Metal Collector “blowing smoke up your ass”. That’s the OPPOSITE of what a good colleague or nice guy does. That is an attack on someone’s character. But that’s neither here nor there. The guy was a hack. Ultimately the question comes down to: why is this even a story? 90% of comics creators are hacks. The difference is Colletta was good at being a hack. That’s an admirable talent, to be honest, and I totally understand why he worked so long. My post wasn’t defensive. It was the actual impression I got from the video.
There's no way this guy wasn't expendable. If other artists could do Jack's art justice while making deadlines, there was surely another hungry kid out there with enough drive to do the same.
@Lassi Kinnunen people still use that system in offset printing, the thing with mass produced comics is that you have to make the CTP for print and that manual process of separating each color takes some time. Nowadays it's really simple thanks to digital
@@chiyo-chanholocaust8143 Honestly, him erasing characters and details just tells me that he wasn't good at his job which was to ink what the artist drew. He wasn't hired to make editorial decisions.
@MemphoWrasslin1 They got the work when there was plenty of time to do it. Coletta got the work when the pencil artist ran behind schedule but the comic still needed to get to print in two days.
Honestly, it probably would have been worthwhile to put him on a rapid-release lower detail series. Hopefully he had luck finding other employment after that or had enough savings to last.
As a fairly mediocre artist who has gotten a lot of work because I'm quick, I sure hope nobody ever makes a video critiquing the stuff I've drawn when rushing to a tight deadline.
Meeting tight deadlines and navigating the impossible epectations set by employers is an artform in and of itself. We wanna romantacize all art but at the end of the day, sometimes ya just gotta do what puts food on the table.
In Vince’s defense, printing technology at the time wasn’t that advanced either and they were printing on the cheapest paper they could. The more simple the inking, the better it would reproduce. Same reason they had to change the hulk from grey to green: because they couldn’t print grey reliably.
Are you sure about the Hulk? I'd always been under the impression the gray hulk was the result of a printing error; he was always intended to be green.
@MemphoWrasslin1 Inkers are a mixed bag. Some inkers compliment an artists work others detract from it. And an inker that compliments one artist might detract from a different artist - because artists themselves are a mixed bag. Some artists hand in pencils that are very detailed (the inker just needs to not mess it up, for the most part) while others hand in pencils that are very vague and sketchy (the inker often needs to "fill in the gaps"). When you got an aritst and an inker that compliment each other well, you've got comics gold. When you don't, it can be a train wreck. most of the time it's somewhere in between.
Honestly, he doesn't really seem like a bad guy, nor that much a bad artist. He was just always given last-minute assignments that he had no choice but to rush through since he knew how to simplify them down to what was needed. Things like simplifying backgrounds or removing a figure or whatnot are industry standard when considering both how much time you got and what tools you're working with. You can't make a magnum opus every single month and there are limitations to be made when on a quota like that. Better inkers are out there, sure, but I don't really see him as "ruining" it, he seems to simply reflect the industry and expectations at the time
@@jimbendtsen8841 Take it up with the artists. If they wanted all their work to look like a magnum opus, then they should have got it done on time instead of handing it up at the last minute and blaming the person who had to rush their work out to print
Colleta seemed very immature than disloyal he probs didnt understand the beef with Marvel and Jack and was like im sure if i showed them his work we could be friends again and when jack got angry and spoke to Vince he was initially gonna be like you betrayed me and then sees this guys pure obliviousness
I suspect that because he was fast he was given a lot of short deadline work. By using 'cheats' to always meet the deadlines the overall look of the work clearly suffered, but the books were on the stands on time, which made the editors happy. In the end comics are a business, late books, let alone year late books were not a thing in the 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's (I'm looking at you Doomsday Clock, wipe that smirk off your face Planetary)
Same. It’s literally exactly what came into my head I sometimes wonder if the advice is a lil dated, and perhaps they expect more from freelancers these days
I think Dave McKeen was technically fired for a short period cause he couldn't meet the deadlines for the Sandman covers, but then he bounced back quickly and delivered a bunch of covers all at once.
When you consider how badly almost all of the artists and writers were treated by the industry and you look at how well Colletta provided for his family, he was right: comics at the time were commerce, not art. We rightly revere Kirby and his brethren, but they did not get a seat at the table when money was apportioned. Vince had a grand house and provided well for his wife and family. I certainly agree that he hurt Kirby's art, but my dislike of his work is lessened by my hatred for comics publishers. It was a sleazy business and I'm not sure how much better it is now.
@@deathdoom8 How does that make it worse.. exactly? The censorship is still not as bad as it was in the 20th century... either equal or better on that front. If it truly is ideology over profit, then at the very least, it doesn't get in the way of the fidelity etc.... not to mention, pushing ideology isn't only happening when it's an ideology you don't agree with... so, rather than say, that it's ideology over profit, it's more accurate to say: It's different ideology than before. (also, profit still rules)
@@cyryl3827 because they'll "cancel" someone out of the industry for not following their extremely dogmatic ideology, which also clearly leaks into their works
"Generic" is the best word I can think of to describe Colletta's work. Even as a kid in the 1970s I could tell his ink work from others, no matter who the penciller was. It had this bland sameness to it. It wasn't bad, it wasn't great, but it got the job done. Now, showing Kirby's New Gods art to people at Marvel .... no matter how well liked, I'm surprised he worked at DC much after that.
If you could tell his ink from others, even as a child, it obviously wasn't generic. You can call it uniquely trash, but it was absolutely not generic.
@@blackeesh463 I actually liked it. Colletta came from romance titles and it made Kirby stuff more "romantic". His characters esp. were more beautiful.
A lot of the people at DC resented Kirby and didn't want him there. They fucked with him a lot in all sorts of ways, including cancelling his Fourth World titles that were still selling and reviving them a few years later with other creators. Half of them were probably supportive of anything that messed with Jack. Above the creative level comics then and now was filled with petty, almost criminal scumbags.
Stan Lee, Marvel’s former Editor in Chief and Colletta’s former boss: - “Just mention the name Vinnie Colletta and the first thing that comes to mind is his gorgeous portrayal of beautiful females in his artwork. When I first met Vinnie and he showed me his art samples I was overwhelmed. I had never seen anyone depict beautiful women in romance stories as dramatically or as glamorously. Years later, when the trend turned to superhero stories, Vince showed his amazing versatility by becoming a terrific inker of many of our main characters, with the countless issues he inked of Thor being his most memorable. Not only was Vincent Colletta extremely talented, but he was also one of our most dependable artists. If ever another artist became ill and couldn’t meet his deadline, I can’t remember the number of times I’d give the assignment to Vinnie who would work through the night and inevitably deliver the work on time. Indeed, Vincent Colletta was a fine artist, a valued co-worker and a dear friend whose work will be long remembered.”
Say what you will about Colette, but his art sucked. That being said, he got the deadlines. That's such an incredibly important factor and people love to just gloss over it because 'it ruined the art'. Obviously it did, but not without good reason. Getting that deadline isn't like missing an assignment in school where you get told off and a bad grade. It means money, hours and effort spent without getting any returns. Coletta made sure that didn't happen, which wasn't just good for his paycheck, it was good for everyone. Including the consumers. Coletta was a product of a business model, who still tried his hardest. The fact he was willing to commit career-suicide by that letter shows he must've been a loyal man with serious principles. I personally think that's a thousand times more important than the art.
Give me a black marker and zero fucks to give and I'd still do a better job. It's easy to meet deadlines when you're rush-jobbing and blacking every single detail out.
His romance art from the 50's is good. He's not the only artist from the 50's pre-Marvel era of american comics who didn't reeally cut in the post-EC world
@@VileVamp That's why he was hired to do the job. Getting it done on time was the companies priority so they weren't hiring for talent but for speed. Comics were considered disposable. That was the reality.
Lesson here is he was a decent inker, but knew his limitations which is why he preferred romance comics. Too bad he couldn't have found non superhero titles to work on that weren't so demanding with all the detail.
@@princenamor1939 Yeah, I watched the entire video, thanks for your concern. I didn't say he was great. He got a passing grade for comics with minimal detail. He had to take too many short cuts on nearly anything else. And that's all I was saying...he should have stayed in his lane. I think he bit off more than he could chew with taking the superhero title assignments.
He sounds like a very principled man with a strong work ethic. Let’s not forget how appalling Marvel used to be with missing deadlines in the 70s and early 80s.
Not sure who said it, but being asked who are his favourite inkers are an artist claimed Vince to be his second favourite inker. Being asked who his number one would be he said all others. :)
Regarding the Vince Colletta letter. The major artists at Marvel wouldn't let Colletta near their art any more but Jim Shooter insisted that the editors give him work, so Colletta was regularly assigned to ink the new artists who'd begun working at Marvel, like Bret Blevins. Bret hated Colletta's inking so much that he had to prove to Marvel that he could ink his own work much better than Colletta could before they'd let him do it. But Shooter still insisted that they give Colletta work. But when Shooter was fired the editors stopped returning Colletta's phone calls and his work at Marvel suddenly dried up. That's when he wrote the letter which the editors found hilarious and they shared it with everyone.
This has to be at least the 1,000th time that Jim Van Hise has mentioned this supposed Vince Colletta-Bret Blevins tale LOL....give it a rest already Jimbo
@@KyuuStarr Helpful means providing something that enlightens us. While it's true that some people are reading James Van Hise's comment for the first time, many of us have read it and read it, etc...I asked for Bret Blevins take on this but never received a response. I'm glad that people keep this epic subject of was Vinnie a hack or was he a hero alive. It has developed a life of its own, LOL. Artist Mike Netzer put it best: "Michael Netzer (Former Marvel and DC penciler): When looking at Vinnie’s work from outside of the context of being a comics penciler, it’s usually very proficient and has a special quality to it. The way he was judged was similar to how Michelangelo’s students would react to Van Gogh or Picasso. That’s probably why some people simply love his Thor run on Kirby while others despise it because they judge it based on Kirby’s pencils. Vinnie was a very helpful art director at DC. He always took time to engage artists about their work and help them approach it more professionally. For all that’s said about him, he was very suitable for that position and elevated the art craftsmanship at DC during his tenure. He was also a very nice guy who helped artists move ahead in their career. It was Vinnie who once suggested to me that I come up with a new female character because DC was looking for one - and that’s how the idea for Ms. Mystic was born. On the one hand, it’s unfortunate that an unflattering reputation stuck to him. On the other, this has spawned a new look at his work since his passing away, and has raised a strong voice of admiration and support for him in fandom. That’s certainly better than if no one cared about it one way or the other."
10:35 The thing about Vince Colletta's characters, they've got lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eyes. When it comes at you it doesn't seem to be livin'... until he bites you, and those black eyes roll over white.
One of the coolest lines of that movie. Quint's whole monologue on the sinking of the U.S.S. Indianapolis was amazing. Classic storytelling. Probably my favorite scene of that movie.
majooismajor But you can't expect high quality art when you don't give enough time for your employers to do their job. If all you care about is money in your industry then the state of how the work is done will reflect that. Plain and simple.
