Santiago Scalabroni Ceballos

Santiago Ceballos, William Van Horn, Paul Murry, Don Rosa, etc.

Postby Egg » Sun May 28, 2006 12:21 pm

Santiago Scalabroni C. wrote:We all know that comix is realised first in pencil and then in ink . Certain publishing houses ( DC , Marvel etc.) divide the work in two and deal directly with pencilers and inkers independently. Egmont buys only the whole work finished , so a penciler depends completely on his inker's capacity, fluency, honesty and responsibility, when his eyes are not that precise ( like in my case ) after having covered the whole spectre of this profession ( pencils, ink, cover ideas and realisation) with continuity in the same company since 1977 ( see INDUCKS ).

What do you think of Spanish studio Comicup? There for example works Ramon Bernado, known of Madam Mim.
I've heard that Comicup does the inking of Mau Heymans stories.
Egg
Member
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 11:19 am

Postby Robb_K » Sun May 28, 2006 5:38 pm

Is this question for Sr. Scalabroni, or for me? Or for ANYONE on the forum?
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Egg » Mon May 29, 2006 2:14 pm

Robb_K wrote:Is this question for Sr. Scalabroni, or for me? Or for ANYONE on the forum?

Especially for Santiago Scalabroni, but also for you and anyone on the forum.
Egg
Member
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 11:19 am

Postby Robb_K » Tue May 30, 2006 9:56 am

I'll provide my two Euro cents: I have had my stories drawn by Barreira of Comicup, Branca, Vicar, Scalabroni, Gulbransson and several others. I much prefer Branca, Gulbransson, Scalabroni and Vicar to Barreira. As for Bernado, I think his figures are much too distorted. He seems to emulate Branca (on his wildest day) in that regard. Once in a while his Ducks seem paterned after the Jippes style, but a very, very weak version. He is also not consistent in his work. I feel the work of The Comicup artists is roughly equal to the lower level of artists' qualityof those "Spanish Studio" artists employed by Egmont. I prefer Barreira to Bernado. But I must admit that I'm spoiled by Barks and Jippes and Milton and so I would have to say that it may be a matter of style. They are mostly competent artists, but I don't like much the way they draw The Ducks.
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Santiago Scalabroni C. » Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:55 pm

Egg wrote:
Santiago Scalabroni C. wrote:We all know that comix is realised first in pencil and then in ink . Certain publishing houses ( DC , Marvel etc.) divide the work in two and deal directly with pencilers and inkers independently. Egmont buys only the whole work finished , so a penciler depends completely on his inker's capacity, fluency, honesty and responsibility, when his eyes are not that precise ( like in my case ) after having covered the whole spectre of this profession ( pencils, ink, cover ideas and realisation) with continuity in the same company since 1977 ( see INDUCKS ).

What do you think of Spanish studio Comicup? There for example works Ramon Bernado, known of Madam Mim.
I've heard that Comicup does the inking of Mau Heymans stories.

My answer to this question could end up to a long essay, Egg.
Do you think I should give it a try here ?
Santiago Scalabroni C.
 

Postby Daniel73 » Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:25 pm

Santiago Scalabroni C. wrote:My answer to this question could end up to a long essay, Egg.
Do you think I should give it a try here ?

Yes, that would be great.
Daniel73
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:40 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Robb_K » Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:17 pm

A long essay on the many different artists of Comicup studio would be welcomed. I'd certainly like to find out more about them (and what other people think of their work.
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Santiago Scalabroni C. » Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:51 pm

Daniel73 wrote:
Santiago Scalabroni C. wrote:My answer to this question could end up to a long essay, Egg.
Do you think I should give it a try here ?

Yes, that would be great.

Well , the promised " essay" is thanking you for the invitation. It is part of a text I wrote in 1993 , while training a group of young artists in Athens, Greece , aiming at their qualification in the style of Disney comics , at Egmont' s request to form a team for Mickey's production. It deals with the general concept and rules that make the difference between Disney comics on one hand and illustration and animation on the other. It is "the Grammar" that should be learnt, forgotten and applied spontaneously while one is drawing. It could also be a safe tool for checking the level of an artist's knowledge of his "craft".
( Now, please, let me thank Mrs. Philippa Currie and my wife, Anastasia Kelesakou for translating it from Spanish to English ).

