I am curious about what the people here at the board think are the required qualifications for a creator to be deserving to be featured in this Disney Masters series.
Do you think an artist must have for example say a minium number of stories created? Should an artist's output exceed a certain grade score or number of votes of his/hers stories in total at the INDUCKS? Do the stories need to be of a certain significance in the duck universe? {E.G. introduce new characters, key plot content or something similar? If a story was penciled by artist X but inked by artist Y, would it be suitable to feature the story in a DM volume of artist X or Y?
Any other qualifications you come up with are of interest!
Post by Dr Ivo G Bombastus on Jun 11, 2019 17:08:40 GMT
The criteria they've followed so far seems to be "introduce new characters, key plot content etc". The other factor would be whether the stories have been published or republished in English recently, as it appears to be geared towards filling in the missing slots in long time fans' collections.
If a story was penciled by artist X but inked by artist Y, would it be suitable to feature the story in a DM volume of artist X or Y?
I'd say the pencil artist always ranges above the inker in cases like these. For example: you don't make a Giorgio Cavazzano volume filled with Romano Scarpa stories that Cavazzano merely inked (even though, of course, his inking did affect the final result). The main artist in such a case is still Romano Scarpa.
If a story was penciled by artist X but inked by artist Y, would it be suitable to feature the story in a DM volume of artist X or Y?
I'd say the pencil artist always ranges above the inker in cases like these. For example: you don't make a Giorgio Cavazzano volume filled with Romano Scarpa stories that Cavazzano merely inked (even though, of course, his inking did affect the final result). The main artist in such a case is still Romano Scarpa.
I'd say the pencil artist always ranges above the inker in cases like these. For example: you don't make a Giorgio Cavazzano volume filled with Romano Scarpa stories that Cavazzano merely inked (even though, of course, his inking did affect the final result). The main artist in such a case is still Romano Scarpa.
I am curious about what the people here at the board think are the required qualifications for a creator to be deserving to be featured in this Disney Masters series.
Are the comics worth owning in hardcover format? Yes or no?
That's really all I care about.
Last Edit: Jun 13, 2019 17:26:22 GMT by squeakyboots
I am curious about what the people here at the board think are the required qualifications for a creator to be deserving to be featured in this Disney Masters series.
Are the comics worth owning in hardcover format? Yes or no?
That's really all I care about.
Isn't that up to you to decide, though? Depending on the creators and comics selected so far, are there any books you are tempted to buy? The production values (binding, paper quality etc) are quite nice, so from that perspective I'd say yes.
I think they're all worth the hardback treatment given their re-readability and the fact that any worthwhile monthly titles are now extinct (although the re-readability of "King of the Golden River" is debatable).
I think they're all worth the hardback treatment given their re-readability and the fact that any worthwhile monthly titles are now extinct (although the re-readability of "King of the Golden River" is debatable).
I haven't gotten around to rereading "King of the Golden River", but I was thinking that a few of the Paul Murry Mickey stories are of debatable rereadability.
I am curious about what the people here at the board think are the required qualifications for a creator to be deserving to be featured in this Disney Masters series.
Do you think an artist must have for example say a minium number of stories created?
Yeah, she/he must at least have created enough stories to fill a Disney Masters volume.
I think they're all worth the hardback treatment given their re-readability and the fact that any worthwhile monthly titles are now extinct (although the re-readability of "King of the Golden River" is debatable).
I haven't gotten around to rereading "King of the Golden River", but I was thinking that a few of the Paul Murry Mickey stories are of debatable rereadability.
Paul Murry isn't exactly waiting to be "discovered" - everyone in the target audience knows who he is and what they'd be getting. It's the "undiscovered" European artists this series is highlighting that should strive for re-readability. I think almost all the stories printed so far (and that are planned to be printed) pass that test.
Paul Murry isn't exactly waiting to be "discovered" - everyone in the target audience knows who he is and what they'd be getting. It's the "undiscovered" European artists this series is highlighting that should strive for re-readability. I think almost all the stories printed so far (and that are planned to be printed) pass that test.
Good point. I hadn't thought of that. And the books showcasing lesser-known creators or Scarpa stories that haven't run in the US before are the ones I've looked forward to the most.
I haven't gotten around to rereading "King of the Golden River", but I was thinking that a few of the Paul Murry Mickey stories are of debatable rereadability.
Paul Murry isn't exactly waiting to be "discovered" - everyone in the target audience knows who he is and what they'd be getting. It's the "undiscovered" European artists this series is highlighting that should strive for re-readability. I think almost all the stories printed so far (and that are planned to be printed) pass that test.
....of which there are quite a few still. Leoni, Guerrini, Chierchini, Gervasio, Scala, to name a few.