@@conker690 because jack Kirby was legend for that. He was insanely fast and good. He might have not been as good as kirby, but he apparently was insanely fast. Inking a whole comic book in 2 days???? that's fast.
This is a little dishonest and taken out of context When he says Colletta cared about being fast, he's mentioning how the most important thing to him was getting his paycheck, but when he says Jack Kirby "just moved on to the next issue" he was talking about how Kirby wouldn't look at the finished product and would continue on with new projects. Honestly not sure why these are being compared as they're two completely different instances
The part that fascinates me is how Kirby not only kept working with him but also started to play to Colletta's strengths, even to explore new ways of doing background in a way that would benefit his inking. What an amazing guy.
I've heard this said as a truism about comics work. The 3 most important qualities are: 1. Doing great work. 2. Hitting deadlines 3. Being easy to get along with. If you have 2 out of 3, you'll never have trouble getting work.
Honestly I think your overplaying the simple fact that someone has to make the deadlines. If Jack Kirby's work is running late then someone has to keep it on schedule or there is no book. So I'm not going to judge him too harshly for being the fall guy for the good of getting work out in time
Yeah, if someone had just allocated things a little different then it could have worked a lot better. Treat the inkers like color: allocate a few "high end" pages in an issue (let's say first & last, maybe one or two more for the average book), and have both the covers (to reduce the severity of mis-aligned color) and the rest of the pages be lower-detail for the sake of inking speed.
Colletta had balls to write such a letter. It was too much and too graphic but at the same time you don't see people defending others like that too often. Very italian of him. And that's also a reminder of how "old school" business was much more human and had values, vs 1985 and even worse today.
That was very interesting, I had no idea Colletta's inks actually looked good, on his own early artwork. I was a big Warlord/Mike Grell fan during the run of that book, and Colletta's inks on that used to really make me angry as a youngster, everything became so brittle and thin, no depth to anything. This was a real flash-back dude, thanks!
At first I hated Coletta's inks and for the most part still do however occasionally I'll see a piece he'd inked and be pleasantly surprised. After watching this I think that when he was working within his limitations he was quite capable. He was a commercial artist, as one myself I can tell you sometimes it is just about the paycheck and in the comics industry it really does seem to be about attrition. I don't blame him for stacking cash and getting the jobs done quickly but because of this I prefer practically every other Kirby inker over him.
Best inker in the business was Joe Sinnott, who made the art look like HD. Vince I always found his inking rough. I used to groan when I saw *"Inks by Vince Colletta."*
Are we talking eras or just inkers who worked with Kirby? I think Scott Williams and Klaus Janson are amongst my favorites who live in the shadows of their pencillers. Jim Lee and Frank Miller deserve their fame and recognition but they take a lot of shortcuts in their pencil work and omit a lot of detail. Williams and Janson brought finished their work and brought them to life.
@@MildMisanthropeMaybeMassive Probably eras. I grew up in the 70s and collected comics from the late 70s - 80s and Sinnott was still prolific then. He's my favourite but there are others I do respect. People like Tom Palmer, who used to ink John Buscema's work during their run on *"ThE AvEnGeRs."*
The reason Kirby loved Sinnott's inks on his work was because Sinnott added nothing and took away nothing. He essentially traced Kirby's pencils in ink and that was it. Of course this pleased Kirby immensely. Not saying that was bad or good. Just pointing out something obvious.
As someone who has done art for pleasure and for profit, deadlines=lower quality work. But this guy met his deadlines. End of story. I will defend that. And hell, its not even ruined in my opinion. Could be it be better? Yes. But is it shit? No. I have this annual gig where I get commissioned by a business to be their primary artist and creative director for a onsite artistic project. The first year I was given almost unlimited time, resources, and manpower. The team put together a fabulously planned mural, intricately detailed, fully coloured, with a write up for display about the piece & the meaning behind each choice. I had about 150 hours logged on this thing. Its probably the best painting I have ever done. The next year I was given 2 weeks besides my day job, had to provide my own materials, and had to wait a week to have the painting space set up (despite my insistence I could set it up, but no, “that would unsafe little lady!”) I cut so many corners to get it done. Dropped the colour palette, used a stencil rather than freehanding, if I made a mistake oops its there, and had to leave a lot of the space blank for a “minimalist” look. It looked good, but with only me? It was hard. This last year I got a full time day job. It was made non-negotiable between the business and my manager. I was not asked, rather TOLD, I would do the painting this year. So I was told to do the painting and my job in the same time, again minimal notice of the deadline.... so 40 hours a week to do a 40 hour, and 30-120 hour job? No OT? And my manager coming by to crack the whip as I try to paint??? I smashed a paintbrush into a bunch of acrylics, slapped it on, left a bunch of pencil lines, and left off the varnish to preserve it for years to come. If they try to force me again this year they can fuck right off. With Coletta he got paid for every ink job, but I didn’t get extra anything this last year. They want a set of comic pages within a weekend? They are gonna get a slapdash job. The guy can ink well! Just like I can paint well! But we all sacrifice quality to meet the deadline- bc capitalism does not appreciate art, it sells it.
I mean, I will say there were definitely times where even if we look at the idea of cutting corners to get it done quick, he cut the wrong corners. Like, he would have been better off cutting out more details in the background crowd to have time to make the guy who had fallen down in the center. But that said, yeah, like... He was asked to do the art quickly and cheaply. Like any freelancer will tell you, cheap-fast-good, pick two. They picked two. So if they didn't get high-quality work, blame them.
Supposedly he cut corners even when the deadlines weren't tight and he had all the time in the world to properly ink the pencils but he rushed them anyway.
The problem with allowing yourself to become a habitual hack of anything is you can't just turn it off at will. It becomes part of your working approach. You automatically shortcut. You're not even aware of it. You have to establish certain habits and insist on maintaining them. Otherwise, you're lost. At the extreme end opposite to a Colletta, you'd have an Alex Toth or a Harlan Ellison. Amazing, exacting, and utterly original people that were near-impossible to work with and hard even to talk to. But they would rather have walked than compromise, because their relationship with themselves required it. Somehow they made it all work, managed to make a living, while also making themselves routinely hated. However, they were okay with that. If anything, they came to savor it. Imagine living that way! But it's possibly worth it if your inner man or woman insists upon it. You have to make sacrifices for what you really care about. And if your stuff is good, it will live after you, with any luck. It will continue to matter, and be examined and reexamined and found to have real life in it, have something in it to learn from. That's a decent prize. Colletta wanted, above all, to be liked, to be the fast solution guy, to be the one the editors turned to. And yes, he got that... but nothing else. Jim Shooter appreciated him, but no one cares about that. Shooter just wanted the work out, like any other boss. Period. Colletta might as well have been a really hustlin' cab driver at the airport, going after all those fares. And his dispatcher loved him. I picture something like that as his big Silver Age legacy.
I like seeing someone here who actually gets the point about deadlines from lived experience. I'm also an artist but have never had a deadline for my work, but seeing the amount of people saying "give me a marker and I could do better deadline or not" is laughable. Deadlines suck, and as an artist you gotta do what you gotta do!
Same goes for me with my consultancy work. Give me the time and I will come into your place of business see all the processes you have in place review your existing policies and SOPS and research all of the machinery and chemicals you use and build you a bespoke safety management system for you company and help you to transition to it. If you only give me an afternoon to do it and I will have a quick chat with you to get gist of your work activities then put together a generic safety manual for your business that will cover your bases if the safety inspector drops in.
The one I remember bothering me in the 70's was that Colletta was often paired with George Tuska . As a kid I thought I didn't like Tuska until I realized it was Colletta. Kinda ruined bronze age Ironman for me
Judging from, among other things, his fill in job on Marvel's Champions book, George Tuska wasn't a great match for superhero comics in general, though the Colletta inks didn't help any. Tuska is like Don Heck, a great journeyman whose work started to look dated compared to up and comers like Perez, Byrne and even Sal Buscema.
@@Norvo82 I really liked George Tuska's Iron Man when Jack Abel inked him in the mid-'70s (as well as the early Johnny Craig-inked issues). Give me a Tuska Iron Man issue over Don Heck issue any day.
@@Norvo82 I always said Don Heck was a poor man's Jack Kirby. Plus, I like Sal Buscema's style. I got friends who don't rate him, but his run on *"The Incredible Hulk"* was fantastic.
I actually really appreciate the stories of artists who are just below the line of amazing. I'm never going to be the best cartoonist, but I love drawing and animating...and it's people who stick with it that give me some form of inspiration.
A new awesome episode, I'm learning so much with you and you have this superpower of making me open a comic book after every episode you download. Thanks a lot!
As a kid, I remember wondering why Jack's Thor artwork looked like pencil sketches next to his bold Fantastic Four work. I didn't understand the role and importance of an inker like a Joe Sinnott until many years later.
When I was a boy in the '60s, I loved Colletta's work on Thor. That book (especially the scenes set in Asgard) seemed to demand a style reminiscent of 19th century illustration. Colletta was the only person in comics who routinely used dip pens with crowquill nibs -- the preferred approach of those illustrators of yore, most of whom would never have considered inking with a brush. I loved the scritchy-scratchy crowquill lines Colletta used to model Kirby's figures. I suspect that Kirby liked the look as well, hence his loyalty to Colletta after the move to DC. The allegation that Kirby NEVER saw the finished product simply is not believable. Moreover, I don't buy the suggestion that inking with a brush is more time-consuming than inking with a dip pen. Having tried my hand at both, I think the pen-and-ink approach takes a bit longer. Nib pens are more terrifying because you're more likely to get an unwanted SPLOTCH on your page. That said: Over other artists' pages, Colletta's dip-pen approach did not work. His work became downright irritating in the 1970s. The pen works best when you use it to indicate light and shadow through careful, tedious hatching, and Colletta stopped doing anything of that sort. Maybe you just can't do that kind of inking in comics. When the majority of lines are contour lines, the dip pen can seem mechanical and lacking in character, while the brush offers greater liveliness and suppleness. At any rate, as I grew older, I sided with those who greatly prefer to see Kirby inked with a brush. I'd like to see a video on Alfredo Alcala. He was the closest thing to Franklin Booth that comics ever produced -- yet, unlike Booth, Alcala did NOT use pen and ink, as I once presumed he did. He created his own fountain pen with a brush head. (He worked fast and didn't like to pause to dip his brush.) Nowadays, you can buy brush pens of that sort -- the Japanese make 'em -- but I've never been able to get the consistent fine lines that Alcala got. I'd love to know how he made those tools!
Damn that was interesting. The strangest part of all for me was Colletta own artwork was so accomplished, its strange that he abandoned it so early without so much as a backward glance.
So here's what I understand: Vince Coletta was a charming, nice guy who got his art done quick and cheap when deadlines were only a few days away, understood the business of comics, and stood up for his friends, even when it cost him his job. And he also kinda screwed up some art. What a fool!