1 . Years of research, constant observation , comparison and work continuity have driven me to the discovery of this "grammar" within the balanced , structured fluency of Gottfredson , Barks and Paul Murry who are always aware of their young readers' needs. Their stories are very nice with a clear design and narrative text which attracts children's attention so there is no dependance on written dialogues. In their stories I have noticed something essential that makes Mickey's image exceptionally outstanding without having exaggerated physical movement or facial expressions.
There is something special about these stories : It is Mickey who has more movement of the head and expression of his face than his friends, thus showing that he is the only hero with substance, intelligence and a wide spectrum of feelings and emotions. All this gives facial expressions of feelings of kindness, anger, as well as the profundity of his rational thought through expressions of discernment or perspicacity, observation and doubt. That is to say everything distinguishing Mickey from the other characters in the society he lives in.
In addition there is no doubt about the fascination and enchantment which makes him so dear to children. These are details Walt Disney himself cared a great deal about, as he was his most beloved creation.
The secondary characters usually appear in profile , repeated in different pictures of the same page. This particularly important detail prevents these characters from attracting the reader's attention.
It must be noted that Gottfredson and (even more) Paul Murry have used other resorts for secondary
characters. In this case, for example, the fact that Goofy was to appear alone in a close up picture. These artists wouldn't have made him any bigger than a standard size of a close up picture , where he would appear with Mickey. In this way certain characters would not appear enormous alongside Mickey thus diminishing his image on the overall page.
Gottfredson and Paul Murry can now be seen to resort to other means such as the fact that Mickey is never overcome by the background. Furthermore , background lines very rarely touch Mickey's image, least of all his head. This emphasises his intelligence.
It is well known that the abuse of background is absurd as is the constant change of focus in the picture, both of which confuse children when reading comics.

2 . In order to confirm this point I should like to give my opinion on the concept that identified Barks, Gottfredson and Paul Murry and which I believe stems from Walt Disney's leadership, as these artists produced memorable stories while he was still living . ( to be continued ...)
Santiago Scalabroni C.
 

Postby Santiago Scalabroni C. » Sun Jun 04, 2006 11:07 pm

Santiago Scalabroni C. wrote:
Daniel73 wrote:
Santiago Scalabroni C. wrote:My answer to this question could end up to a long essay, Egg.
Do you think I should give it a try here ?

Yes, that would be great.

Well , the promised " essay" is thanking you for the invitation. It is part of a text I wrote in 1993 , while training a group of young artists in Athens, Greece , aiming at their qualification in the style of Disney comics , at Egmont' s request to form a team for Mickey's production. It deals with the general concept and rules that make the difference between Disney comics on one hand and illustration and animation on the other. It is "the Grammar" that should be learnt, forgotten and applied spontaneously while one is drawing. It could also be a safe tool for checking the level of an artist's knowledge of his "craft".
( Now, please, let me thank Mrs. Philippa Currie and my wife, Anastasia Kelesakou for translating it from Spanish to English ).

1 . Years of research, constant observation , comparison and work continuity have driven me to the discovery of this "grammar" within the balanced , structured fluency of Gottfredson , Barks and Paul Murry who are always aware of their young readers' needs. Their stories are very nice with a clear design and narrative text which attracts children's attention so there is no dependance on written dialogues. In their stories I have noticed something essential that makes Mickey's image exceptionally outstanding without having exaggerated physical movement or facial expressions.
There is something special about these stories : It is Mickey who has more movement of the head and expression of his face than his friends, thus showing that he is the only hero with substance, intelligence and a wide spectrum of feelings and emotions. All this gives facial expressions of feelings of kindness, anger, as well as the profundity of his rational thought through expressions of discernment or perspicacity, observation and doubt. That is to say everything distinguishing Mickey from the other characters in the society he lives in.
In addition there is no doubt about the fascination and enchantment which makes him so dear to children. These are details Walt Disney himself cared a great deal about, as he was his most beloved creation.
The secondary characters usually appear in profile , repeated in different pictures of the same page. This particularly important detail prevents these characters from attracting the reader's attention.
It must be noted that Gottfredson and (even more) Paul Murry have used other resorts for secondary
characters. In this case, for example, the fact that Goofy was to appear alone in a close up picture. These artists wouldn't have made him any bigger than a standard size of a close up picture , where he would appear with Mickey. In this way certain characters would not appear enormous alongside Mickey thus diminishing his image on the overall page.
Gottfredson and Paul Murry can now be seen to resort to other means such as the fact that Mickey is never overcome by the background. Furthermore , background lines very rarely touch Mickey's image, least of all his head. This emphasises his intelligence.
It is well known that the abuse of background is absurd as is the constant change of focus in the picture, both of which confuse children when reading comics.

2 . In order to confirm this point I should like to give my opinion on the concept that identified Barks, Gottfredson and Paul Murry and which I believe stems from Walt Disney's leadership, as these artists produced memorable stories while he was still living . ( to be continued ...)

If we stop to compare the work of these designers we can see that there is a concept that unites them and causes them to design different characters with different styles which didn't break up the unity of the magazine.
This fundamental concept which is the base for the definition of the Disney style in comics is that which is used in all the stories that the above designers effected using only three horizontal lines.

