That newfangled coloring?

[Morlock]

Wow! I haven't been buying or reading comics for years. So I pick up a copy of Civil War #1 and I was just blown away by how far coloring has come.

I'm wondering how Hollowell (and anyone doing this much painting with his coloring) does it. Does he have any kind of indication from the penciler or inker, or is that all him? Here's an image to show what I mean. There's an awful lot of detail there shown strictly by the color. Do the penciler or inker give any hints, other than what you might expect (i.e., good draftsmanship)?

I have similar questions about when I see those colored lines. Is there a way for the penciler to put down on paper that he wants a line colored, or is that the inker's job, or do they just chat on the phone, or what?

Feel very free to ramble about color as long as you like, as you might to a comics fan who's been in a time capsule since 1990. More info is better. Links are good. Tutorials are wonderful. Oh, and scans of art at the penciled, inked, and colored stages are great.

Btw, was anyone else blown away by how cool Annihilation was? I picked up a few issues of Nova and the art was just killer, again the coloring (Villari). Plus it's nice to see sci-fi comics doing well.

[Erik Roman]

Originally Posted by Morlock

Oh, and scans of art at the penciled, inked, and colored stages are great.

http://www.alandavis-comicart.com/

[John Rauch]

Morry did a great job on Civil War and is just a stellar colorist in general. On some books, a penciler will give an idea of what they're looking for in terms of overall color choices, but that's pretty uncommon. I odn't know how McNiven is about those things. Maybe he does, maybe not. As far as lines that are made a color, this is usually up to the colorist and at their discretion. Edits like that aren't very difficult to make in Photoshop, but it can sometimes be time consuming and it takes a good understanding of your job to do it effectively.

[Morlock]

Thanks Erik.

Originally Posted by EraserX

On some books, a penciler will give an idea of what they're looking for in terms of overall color choices

How? Verbal? I was thinking one way to do this would be with tone - the inker goes over the pencils as normal, but doesn't erase, and leaves the tone alone; then the colorist uses the tone as a starting point.

[John Rauch]

Nah, most colorists should know what they're doing enough not to need all that extra help, especially someone like Morry. I've worked on many, many books where I never had any contact with the penciler or inker and I never needed them to spell out for me how to do my job. I have also worked with some artists who like to have their hand in the color choices as well. Usually, it's just if they had something specific in mind while drawing the page. I've never heard of anyone leaving pencil lines in so the colorist knows how to shade. Personally, I'd be a little put off by that. If a colorist truly isn't capable of doing something as miniscule as that on their own, they should have never been hired in the first place.

[John Rauch]

And yeah, verbally or by e-mail. Recently, I colored a book drawn by long time comic artist Paul Gulacy. He's probably the most hands on penciler I've worked with in my 11 years coloring comics. Typically, we'd talk over the phone a few times while I was coloring each issue and exchange a few e-mails as well. There were usually a couple pages in each issue where he had an idea of what colors he intended for and he would tell me before I started. Other than that, I did my own thing, sent him and the editor pages at the same time, and everything went smoothly.

[Morlock]

Personally, I'd be a little put off by that. If a colorist truly isn't capable of doing something as miniscule as that on their own, they should have never been hired in the first place.

I think this sentiment is misplaced. I start from the position that the finished work is what matters, and I think this is what should be first and last in any artist's mind. Keeping that in mind, given the direction comics coloring is going, I think a lot of detail is (ideally) best delivered by color. When was the last time anybody saw hatching on a figure (in real life I mean)? Keeping that in mind, I think there's something to be said for colorist as inker, in the sense that he uses the pencil's lines to show him where the form lies, at least to the extent such information can be conveyed in tone (and not just tone - I don't see why hard lines can't end up as color - they end up as ink, don't they?).

It's not a matter of the colorist not being able to do something - it has to do with the penciler being the guy who composes the panel.

That doesn't mean I think the standard now is a bad one, just that I think there's room for either style. It also doesn't mean I think the penciler is "the man" and should always have the say on all things form (clearly things are going in the other direction, where color often dominates the pencils and inks - where dark coloring swallows line).