He definitely had his ups and downs, his work on Thor, while yes he did tamper with Kirby’s work, it had a simplicity to it that really fit the style of the book. I was always a huge fan of that initial Thor run and its art. His work on Wonder Woman and elsewhere at DC was fantastic as well. But Fantastic Four and New Gods almost got ruined by his shortcuts. Does he compare to Sinnott? No, but along the same lines that’s like comparing Greg Capullo to Jim Lee, one is an icon and a master, but the other isn’t without merit. I equal parts respect Coletta and dislike him. Comics were a cutthroat industry back then and meeting his deadlines like he did was an invaluable tool, even if he did take many liberties that earned the ire of his contemporaries.
I collected British marvel reprints in the seventies. Every time I saw the name Vince Coletta a deep sigh crawled out. Without the colour some of his work is woeful.
It was extremely painful for me to see the inking of Vince on the Fantastic Four. It was butchery, but I also understand the situation. Comic artists were paid horribly at the time. Kirby was treated badly by Archie Goodman and to this day -- outside of the comic world, Kirby is not well known and doesn't even had a brick and mortar museum to display his art. That to me is the real crime.
Gotta be honest, this episode made me realize how good of an artist Jack Kirby was. I mean, if those originals were the main pages of the comic, he'd be one of my favourite comic-book artists of all time. And also how inkers can ruin or improve others work, which I've never questioned myself. Guess the writer and the penciler aren't the only ones that make a comic-book good or bad.
Personally, I always liked Colletta's inking of Kirby's art for Thor. For me, it gave Thor comics that classic old-world look, that reminded me of Prince Valiant. Totally agree, that Sinnott was the obvious choice to ink the Fantastic Four. Although less polished than Sinnott, I also enjoyed Chic Stone's inking of Kirby's art for the FF, X-Men and Captain America in the early years of Marvel.
About the same opinion of Colletta and I also would add Frank Giacoia and Syd Shores I am surprised nobody has mentioned Dick Ayers who also inked a lot of Kirby work
I actually always liked Vince Colletta's inking with Jack Kirby, particularly with Tales of Asgard. I loved his fine lines, which lent a lighter touch to the art.
He seems to be the un-sung hero of inking. I love creatives and art and creating things that push the boundaries. But it sounds like he was the guy who could scale things back enough to reasonably get those grand ideas onto shelves on time. Well by today’s standards it certainly is disheartening to see how much detail was removed, but I am sure the editors and chiefs always appreciated the fact that he would keep it more simplified and much easier to print.
Agreed. If you can't get a shipment to Safeway in time, does that mean that Marvel has to take a penalty? If a Marvel comic doesn't get to them in time, does this mean that shelf space can be given to a DC comic?
@matt fahringer *oh don't get me **_WRONG._** it's **_definitely a GARBAGE_** joke. but i'm giving **_TOTAL_** points to the boldness of such an obvious **_HACK OFFERING._*
This was an excellent episode - definitely got me to like and subscribe! Very fair - shocked to learn that Colletta actually ERASED Kirby pencils - but loved the letter at the end. This episode also made me respect Jack Kirby even more (which I didn't think was possible). Excellent work! Now looking forward to watching other episodes!
I know quite a few engineers, and more than one has said something like: Always use the right tool for the Job. The right tool can be substituted with a hammer in most cases. Any tool can be a hammer if you swing it hard enough.
As a young reader in th 70's I quickly learned the names of all of Marvel's creators thanks to the splash page credits. I also learned who's work I liked and didn't like. I never liked Coletta's work for the reasons you mentioned, especially when compared to other inkers like Sinnott.
I just discovered this channel today when this video appeared on my feed. I have to say that it is excellent and very entertaining. Thank you so much. You have earned a like and new subscriber.
Loved this! Regardless of how we feel about Colletta, you did a nice job of illustrating *cough* the collaborative process. And to be frank, I hadn't really thought about the inkers before. So thanks! I'm subscribing.
This just makes me respect Jack Kirby that much more. Didn't know that was possible. "Hey, did you know this guy's been sabotaging your work for a decade?" "Eh, keep him on." "He's literally bringing your work to the competition, which you left." "Eh, keep him on one book."
demigod dĕm′ē-gŏd″ noun A male being, often the offspring of a god and a mortal, who has some but not all of the powers of a god. An inferior deity; a minor god.
Looking forward to Jim Shooter's episode. I should note that while Vince's letter was certainly rude and disrespectful, the objective facts tend to support his view. As for Vince Colletta himself, we should probably keep in mind that he was doing a job and fulfilled its demands honestly enough. His was a time when people just did not expect any better than that.
Sean Howe's Marvrl Comics: The Untold Story is, to my mind, the best book on the history of Marvel, and the story it tells seems to be a lot more complicated. Shooter in no way comes out a hero.
@@yatz57 Right, because like most books it's based on accounts of people who Jim Shooter passed by. The problem with all these books is they're asking all the people who were wrong about things to describe the guy who was right. There is no way a bunch of people are ever going to give a fair account of their boss or the guy who told them they're writing wasn't up to snuff. Especially when that guy's job is to maintain continuity over multiple publications.
I really appreciate that you gave a fully nuanced explanation of the guy’s work instead of just trying to sensationalize it to make it easier to swallow. Great video!
You know, I'm in the small minority of 80's and 90s comic collectors who didn't worship at the temple of Jack Kirby. I appreciated his great storytelling and visual dynamics, but I never much cared for his blocky style of drawing. His style, while detailed, wasn't quite realistic enough for me, and I always felt his characters were drawn far too crudely (although the panels themselves were always exciting and dynamic). Now I see, however, that at least part of this reason his character style never appealed to me was actually the fault of the inkers. I'm sure I'd seen some of Vince's work with Jack and probably dismissed it right away.
Here as well, I just thought it was an instinctive preference for DC, but there was something about Kirby that kept me looking, nonetheless. This makes sense.
CG Vapors This is why bad inking is so bad. It changes original art and makes people see it as worse than it used to be. As an inker you have a duty to the artist to ink well and accurately. It’s _literally_ just tracing. I’m not saying it’s easy but if you’re gonna add or delete stuff, just be the damn artist. Don’t fuck up another person’s work.
I honestly think a lot of his art is too busy for just one panel on a page Like it's a lot of stuff and while "very detailed" is often sung highly self editing is also important There's a reason I don't like the look of cosmic stories of that era
@MemphoWrasslin1 Well, I see what you're saying but I don't think it's entirely true. There's nothing saying that only stylized or toony style artists make good stories. In fact, there are many cases where the artists did not actually come up with the stories or characters. I don't mind stylized art, but I do like more realistic art than what Kirby was doing. Seth McFarland is a good example of stylized but still realistically detailed.
Personally, my favorite regular Kirby inker was Mike Royer. In my early days of reading comics I enjoyed Kirby's Thor work, which was being inked by Colleta. It was not until I saw Kirby's pencils that I realized that a lot of Kirby's detailed pencils were being simplified. One thing to remember is that comics were not considered "art" or collectable at one time. I cringe when hear about warehouses of art being destroyed by Marvel, etc because it was taking up room. Yet that was the reality that Colleta worked in.... it was a business, not an art studio.
The first Kirby art I read was the exact episodes of Thor you showed in the intro. I hated it so much I avoided Kirby stuff for a very long time. Didn't understand how great his work was until much later when I started collecting older books. There are some amazing inkers. But they definitely can destroy things. Sienkewicz was hit by this a number of times, too.
Erik Larsen: (Former Marvel and DC penciler):Years later, I look back and get a kick out of it. It was the last issue of Thor that Vinnie Colletta ever inked and the last issue Stan Lee ever scripted, so it was like I was filling in for Jack Kirby as part of the classic Thor creative team. In retrospect, it really wasn’t as bad as I seemed to think it was. And it one case, what I took to be a shortcut on Vinnie’s part aided the storytelling. Vinnie had made an incidental foreground figure bald, which, in retrospect, eliminated a distraction that helped focus the readers attention on what it should have been focused on: the battle, which raged behind him. This foreground figure was unimportant - the battle was.
The way he colored said, this is my job and I'm going to get it done quickly. Artists wanted his colors to say, I respect the detail and time you put into this. I hope the colors enhance the artwork and make this world a vibrant feast for the readers eyes to enjoy.
What Vince Colletta was doing to great artwork like Kirby's detailed scenes was awful, but the alternative wasn't just editors being less happy. It was Marvel's Dreaded Deadline Doom, a common situation when, in the worst case, Marvel would cheat fans with the cover of a new comic but with a reprint inside it. Effectively stealing the lunch money of a fan base of young boys (who were buying comics unopened from newspaper stands) is a bad way to build brand image and loyalty. Also, we read these stories in blocks such as volumes of Essentials. There are no delays, we know we are going to get the whole story, and anyway we are adults. Back them, impatient boys would wait a month (per issue) to find if Doctor Doom had really killed Mister Fantastic this time -- with hit-and-miss delivery at the newspaper stands meaning that every issue a story stretched out increased the chances the fan would never get the ending. What if editors had said, "forget deadlines, this is art. Those seven to twelve year old boys will eat reprints, multi-month delays, and incomplete stories, and like it"? We might never have heard of comics as a popular art-form.
This video felt very fair to the man and I appreciate that! With an agenda, you could make the guy seem any way you want I feel (and it’d be exciting to view probably), so it’s nice to have a more down to Earth look. A proper level of respect to someones work even if the quality isn’t where people wish it was
I love his inks on the romance comics you showed. Iconic. On superhero comic, not so much - but I think he was a good choice for a romantic wedding issue.
I forwarded this video to someone I know who was an artist in the industry at the time. He told me he was hired by Colletta when Colletta was art director at DC so maybe he's biased, but he said that the problem with the video is that its not based on the realities of the industry at the time. He said that the single most important thing was beating deadlines and everything else was second. This is a quote: "Colletta was hired to ink a comic book over a weekend so as to not blow deadlines so he had permission to block out areas and erase details to get the work out . DC would be fined by the printer if a dead line was not met." I wasn't a big comic book fan myself, so don't know much about the history of the industry, but that's how the professionals saw it (as opposed to the fans who, of course, want to see the best art possible.)
If I was running a studio, I'd want some artists who obsess over fine stand-out work, but 100% I'd also want a couple Vinces around to fill gaps and get the bulk of the work _finished_ while the artístes agonize over their splash pages.
Im sorry, but i'm gonna guess that most people who watch this video have never worked on a project that requires drawing or any kind of art form. I work in animation and let me tell you if you fuck up the deadline then your entire carreer is fucked more than if you cut a few corners. I respect this guy for being able to consistently work on multiple inking projects without being delayed at all because it's honestly incredibly hard not only because of the little amount of time these projects give the artists, but also because inking is incredibly stressing to the mind and body (especially the arms and back). Yes there are people who can do it better, but that doesn't change that he is definitely good at his job. And yeah, to artists its a job, even if we love doing it we also do it because we need the money, and we will prioritize finishing the work over doing it perfectly because if we don't we won't get paid. Blame the capitalist system that pressures artists into ridiculous deadlines if you want to blame someone.
