Steve Bryant wrote:...um, the majority of the book is <i>supposed</i> to be tight. In the text, Martin states its divided into three sections with the third section being the loose one where inkers choose how/where to spot blacks, etc. That's the section that has an incredible varience of approaches from Kevin Nowlan to Jerry Ordway to Rudy Nebres, Dave Stevens, Mark Schultz, Brian Bolland, etc...
That's the section that I refer to the most. Maybe it's just me and my myopic attention to detail, but I found it very helpful.
Well, that wasn't exactly loose pencil in third part - it was unfinished, but still tight in it's own way. Artists had to deal with the lack of information on what's going on the panel.
But it's true, that part if mucho helpful, to me specially on matters of shading and black areas. I was mostly reffering to other two parts - and not to all examples from those two parts, but yes, majority.
I mean, it's not bad book, it's good, oriented to USA comicbook style but that was the idea. I just thought that it was funny, and was pondering whether there's a point in being stressed over something that no reader is gonna notice unless they're professional inkers too.