[John Rauch]

I get what you're saying, but I think pencilers who need that much control over their work should just color it themselves. Nothing wrong with doing that at all, but when you think you need to spell out every minute detail of another person's job for them, it tends to get insulting. I don't think I'm alone in saying this, but if they really do know more about coloring than the colorist, there's no reason not to color it themselves unless they're just painfully slow. In an ideal world (and I know it doesn't always work this way) the colorist, inker, penciler, and anyone else involved in the art should all have overlapping skills enough to know what the other person intended without actually doing other people's job to spell it out for them. Like I said before, in 11 years coloring mainstream comics, Gulacy is the most hands on penciler I've EVER worked with and he's no where near what you're talking about.

[Calloway]

Personally, I think a colorist should know how to paint and understand color theory fully before doing the computer coloring thing. I see too many people get work and claim to be colorist when it's evident to me they don't have a clue.

[John Rauch]

You can learn those things with paint, colored pencils,in a graphics program, etc. but I agree that you should know it before getting paying work. Really, anyone who doesn't and is working in comics, I blame the editor who brought them on.

[Scott Story]

Personally, I think a colorist should know how to paint and understand color theory fully before doing the computer coloring thing. I see too many people get work and claim to be colorist when it's evident to me they don't have a clue.

YEESSS!

I am often shocked at the colorists who have no idea how to use color. They create these hypersaturated, no warm/cool color contrast, no ariel perspective pieces of all warm crap that hurts the eyes! There are some good colorists out there (Laura Martin/Depuoy, or however her name is spelled), but a great many are terrible!

This goes to my thesis: You can teach computer techniques, but you can't really teach style, taste, or class.

[John Rauch]

Well...to an extent, those things can be taught, but it takes some people a lot longer to learn than others. For that matter, color theory is a constantly evolving thing. I've been coloring for a long time and I still learn new things. Some colorists are bad though. Some pencilers are bad. Actually, who was it that said 90% of everything is crap? Someone who still has plenty to learn isn't really at fault. They're just tying to get work like everyone else. Blame the people hiring them instead of someone who knows their stuff.

[Morlock]

Originally Posted by EraserX

I get what you're saying, but I think pencilers who need that much control over their work should just color it themselves. Nothing wrong with doing that at all, but when you think you need to spell out every minute detail of another person's job for them, it tends to get insulting. I don't think I'm alone in saying this, but if they really do know more about coloring than the colorist, there's no reason not to color it themselves unless they're just painfully slow. In an ideal world (and I know it doesn't always work this way) the colorist, inker, penciler, and anyone else involved in the art should all have overlapping skills enough to know what the other person intended without actually doing other people's job to spell it out for them. Like I said before, in 11 years coloring mainstream comics, Gulacy is the most hands on penciler I've EVER worked with and he's no where near what you're talking about.

No offense meant, but I don't think you really do get what I'm saying. Think of a guy like Bernie Wrightson, or Travis Charest, who invest a lot of work into detailing form. Are they "spelling out" the inker's job? What I'm saying is that maybe some of that same inker's job might best be looked at as the colorist's job in some workflows - pencil detail that in times past might've wound up as inks, wind up as color instead.

I think it's great when a colorist is so perfectly in tune with a penciler that he can render form pretty much exactly where the penciler would if he had the time or it was his style or whatever (i.e., exactly where the penciler intended with the hints of his work *). But what about when a colorist isn't that in tune (probably most of the time?)?

* Maybe I should illustrate some examples to get my point across. It's hard to describe.

[John Rauch]

What you mentioned before was leaving the pencil tones so the colorist would know how to render. This is what I'm responding to. As far as what detail level/style of pencil/ink/color is being used is just that. It's not doing someone else's job. If you're talking about something other than these two things, then you're right, I have no idea what you're talking about. This has been my job for a long time and what you're talking about sounds pretty foreign to me. As someone who is curious how these things are done, it seems odd that you're telling me, as someone who does the same things, how it could, or should work. If I'm taking it the wrong way, then I apologize, but I don't understand the point of arguing things that I know first hand.

[John Rauch]

BTW, here is some of my personal work. Maybe there's something in there that shows what you're thinking of. Some of it is drawn by me and some by others. I probably have some samples over more detailed line art, but not posted.

http://eraserx.deviantart.com/