Coletta was fast. But Kirby was even faster. Kirby could pencil an entire book in less time than it took another artist to draw a single page. And the inking on Tales of Asgard he did is frankly lovely. Coletta's excusion of Kirby's detail is indeed horrendous, but the pressure that Lee & Marvel bullpen production mgr. Sol Brodsky put on artists to hit those deadlines (due in no small part to Kirby's astounding pace) left its mark on a lot of artists, & Coletta managed to keep his job despite F'ing up the work of one of comics' masters both at Marvel & later at DC on Kirby's 4th world oeuvre.
Hats off to Chris for cramming tons of info on the Coletta Crap Pile into a mere 20 min. without it seeming to be forced. I've said before that Coletta was okay in Tales Of As because he functioned as a scratchy TV court reporter like it was all really happening live (had TV been invented yet). This whole saga would make a great dark comedy film script. Sorry this comment isn't better constructed, but I'm a very charming guy.
That wasn't bad, just cutting corners. Bad is stuff like splotches that don't belong, excessive waviness, etc. Not gonna say he should have handled most of the work in major titles, but his work looks like it should have been appropriate for 90% of the pages in any one issue.
My god. That letter would of been the greatest Twitter call out post ever made. Both yeah all things consider, Coletta seems like a nice guy with good work ethics and an ability to meet corporate deadlines. The problem is largely that as an inker/artist he is lazy and his negligence ruin the impact for iconic panels in Kirby’s art had he put in the necessary time needed for certain details.
I was born in 61. Grew up with early Marvel. As a kid I found Kirby's art to be harsh and over stylized. I only really liked him when Colletta inked him and softened his pencils a touch. Yeah, I know my opinion will be ganged up on, but I don't care. Yes, I came to appreciate Kirby's work more later, but at the time that was my honest appraisal.
7:12 You know what, I actually think that change was for the better; it emphasizes the woman's place in the foreground, makes the guy in the back pop out more, and leaves Loki with a nice shadow to contrast from. Jack Kirby's penciling is obviously great, that missing guy does give some nice framing to lead the eye to Loki; but for the transition to ink I think the cut was a good one to make. A less rush-hungry inker might have kept that guy in and found a creative method to deal with him being between a sharp dark and bright area, but the cut seems to have been made with consideration. That's the only example in that sequence that I can defend tho, lol
I remember as a kid finally getting a copy of “How to Draw Comics the Marvel Way” and having my tiny mind blown at how amazing the pencils looked compared to final Marvel books.
How to Draw Comics the Marvel Way was by Stan Lee and John Buscema. Most of the artwork in that book was Buscema's but some other artists' work was used as examples including Kirby's. Don't remember any of Ditko's work in there.
@@gungadan3784 i don't think there was any Ditko in there. Romita? Maybe.
That book is good for beginners, totally recommend it
@@fredtherndmrtpstr5052 the full documentary (idk if that would be the right word for it) is on UA-cam as well and him and Stan Lee go over most, if not all, of the steps
@Miles Doyle nobody gives two shits we're here for MARVEL not bible
Coletta’s rage quit letter should be analyzed in high school AP English classes. Glorious
@Crimson i'd assume its because back then letters took a long time to send and receive and correcting spelling and punctuation letters will be real tricky.
@@mechamudskipper my guess is that it took too much time to get the letters around so there was no point in holding back
I would have loved reading that in AP
@Crimson It's because letters are usually not written off the cuff.
That was amazing.
He didn't fire him because he didn't want to take away another man's income.
Oh my god, the level of honor in this man 🥺
Yeah Jack Kirby was a honorable man, a great artist and the soul of marvel.
We all love stan but jack definitely deserved way more spotlight and fame
And that’s why Jack Kirby is the king!
He was actively giving fans that buy his comic books sub par art work just so his friend could get a paycheck. It's all about perspective.
@@ailbrown1000 I don’t believe he was in control of who inked his work
@@horacebond9394 He was on the DC books (New Gods etc) because he was also the editor.
By the early 80s, George Perez famously refused to let Colletta touch his work. He went on record, calling Vinnie a "great equalizer". He lifts or brings down every artist to his level, no matter the penciller, it all ended up looking like Colletta.
Could you imagine 80s Teen Titans inked in this style. It would be awful. Thank God he stood up to editorial and got people like Romeo Tanghal to do his inks.
"the great equalizer" isn't that what they called death in the middle ages?
@@TabbyeLynne Fitting, considering a Colletta ink job signified the death of individual artistic expression.
man, seeing some of the King's characters just chopped off in those panels was infuriating. Imagine the effect that Coletta would cause in the art of someone who is known for putting many super detailed characters on paper
@@nilus2k Perez didn't like Tanghal's inks at first, but Tanghal was able to change to fit George's requirements - and it was great for both men's careers! Neither's work ever looked better than working together at their prime!
What I got from this:
- Vince Colletta was a nice, charming guy who got along with all his coworkers and no one who knew him personally had a bad word to say about him.
- Vince Colletta always met his deadlines.
- Vince Colletta was the only guy you could turn to and rely on to get your work to print when the penciller turned the pages in on Friday and you needed it done by Monday.
- Vince Colletta took the business side of comics seriously.
-Vince Colletta’s speed helped keep the lights on, kept a lot of series from losing money and being canceled, and helped to keep those artists employed.
- Vince Colletta stuck up for his friends even if it cost him his job.
- Vince Colletta was NOT a great inker.
The bastard!
_________________
Edit: Having seen the responses to this comment (both agreeing and respectfully disagreeing), I’ll end with this final thought. Isn’t it ironic that Colletta was the only one to stand up for Jim Shooter? Jim Shooter is the complete opposite of Colletta. Shooter is respected and despised for the inverse reasons; he is respected for elevating the art and despised for his strong, strict personality that rubbed people the wrong way and for his intolerance toward flaky artists. Maybe Colletta saw his own failings and respected Shooter for possessing all those qualities he lacked. In any case, none of those people who criticized Colletta (again, they had good reasons to) quit in protest over seeing Shooter - who embodied the attitude toward comices they wish Colletta had - fired. Because Colletta recognized what was good for comics. And because Colletta stuck by his friends when no one else would.
WHAT AN EVIL MAN! I HATE HIM! OH MY GOD!
His actions definitely werent all bad, but at the end of the day his actions ruined a lot of work from other artists who put in much more talent and effort in. I highly doubt he was using the maximum amount of effort when doing these rush jobs. Its easy to meet all deadlines when you say fuck it halfway through.
I mean, I get that some artwork was rushed completely ruined, but you don't always find friends that stuck with you at bad times, and that also write fantastic angry letters while doing so, so good for him, really.
@@cibor07 You could definitely argue that his problems were caused by the industry and how cuthroat and utilitarian it was
Heavy Metal Collector “blowing smoke up your ass”. That’s the OPPOSITE of what a good colleague or nice guy does. That is an attack on someone’s character. But that’s neither here nor there. The guy was a hack. Ultimately the question comes down to: why is this even a story? 90% of comics creators are hacks. The difference is Colletta was good at being a hack. That’s an admirable talent, to be honest, and I totally understand why he worked so long. My post wasn’t defensive. It was the actual impression I got from the video.
He meeting his deadlines probably kept a lot of important issues from being cancelled
There's no way this guy wasn't expendable. If other artists could do Jack's art justice while making deadlines, there was surely another hungry kid out there with enough drive to do the same.
@Lassi Kinnunen people still use that system in offset printing, the thing with mass produced comics is that you have to make the CTP for print and that manual process of separating each color takes some time. Nowadays it's really simple thanks to digital
@Miles Doyle you need help. "A lot of people like to say he didn't exist, even though people that believed in him wrote about him"
F*ck that. How about both meet deadlines and NOT erase characters and details?
@@chiyo-chanholocaust8143 Honestly, him erasing characters and details just tells me that he wasn't good at his job which was to ink what the artist drew. He wasn't hired to make editorial decisions.
Too bad he didn't become a writer instead. That letter was epic!
I know, right?!
Vince, Co-Letter
@@TheEnderBand woah woah there, not the hard R
Oh gyro you should become a writer
Nyo ho~
It sounds like this guy was a product of the industry, and not really bad by himself.
@MemphoWrasslin1 They got the work when there was plenty of time to do it. Coletta got the work when the pencil artist ran behind schedule but the comic still needed to get to print in two days.
He had no respect for fellow artists' work
*He erased JACK KIRBY'S artwork*
@@strombreakr Because Kirby took too long! Vince is the guy who allowed Marvel to keep the lights on. Think about it from a business perspective
@@juansanchez209 Although that is true, I am a very strong headed person and this goes along with my morals. This goes against my morals.
He wasn't even bad, just not amazing. If this work is him rushing and cutting corners then he still had talent.
Honestly, it probably would have been worthwhile to put him on a rapid-release lower detail series. Hopefully he had luck finding other employment after that or had enough savings to last.
I think it was more his attitude towards the cutting corners rather than him just doing it
The stuff he pencilled in his early career shown in this video looked pretty good
You are a sick man, and I pity your total lack of taste.
exactly, his work is ok, nothing to write home about, but good enough if you dont care about detail
Seems Colleta missed his vocation. Should've been a writer, not an artist.
Not a visual artist.*
Everyone was a better writer back then
"They should've sent a POET!"
when you got the passion and the rage this man apparently had, anyone can be Shakespeare on the pen
Writing is harder than drawing*
Love that scathing letter Colletta wrote. Maybe he missed his calling. He was a writer in an inker's body.
I wouldn't call him an inker.
His body didnt fit.
@@freggittlegamint2830 Um, that's Rometiklan's point. That he is NOT a good inker.
@@Luka1180
Yeah, I was agreeing with a slight joke.
@@freggittlegamint2830 he literally was
As a fairly mediocre artist who has gotten a lot of work because I'm quick, I sure hope nobody ever makes a video critiquing the stuff I've drawn when rushing to a tight deadline.
Meeting tight deadlines and navigating the impossible epectations set by employers is an artform in and of itself. We wanna romantacize all art but at the end of the day, sometimes ya just gotta do what puts food on the table.
You'll get that. Like it or not.
speaking from experience, you'll get that, but if you explained in a polite matter, people actually appreciate it even more :)
Sounds like he was a bit of a menace at times to be fair.
@@dustinakadustin A WEBHEADED MENACE!!!
In Vince’s defense, printing technology at the time wasn’t that advanced either and they were printing on the cheapest paper they could. The more simple the inking, the better it would reproduce. Same reason they had to change the hulk from grey to green: because they couldn’t print grey reliably.
Are you sure about the Hulk? I'd always been under the impression the gray hulk was the result of a printing error; he was always intended to be green.
@@astrosteve : "Couldn't print grey reliably" _is_ a printing error. Moving to green instead is a _fix for_ the printing error.
Lassi Kinnunen because drawing and inking are different skills
@MemphoWrasslin1 Inkers are a mixed bag. Some inkers compliment an artists work others detract from it. And an inker that compliments one artist might detract from a different artist - because artists themselves are a mixed bag. Some artists hand in pencils that are very detailed (the inker just needs to not mess it up, for the most part) while others hand in pencils that are very vague and sketchy (the inker often needs to "fill in the gaps"). When you got an aritst and an inker that compliment each other well, you've got comics gold. When you don't, it can be a train wreck. most of the time it's somewhere in between.
