Unpublished Indy Page!

Stoo

Well-known member
After that I hope the poor B%#@&*D is crying with shame!:D

Your right! But I think it's a nice fake.
Fake-Schmake. It was drawn by a "poor bastard", schlemiel.:D
Rocket Surgeon said:
I'd be surprised to hear that most artists we admire DON'T use light boxes/boards, (to "trace" pictures)!
No boubt, Rocket. I have a light box and have worked on light tables. Even the revered, Drew Struzan, uses an overhead projector. (I had one of those but it was just too damned cumbersome to keep.)

My point is: The perspective in the top panel is good. Why is the rest so bad? Because...the top panel was copied/traced from a photo and the artist obviously didn't know enough about perspective to do the other panels as well. (The line of scouts in panel #2 is, yet, another example.)(n)
Rocket Surgeon said:
I think the character style precludes depth, clashing with the background, (different artist?) and so supports your position. Maybe why its unpublished?

Maybe it was a test run to work out style...
Nah...There is only one artist credited. The reason why it's unpublished is, most likely, because it was NEVER INTENDED to be published! It reaks of a poor fan submission.

What publisher would hire an artist who is afraid to draw hands?:rolleyes:
Rocket Surgeon said:
Eh...maybe.

Junior?
Junior has already agreed with me.:p
 
Stoo said:
My point is: The perspective in the top panel is good. Why is the rest so bad? Because...the top panel was copied/traced from a photo and the artist obviously didn't know enough about perspective to do the other panels as well. (The line of scouts in panel #2 is, yet, another example.)(n)
I agree. The styles are vastly different...

I didn't think it that odd to have a background artist and a character artist.

Stoo said:
Nah...There is only one artist credited. The reason why it's unpublished is, most likely, because it was NEVER INTENDED to be published! It reaks of a poor fan submission.
Most likely.:)

Stoo said:
What publisher would hire an artist who is afraid to draw hands?:rolleyes:
A fetishist?
Stoo said:
Junior has already agreed with me.:p
Oh, I'm not asking for opinion!;)
 

JuniorJones

TR.N Staff Member
I agreed with Stoo's points in regards to the standard of the art and as it doesn't ring any memory bells there might be nothing more to add.

Still, I never been one for Dr Tyree's class and I think it a bit premature to discount it altogther especially when I'm on the case...;)
 

Stoo

Well-known member
JuniorJones said:
Still, I never been one for Dr Tyree's class and I think it a bit premature to discount it altogther especially when I'm on the case...;)
Keep on the case, JuniorJones, but it's probably a lost cause.

Here is my prediction:

-c.1990
-U.K. origin
-Amateur (who was +50 years old in 1990 with no formal, artistic training)
-Overweight, FAT guy! :eek:
 

JuniorJones

TR.N Staff Member
Stoo said:
-Amateur (who was +50 years old in 1990 with no formal, artistic training) -Overweight, FAT guy! :eek:

Ha!Ha! He's had too many pies which made his hands too fat to hold the pencil...:D
 
JuniorJones said:
Still, I never been one for Dr Tyree's class and I think it a bit premature to discount it altogther especially when I'm on the case...;)
Facts are preferrable, but still, this didn't come from the pencil of an artist near Lancashire?
 

JuniorJones

TR.N Staff Member
Rocket Surgeon said:
Facts are preferrable, but still, this didn't come from the pencil of an artist near Lancashire?

Well, it would be a good area for someone who like pies...but, no.

The work reminds me of Mike Parobeck and the timescales matches but not the signature.
 
Last edited:
Top