Dave Galanter
December 1st 1969 - December 12th 2020
He was loved.

Marvel Universe >> View Post
·
Post By
DragynWulf

In Reply To
Tiger Shark

Subj: Re: What A Well-Considered Response! What's this About Your Finale W / Marvel?
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 at 12:54:45 pm EST
Reply Subj: What A Well-Considered Response! What's this About Your Finale W / Marvel?
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 at 11:55:34 am EST

Previous Post

Look, if they can't afford new art--which is really a presumption on your part--how do you know they're just not being lazy?--then AT LEAST selected DECENT 'older' ART. It's THAT Simple. Whoever is behind the art direction on this book is doing a mediocre job.

For example, the shot of Banshee about the time of the X-Corps was excellent, and there were a few nice (and recent) shots of Avalanche--so why not blow one of them up instead of using the crappy images they did that says to me, 'turn the Page, THAT looks really boring.' Avalanche looked more like Quasimodo than Avalanche.

Also, there is little or no consistency to the establishing images, as there was in the classic 80s edition.

This makes the book look throw-together piece-meal and just plain crappy.

As far the TPB and hardbound market is concerned, I expect it to go belly up soon. Thay've created a 'bubble' in a sense, that can only explode---talk about inflation and creating too much product for a small audience!

Every crappy Chuck Austen X-Men arc got a TPB. That's simply ridiculuous.

I'm happy to report that my comic store, the great Midtown Comics in Manhattan, has a whole bookcase (not just a shelf) FULL of TPBs and Hardbounds that the prices have been slashed on up to 80%.

And not all 'crap' either or very obscure 'Essentials'-style titles like 'Sgt. Rock.' We're talking Wolverine, the X-men, Batman, Spider Man, the FF, Superman, the JLA.

Who wants all those Crappy SM TPBs abotu his recent endless problems? Not too many.

The truth is there's a relatively small audience for this MASSIVE wave of hardbounds and TPBs the major two companies are producing.

Now, what's this about your dropping the Marvel habit, or whatever?

Explain.


> Look, if they can't afford new art--which is really a presumption on your part--how do you know they're just not being lazy?
>

They are not being lazy. They are being smart. Handbooks do not make the amount of money a normal comic does. This is a fact. By cutting costs and using exisiting artwork instead of commisioning new artwork, it drastically cuts the cost to make the Handbook. Therefore, by doing so, it makes publishing the Handbook a profit instead of a loss and because of that offset of not using new art, it allows the Handbooks to be published for as long as it has been unlike the previous 3 editions that were either cancelled or given a limited run because it cost too much to publish.

>then AT LEAST selected DECENT 'older' ART. It's THAT Simple. Whoever is behind the art direction on this book is doing a mediocre job.
>

The writer of the entry search for a full body image in a current costume. Quite a few times the writer has no alternative but to use images that they may not like themselves, but we have no alternative as we have guidelines to follow in order to make the Handbook cost effective in order to make them, which has gotten the Handbooks to the point that they are currently at.

As I mentioned below, it all comes down to what you like or dislike as far as artists. Some you will like and others you won't.

For the hardcovers, main image change were only made if a costume changed. Avalanche's did not, therefore no image change was made because it would have cost more money to do so when there was nothing wrong with the image used.

> For example, the shot of Banshee about the time of the X-Corps was excellent, and there were a few nice (and recent) shots of Avalanche--so why not blow one of them up instead of using the crappy images they did that says to me, 'turn the Page, THAT looks really boring.' Avalanche looked more like Quasimodo than Avalanche.
>

Because those other costumes were not his currnet costumes.

> Also, there is little or no consistency to the establishing images, as there was in the classic 80s edition.
>

What consistency are you looking for exactly? Each entry consistently shows main images of the characters in their current costume just as the classic 80's Edition did.

> This makes the book look throw-together piece-meal and just plain crappy.
>

Matter of opinion, but if you don't like it based on a few images, why buy it? There is always going to be a few images that you won't like.

> As far the TPB and hardbound market is concerned, I expect it to go belly up soon. Thay've created a 'bubble' in a sense, that can only explode---talk about inflation and creating too much product for a small audience!
>
> Every crappy Chuck Austen X-Men arc got a TPB. That's simply ridiculuous.
>

Yet it sold good enough to continue to make TPBs of all of them. Just because you might not like a story, does not mean others do not.

> I'm happy to report that my comic store, the great Midtown Comics in Manhattan, has a whole bookcase (not just a shelf) FULL of TPBs and Hardbounds that the prices have been slashed on up to 80%.
>

They are a few large stores and can afford to buy overstock in order to fill their shelves so that they can have something avalible for their comic shop customers or online store.

> Now, what's this about your dropping the Marvel habit, or whatever?
>
> Explain.

I think that is a bit rude on your part. He shouldn't have to "explain" anything just because you want it and you should take his comments that this is last work on the Handbook at face value.

Have a Nice Day!
-DragynWulf






Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2021 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2021 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2021 Powermad Software