The evolution of your drawing style

Got questions? He's got answers!
Post Reply
Paul Renaud
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:59 pm

The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Paul Renaud »

Hi Alan and forumers,

I've been thinking about posting a few questions to Alan about his work, knowing that his comments might be of interest to many artists and fans.

I was reading the new ClanDestine series again, and issue's 3 cover got me to check the original reference in Excalibur and I began to go through the pages with delight. I think it's very interesting to notice the evolution in one artist' style. Althought Excalibur will always be very dear to me since I discovered your work through the series, it's impossible not to catch the major improvements your art went through over the years.

I was wondering how you feel about it. Is there still any unsatisfaction in some areas of your work, driving you to keep on working to perfect your art?

Also comparing your early Excalibur issues to your more recent jobs, I was interested to see how you seem so much more comfortable now working with shadows and dark renderings, especially on faces and figures. It really has become a major part of your style.
The other consistant change would be the use of dynamic shapes for panel borders that you do now, and did not use back then.
These two aspects (shadows and panel shapes) got me to think of the work of Neal Adams. I know Neal Adams is an early influence on your work of course, and I was wondering if you consider that his influence is still somehow affecting your approach?
I know it might well be a natural evolution of your work due to the improvement of the printing process, but I'm just curious to know how you feel about it looking back at the evolution of your art.
A.D.fan
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:50 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by A.D.fan »

I'm also interested in these very same questions!
Alan Davis
Creator
Posts: 472
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 9:13 pm

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Alan Davis »

I was wondering how you feel about it. Is there still any unsatisfaction in some areas of your work, driving you to keep on working to perfect your art?
I don’t consider what I do as art. I draw and write stories. I’m a storyteller. And as such I am always dissatisfied by the distance between conception and realisation.
Also comparing your early Excalibur issues to your more recent jobs, I was interested to see how you seem so much more comfortable now working with shadows and dark renderings, especially on faces and figures. It really has become a major part of your style.
The vast majority of my earliest work for British publication-- Captain Britain, Harry 20, Marvelman and DR and Quinch-- was in black and white so I used far more black and shading—including letratone—as a matter of course.
When I began to work for DC I was asked to cut back on shading in order to leave space for colour.
Marvel had a far more definite policy when I began working for them. Shading and black were to be restricted to one plane of the art
Along with conceding to these demands my approach also evolved as a result of seeing what worked in print—survived the publication process. Drawing defensively! Flexographic printing was a particular nightmare because the plastic plates were fragile and drawing fine lines became pointless. So I began to draw more robustly, open and basic. When paper quality and publishing standards improved I began to use more black and rendering because the effort was visible on the printed page but more recently I have increased the amount of solid blacks as defensive adaptation to the excesses of digital colouring.
The other consistant change would be the use of dynamic shapes for panel borders that you do now, and did not use back then.
Again, I did use irregular/dynamic panels in the past but the primary reason I have used them far more extensively recently is another attempt to counter overbearing colour. Firstly because, as your question states, there is an inherent dynamism to the abstract forms (that I hoped may go some way to lifting the energy of pages that are often reduced to a murky flatness of browns and purples) but, more importantly, the shapes reduce the amount of empty space in the art that colourists invariably see as an opportunity to fill with irrelevant distraction.
These two aspects (shadows and panel shapes) got me to think of the work of Neal Adams. I know Neal Adams is an early influence on your work of course, and I was wondering if you consider that his influence is still somehow affecting your approach
?

Without a doubt, Neal was a major influence on my development-- As an illustrator, a storyteller and in understanding characterisation. Although I don’t consciously consider the influence I’m sure it remains a foundational element within my approach—And is possibly more obvious because the primary thing I took from Neal was the surface finish-- lighting. As Bill Sienkiewic said, Neal could double light Charlie Brown to look photo realistic. But, before any of the Wally Wood or Gene Colan fans get irate about ignoring their contribution to stylised comic lighting it was Neal’s work that ‘made sense’ to me (in conjunction with the Stan Drake exercise of tracing photos).

Although Neal was one of the main artists to use irregular panels in US comics I was already very comfortable with the concept because of Frank Bellamy’s explosive layouts on Heros the Spartan, Dan Dare and Thunderbirds. The ‘lightning’ edged panels, which I have also used recently, are pure Bellamy.
I know it might well be a natural evolution of your work due to the improvement of the printing process, but I'm just curious to know how you feel about it looking back at the evolution of your art.
As I explained above, a lot of the developments were by necessity or defensive and each job must be judged within the framework it was created. As a creator my only assessment of success can be if I achieved what I set out to do—as a story. Not as illustration and text separately. The success of any illustration depends on whether I achieved some degree of emotional reality, that’s where my focus is-- the drawing process itself feels almost incidental.