Not to mention personal style. If you're good at drawing but can't replicate styles well, it will show@@greendream848
Honestly, he doesn't really seem like a bad guy, nor that much a bad artist. He was just always given last-minute assignments that he had no choice but to rush through since he knew how to simplify them down to what was needed. Things like simplifying backgrounds or removing a figure or whatnot are industry standard when considering both how much time you got and what tools you're working with. You can't make a magnum opus every single month and there are limitations to be made when on a quota like that. Better inkers are out there, sure, but I don't really see him as "ruining" it, he seems to simply reflect the industry and expectations at the time
Whatever. Excuses, excuses.
@@jimbendtsen8841You say "whatever," but a book that can't make deadlines is in jeopardy of being dropped. Deadlines aren't "suggestions."
@@jimbendtsen8841lol you don't know how much stressfull is to meet a deadline when they give you all the work to do last minute?
@@jimbendtsen8841 Take it up with the artists. If they wanted all their work to look like a magnum opus, then they should have got it done on time instead of handing it up at the last minute and blaming the person who had to rush their work out to print
@@jimbendtsen8841excuses are all you'd have instead of a finished comic, yeah. 😂
That letter to the Marvel editors was epic. Kudos to Coletta for sticking up for his friend, even if it unfortunatley cost him his career.
It's a wonderful letter.
"Colleta had loyalty."
Hey Marvel, want to see Jack Kirby's art?!
Colleta seemed very immature than disloyal he probs didnt understand the beef with Marvel and Jack and was like im sure if i showed them his work we could be friends again and when jack got angry and spoke to Vince he was initially gonna be like you betrayed me and then sees this guys pure obliviousness
Loyal, but to who?
That makes him loyal to Marvel
I'd like to see the art too, but I can't because some asshole scribbled over it with black marker.
Lol!
I suspect that because he was fast he was given a lot of short deadline work. By using 'cheats' to always meet the deadlines the overall look of the work clearly suffered, but the books were on the stands on time, which made the editors happy. In the end comics are a business, late books, let alone year late books were not a thing in the 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's (I'm looking at you Doomsday Clock, wipe that smirk off your face Planetary)
For real! I can't imagine the Doomsday Clock situation if it was an 80's book
@@lucianganea3034 They would have put another team on the book and hit the deadline with a hurriedly drawn and inked book...
@@lucianganea3034 I mean that was original Watchmen.
Yeah. I think some of this is slightly unfair. They were getting paid very little and needed to get work done quickly.
Agreed. Early 60s marvel was throwing down against DC and had to get issues out while their new creations were hot.
"Vince, we're runnin late!"
Vince: "COWABUNGA IT IS"
neil gaiman was right:
- a good attitude
- hits deadlines
- excellent output
and you only need at least 2.
I was just thinking that.
Same. It’s literally exactly what came into my head
I sometimes wonder if the advice is a lil dated, and perhaps they expect more from freelancers these days
What I’ve heard in my career of creating visuals is “You can have it cheap, you can have it fast, you can have it good - pick two.”
I think Dave McKeen was technically fired for a short period cause he couldn't meet the deadlines for the Sandman covers, but then he bounced back quickly and delivered a bunch of covers all at once.
Fast, good, cheap, pick 2 and thats what you get. And most wont pay for fast and good
When you consider how badly almost all of the artists and writers were treated by the industry and you look at how well Colletta provided for his family, he was right: comics at the time were commerce, not art. We rightly revere Kirby and his brethren, but they did not get a seat at the table when money was apportioned. Vince had a grand house and provided well for his wife and family. I certainly agree that he hurt Kirby's art, but my dislike of his work is lessened by my hatred for comics publishers. It was a sleazy business and I'm not sure how much better it is now.
Well said 👏🏼
i would say it's currently worse then it was then, because now they care more about their ideology over profit
@@deathdoom8 How does that make it worse.. exactly? The censorship is still not as bad as it was in the 20th century... either equal or better on that front.
If it truly is ideology over profit, then at the very least, it doesn't get in the way of the fidelity etc.... not to mention, pushing ideology isn't only happening when it's an ideology you don't agree with... so, rather than say, that it's ideology over profit, it's more accurate to say: It's different ideology than before.
(also, profit still rules)
@@cyryl3827 because they'll "cancel" someone out of the industry for not following their extremely dogmatic ideology, which also clearly leaks into their works
@@deathdoom8 So... they will do what all show-business industries have been doing.. since forever.
Ok.
"Generic" is the best word I can think of to describe Colletta's work. Even as a kid in the 1970s I could tell his ink work from others, no matter who the penciller was. It had this bland sameness to it. It wasn't bad, it wasn't great, but it got the job done.
Now, showing Kirby's New Gods art to people at Marvel .... no matter how well liked, I'm surprised he worked at DC much after that.
If you could tell his ink from others, even as a child, it obviously wasn't generic.
You can call it uniquely trash, but it was absolutely not generic.
To me, it literally looked like a child had gotten ahold of an artist’s pencils and fucked them up.
@@blackeesh463 I actually liked it. Colletta came from romance titles and it made Kirby stuff more "romantic". His characters esp. were more beautiful.
A lot of the people at DC resented Kirby and didn't want him there. They fucked with him a lot in all sorts of ways, including cancelling his Fourth World titles that were still selling and reviving them a few years later with other creators. Half of them were probably supportive of anything that messed with Jack. Above the creative level comics then and now was filled with petty, almost criminal scumbags.
Stan Lee, Marvel’s former Editor in Chief and Colletta’s former boss: - “Just mention the name Vinnie Colletta and the first thing that comes to mind is his gorgeous portrayal of beautiful females in his artwork.
When I first met Vinnie and he showed me his art samples I was overwhelmed. I had never seen anyone depict beautiful women in romance stories as dramatically or as glamorously.
Years later, when the trend turned to superhero stories, Vince showed his amazing versatility by becoming a terrific inker of many of our main characters, with the countless issues he inked of Thor being his most memorable.
Not only was Vincent Colletta extremely talented, but he was also one of our most dependable artists. If ever another artist became ill and couldn’t meet his deadline, I can’t remember the number of times I’d give the assignment to Vinnie who would work through the night and inevitably deliver the work on time.
Indeed, Vincent Colletta was a fine artist, a valued co-worker and a dear friend whose work will be long remembered.”
Say what you will about Colette, but his art sucked. That being said, he got the deadlines. That's such an incredibly important factor and people love to just gloss over it because 'it ruined the art'. Obviously it did, but not without good reason.
Getting that deadline isn't like missing an assignment in school where you get told off and a bad grade. It means money, hours and effort spent without getting any returns. Coletta made sure that didn't happen, which wasn't just good for his paycheck, it was good for everyone. Including the consumers.
Coletta was a product of a business model, who still tried his hardest. The fact he was willing to commit career-suicide by that letter shows he must've been a loyal man with serious principles. I personally think that's a thousand times more important than the art.
Give me a black marker and zero fucks to give and I'd still do a better job.
It's easy to meet deadlines when you're rush-jobbing and blacking every single detail out.
His romance art from the 50's is good. He's not the only artist from the 50's pre-Marvel era of american comics who didn't reeally cut in the post-EC world
It's Colletta, not Colette.
@@VileVamp I very much doubt that
@@VileVamp That's why he was hired to do the job. Getting it done on time was the companies priority so they weren't hiring for talent but for speed. Comics were considered disposable. That was the reality.
Lesson here is he was a decent inker, but knew his limitations which is why he preferred romance comics. Too bad he couldn't have found non superhero titles to work on that weren't so demanding with all the detail.
He really had a knack for drawing pretty girls, which you can see even in his later work on Dazzler.
@@suedenim those eyelashes...
He wasn't a decent inker. Did you even watch this and see his samples?? lol
@@princenamor1939 decent, not great. His work is quick and simple, but not hideous, just less detailed.
@@princenamor1939 Yeah, I watched the entire video, thanks for your concern. I didn't say he was great. He got a passing grade for comics with minimal detail. He had to take too many short cuts on nearly anything else. And that's all I was saying...he should have stayed in his lane. I think he bit off more than he could chew with taking the superhero title assignments.
He sounds like a very principled man with a strong work ethic.
Let’s not forget how appalling Marvel used to be with missing deadlines in the 70s and early 80s.
I dunno what you're talking about, that letter is amazing. Maybe they should've had Vince on writing duties instead of inking.
Instead of some guy with an English accent, maybe they should have gone with a reader who could do a full-blown mob-Italian accent. :D
Im a fan now just because of that letter
dont know why he thought some italian guys angry letter should be read with some annoying british accent spoken intentionally posh and irritating
@@nknighton70 there we go
Not sure who said it, but being asked who are his favourite inkers are an artist claimed Vince to be his second favourite inker. Being asked who his number one would be he said all others. :)
Nice
Pretty sure that was attributed to Gil Kane.
VERY believable! I agree!
Vince wasn't amazing at his job. But he was pretty good. Met his deadlines, friendly, and loyal. Art wise he's the same, not amazing, but pretty good
Regarding the Vince Colletta letter. The major artists at Marvel wouldn't let Colletta near their art any more but Jim Shooter insisted that the editors give him work, so Colletta was regularly assigned to ink the new artists who'd begun working at Marvel, like Bret Blevins. Bret hated Colletta's inking so much that he had to prove to Marvel that he could ink his own work much better than Colletta could before they'd let him do it. But Shooter still insisted that they give Colletta work. But when Shooter was fired the editors stopped returning Colletta's phone calls and his work at Marvel suddenly dried up. That's when he wrote the letter which the editors found hilarious and they shared it with everyone.
Jimvanhise Thank you, this was some sorely missing context
This has to be at least the 1,000th time that Jim Van Hise has mentioned this supposed Vince Colletta-Bret Blevins tale LOL....give it a rest already Jimbo
Franklin Colletta then I missed the other 999? Why are you getting salty about someone’s helpful UA-cam comment?
@@KyuuStarr Helpful means providing something that enlightens us. While it's true that some people are reading James Van Hise's comment for the first time, many of us have read it and read it, etc...I asked for Bret Blevins take on this but never received a response. I'm glad that people keep this epic subject of was Vinnie a hack or was he a hero alive. It has developed a life of its own, LOL.
Artist Mike Netzer put it best: "Michael Netzer (Former Marvel and DC penciler): When looking at Vinnie’s work from outside of the context of being a comics penciler, it’s usually very proficient and has a special quality to it. The way he was judged was similar to how Michelangelo’s students would react to Van Gogh or Picasso. That’s probably why some people simply love his Thor run on Kirby while others despise it because they judge it based on Kirby’s pencils.
Vinnie was a very helpful art director at DC. He always took time to engage artists about their work and help them approach it more professionally. For all that’s said about him, he was very suitable for that position and elevated the art craftsmanship at DC during his tenure. He was also a very nice guy who helped artists move ahead in their career. It was Vinnie who once suggested to me that I come up with a new female character because DC was looking for one - and that’s how the idea for Ms. Mystic was born.
