|
|
Post by G on Dec 15, 2007 15:29:36 GMT -5
I personally can only look at his work as great. I love it. He's a legend, etc. What comes to mind when I think George Perez? Consistent. The man never got bad in my opinion. A lot of artists had a rise, got to their best work, stayed there for awhile and then started falling down. I see some of George's work today and it looks just as good if not better than it did 25 years ago.
What title comes to mind? Literally lots...but who could argue with New Teen Titans? That series rocked! George was on fire with that title. But I also found him to be a favorite of mine on Avengers and Justice League of America and of course the Crisis titles. Who was he better for Marvel or DC? I would think you might have to give the edge to DC. But, he was great for both.
I never found that he fell into any kind of trend in comics. He didnt have to. He always kept with his style. And Im glad he did.
Im sure Im leaving out some great Perez moments. But maybe that is where you can come in and remind us of what I missed. And oh yes, I think there will be some haters too. But in my mind a work by George is a work worth looking at.
|
|
|
|
Post by cfs on Dec 15, 2007 19:47:21 GMT -5
I personally can only look at his work as great. I love it. He's a legend, etc. What comes to mind when I think George Perez? Consistent. The man never got bad in my opinion. A lot of artists had a rise, got to their best work, stayed there for awhile and then started falling down. I see some of George's work today and it looks just as good if not better than it did 25 years ago. What title comes to mind? Literally lots...but who could argue with New Teen Titans? That series rocked! George was on fire with that title. But I also found him to be a favorite of mine on Avengers and Justice League of America and of course the Crisis titles. Who was he better for Marvel or DC? I would think you might have to give the edge to DC. But, he was great for both. I never found that he fell into any kind of trend in comics. He didnt have to. He always kept with his style. And Im glad he did. Im sure Im leaving out some great Perez moments. But maybe that is where you can come in and remind us of what I missed. And oh yes, I think there will be some haters too. But in my mind a work by George is a work worth looking at. I first met George Perez in 1981 at an Atlanta Comicon convention. I didn't know who artists were back then. He was drawing an incredible sketch of Wolverine for a fan. He was explaining that you had to draw the hairs just the right size so that when they are shrunk down, they won't turn into a blob of black in the comic. George was doing sketches and most of the fans were moving them to notable colorist Steve Oliff to color them. This is the same convention where they gave out Visions #3 which is an early Flaming Carrot appearance. I'm pretty sure I was two comics away from completing my X-Men run after that convention. I had to mail away to get a #1 and a #64. I later saw George at a Heroes Con. Nothing was more cool than the 1981 show when it was all new to me. cfs |
|
|
|
Post by G on Dec 19, 2007 8:31:18 GMT -5
We forgot to mention that George would probably be the king of Collage.
|
|
|
|
Post by cfs on Dec 19, 2007 12:09:49 GMT -5
We forgot to mention that George would probably be the king of Collage. George is a master at drawing team books where you have to fit a lot of characters and detail into a small space. I was at a comic shop drawing one day and I had problems figuring out a perspective. I was trying to draw a view down a street with buildings converging in the background. My problem was finding a way to make the buildings meet the streets. All my attempts to do so looked clumsy and out of proportion. It dawned upon me that there were thousands of comics in the store, why not steal someone's layout ideas?! So I sifted through hundreds of comics looking for a cover with a similar perspective. Bingo! George Perez had draw a cover like that for Teen Titan's! Perfect! When I looked at how George Perez the professional had solved my problem, I broke up laughing. Along the sides of the buildings at the base, he had drawn boulders! huge rocks along a city street. I smiled because I'm assuming he must have been struggling with the same problem I was having. I pondered whether it was intended to be bags of trash, but there was no bunched tops like a bag would have. It resembled boulders. This was a lesson for me that a cover doesn't have to be perfect. You just need to have a focus for the eye and keep the viewer fixed on the central focus. Being in the quality field, my inclination is to want art to be perfect when I'm drawing it. Since I can't draw, finding acceptable compromises is like a treasure to me. cfs |
|
|
|
Post by G on Dec 23, 2007 8:52:08 GMT -5
I think the man is sick....but I love it!  |
|
whetteon
New Hire
Posts: 89
I Am Offline!
|
Post by whetteon on Jan 2, 2008 12:58:30 GMT -5
I always thought his 1980's stuff was overrated. Yeah, yeah so he did montage with each character showing each tooth but so what?
His more recent work has been pretty amazing. Perhaps it's just the same old but using more modern technology that catches my eye and his nack for detail.
|
|
|
|
Post by G on Jan 8, 2008 0:07:48 GMT -5
I always thought his 1980's stuff was overrated. Yeah, yeah so he did montage with each character showing each tooth but so what? His more recent work has been pretty amazing. Perhaps it's just the same old but using more modern technology that catches my eye and his nack for detail. There were times it wasnt the best thing out there. I dont remember going around in the 80s and acting like everything he had I had to search for. I was more of a Byrne fan back in the 80s. That is, until he just got loose and sloppy. But, I think anytime you seen Perez, it generally was consistantly good. Not always great. Sometimes great. Sometimes passing. But, generally it was always good. I think if you look at his 70's work, he looks kind of raw and not so good. I didnt think his Inhumans was all that tight compared to where he was headed. In the 80s, he started becoming more of a name and his art was consistently there getting tighter. By the 90s he was becoming one of the Legends. He continued to get tighter in my opinion. And now, it seems like anything I see him do is refreshingly modern oldschool. He's one of the best at the kind of art I liked as a kid and young adult. And now I just admire his sheer amount of work and how he never really looked terrible. Mediocre was about as bad as it got, but never bad or terrible. Over 30 some years. That's not bad. I must say, I never went after his work and made it a point to get it, but I never felt disappointed when I did get it. After years and years, I feel he's earned a spot with the greats. |
|
whetteon
New Hire
Posts: 89
I Am Offline!
|
Post by whetteon on Jan 15, 2008 22:23:23 GMT -5
Yeah, I would say he's a great. But honestly, what REALLY stands out in his work? The consistence is what he's really known for. Just my two cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by G on Jan 15, 2008 22:46:39 GMT -5
Well, that's better than quite a few. Ive seen a lot of greats rise and then fall and usually its just because their work got looser and looser and looked more rushed and uncared for. It always appeared they started just turning one in instead of loving their craft and fans enough to give it their all. I never felt that from Perez. True, he's not the greatest. I think he is awesome at collages and outputting quality work year in and year out. Otherwise, you're right...not THAT special.
|
|
|
|
Post by leonmallett on Feb 16, 2008 12:29:18 GMT -5
Yeah, I would say he's a great. But honestly, what REALLY stands out in his work? The consistence is what he's really known for. Just my two cents. What stands out in his work? Well, as noted consistency is one. In addition: - technical ability, through use of perspective, level of detail, decent anatomy (in view of the genre - yes it is not realistic anatomy, but within context he is excellent) - panel layouts (check out some of his Titans issues to see him using some funky panel borders, and using them sparingly, and so when needed, not for the sake of it) - storytelling clarity (I have yet to read a Perez drawn book where I cannot understand what I am seeing), not all artists can do this, even some 'great' artists can create cluttered artwork that bogs the reader down (BWS, as much as I like him can be guilty of this) - signature effects (the shattered panel borders, his gaeous effects and so on) - his influence on others I am sure there are lots more signs of his sheer quality that could be included, but these are the factors that immediately spring to mind |
|