Alan
Alan Davis
Creator
Posts: 472
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 9:13 pm

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Alan Davis »

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
A.D.fan
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:50 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by A.D.fan »

Thanks for that response, Mr. Davis. I have thought it odd that you don't consider yourself an artist. Even you refer to craft of storytelling as an art. And rightly so because storytelling is an art. I would consider Shakespeare and Spielberg artists in their craft just as I would Rembrante, just to use a few examples. I don't want to make a debate of this, you are certainly entitled to your beliefs. I just thought it was odd (in an interesting sort of way) and I hope your aren't offended when I tell people my favorite comic book artist is Alan Davis!
Alan Davis
Creator
Posts: 472
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 9:13 pm

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Alan Davis »

To my mind the term artist is misused and abused (in much the same way as the term Genius). I have always believed an artist was someone who achieved a degree of excellence in their chosen field. So a musician, actor, film-maker, sportsman/woman, even a cook, can indeed be an artist if others believe they excel at what they do.
Row
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:09 am
Location: West Midlands, UK
Contact:

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Row »

Hi Alan,

The development of someones style is something I find very interesting.

I know that when we've discussed this in the past ( on Matt's previous forum board) you had mentioned that part of your style..or anyones style developes partly from the artistic shortcuts that you use/discover overtime...it maybe a gross over simpilification of the method, but it could be that using a certain shape for a head allows a stage or two of the rough drawing to be dropped, as it's something that over time the artist has become used to doing... akin to say driving a car, where it becomes almost a subconcious act for most of the time, like a muscle memory..or as my girlfriend has just said over my shoulder ' your own shorthand for drawing'.

I know from my own limited experience of drawing stories that I've found a few shortcuts that seem to suit me and allow me to produce work that is a little closer to the initial idea I saw in my mind's eye, but having said that I've looked back at work I've done from a couple of years ago and seen that the shorthand I was using was leading away from where I should have been.... the old 'practise makes prefect', but if the practise isn't prefect to begin with then that's a whole other ball game. Having said that there are times that something I've done previously with, for wont of a better description, my earlier 'shorthand' that has elements of something I like and trying to bring back into my work.....whether that is a mistake or not, only time will tell, and often does.

In regards to your panel layouts, I have noticed an interest thing.....well, from my point of view, anyway, as a would be storyteller.

I tend to find the standard 10"x15" live area restrictive to what I can present on a page, and I know that's purely my problem and something I have to work on....alas, some of the people I work for can't afford to print full bleed, and I know that's no excuse.

But I have noticed in a few books that you've worked on, that the over lapping panel layouts you've used actually seem to give you what would add up to an extra third to half a page space worth of information. over the usual straight grid style page layouts. As stupid as this sounds, for me it was a real eye opener that the restrictions of the page can be overcome in such away without lossing clarity and the flow of the story.


On a side note, Alan... you mentioned something in your first reply that has sparked my interest. The Stan Drake exercise of tracing photos. Do you have anymore information on this? I ask as someone who is always trying to improve on what they do, and I think I may have a rough idea of what the exercise entails and what can be learned from it and have more than likely at some point unknowingly done something similar, but I'm going to try and not presume too much about what it is, just incase I have the wrong end of the stick.

Thanks for you time, and I hope that my posts makes a little more sense then some of my earlier ones.

All the best.

Row.
When lady luck enters, get her a seat
Alan Davis
Creator
Posts: 472
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 9:13 pm

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Alan Davis »

The artistic shortcuts are often a result of experience and repetition but I don’t think the process of becoming comfortable with drawing is akin to muscle memory. It may well involve accessing the subconscious (but that’s a can of worms I don’t want to open) but I believe it has something to do with relaxing into the process. Learning to go with the flow.

You are spot on with your observation concerning irregular panels allowing for more information on the page. Its one of a number of benefits I have been exploring. I have to say though, that you are the first person to sound optimistic about the approach. So many people seem indoctrinated to the grid that they find any change disorienting or offensive.

