| Author |
|
Daniel Gillotte
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 October 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2683
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 2:32pm | IP Logged | 1
|
post reply
|
|
This thread provides a good example of "taste" and how it differs. I'm honestly gobsmacked that many of you prefer the Layton Secret Wars to the Zeck one. I like Layton pretty well (just started having fun following him on instagram) but to me the quality of the two covers are so stark with Zeck's rising (Cap's) head and shoulder over Layton's. It's like not even close- figure-wise, dynamism, lighting, etc. I imagine that this swap was actually more about lacking Spider-woman like someone else mentioned upthread.
Dumb question, probably- did artists get paid for unused covers?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133688
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 2:49pm | IP Logged | 2
|
post reply
|
|
I didn’t.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Dave Kopperman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 December 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3502
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 3:23pm | IP Logged | 3
|
post reply
|
|
There seriously wasn’t any kind of kill fee structure in place? That seems pretty screwed. Did cover work pay substantially more than interior work? There’s got to be some kind of incentive (beyond pride) to make it worth the hassle if there’s an increased risk of work being rejected. That last bit presupposes that covers received greater editorial scrutiny, which could be a totally false assumption on my part.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133688
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 3:41pm | IP Logged | 4
|
post reply
|
|
In part there was a lack of trust. Editors were afraid freelancers would turn in deliberately bad work, in order to collect that kill fee.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Dave Kopperman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 December 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3502
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 3:59pm | IP Logged | 5
|
post reply
|
|
If you play out that train of thought to its logical conclusion, then these freelancers would be pursuing a one-time payout over the possibility of reliably being assigned new work and earning a steady income. That seems... unlikely. I'm not sure if that means that a sizable portion of the freelancer pool was ethically challenged or if the editors were unexamined misanthropes.
Edited by Dave Kopperman on 18 December 2023 at 3:59pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133688
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 4:11pm | IP Logged | 6
|
post reply
|
|
For decades the publishers enjoyed two conditions. First, they were the only game in town. Anyone who didn’t like existing circumstances was free to go elsewhere—except there was no elsewhere. Second, fans/readers were much more character oriented. They weren’t, most of them, collecting artists and writers. Remember, it wasn’t until the Sixties that credits were introduced as a regular feature—mostly by Stan “Hogs All the Credit for Himself” Lee. The general attitude of publishers was parental. We freelancers were naughty children who had to be taught to behave properly!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Dave Kopperman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 December 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3502
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 4:28pm | IP Logged | 7
|
post reply
|
|
I wonder if it was in the publishers' best interests over the longer financial term to play into the whole 'disreputable underbelly of publishing' angle. If no-one thinks there's any real money there, the Feds will largely not bother digging in to any violations of anti-labor practices, and the freelancers will always be made to feel grateful for the work.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Andrew Bitner
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7527
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 8:46pm | IP Logged | 8
|
post reply
|
|
That might be giving them too much credit, Dave.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Eric Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 October 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 2386
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 9:43pm | IP Logged | 9
|
post reply
|
|
And here is this one by JB, which I'm sure we've seen in other threads here. I wonder how many other examples there are of creative teams/storylines switching after the cover was already done.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jim Petersman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 26 June 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 10:53pm | IP Logged | 10
|
post reply
|
|
Q4JB: If that She-Hulk cover was published years later in an Omnibus or other collection, how would your pay for the piece be determined?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 31324
|
| Posted: 18 December 2023 at 11:34pm | IP Logged | 11
|
post reply
|
|
Had you done any of the interior work of that issue at all?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Eric Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 October 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 2386
|
| Posted: 20 December 2023 at 10:53am | IP Logged | 12
|
post reply
|
|
This is a POSSIBLE unused cover, a painting by Earl Norem, and a mockup somebody (sorry, I missed the attribution) did, thinking it was intended for MARVEL PREVIEW #8. It's a good guess as this is one of the very few magazine issues that might have needed such a Norem painting for the cover. The printed one by Ken Barr is down below.
Edited by Eric Jansen on 20 December 2023 at 10:58am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
