Stylistic art vs Bad art

[Cybak]

What is the difference from an artist with his own unique style, Kelley Jones for instance, to say Rob Liefeld who is often maligned for his poor grasp of anatomy? Both examples have characters drawn with widely exaggerated anatomy but Liefeld and others get a bad rap while Jones and others do not. In this discussion I am omitting any reference to artists blatantly using others work as Liefeld did in Deathstroke.

I like JRJR but I don't care for Jock or Ngyuen. That doesn't mean that they are bad artists but have their own unique style.

[Dr. Cheesesteak]

What is the difference from an artist with his own unique style, Kelley Jones for instance, to say Rob Liefeld who is often maligned for his poor grasp of anatomy? Both examples have characters drawn with widely exaggerated anatomy but Liefeld and others get a bad rap while Jones and others do not. In this discussion I am omitting any reference to artists blatantly using others work as Liefeld did in Deathstroke.

I like JRJR but I don't care for Jock or Ngyuen. That doesn't mean that they are bad artists but have their own unique style.

exaggerated anatomy and poor anatomy are 2 different things. For instance, some Liefeld pieces, the arm would be like, dislocated from the socket...and the torso is facing one way while the waist/legs are facing another way, and there's no sign of waist rotation, etc.

Besides, Liefeld (and other "bad" artists) usually get ripped on more than just their poor understanding of anatomy.

[BohemiaDrinker]

Well, Liefeld art just looks bad. There's that.

[poroto678]

Dude...
cap.jpg

there's "unconventional style" which you might not like and BAD art. Ian Bertram is my least favorite artist of the last five years, but i can respect his style. Same with Jones. I actually liked his batman (back then). Liefeld is a whole different thing.

[Lee Stone]

We mustn't forget the brokeback poses.
And how fandom is torn between celebrating them and abolishing them.

[FanboyStranger]

Bad art fails to tell a story in an effective manner. Poor anatomy may be part of that, but more often, it has to do with pacing problems, page design that fails to lead the eye through the narrative, poor transitions from panel to panel and page to page, ineffective choreography of action, etc. Anything that takes you out of the story is bad storytelling, and since the purpose of the artwork in comics is ultimately to tell a story, that makes it bad art.

Poor anatomy tends to be most glaring when it's inconsistant from panel to panel. Distortion of your figures can work wonderfully if it's consistant throughout the story, particularly in setting a surreal or disturbing atmosphere.

[FanboyStranger]

exaggerated anatomy and poor anatomy are 2 different things. For instance, some Liefeld pieces, the arm would be like, dislocated from the socket...and the torso is facing one way while the waist/legs are facing another way, and there's no sign of waist rotation, etc.

Besides, Liefeld (and other "bad" artists) usually get ripped on more than just their poor understanding of anatomy.

Liefeld's work presents the worst transitions between scenes I've ever seen in comics. I don't mind the work within his panels so much, but he still has no idea how to string them together in a effective manner. It's easy to rag on his anatomy-- and yeah, it's terrible, and all over the place from one panel to the next-- but it's the nuts and bolts (or lack thereof) of his storytelling that really bothers me.

[CrazyOldHermit]

Good stylized art is made with skill, bad stylized art is used to cover a lack of skill. For example, Kelley Jones knows how the human body works so he was able to exaggerate it in a realstic way, if that makes sense. Another example is Bruce Timm, whose style is based around reducing a lot of anatomical detail to the basic gesture (a swoop for the inside of the arm instead of an anatomically correct contour).

Liefeld made the mistake a lot of amateur artists make. They start off copying stylized artwork and never learn to draw realistically. As a result they exaggerate what is already exaggerated and don't understand the reasoning for it. Look on Deviant Art and you'll tons and tons of crappy anime drawings that just copy the style without the substance.