The Stan Drake exercise, or at least my recollection of an interview I read years ago, was to simply take an A3 sheet of Velum (tracing paper) and trace faces and figures from magazines and newspapers until the page was filled. The photographs used shouldn’t be anything posed or arranged but natural, impromptu, reportage images. The idea is to do this daily, working quickly, broadly (with no noodling—maybe using a thick-ish felt tip) to capture the essence of the faces and figures. Its as simple as that but very revealing all the same.

Alan
Row
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:09 am
Location: West Midlands, UK
Contact:

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Row »

Cheers Alan,

I thought the Stan Drake experiment might have been something along the lines of shadows creating form to the figure or faces, using the method of tracing to allow the shading to give a volumetric form to the drawing...see, I'm trying not to presume so much from our previous thread discussions. I shall definately be giving that a try...it sounds a little similar to what I had to do during my 'A' level art course years ago, quick 30 second gesture drawing to capture the flow of the figure etc in a natural way... as you say without them being posed.

I do like the overlapping panel layouts, whether that puts me in the minority or not is a question for another day.
I can see the benefits of using this type of layout, from my limited experience of trying to use such a layout, I've found that I'm often creating not only a more dynamic flow across the page, but also not having to compromise important story elements within the panels to suit a standard grid layout. I've also found that from a design point of view that I can carry certain things from one panel into another ( such as an arm from one panel becoming part of a rock formation in another, for example)

I do think there is an awful lot of benefit to be gained, not only from a design point, but also as a way of guiding the reader across the page when using the overlapping panels/elements, and it's something that I'll be pursuing more in the future.

Thanks for the reply.

All the best.

Row
When lady luck enters, get her a seat
A.D.fan
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:50 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by A.D.fan »

To my mind the term artist is misused and abused (in much the same way as the term Genius). I have always believed an artist was someone who achieved a degree of excellence in their chosen field. So a musician, actor, film-maker, sportsman/woman, even a cook, can indeed be an artist if others believe they excel at what they do.
In that case, I believe you are simply modest, because you are excellent in your chosen field! And that modesty is refreshing in the world we live in! On a similar note--I'm dying for some new excellence from you. When can we expect some?
Paul Renaud
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:59 pm

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Paul Renaud »

Alan Davis wrote: I don’t consider what I do as art. I draw and write stories. I’m a storyteller.
Understood.
I used "art" for the lack of a better term. I'm not as fluent in English as I would like.
(Maybe "craftmanship" would be better to define the mere drawing part of the storytelling process? ).
Alan Davis wrote:And as such I am always dissatisfied by the distance between conception and realisation.
Would you say you're more satisfied with your comics than you used to be?
JLA : The Nail and Another Nail are very ambitious projects in term of storytelling and the amount of characters and informations told. It is the same with FF: The End.
Surely you must feel somehow more confident about your capabilities to deal with such huge projects as these?

Alan Davis wrote:The vast majority of my earliest work for British publication-- Captain Britain, Harry 20, Marvelman and DR and Quinch-- was in black and white so I used far more black and shading—including letratone—as a matter of course.
When I began to work for DC I was asked to cut back on shading in order to leave space for colour.
Marvel had a far more definite policy when I began working for them. Shading and black were to be restricted to one plane of the art
Along with conceding to these demands my approach also evolved as a result of seeing what worked in print—survived the publication process. Drawing defensively! Flexographic printing was a particular nightmare because the plastic plates were fragile and drawing fine lines became pointless. So I began to draw more robustly, open and basic. When paper quality and publishing standards improved I began to use more black and rendering because the effort was visible on the printed page but more recently I have increased the amount of solid blacks as defensive adaptation to the excesses of digital colouring.
I won't go further on the colorists topic as there's a whole thread dedicated to this discussion.
On the bright side, drawing defensively as you do brought us some very great pages. Killraven for instance really beneficited from the solid blacks and black renderings in my point of view.
But then, I remember it to be respectfully coloured, and it might be the reason why it stands as such in my memory.
Alan Davis wrote:Without a doubt, Neal was a major influence on my development-- As an illustrator, a storyteller and in understanding characterisation. Although I don’t consciously consider the influence I’m sure it remains a foundational element within my approach—And is possibly more obvious because the primary thing I took from Neal was the surface finish-- lighting. As Bill Sienkiewic said, Neal could double light Charlie Brown to look photo realistic. But, before any of the Wally Wood or Gene Colan fans get irate about ignoring their contribution to stylised comic lighting it was Neal’s work that ‘made sense’ to me (in conjunction with the Stan Drake exercise of tracing photos).
That is a great quote!
Alan Davis wrote:Although Neal was one of the main artists to use irregular panels in US comics I was already very comfortable with the concept because of Frank Bellamy’s explosive layouts on Heros the Spartan, Dan Dare and Thunderbirds. The ‘lightning’ edged panels, which I have also used recently, are pure Bellamy.