I would like to clarify how they obtained the above mentioned three lines. If we take any comic picture and divide it first of all by drawing a horizontal line through the middle , it will give us two equal areas. We then divide the above area into two equal horizontal parts. Next we move on to the space below and devide it into three equal areas by drawing two horizontal lines. As a result we see that our picture now has four horizontal lines which devide it up.
However, the particularity lies in the fact that symmetry is not used in horizontal lines in Disney comics. Because of this, we are obliged to leave this first line which devides the area into two, thus giving three horizontal lines which give us four areas.
Barks, Gottfredson and Paul Murry have used these lines but selected only one of these to define which horizontal line they would design their comic picture on.
As regards the vertical lines of the picture, I have observed that the previous system used to obtain horizontal lines also applies here. There is no symmetry in the vertical lines either, and as I said there are three of these as well.
As far as diagonal lines are concerned it's clear that these are the result of joining a horizontal line to a vertical one.
The concept we have just explained basically entails the intention to rationalise the structure of backgrounds. As Disney comics based on animation models requires excessively soft and round forms in its construction, the said forms must be sustained by background lines rationally obtained.
It must be noted that Barks and Paul Murry 's observation indicates that they both had another resource in common; that is the relating of a sequence in which the conversation required the design of three or more consequent pictures. So they repeated the horizontal lines with which they had designed the first comic picture in the sequence thus preventing children's attention from wandering.
Let us now move on to comment another point. The character who speaks first is always the same in those pictures thus avoiding constant change of focus. But here we are entering into the scriptwriter's field.

To sum up and answer your original question , Egg. We, Disney comic artists need to know how to distribute space in order to unite our particularities on a shared ground thus giving quality and style to the magazine and pleasure to our readers. Of course, we know that we can't reach this unity at the final production stage (inking) without having worked on a concept of space in common before.
Santiago Scalabroni C.
 

Postby Robb_K » Mon Jun 05, 2006 12:26 am

Thank you very much, for your time and effort in providing us with this information and personal insight. This is precisely the kind of information from "inside" the cartoon and comic book industry that we, here on McDuck.NL (and other fan fora) want to be exposed to.

For Rockerduck, Sander, Egg, and any other members, can you please list for me the artists that work and have worked for Comicup Studios? I know of only Bernado, Barreira, Colomer (in the past-before he started working for Egmont?), and, possibly, Peinado?
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Robb_K » Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:23 pm

Also, after listing the different artists, we would appreciate it much if someone could post scans of artwork by each of them, so we could compare them to each other, and also to our memories of the artwork of the Dutch, Egmont, clkassical US and other artists we know well. Personally, I will look up artists on Inducks' COA pages, and also on Lambiek's artist encyclopaedia, so I can have better background to comment on this topic.
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Robb_K » Mon Jun 05, 2006 8:37 pm

I found this list of all the Comicup artists:

Marsal Abella
Jose Aviles
Santiago Barreira
Jose Cardona
Jose Carreras
Jose Caruana
Mario Cortes
Joan Espinach
Jaime Esteva
Miguel Fernandez
Tony Fernandez
Francisco Figueras (Mau & Bas Heijmans' inkers)
Juan Fornes (Mau & Bas Heijmans' inkers)
Mando Galdon
Jorge Granjel
Conrado Lazaro
Martin Lourdes
Ignacio Majoral
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Rockerduck » Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:01 pm

Maybe a new topic called 'ComicUp'?
Rockerduck
Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 6:40 pm

Postby Robb_K » Tue Jun 06, 2006 2:14 am

Robb_K wrote:I found this list of all the Comicup artists:

Marsal Abella
Jose Aviles
Santiago Barreira
Jose Cardona
Jose Carreras
Jose Caruana
Mario Cortes
Joan Espinach
Jaime Esteva
Miguel Fernandez
Tony Fernandez
Francisco Figueras (Mau & Bas Heijmans' inkers)
Juan Fornes (Mau & Bas Heijmans' inkers)
Mando Galdon
Jorge Granjel
Conrado Lazaro
Martin Lourdes
Ignacio Majoral

The list above is only partial. As we should start a new topic titled: "Comicup Studio", I will list the ENTIRE all-time Roster of Comicup on the new thread (I will start, forthwith). Stay here to discuss Santiago Scalabroni, and ask him questions. Please go to the Comicup thread to discuss that studio and its artists.
Robb_K
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Postby Jesper P. » Sat Jun 17, 2006 8:25 pm

Santiago Scalabroni C. wrote:Well , the promised " essay" is thanking you for the invitation. It is part of a text I wrote in 1993 , while training a group of young artists in Athens, Greece , aiming at their qualification in the style of Disney comics , at Egmont' s request to form a team for Mickey's production.

I'm just wondering where the rest of the text is;-)
I know it's a lot to ask, but I really think the part about backgroundlines and minor characters is great. I'm drawing and writing a lot myself, so I'm just "lapping it all up"!
Jesper P.
 

PreviousNext

Return to Other creators

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron