some PinUps, Splashes, Covers, and Posters by Jim Lee.
His work is so much better looking without all this bullshit digital rendering. It kills the art of just pencils and ink.
It can, depending on the colorist. For example, the last two were actually painted by Gabriele Dell’Otto. Alex “Sinc” Sinclair usually colors his DC work, and I am kind of ambivalent about his (Sinc’s) work. It depends on the subject, frankly.
As far as Black and White being superior for enjoying the art form, you hit the nail on the head.
Jim Lee’s pencils are often far more rendered than need be, because that is his style. The downside is that his colored art can be muddy or unimpressive once it gets published. The REASON Jim’s art usually looks great at publication has a name: Scott Williams.
No one is doing anything wrong, per se. I just think that Jim should stream line his designs. I think he should push himself towards Bruce Timm, Dan DeCarlo, or Darwyn Cooke. Look at all of Jim’s art, he was clearly influenced by Arthur Adams, Neal Adams, and Frank Miller. He likes short shorts, guns, and muscles. Imagine how good Jim Lee could get if he started working on Archie Comics for a while. Make him do Romance Comics and some WB Kids properties.
Jim already has a very recognizable, super stylized form. Right up there with as you mentioned, the Adams brothers (Art & Neil), and Bruce Timm. His style is QUINTESSENTIALLY 90’s and is instantly recognizable to fans like myself, who grew up with his art in X-Men, W.I.L.D.CATS, Gen13, etc.
I agree that they’re not really doing anything WRONG per se, it’s just to me, I like the flat, pencil to paper style Jim had when his works were directly published, like the Rogue’s Gallery splash at the top? Perfect. That X-Men group shot suffers from too many computers and should’ve been left alone as it was.
The X-Men Group Shot was recolored by Tom Smith (I think). If memory serves, it was either a press poster or a cover. The Villains poster was from the back of X-Men, Vol. 2 # 01. In any case,the original colors do look better, but that’s not really anyone’s fault.
The older books were printed on different paper, and certain colors and palettes don’t work as well. Barry Windsor-Smith’s Conan was mind blowingly good on Newsprint.
The high gloss paper introduced in the 90s lost the elegance of a lot of that artwork, because it was created for publication on newsprint. Jim Lee’s X-Men looks better in the original issues because it was created to be read in that format, with those materials
I’m sure you know this, but just for the sake of clarity: Neal Adams and Arthur Adams are not brothers.
The problem I have with Jim Lee’s has nothing to do with its recognizability. He is an enormously successfully licensing artist, and rightfully so.
His Storytelling - particularly emotional scenes, or anything without action in it - is rather unimpressive, frankly.
He has a niche that he is filling, and he is the best at his style, so more power to him. Jim Lee’s artwork is wrong for a LOT of comics though. And his style is very, um, “Merchandisable” is the word. It all looks like the packaging for an action figure or a Lunchbox pinup. The result of him being the lead art guy for DC is that a lot of Image guys went to DC…
And when everybody started complaining about late books, books that got cancelled after 7-9 issues, books with crappy dialogue and lots of splash pages (JUSTICE LEAGUE), everyone was shocked.
Jim Lee is the King of the ’90s comics, for both the good and the bad side.
i agree so many aspects of everyone’s argument.
But i believe that we all really blessed to be around during Jim Lee’s artwork.
Black n white, pencil, color, digital or whatever; im not gonna complain, cause at the end of it all, i was alive during the same time as Jim Lee’s artwork.
By far one of the most influential comic artists or even just artists ever.