Frank Bellamy is sadly underknown in France, and I think in USA too.
http://www.frankbellamy.com/


Alan Davis wrote: As I explained above, a lot of the developments were by necessity or defensive and each job must be judged within the framework it was created. As a creator my only assessment of success can be if I achieved what I set out to do—as a story. Not as illustration and text separately. The success of any illustration depends on whether I achieved some degree of emotional reality, that’s where my focus is-- the drawing process itself feels almost incidental.

Alan
Thank you very much for the answers Alan!
Alan Davis
Creator
Posts: 472
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 9:13 pm

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Alan Davis »

Understood.
I used "art" for the lack of a better term. I'm not as fluent in English as I would like.
(Maybe "craftmanship" would be better to define the mere drawing part of the storytelling process? ).
It’s not a problem with your fluent English, Paul. Artist is a term with multiple meanings and, in my opinion, used by the pretentious to sound worthy, intellectual, superior. I believe comics should be entertainment. IF the comics are good enough some might judge them as ‘ART’. But if creators set out to produce ‘ART’ it’s usually self indulgent and rarely entertaining.
Would you say you're more satisfied with your comics than you used to be?
JLA : The Nail and Another Nail are very ambitious projects in term of storytelling and the amount of characters and informations told. It is the same with FF: The End.
Surely you must feel somehow more confident about your capabilities to deal with such huge projects as these?
No. I’m never satisfied. All I can ever see are the deficiencies.
The Nail. Another Nail and FF: The End all actually have very simple story arcs at their heart. Perhaps rather simplistically, a simple story can carry additional layers of complexity while a more complex story (like Killraven) needs to be told very simply.
The five issue ClanDestine series was the most complex story I had attempted (in the hope of setting the stage for subsequent series). In part because of being required to reintroduce the basic concepts and introduce longer ranging plot threads. The potential scale wasn’t something I felt confident (or not) about. I know the characters. I try to make my story arcs as tight as possible. After that it’s all a leap into the dark.

Hopefully the three annuals I’m working on will satisfy those who did follow/support the ClanDestine.
On the bright side, drawing defensively as you do brought us some very great pages. Killraven for instance really beneficited from the solid blacks and black renderings in my point of view.
But then, I remember it to be respectfully coloured, and it might be the reason why it stands as such in my memory.
Greg Wright did a terrific job on Killraven as did John Kalisz on Another Nail. And I think you’re correct that the ‘blackline’ was well served by the colour in both instances-- which is perhaps something most readers don’t recognise because they can only judge the published comic, so if the colour obliterates or obscures the blackline, the entire illustration is judged deficient.
Frank Bellamy is sadly underknown in France, and I think in USA too.
http://www.frankbellamy.com/
Have you checked out the Bellamy work in the Inspiration page of my Website
http://www.alandavis-comicart.com/ADInspiration.html
Paul Renaud
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:59 pm

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Paul Renaud »

Alan Davis wrote: It’s not a problem with your fluent English, Paul. Artist is a term with multiple meanings and, in my opinion, used by the pretentious to sound worthy, intellectual, superior. I believe comics should be entertainment. IF the comics are good enough some might judge them as ‘ART’. But if creators set out to produce ‘ART’ it’s usually self indulgent and rarely entertaining.
I see.
Too me, the use of the word "art" for the penciller's work is something I've learned from American comics, in the credits. I don't use that word for its real meaning, but as way to describe the visual part of the book...and in that I contribute to the misuse of the word, I agree.
In French comics, the term art is very rarely used (which is somehow surprising since comics here are more highly regarded than in America). Both contributors are usually called authors, and the "artist" is called draftsman.
No. I’m never satisfied. All I can ever see are the deficiencies.
The Nail. Another Nail and FF: The End all actually have very simple story arcs at their heart. Perhaps rather simplistically, a simple story can carry additional layers of complexity while a more complex story (like Killraven) needs to be told very simply.
The five issue ClanDestine series was the most complex story I had attempted (in the hope of setting the stage for subsequent series). In part because of being required to reintroduce the basic concepts and introduce longer ranging plot threads. The potential scale wasn’t something I felt confident (or not) about. I know the characters. I try to make my story arcs as tight as possible. After that it’s all a leap into the dark.
That's interesting.
I would have thought those stories (The NAil and FF) to be more complicated to write based on the mere numbers of characters to deal with.
I remember Bruce Timm said he had a hard time writing Justice League and JLU shows compared to the Superman and Batman solo adventures. He explained that every character had to be part of the plot, had to make the story go on in his particular way..and so dealing with a huge team was a lot of work as a huge rock to lift (I think he was referring to Justice League Unlimited where almost every major characters of the DC universe was there).
Alan Davis wrote: Hopefully the three annuals I’m working on will satisfy those who did follow/support the ClanDestine.
Yes, I remember you answering about this here:
http://www.alandavis-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=361
Alan Davis wrote:I’m currently working on three annuals for next year, FF, DD and Wolverine-- and though I can’t go into detail-- ClanDestine fans will not be disappointed (I hope). I should also mention that the Thor: Truth of history book has a connection to the ClanDestine legend.


