Are there any other artists -

[Mee]

You know, I've seen that several times at Half Price Books and was just never that interested. I might have to pick it up, now.

It's worth a read I guess. Not great, but pretty good.

 

[deathfromabove]

Agreed with that. I like Jim Lee because his art is so real, it could happen, whereas Tim Sale is so out there, so expressionistic it doesn't feel right.

However that, I guess, is the great comic book versus realism debate, that is best left for another day!

jim lee's artwork is not realistic. 18 inch waists, 40 inch busts, and 20 inch arms are not realistic at all. i would say his artwork is closer to a (expertly rendered) standard comic book stylization. is he more realistic than say, tim sale? maybe, but not by much. if you compare him to naturalistic art by the likes of mazzuchelli or michael lark then the difference is obvious.

 

[BubbaGump]

No one's mentioned Neal Adams? Thought that was pretty obvious...

 

[Mee]

Which is why we didn't. You fail!

 

[The Guard]

Brian Bolland tends to draw pretty realistically.

 

[JokerLedger]

After 2 pages I can't believe nobody mentioned Alex Ross.
He draws the most realistic batman.

 

[theMan-Bat]

gah! no it's not...look at his chest, look at how is arm is bent in a crazy, impossible way...it's terrible. not as bad as the one above, but thats like saying "well, torture isnt bad, but only in comparison to death."

It's not merely exaggerated, it's distinctively Jones. Let him off the hook on the grounds of artistic licence. There are enough Batman artists out there to please anyones taste in artwork.

 

[Joker]

Yes, it's distinctively crap that's on the same level as Rob Leifeld.

 

[theMan-Bat]

After 2 pages I can't believe nobody mentioned Alex Ross.
He draws the most realistic batman.

I mentioned him.

 

[RogueDK]

No one's mentioned Neal Adams? Thought that was pretty obvious...

Agreed.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Yes, it's distinctively crap that's on the same level as Rob Leifeld.

Not at all. Jones doesn't plagiaris other artists.

 

[Matthew Allison]

I'm not sure why Lee and Adams' work is being labeled as realistic. Both artists draw their characters as if the costumes were painted onto their bodies and they render every vein and sinew as if Batman were constantly flexing. As far as anatomy goes in general they both give Batman a physique that would require spending 5 or 6 hours in the gym every day.

Now, I love Neal Adams (I can tolerate Jim Lee, for the most part), but heavy detail and cross-hatching doesn't equal realism.

Mazzuchelli is far and away the most "realistic" artist mentioned.

 

[Doctor Baywatch]

Neal Adams makes "idealized realism"

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Mazzuchelli is far and away the most "realistic" artist mentioned.

Ross is.

 

[Matthew Allison]

Ross is.

You're right, for the most part, but Ross' work takes into consideration the whole fantastical DC universe, whereas the story Mazzuchelli drew dealt with an almost "real world" view of the material. The Batman in that story was a man in a costume taking on gangsters and cops while the Batman seen in Kingdom Come and Justice is in a pure fantasy environment. I also think that Mazzuchelli's version of Batman's costume is closer to what a real person would wear as opposed to the more traditional comic book-style suit Ross uses.

Ross also goes out of his way to include very dynamic, comic-booky compositions in his stories while the artwork in Batman:Year One takes on a more straight-forward approach.

It's debatable.

 

[deathfromabove]

Yes, it's distinctively crap that's on the same level as Rob Leifeld.

uh, no comparison. leifeld is a complete hack

"should i look down and say it or just say it"

 

[RogueDK]

I'm not sure why Lee and Adams' work is being labeled as realistic. Both artists draw their characters as if the costumes were painted onto their bodies and they render every vein and sinew as if Batman were constantly flexing. As far as anatomy goes in general they both give Batman a physique that would require spending 5 or 6 hours in the gym every day.

Now, I love Neal Adams (I can tolerate Jim Lee, for the most part), but heavy detail and cross-hatching doesn't equal realism.

Mazzuchelli is far and away the most "realistic" artist mentioned.

I sort of agree with you on Lee's incarnation but for Neal Adams, when he took the character on, there wasn't anything like it at the time. I mean he took Bats out of the campy doldrums of the 50s-early 60s art with a stylized realism that isn't quite rivaled to this day.
Hypothetically, if we had this arguement 35 years ago, how many artists could you list that were on par with him? I can assure not many. Nowadays, everyone's a headhunter so it's a more competitve field to debate from.