Probably the most neglected skill in comics is perspective. Perspective isn't just drawing a set of railroad tracks, it is used to define forms and make sure everything fits. Going back to Liefeld, the famous Cap drawing is a bigger perspective gaffe than an anatomical one. He drew the chest from a 3/4 view and the rest of the body in a profile view It wouldn't have happened if he had established a perspective grid and mapped out the forms of the body. Learning to draw in perspective is a tedious, complicated and difficult process which is why so many young artists neglect it. When people start learning they focus on anatomy. "Gotta do some anatomy studies to git gud." Doesn't work like that. You don't need a lot of anatomical knowledge to draw a good basic cartoon. But unless you're doing some seriously surreal stuff perspective is something that you can't skip. Perspective is what grounds a picture.

The reason Liefeld never drew feet? Feet at the point where the figure meets the ground plane and unless they're drawn in perspective they don't look right.

[Tupiaz]

Liefeld's work presents the worst transitions between scenes I've ever seen in comics. I don't mind the work within his panels so much, but he still has no idea how to string them together in a effective manner. It's easy to rag on his anatomy-- and yeah, it's terrible, and all over the place from one panel to the next-- but it's the nuts and bolts (or lack thereof) of his storytelling that really bothers me.

However most of the critique targeted at Liefeld is about his style and not his storytelling.

[Jim Kelly]

I use my three "cons" to objectively judge any artist. These are: consistency, continuity and economy.

Continuity means that one panel follows another in a good flow that tells the story. Economy is telling the story in an effective way with as little fat as possible. Consistency means that the artist sticks to his own rules and applies them uniformly throughout the story.

Many modern artists don't follow those three "cons" and I give them some latitude for that, but it's really the consistency that often seaparates a good style artist from a bad one. It's all right to violate anatomy, but you need to do it consistently and in the same way all through the story. An artist can't jump around in styles--one moment something looks realistic the next it looks out of whack--unless that's part of the story and done for effect at a specific moment to show a different state of consciousness.

In other words, the artist needs to know what he's doing. If the artist can't maintain a consistent style throughout a story, then he's not in control of his own art.

[Cybak]

Dude...
cap.jpg

there's "unconventional style" which you might not like and BAD art. Ian Bertram is my least favorite artist of the last five years, but i can respect his style. Same with Jones. I actually liked his batman (back then). Liefeld is a whole different thing.

I like Bertam's art and Quitely's also who apes to a degree and they are unconventional and I don't mind the exaggerated art. I am not a fan of Liefeld's he was only an example. Emanuel Simeoni just on Batman Eternal is another example, bad art or stylistic?

And I agree poor anatomy and exaggerated anatomy are two different things but I have seen art, Ethan Van Sciver who I believe falls into drawing both.

Mahmad Asrar seems to be a popular artist but I notice a lot of his work character's eyes are off and foreshortening is off sometimes too.

[Cybak]

I also think in the last 5 yrs or so many artists even the popular ones are guilty of "lazy art". The pages still look god but there is a rushed look. Jesus Merino on the early issues of Team 7 was not his greatest work but he did probably get a late start and it showed his work on JSA was much better and probably indicates a greater lead time.

[CrazyOldHermit]

I also think in the last 5 yrs or so many artists even the popular ones are guilty of "lazy art". The pages still look god but there is a rushed look. Jesus Merino on the early issues of Team 7 was not his greatest work but he did probably get a late start and it showed his work on JSA was much better and probably indicates a greater lead time.

I think the term lazy art is disrespectful. We don't know the backstory behind the pages and deadlines are a reality. If someone redraws a page three times but it still isn't ideal they aren't being lazy if they settle for a lesser page. Not every artist can afford to work and work and work on something until it's perfect, especially when there is a looming deadline.

[Carabas]

What is the difference from an artist with his own unique style, Kelley Jones for instance, to say Rob Liefeld who is often maligned for his poor grasp of anatomy?

Good artists with an excentric style have the ability to abandon that style and draw normally. Guys like Liefeld, doing that is the entirety of what they can do.

[PyroSikTh]

At the end of the day art is subjective. In a few cases, there can definitely be a piece of work or an artist who is universally regarded as being bad regardless of style. Then there are those who are considered bad because certain people don't like that certain style (for me that would be Frazer Irving's work; it's good on a technical basis, but to me the style is just horrendous and I can't understand how anyone can like it).

A good artist can draw in a style that is both likeable and unique (Frank Quietly and Bruce Timm are good examples).