This sounds very exciting! I suppose you still cannot go into detail at this point, but do you consider those 3 annuals as chapters of a same story (with cliff-hangers at the end), or stand-alone stories with a common subplot?
Alan Davis wrote: Have you checked out the Bellamy work in the Inspiration page of my Website
http://www.alandavis-comicart.com/ADInspiration.html
I just did. This is incredible.
Hero The Spartan is the one I'm most familiar with, but I have to say Fraser of Africa and the Sheperd King look fantastic!
I really love the use of a short range of colours. Works so well with the linework and blacks. And it brings such a wild atmosphere to it.
Would you know if those stories have been collected or if they're availlable somewhere?
Alan Davis
Creator
Posts: 472
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 9:13 pm

Re: The evolution of your drawing style

Post by Alan Davis »

I see.
Too me, the use of the word "art" for the penciller's work is something I've learned from American comics, in the credits. I don't use that word for its real meaning, but as way to describe the visual part of the book...and in that I contribute to the misuse of the word, I agree.
In French comics, the term art is very rarely used (which is somehow surprising since comics here are more highly regarded than in America). Both contributors are usually called authors, and the "artist" is called draftsman.
I’m sure many regard me as playing a semantic game or being pointlessly pedantic but I do believe the word artist has been adopted as a title to give status of gravitas to a fairly mundane job that, to the general public, is considered somewhere between juvenile and contemptible. I agree with the European designations for authors and creators, believing the ‘title’ artist should be earned. As it stands, any artist who does excel is designated a phenomenon or genius which make one wonder what title will need to be created for someone who actually does something really worthwhile like develop the unified field theory.

That's interesting.
I would have thought those stories (The NAil and FF) to be more complicated to write based on the mere numbers of characters to deal with.
I remember Bruce Timm said he had a hard time writing Justice League and JLU shows compared to the Superman and Batman solo adventures. He explained that every character had to be part of the plot, had to make the story go on in his particular way..and so dealing with a huge team was a lot of work as a huge rock to lift (I think he was referring to Justice League Unlimited where almost every major characters of the DC universe was there).
It is true that every character has a role to play but if you know the characters they can find their own role. Perhaps it was easier for me because I didn’t need to do any research on continuity— In both cases I relied on knowledge accumulated in my misspent youth.

This sounds very exciting! I suppose you still cannot go into detail at this point, but do you consider those 3 annuals as chapters of a same story (with cliff-hangers at the end), or stand-alone stories with a common subplot?
No Comment!

I just did. This is incredible.
Hero The Spartan is the one I'm most familiar with, but I have to say Fraser of Africa and the Sheperd King look fantastic!
I really love the use of a short range of colours. Works so well with the linework and blacks. And it brings such a wild atmosphere to it.
Would you know if those stories have been collected or if they're availlable somewhere?
Heros has never been collected to my Knowledge but there were colour publications some years ago but I don’t know how easy it would be to get hold of them now.
High Command from Dragons Dream 1981.
Fraser of Africa from Hawk Books 1990.
Thunderbirds by Ravette books 1991-1992 (six books/magazines)
Dan Dare by Hawk Books 1993- (available but at a very inflated price)
Garth (black and white) was published by Titan. (two books) 1984-85
Timeview-- the complete Doctor Who illustrations. (B/w and colour) 1985 Who dares publishing.
Robin Hood and King Arthur Book palace books. 2008-2009 (easily and cheaply available) These are early Bellamy, in black and white. Very nicely reproduced wonderful art.

Alan
Post Reply