"Cinema Tengu" & "A Miracle For Creator Rights"

From time to time I'm asked whether I use a computer to create my images. To this question I always answer with a firm "No, unless a Xerox machine counts..." and explain that I DO use a computer to scan and conduct digital clean-up for online presentation, but at the end of the day I'm an ink-stud, not a mouse technician. Personally, I'd be overjoyed if my responsibility with a piece ended once the ink is dry and the last shard of zip-a-tone is cut, but the fact that I don't do this professionally nor do I have art curators or comics publishers beating down my door leaves me with no other option than to make this "art" accessible and enjoyable for the online community.

I pretty much draw for myself out of the love of solving spatial problems, trying to maintain complexity while staying as iconic as possible within a singular image, and illustrating subjects I find compelling or engrossing based on my influence from the world at large (okay, mostly comics...) but I put it up here for all of you readers 1) because you might get a kick out of it and 2) well, I think it's the only thing that separates me from every other working stiff who's gonna work til they're 65 and die someday.

So anyway, without any further self-centered lamentation on my part I present my latest piece, "Cinema Tengu" (which is a bit of a callback to a piece I drew last summer - Tengu).



So, here's the final grayscale and primary color infused scans of this 3-piece composition, lightly cleaned in Photoshop. This however, is the end digital product of my efforts and I'll be showing you through the originals as well...





Here are the matted originals of the final zip-a-tone treatment...



And here is the matted originals of the initial concept line art and the 1st generation zip-a-tone of the original drawing...



For the second part of this post you'll need to go back to that glorious moment on July 24th when Marvel Editor-In-Chief and continually dynamic artist Joe Quesada revealed that Marvel had secured the rights to the most disputed superhero of all time, Miracleman. Now, needless to say I was extremely jazzed by this news both because (most likely) we'll finally see Alan Moore's run on the title collected and because Joe Q made it very clear that Mick Anglo (original creator of "Marvelman" in the UK) signed off on this deal, which however roundabout, is a creator rights victory...

So, presented here is the tribute piece I wrote in the heat of the moment and the ensuing tribute drawing to mark the occasion. Both are followed by the Quesada color-study of the character directly below...



"A Miracle For Creator Rights" By Joshua Nelson

If someone would have asked me yesterday which was more likely to happen before I died, the Miracleman legal battle ending or the Crazy Horse Memorial being finished I would have gone with Crazy Horse, hands down. The character and reprint rights for "Miracleman/Marvelman" have been mired in a legal swamp since the mid-90s and I was shocked to see that Marvel had acquired both of these today...

This is an astounding development and an unexpectedly ironic victory for creator rights. First, Todd McFarlane, creator of "Spawn" who in the 80s and early 90s was one of mainstream comics' more staunch creator rights advocates lost his long & overtly hypocritical battle to remain a contending "owner" of this character's rights, and in effect freed the character from publishing limbo. Secondly, thanks to Neil Gaiman's legal organization "Marvels & Miracles", the reprint rights (at least for the material released by Eclipse Comics) to the character have been sold to Marvel.





It's a complete inversion of last year's Superman case, in which Jerry Siegel's Estate was actually able to retain the copyright for him and Joe Shuster's original "Action Comics" Superman run and sold the rights to indie comics house Oni Press 2 days after the ruling... Even taking into account how hilariously Sara Palin-ish Mcfarlane and his legal team have been in past court legal matters ((wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_twist#Lawsuit_against_Todd_McFarlane) <- In another ironic yet inconsequential twist, McFarlane was once a part owner of the NHL's Edmonton Oilers), it's still embarrassing that he couldn't even preserve the status quo of limbo... And who would have thought that in the end, the character's rights would end up at America's premiere mainsteam comics publisher (via "Marvel & Miracles") rather than being sold as what would probably have easily been the most successful independent comic since the black & white explosion of the early 80s??? I have a feeling Alan Moore ("Watchmen", "V For Vendetta") and his future "Swamp Thing" collaborator John Totleben's run is probably the gold everyone was after, but it's a pretty impressive roster of creators who worked on this character and I'm sure Neil Gaiman ("Sandman" "Coraline") & Mark Buckingham's run has its own merits. Anyway, I can't wait until this stuff is out there and us fans can finally see what all the fuss was about.



I guess, at the very least, now we can say that the "Comic" aspect of "Comic Con International" hasn't completely been eroded by Hollywood and the video game industry...