So Adams gets a nod from me although his aptitude on Batman goes without saying...

I also believe it's a generational thing that kinda comes into play. Mazzuchelli draws a good Bats but it doesn't blow me away with realism like N.A.'s does... I understand & respect those though who think otherwise.

 

[Matthew Allison]

Sure, when you compare Adams to someone such as Infantino (and I'm not knocking Infantino. He was great.) you can see an elevation of craft that, at the time, was very exciting. Adams still blows away most of the artists working today in terms of pure drawing ability and composition.

In the context of the question asked in this thread though, these...

...have a kind of realism that this does not...

Obviously, though, Miller and Mazzuchelli were re-thinking Batman, just as O'Neil and Adams did, but in my opinion they were going even further with the realism in a way that went beyond the 70's books.

Somebody else not mentioned yet is Gene Colan. He's really an unsung Batman artist who did some great work right up until Dark Knight Returns and Burton's BATMAN caused the late 80's/early 90's Bat-mania.

 

[RogueDK]

Matthew, I guess I'm too much of an Adams-Bot to see it otherwise and I know that you're making valid points; I'm not that stubborn to realize that. IMHO, Adams' talents were just very impressionable to me as a small child compounded with the fact that I've been a huge Batman fan all of my life. t:

There is Adams' Batman...and then their is everyone else's...the rest are strangers.

And btw, I think that I draw a realistic Batman...I'm just a nobody though for now. One of the strangers.

And you're right about Gene Colan. But he's been amazing on every title he's touched.

 

[Matthew Allison]

That's fantastic work.

 

[RogueDK]

That's fantastic work.

Thanks, man.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Alex Ross does a very realistic Batman, almost too much so.

 

[deathfromabove]

I sort of agree with you on Lee's incarnation but for Neal Adams, when he took the character on, there wasn't anything like it at the time. I mean he took Bats out of the campy doldrums of the 50s-early 60s art with a stylized realism that isn't quite rivaled to this day.
Hypothetically, if we had this arguement 35 years ago, how many artists could you list that were on par with him? I can assure not many. Nowadays, everyone's a headhunter so it's a more competitve field to debate from.

So Adams gets a nod from me although his aptitude on Batman goes without saying...

I also believe it's a generational thing that kinda comes into play. Mazzuchelli draws a good Bats but it doesn't blow me away with realism like N.A.'s does... I understand & respect those though who think otherwise.

Sure, when you compare Adams to someone such as Infantino (and I'm not knocking Infantino. He was great.) you can see an elevation of craft that, at the time, was very exciting. Adams still blows away most of the artists working today in terms of pure drawing ability and composition.



Obviously, though, Miller and Mazzuchelli were re-thinking Batman, just as O'Neil and Adams did, but in my opinion they were going even further with the realism in a way that went beyond the 70's books.

Somebody else not mentioned yet is Gene Colan. He's really an unsung Batman artist who did some great work right up until Dark Knight Returns and Burton's BATMAN caused the late 80's/early 90's Bat-mania.

i agree with both of you. adams brought such an elevated level of realism at the time that is hard to put in context. but its efffect can not be understated.

and neither can miller's impact with year one (and tdkr). and the style in just mazzuchelli's four issues has been copied and referenced dozens of times since.

Matthew, I guess I'm too much of an Adams-Bot to see it otherwise and I know that you're making valid points; I'm not that stubborn to realize that. IMHO, Adams' talents were just very impressionable to me as a small child compounded with the fact that I've been a huge Batman fan all of my life. t:

There is Adams' Batman...and then their is everyone else's...the rest are strangers.




And btw, I think that I draw a realistic Batman...I'm just a nobody though for now. One of the strangers.

And you're right about Gene Colan. But he's been amazing on every title he's touched.

nice work...

 

[RogueDK]

i agree with both of you. adams brought such an elevated level of realism at the time that is hard to put in context. but its efffect can not be understated.

and neither can miller's impact with year one (and tdkr). and the style in just mazzuchelli's four issues has been copied and referenced dozens of times since.



nice work...

Thanks for the comp, death.

 

[Joker]

Not at all. Jones doesn't plagiaris other artists.

That's the least of Leifields crimes, and the only one Jones doesnt commit.