On the one hand, it’s unfortunate that an unflattering reputation stuck to him. On the other, this has spawned a new look at his work since his passing away, and has raised a strong voice of admiration and support for him in fandom. That’s certainly better than if no one cared about it one way or the other."
That's really sad and cruel. His own inks seemed pretty fine. It looked like when he had other characters to do that he had problems.
10:35 The thing about Vince Colletta's characters, they've got lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eyes. When it comes at you it doesn't seem to be livin'... until he bites you, and those black eyes roll over white.
Beat me to it!
@@dantheman2907 Hmmm, I always thought that added to the general mystery and regalness of Thor
Well done!
the blackest eyes... the devil's eyes...
One of the coolest lines of that movie. Quint's whole monologue on the sinking of the U.S.S. Indianapolis was amazing. Classic storytelling. Probably my favorite scene of that movie.
"Colletta didn't care about art, just about being fast"
"Kirby did lots of comics monthly and was just concerned with getting on to the next issue"
?
majooismajor
But you can't expect high quality art when you don't give enough time for your employers to do their job. If all you care about is money in your industry then the state of how the work is done will reflect that. Plain and simple.
Unfamiliar Intimacy0070 then how come jack Kirby do the work but fast?
conker690
Not every artist is as efficient as others. They aren't machines.
@@conker690 because jack Kirby was legend for that. He was insanely fast and good. He might have not been as good as kirby, but he apparently was insanely fast. Inking a whole comic book in 2 days???? that's fast.
This is a little dishonest and taken out of context
When he says Colletta cared about being fast, he's mentioning how the most important thing to him was getting his paycheck, but when he says Jack Kirby "just moved on to the next issue" he was talking about how Kirby wouldn't look at the finished product and would continue on with new projects. Honestly not sure why these are being compared as they're two completely different instances
The part that fascinates me is how Kirby not only kept working with him but also started to play to Colletta's strengths, even to explore new ways of doing background in a way that would benefit his inking. What an amazing guy.
"We need to get rid of him."
"But he's such a nice guy..."
I've heard this said as a truism about comics work. The 3 most important qualities are:
1. Doing great work.
2. Hitting deadlines
3. Being easy to get along with.
If you have 2 out of 3, you'll never have trouble getting work.
"Jesus had one Judas, Jim had many!"
that is amazing hyperbole! Where can I find the full letter?
toppledidols.blogspot.com/2010/07/hats-off-to-vince-colletta.html
It should be easy to find in a google search.
@L Franco , I agree. The letter was epic, the great Cicero himself wouldn't write a better one.
Brent Grenier try here
www.lettersofnote.com/2010/06/marvel-editorsyou-are-droppings-of.html?m=1
He missed his true calling! Oh, for a script by this guy! lol
Honestly I think your overplaying the simple fact that someone has to make the deadlines. If Jack Kirby's work is running late then someone has to keep it on schedule or there is no book. So I'm not going to judge him too harshly for being the fall guy for the good of getting work out in time
Yeah, if someone had just allocated things a little different then it could have worked a lot better. Treat the inkers like color: allocate a few "high end" pages in an issue (let's say first & last, maybe one or two more for the average book), and have both the covers (to reduce the severity of mis-aligned color) and the rest of the pages be lower-detail for the sake of inking speed.
Kirby never was running late. He was one of the fastest artists in the business.
If Colleta sucked then Kirby wouldn't have used him.
@@grumblekin Did Kirby have a choice who inked his comics? I imagine he'd be pissed that an inker was removing background characters.
@@grumblekin ...2000 AD
Colletta had balls to write such a letter. It was too much and too graphic but at the same time you don't see people defending others like that too often.
Very italian of him. And that's also a reminder of how "old school" business was much more human and had values, vs 1985 and even worse today.
very
That is likely because we weren't living in a neo-liberal hell hole like we are today.
That was very interesting, I had no idea Colletta's inks actually looked good, on his own early artwork. I was a big Warlord/Mike Grell fan during the run of that book, and Colletta's inks on that used to really make me angry as a youngster, everything became so brittle and thin, no depth to anything. This was a real flash-back dude, thanks!
Never seen anyone talk about Warlord beforehand! Was a big fan when I was a kid, my mom had a big collection of them.
At first I hated Coletta's inks and for the most part still do however occasionally I'll see a piece he'd inked and be pleasantly surprised. After watching this I think that when he was working within his limitations he was quite capable. He was a commercial artist, as one myself I can tell you sometimes it is just about the paycheck and in the comics industry it really does seem to be about attrition. I don't blame him for stacking cash and getting the jobs done quickly but because of this I prefer practically every other Kirby inker over him.
Thank you *James and Maso* for recommending this channel which I'm sure I'll be spending a good bit of time with!
Rodney!
Best inker in the business was Joe Sinnott, who made the art look like HD. Vince I always found his inking rough. I used to groan when I saw *"Inks by Vince Colletta."*
I always liked Tom Palmer's work, especially on Gene Colan.
Are we talking eras or just inkers who worked with Kirby? I think Scott Williams and Klaus Janson are amongst my favorites who live in the shadows of their pencillers. Jim Lee and Frank Miller deserve their fame and recognition but they take a lot of shortcuts in their pencil work and omit a lot of detail. Williams and Janson brought finished their work and brought them to life.
@@MildMisanthropeMaybeMassive Probably eras. I grew up in the 70s and collected comics from the late 70s - 80s and Sinnott was still prolific then. He's my favourite but there are others I do respect. People like Tom Palmer, who used to ink John Buscema's work during their run on *"ThE AvEnGeRs."*
Luckily Vince was never part of Neal Adams' *'Crusty Bunkers'* crew at Continuity - which posted some of the finest inkers of the time.
The reason Kirby loved Sinnott's inks on his work was because Sinnott added nothing and took away nothing. He essentially traced Kirby's pencils in ink and that was it. Of course this pleased Kirby immensely. Not saying that was bad or good. Just pointing out something obvious.
I could always hit my deadlines too if I just blacked out all detail and straight up erased people entirely.
Project management 101. The fastest work is the work you end up not needing to do
@@nilus2k I can see the wisdom in that. I´m still not trying to cut any corners though.
Crimson well it’s not like I’m a comic book artist.
Marvel: When can you start?
Just erase the complainers and you are done.
As someone who has done art for pleasure and for profit, deadlines=lower quality work.
But this guy met his deadlines. End of story. I will defend that. And hell, its not even ruined in my opinion. Could be it be better? Yes. But is it shit? No.
I have this annual gig where I get commissioned by a business to be their primary artist and creative director for a onsite artistic project. The first year I was given almost unlimited time, resources, and manpower. The team put together a fabulously planned mural, intricately detailed, fully coloured, with a write up for display about the piece & the meaning behind each choice. I had about 150 hours logged on this thing. Its probably the best painting I have ever done.
The next year I was given 2 weeks besides my day job, had to provide my own materials, and had to wait a week to have the painting space set up (despite my insistence I could set it up, but no, “that would unsafe little lady!”) I cut so many corners to get it done. Dropped the colour palette, used a stencil rather than freehanding, if I made a mistake oops its there, and had to leave a lot of the space blank for a “minimalist” look. It looked good, but with only me? It was hard.
This last year I got a full time day job. It was made non-negotiable between the business and my manager. I was not asked, rather TOLD, I would do the painting this year. So I was told to do the painting and my job in the same time, again minimal notice of the deadline.... so 40 hours a week to do a 40 hour, and 30-120 hour job? No OT? And my manager coming by to crack the whip as I try to paint??? I smashed a paintbrush into a bunch of acrylics, slapped it on, left a bunch of pencil lines, and left off the varnish to preserve it for years to come.
If they try to force me again this year they can fuck right off.
With Coletta he got paid for every ink job, but I didn’t get extra anything this last year. They want a set of comic pages within a weekend? They are gonna get a slapdash job. The guy can ink well! Just like I can paint well! But we all sacrifice quality to meet the deadline- bc capitalism does not appreciate art, it sells it.
I mean, I will say there were definitely times where even if we look at the idea of cutting corners to get it done quick, he cut the wrong corners. Like, he would have been better off cutting out more details in the background crowd to have time to make the guy who had fallen down in the center. But that said, yeah, like... He was asked to do the art quickly and cheaply. Like any freelancer will tell you, cheap-fast-good, pick two. They picked two. So if they didn't get high-quality work, blame them.
Supposedly he cut corners even when the deadlines weren't tight and he had all the time in the world to properly ink the pencils but he rushed them anyway.
The problem with allowing yourself to become a habitual hack of anything is you can't just turn it off at will. It becomes part of your working approach. You automatically shortcut. You're not even aware of it.
You have to establish certain habits and insist on maintaining them. Otherwise, you're lost.
At the extreme end opposite to a Colletta, you'd have an Alex Toth or a Harlan Ellison. Amazing, exacting, and utterly original people that were near-impossible to work with and hard even to talk to. But they would rather have walked than compromise, because their relationship with themselves required it. Somehow they made it all work, managed to make a living, while also making themselves routinely hated. However, they were okay with that. If anything, they came to savor it. Imagine living that way! But it's possibly worth it if your inner man or woman insists upon it. You have to make sacrifices for what you really care about. And if your stuff is good, it will live after you, with any luck. It will continue to matter, and be examined and reexamined and found to have real life in it, have something in it to learn from. That's a decent prize.
Colletta wanted, above all, to be liked, to be the fast solution guy, to be the one the editors turned to. And yes, he got that... but nothing else. Jim Shooter appreciated him, but no one cares about that. Shooter just wanted the work out, like any other boss. Period. Colletta might as well have been a really hustlin' cab driver at the airport, going after all those fares. And his dispatcher loved him. I picture something like that as his big Silver Age legacy.
I like seeing someone here who actually gets the point about deadlines from lived experience. I'm also an artist but have never had a deadline for my work, but seeing the amount of people saying "give me a marker and I could do better deadline or not" is laughable. Deadlines suck, and as an artist you gotta do what you gotta do!
Same goes for me with my consultancy work. Give me the time and I will come into your place of business see all the processes you have in place review your existing policies and SOPS and research all of the machinery and chemicals you use and build you a bespoke safety management system for you company and help you to transition to it. If you only give me an afternoon to do it and I will have a quick chat with you to get gist of your work activities then put together a generic safety manual for your business that will cover your bases if the safety inspector drops in.
That shirt is straight out of Charlie Sheen's closet from 2003 Two and a Half Men era.
LOL
So a bowling shirt?
Those oversized two panel shirts were on the rack everywhere. Giving someone credit for going to the mall is stupid
I have the same shirt
Aka guayabera
The one I remember bothering me in the 70's was that Colletta was often paired with George Tuska . As a kid I thought I didn't like Tuska until I realized it was Colletta. Kinda ruined bronze age Ironman for me
Judging from, among other things, his fill in job on Marvel's Champions book, George Tuska wasn't a great match for superhero comics in general, though the Colletta inks didn't help any. Tuska is like Don Heck, a great journeyman whose work started to look dated compared to up and comers like Perez, Byrne and even Sal Buscema.
