"Just OK" and Better Comic Art

Not too long ago, my daughter asked me if I could go out and get some Chip 'n Dale comics for her to read.  How could I say no!  She was familiar with a modern version of the characters, so I went out and found some older Chip 'n' Dale comics for her.

We were looking at these books tonight, and I thought they would make for an interesting blog on the topic of "good" comic art vs. "just ok" comic art.  I am not an artist...just a consumer of comics with an eye that has seen many a comic book.  After a while, you start to see stuff, and realize, "Oh...that's a nice page!"  Take these two pages...one is from 1960, the other from 1978.  While appreciating a drawing is a subjective thing...one of these pages is, I think, a little better than the other.  Without reading further, care to guess which one is which (in your opinion)?

The one on the left is, if you look carefully, done in a "heavier" style.  It is less detailed and doesn't really jump out at you very much...it's kind of flat.  It is from 1978 and is typical of a lot of these types of comics from that era.  The work on the right has a finer line, carries more detail, uses shadow effectively and just comes off the page better than the other.  Do you agree with this assessment...or not...or do you think I am seeing things?

This type of thing could be taken to extremes.  If I put a run of the mill artist's page up against a Frank Frazetta or Neil Adams page, you would be able to see the quality (or lack thereof) right away.  I think this example, from two rather non-descript books, shows that there is a wide spectrum of ability displayed out there in old comics.  Even just a little difference in the work can go a long way.

Until next time....