Major props to Joe Quesada, Dan Buckley, The Marvel Legal Team, Neil Gaiman, and Mick Anglo on getting this done. Lastly, there's still an act left in this play and I wonder what Alan Moore thinks of these developments, given his tenuous history with Marvel over Captain Britain and the obvious supposition that they're going to make his name HUGE on the cover of this to cash in on the bookstore market...

And hey, if you read this far, thanks for the ego-stroke... I know this is confusing and inconsequential to normal folk, but I've been watching this play out for a long time and had to submit my humble opinion to the public...

Peace!

The Final Word On "Motion Comics"

Welcome,
I bet all of you who actually check the site didn't expect me to return after almost 4 months with an informal essay, but it's my website and I'm way behind on scanning artwork. Rest assured, there is new artistic content en route. But for now, enjoy my final word on "Motion Comics"...

To begin, last year Warner Brothers (owner of DC Comics) started their "motion comics" initiative. The content of these products is essentially "animated" comic panels via zooms, pans, and narration/sound effects. The most well-known of these is the 12 episode presentation of Alan Moore & Dave Gibbon's "Watchmen" which was released in Itunes and DVD format to coincide to with the release of the recent film. Warner/DC has led the charge thus far, with "Watchmen", various Batman and Superman shorts, and an upcoming batch "Peanuts" shorts, but now Marvel has put their offering on the table with last week's release of the first episode "Spider-Woman" on Itunes and an announcement that Joss Whedon & John Cassaday's "Astonishing X-Men" run will get the "motion comics" treatment.

So now that the big 2 have flexed their game and entered the arena, I'm compelled to take a definitive stand on this new advent of the industry. Before I begin, it's at least worth noting that these methods for animation were routinely utilized, albeit in analog form, to create many of the Marvel cartoons of the 60s and 70s and the genesis of what we're seeing in today's "motion comics" is right there in the MTV animated adaptation of Sam Kieth's "The Maxx" only 15 years ago. However, "Maxx" did cross the line by having genuinely animated scenes, and by this I mean "real movement" of characters, objects, interspersed with what we're seeing in "motion comics" today.



My opinion is that to their credit, these "motion comics" are basically a clever way for comics publishers to sell their printed content to people who are one of 2 ways...

A) People who are too passive or unimaginative to read the stories as they're meant to be read. The atrocious voice acting for "Spider-Woman" make it all too apparent how much Bendis (series writer) has lost a step in the dialogue department and should just be an editor. But there ARE instances where this does work, at least when infused with familiarity, like with Kevin Conroy (voice of Bats from the 90s "Batman:The Animated Series") voicing some of the Batman B&W shorts. Some people just plain hate to read, some people view the comics page as some kind of puzzle, and others just like to sit and watch with no cognitive dissonance crowding up their head...

B) I understand Group B a little better as a guy who's into comics, knows a bit about their history in America, and tries to almost no avail to make sure folks know that not everything in this medium is Archie and Superheroes. Group B is comprised of mostly people who are afraid of the stigma that STILL exists with respect to printed comics and their acquisition. How many "casual readers" do you really think frequent a direct market comic shop? Uh, not many... Publishers might bag a few of these folks a week at Barnes & Noble, but it's the exception to the bookstore demographic (at least until those "Twilight" comics hit) and a lucky break for the comics industry.



Let's just be no-nonsense about this, most lowest common denominators and even a significant chunk of more culturally-enlightened Americans 25 years and older would think comics were a completely valid form of entertainment in the same league as books, film, television if the print medium of comics, its entire history, and most importantly its association with their childhood were somehow erased and these "motion comics" OR their printed source were to appear out of the ether as some bold new storytelling medium. Of course, we all know this is impossible but think about it the next time you see someone checking out content on their Kindle or Iphone that isn't completely text based.

To conclude, my problem with "motion comics" lies more with terminology and the erosion of its source art form's perception than it does with with the sanctity of the printed work . Heck, I think it's great that publishers are taking this low-cost chance to rake in new fans. I only hope that they have the same mindset that I do in that I believe purity of expression will prevail when these folks, should they have the opportunity, compare the analog oasis to its digital mirage.



These products are not comics, they are animation made on-the-cheap specifically for view on mobile devices. Comics, on the other hand, is a unique and complex storytelling language that demands equal participation on the creator's part in producing the work and the reader's part in being fully engaged in what is a highly stimulating and interactive reading experience should they desire one.

In essence, unless we plan on calling all regular comics "still films" or something equally absurd and disrespectful to its source medium this conversation (at least for awhile) is over.