I prefer Tuska’s 1940’s Golden Age art myself, such as some of his Fiction House and Quality Comics work among other companies back then.
@@Norvo82 I really liked George Tuska's Iron Man when Jack Abel inked him in the mid-'70s (as well as the early Johnny Craig-inked issues). Give me a Tuska Iron Man issue over Don Heck issue any day.
@@Norvo82 I always said Don Heck was a poor man's Jack Kirby. Plus, I like Sal Buscema's style. I got friends who don't rate him, but his run on *"The Incredible Hulk"* was fantastic.
@@56postoffice I always called him Don Dreck.
I actually really appreciate the stories of artists who are just below the line of amazing. I'm never going to be the best cartoonist, but I love drawing and animating...and it's people who stick with it that give me some form of inspiration.
Yeah fuck prodigies man. Boring as hell.
Oh hi, you just caught me getting ready for work. Speaking of hard work, a new episode of comic tropes just been uploaded.
A new awesome episode, I'm learning so much with you and you have this superpower of making me open a comic book after every episode you download. Thanks a lot!
As a kid, I remember wondering why Jack's Thor artwork looked like pencil sketches next to his bold Fantastic Four work. I didn't understand the role and importance of an inker like a Joe Sinnott until many years later.
When I was a boy in the '60s, I loved Colletta's work on Thor. That book (especially the scenes set in Asgard) seemed to demand a style reminiscent of 19th century illustration. Colletta was the only person in comics who routinely used dip pens with crowquill nibs -- the preferred approach of those illustrators of yore, most of whom would never have considered inking with a brush. I loved the scritchy-scratchy crowquill lines Colletta used to model Kirby's figures. I suspect that Kirby liked the look as well, hence his loyalty to Colletta after the move to DC. The allegation that Kirby NEVER saw the finished product simply is not believable.
Moreover, I don't buy the suggestion that inking with a brush is more time-consuming than inking with a dip pen. Having tried my hand at both, I think the pen-and-ink approach takes a bit longer. Nib pens are more terrifying because you're more likely to get an unwanted SPLOTCH on your page.
That said: Over other artists' pages, Colletta's dip-pen approach did not work. His work became downright irritating in the 1970s. The pen works best when you use it to indicate light and shadow through careful, tedious hatching, and Colletta stopped doing anything of that sort. Maybe you just can't do that kind of inking in comics. When the majority of lines are contour lines, the dip pen can seem mechanical and lacking in character, while the brush offers greater liveliness and suppleness. At any rate, as I grew older, I sided with those who greatly prefer to see Kirby inked with a brush.
I'd like to see a video on Alfredo Alcala. He was the closest thing to Franklin Booth that comics ever produced -- yet, unlike Booth, Alcala did NOT use pen and ink, as I once presumed he did. He created his own fountain pen with a brush head. (He worked fast and didn't like to pause to dip his brush.) Nowadays, you can buy brush pens of that sort -- the Japanese make 'em -- but I've never been able to get the consistent fine lines that Alcala got. I'd love to know how he made those tools!
Damn that was interesting. The strangest part of all for me was Colletta own artwork was so accomplished, its strange that he abandoned it so early without so much as a backward glance.
So here's what I understand: Vince Coletta was a charming, nice guy who got his art done quick and cheap when deadlines were only a few days away, understood the business of comics, and stood up for his friends, even when it cost him his job.
And he also kinda screwed up some art.
What a fool!
He definitely had his ups and downs, his work on Thor, while yes he did tamper with Kirby’s work, it had a simplicity to it that really fit the style of the book. I was always a huge fan of that initial Thor run and its art. His work on Wonder Woman and elsewhere at DC was fantastic as well. But Fantastic Four and New Gods almost got ruined by his shortcuts. Does he compare to Sinnott? No, but along the same lines that’s like comparing Greg Capullo to Jim Lee, one is an icon and a master, but the other isn’t without merit. I equal parts respect Coletta and dislike him. Comics were a cutthroat industry back then and meeting his deadlines like he did was an invaluable tool, even if he did take many liberties that earned the ire of his contemporaries.
I've been a fan of Capullo since Quasar. You don't think his work on Batman has raised his standing among fans?
I collected British marvel reprints in the seventies. Every time I saw the name Vince Coletta a deep sigh crawled out. Without the colour some of his work is woeful.
"Jesus had one Judas, Jim had several"
Dang, why was Vince an inker? Dude should've been a writer. That letter was fire.
It was extremely painful for me to see the inking of Vince on the Fantastic Four. It was butchery, but I also understand the situation. Comic artists were paid horribly at the time. Kirby was treated badly by Archie Goodman and to this day -- outside of the comic world, Kirby is not well known and doesn't even had a brick and mortar museum to display his art. That to me is the real crime.
Gotta be honest, this episode made me realize how good of an artist Jack Kirby was. I mean, if those originals were the main pages of the comic, he'd be one of my favourite comic-book artists of all time.
And also how inkers can ruin or improve others work, which I've never questioned myself. Guess the writer and the penciler aren't the only ones that make a comic-book good or bad.
Personally, I always liked Colletta's inking of Kirby's art for Thor. For me, it gave Thor comics that classic old-world look, that reminded me of Prince Valiant. Totally agree, that Sinnott was the obvious choice to ink the Fantastic Four. Although less polished than Sinnott, I also enjoyed Chic Stone's inking of Kirby's art for the FF, X-Men and Captain America in the early years of Marvel.
About the same opinion of Colletta and I also would add Frank Giacoia and Syd Shores I am surprised nobody has mentioned Dick Ayers who also inked a lot of Kirby work
I actually always liked Vince Colletta's inking with Jack Kirby, particularly with Tales of Asgard. I loved his fine lines, which lent a lighter touch to the art.
Agreed. I thought it was excellent. People tend to only want Jack with Sinnott polishing it. but it's OK that it looks different
Startling.
I mean its *the* art style that is associated with his era's comics.
He seems to be the un-sung hero of inking.
I love creatives and art and creating things that push the boundaries.
But it sounds like he was the guy who could scale things back enough to reasonably get those grand ideas onto shelves on time.
Well by today’s standards it certainly is disheartening to see how much detail was removed, but I am sure the editors and chiefs always appreciated the fact that he would keep it more simplified and much easier to print.
Agreed. If you can't get a shipment to Safeway in time, does that mean that Marvel has to take a penalty? If a Marvel comic doesn't get to them in time, does this mean that shelf space can be given to a DC comic?
Binging your videos today. I like your tone - it's the friendly, relaxed, and educated kind of enjoyable I appreciate.
Well said!
The details of how Colleta worked are fascinating to know. Deadlines are definitely still important today
One comic artist who I can't remember said that when given choice between great work and late work there is no choice - the work is delivered on time.
So far as his art goes, Colletta should've gotten betta.
Sokita Oshiwade thank you
*slow golf swing*
*you know i really wanted to hate on this comment. **_...REALLY wanted to._** but you win. **_👍🏿❗️❗️❗️❗️❗️_*
@matt fahringer *oh don't get me **_WRONG._** it's **_definitely a GARBAGE_** joke. but i'm giving **_TOTAL_** points to the boldness of such an obvious **_HACK OFFERING._*
@Heavy Metal Collector *no! **_...NO! NO! NO! NO! ...NO! ...just._*
This was an excellent episode - definitely got me to like and subscribe! Very fair - shocked to learn that Colletta actually ERASED Kirby pencils - but loved the letter at the end. This episode also made me respect Jack Kirby even more (which I didn't think was possible). Excellent work! Now looking forward to watching other episodes!
Any tradesman knows every tool has its job. Not everything takes a hammer.
I know quite a few engineers, and more than one has said something like:
Always use the right tool for the Job.
The right tool can be substituted with a hammer in most cases.
Any tool can be a hammer if you swing it hard enough.
@@stevenwitcher8087 hey that's true
My dad was an engineer, and a big wrench? Hammer. Banana? Liquid Nitrogen the dang thing, that's a hammer.
@@jeanne-emerycoleman214 i love using my highly fragile bottles of liquid nitrogen as a hammer, gives my hand a funny, cold feeling.
As a young reader in th 70's I quickly learned the names of all of Marvel's creators thanks to the splash page credits. I also learned who's work I liked and didn't like. I never liked Coletta's work for the reasons you mentioned, especially when compared to other inkers like Sinnott.
I just discovered this channel today when this video appeared on my feed. I have to say that it is excellent and very entertaining. Thank you so much. You have earned a like and new subscriber.
Loved this! Regardless of how we feel about Colletta, you did a nice job of illustrating *cough* the collaborative process. And to be frank, I hadn't really thought about the inkers before. So thanks! I'm subscribing.
This just makes me respect Jack Kirby that much more. Didn't know that was possible.
"Hey, did you know this guy's been sabotaging your work for a decade?"
"Eh, keep him on."
"He's literally bringing your work to the competition, which you left."
"Eh, keep him on one book."
@Dennis Morrigan McDonough Argh I typo'ed!! Fixed it. I blame food poisoning.
@Dennis Morrigan McDonough lmao
i mean, everyone agree that Vince is a nice guy. That maybe enough to convince Jack to keep him
10:24 - I actually find Coletta's Galactus much better at representing an intergalactic demi-god.
Me too i was confused by that one
Aside from the headpiece, and maybe the exposed arms and knees, I do prefer Coletta’s depiction
Any artist can draw Galactus more than Kirby. He made Galactus look puny. I am glad Kirby left Marvel. He originally was a writer.
demigod
dĕm′ē-gŏd″
noun
A male being, often the offspring of a god and a mortal, who has some but not all of the powers of a god.
An inferior deity; a minor god.
Looking forward to Jim Shooter's episode. I should note that while Vince's letter was certainly rude and disrespectful, the objective facts tend to support his view. As for Vince Colletta himself, we should probably keep in mind that he was doing a job and fulfilled its demands honestly enough. His was a time when people just did not expect any better than that.
Yup. Shooter got the shaft. He pulled that company out of the gutter of the 70s.
Wow, so this comparison of Jim Shooter to Jesus is...not necessarily an overblown exaggeration?
Sean Howe's Marvrl Comics: The Untold Story is, to my mind, the best book on the history of Marvel, and the story it tells seems to be a lot more complicated. Shooter in no way comes out a hero.
@@yatz57 Right, because like most books it's based on accounts of people who Jim Shooter passed by. The problem with all these books is they're asking all the people who were wrong about things to describe the guy who was right.
There is no way a bunch of people are ever going to give a fair account of their boss or the guy who told them they're writing wasn't up to snuff. Especially when that guy's job is to maintain continuity over multiple publications.
@@yatz57 I would not call him a hero, but I am even less inclined to call his detractors courageous members of the resistance.
Imagine if colletta inked something like berserk.
FieryVengeance you’re going to give the fans a heart attack
he would have done a good job since Berserk has no deadlines
@@snakeshepard9761 agree
SnakeShepard97 :(
@@manuelquintana3401 xDD
I really appreciate that you gave a fully nuanced explanation of the guy’s work instead of just trying to sensationalize it to make it easier to swallow. Great video!
You know, I'm in the small minority of 80's and 90s comic collectors who didn't worship at the temple of Jack Kirby. I appreciated his great storytelling and visual dynamics, but I never much cared for his blocky style of drawing. His style, while detailed, wasn't quite realistic enough for me, and I always felt his characters were drawn far too crudely (although the panels themselves were always exciting and dynamic). Now I see, however, that at least part of this reason his character style never appealed to me was actually the fault of the inkers. I'm sure I'd seen some of Vince's work with Jack and probably dismissed it right away.
Here as well, I just thought it was an instinctive preference for DC, but there was something about Kirby that kept me looking, nonetheless. This makes sense.
I'm not a fan of Kirby's art. He was a beast of a characters creator though. As classic artists go, I prefer Ditko and my favorite Romita Sr
CG Vapors This is why bad inking is so bad. It changes original art and makes people see it as worse than it used to be. As an inker you have a duty to the artist to ink well and accurately. It’s _literally_ just tracing. I’m not saying it’s easy but if you’re gonna add or delete stuff, just be the damn artist. Don’t fuck up another person’s work.
I honestly think a lot of his art is too busy for just one panel on a page
Like it's a lot of stuff and while "very detailed" is often sung highly self editing is also important
There's a reason I don't like the look of cosmic stories of that era
@MemphoWrasslin1 Well, I see what you're saying but I don't think it's entirely true. There's nothing saying that only stylized or toony style artists make good stories. In fact, there are many cases where the artists did not actually come up with the stories or characters. I don't mind stylized art, but I do like more realistic art than what Kirby was doing. Seth McFarland is a good example of stylized but still realistically detailed.
I remember going to Boston Comic Con and seeing a panel of some old school guys. They ripped into Vince throughout. I remember Sinnott was there.
Bruce Grossman so he’s essentially the Rob Liefeld of the inker’s world
Zilegil He would be but the guy can actually draw unlike Liefeld
Vince never suffered ''Defeat'' unlike Rob
Eh did he take that ok? Comic fans can be mean.
@@niallreid7664 he laughed. I mainly remember it was Trimpe, Chaykin and Layton ripping Vince.
Personally, my favorite regular Kirby inker was Mike Royer. In my early days of reading comics I enjoyed Kirby's Thor work, which was being inked by Colleta. It was not until I saw Kirby's pencils that I realized that a lot of Kirby's detailed pencils were being simplified.
One thing to remember is that comics were not considered "art" or collectable at one time. I cringe when hear about warehouses of art being destroyed by Marvel, etc because it was taking up room. Yet that was the reality that Colleta worked in.... it was a business, not an art studio.
The first Kirby art I read was the exact episodes of Thor you showed in the intro. I hated it so much I avoided Kirby stuff for a very long time. Didn't understand how great his work was until much later when I started collecting older books.
There are some amazing inkers. But they definitely can destroy things. Sienkewicz was hit by this a number of times, too.
I wouldn't care if he "ruined" the art by just simplifying it, but it's an entirely different matter when you start erasing work
Erik Larsen: (Former Marvel and DC penciler):Years later, I look back and get a kick out of it. It was the last issue of Thor that Vinnie Colletta ever inked and the last issue Stan Lee ever scripted, so it was like I was filling in for Jack Kirby as part of the classic Thor creative team. In retrospect, it really wasn’t as bad as I seemed to think it was. And it one case, what I took to be a shortcut on Vinnie’s part aided the storytelling. Vinnie had made an incidental foreground figure bald, which, in retrospect, eliminated a distraction that helped focus the readers attention on what it should have been focused on: the battle, which raged behind him. This foreground figure was unimportant - the battle was.
The way he colored said, this is my job and I'm going to get it done quickly. Artists wanted his colors to say, I respect the detail and time you put into this. I hope the colors enhance the artwork and make this world a vibrant feast for the readers eyes to enjoy.
CT: *ruins a valuable first issue to provide a solid opening skit.*
Me: I admire your moxy, son!
I'm going to tell myself he printed out a shiny copy for that bit...
Honestly I’d buy the colourised version
What Vince Colletta was doing to great artwork like Kirby's detailed scenes was awful, but the alternative wasn't just editors being less happy. It was Marvel's Dreaded Deadline Doom, a common situation when, in the worst case, Marvel would cheat fans with the cover of a new comic but with a reprint inside it.
Effectively stealing the lunch money of a fan base of young boys (who were buying comics unopened from newspaper stands) is a bad way to build brand image and loyalty.
Also, we read these stories in blocks such as volumes of Essentials. There are no delays, we know we are going to get the whole story, and anyway we are adults.
Back them, impatient boys would wait a month (per issue) to find if Doctor Doom had really killed Mister Fantastic this time -- with hit-and-miss delivery at the newspaper stands meaning that every issue a story stretched out increased the chances the fan would never get the ending.
What if editors had said, "forget deadlines, this is art. Those seven to twelve year old boys will eat reprints, multi-month delays, and incomplete stories, and like it"? We might never have heard of comics as a popular art-form.
I know at least one ex comic fan who walked after getting one to many books that had a great cover filled with a reprint inside.
This video felt very fair to the man and I appreciate that! With an agenda, you could make the guy seem any way you want I feel (and it’d be exciting to view probably), so it’s nice to have a more down to Earth look. A proper level of respect to someones work even if the quality isn’t where people wish it was
A new Comic Tropes! Gonna be a good day!
I love his inks on the romance comics you showed. Iconic. On superhero comic, not so much - but I think he was a good choice for a romantic wedding issue.
Your channel came up randomly on autoplay such good in-depth discussion on these artists. Nice video
I think that he should have stuck with books like Archie comics, that seems to be ware his work looks most consistently great
yash mandla and also funny animal comics.
Getting my Sunday started right! Btw, you are looking healthy, congrats on the weight loss. I am also seeing the quality of the new camera as well.
Agreed. You're looking great Chris.
I forwarded this video to someone I know who was an artist in the industry at the time. He told me he was hired by Colletta when Colletta was art director at DC so maybe he's biased, but he said that the problem with the video is that its not based on the realities of the industry at the time. He said that the single most important thing was beating deadlines and everything else was second. This is a quote: "Colletta was hired to ink a comic book over a weekend so as to not blow deadlines so he had permission to block out areas and erase details to get the work out . DC would be fined by the printer if a dead line was not met." I wasn't a big comic book fan myself, so don't know much about the history of the industry, but that's how the professionals saw it (as opposed to the fans who, of course, want to see the best art possible.)
I work in an ad agency and I can easily relate to Vince. Might not be the best inker, but was surely an important piece of the machine.
If I was running a studio, I'd want some artists who obsess over fine stand-out work, but 100% I'd also want a couple Vinces around to fill gaps and get the bulk of the work _finished_ while the artístes agonize over their splash pages.
Im sorry, but i'm gonna guess that most people who watch this video have never worked on a project that requires drawing or any kind of art form. I work in animation and let me tell you if you fuck up the deadline then your entire carreer is fucked more than if you cut a few corners. I respect this guy for being able to consistently work on multiple inking projects without being delayed at all because it's honestly incredibly hard not only because of the little amount of time these projects give the artists, but also because inking is incredibly stressing to the mind and body (especially the arms and back). Yes there are people who can do it better, but that doesn't change that he is definitely good at his job. And yeah, to artists its a job, even if we love doing it we also do it because we need the money, and we will prioritize finishing the work over doing it perfectly because if we don't we won't get paid. Blame the capitalist system that pressures artists into ridiculous deadlines if you want to blame someone.
Mad cuz bad
@@___AVARICE___Your pfp is literally the definition of mad cuz bad lol
@@___AVARICE___your 5'1 goat is mad cause bad
Coletta was fast. But Kirby was even faster. Kirby could pencil an entire book in less time than it took another artist to draw a single page. And the inking on Tales of Asgard he did is frankly lovely. Coletta's excusion of Kirby's detail is indeed horrendous, but the pressure that Lee & Marvel bullpen production mgr. Sol Brodsky put on artists to hit those deadlines (due in no small part to Kirby's astounding pace) left its mark on a lot of artists, & Coletta managed to keep his job despite F'ing up the work of one of comics' masters both at Marvel & later at DC on Kirby's 4th world oeuvre.
Never knew about this... and now I’m enraged... thanks for that! 😂
Congratulations for your dedicated and amazing work. Keep it up!😄
Hats off to Chris for cramming tons of info on the Coletta Crap Pile into a mere 20 min. without it seeming to be forced. I've said before that Coletta was okay in Tales Of As because he functioned as a scratchy TV court reporter like it was all really happening live (had TV been invented yet). This whole saga would make a great dark comedy film script. Sorry this comment isn't better constructed, but I'm a very charming guy.
Colletta: "I'm bad at this..."
Kirby: "Let me dumb it down to your level."
That wasn't bad, just cutting corners. Bad is stuff like splotches that don't belong, excessive waviness, etc. Not gonna say he should have handled most of the work in major titles, but his work looks like it should have been appropriate for 90% of the pages in any one issue.
Cutting corners is inherently bad.
@Bryan Becker yeah, his father taught him it was okay to make people disappear.
My god. That letter would of been the greatest Twitter call out post ever made.
Both yeah all things consider, Coletta seems like a nice guy with good work ethics and an ability to meet corporate deadlines. The problem is largely that as an inker/artist he is lazy and his negligence ruin the impact for iconic panels in Kirby’s art had he put in the necessary time needed for certain details.
“Sophisticated ignorance, write my curses in cursive.”
Did not expect a Harry Partridge cameo going into this, amazing
I was born in 61. Grew up with early Marvel. As a kid I found Kirby's art to be harsh and over stylized. I only really liked him when Colletta inked him and softened his pencils a touch. Yeah, I know my opinion will be ganged up on, but I don't care. Yes, I came to appreciate Kirby's work more later, but at the time that was my honest appraisal.
Nobody home on *Yancy Street* it appears... breathe easy.
:- )
@@iandalziel7405 I'm shocked, but pleased!
my eyes are melting and my brain spinning over all that ruined beautiful king kirby art. i just loved that guys work as a kid.
7:12 You know what, I actually think that change was for the better; it emphasizes the woman's place in the foreground, makes the guy in the back pop out more, and leaves Loki with a nice shadow to contrast from. Jack Kirby's penciling is obviously great, that missing guy does give some nice framing to lead the eye to Loki; but for the transition to ink I think the cut was a good one to make. A less rush-hungry inker might have kept that guy in and found a creative method to deal with him being between a sharp dark and bright area, but the cut seems to have been made with consideration.
That's the only example in that sequence that I can defend tho, lol
Sounds like he would have been better for animation. Imagine if he did a comic with Greg Land.
You should be the one that should be called "Comicstorian" not that other guy who just reads the wiki for you.
THIS! I stopped watching that channel LOOOOONG ago
Benny reads the story backs dramatically to you I don’t know how he is reading off the wiki
True
God I hate that guy!
@@fatcat1 aint hate a little much? What'd he do hit your mom or something?