
1982 DC Comics Style Guide - Moeancurly
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.207954002578217.59091.207950722578545
======
binarymax
I have touched and thumbed through one of these - when I was six or seven
years old. My father was employed in a family printing business as the art
director and an illustrator drawing jigsaw puzzles for various companies. The
company was sold in mid-80s and went out of business mid-90s. I have no idea
what happened to this copy. He had so many amazing things in his office (like
an original Voltron). He wasn't able to keep much of it when he was laid off
when the company ran into trouble. I had completely forgotten about this and
had no idea how rare it was. Thank you for posting this.

------
drzaiusapelord
Maybe its the old man in me talking, but I really miss this style. Marvel also
had a similar style at the time. Clean lines, bright colors, minimal detail,
etc. The post Jim Lee/Rob Liefeld era slowly became a Western version of
Anime/Manga today that looks a cheap imitation of what Japan has been doing
for a long time.

Comics out this week for reference:

[https://pulllist.comixology.com/thisweek/](https://pulllist.comixology.com/thisweek/)

~~~
DannoHung
There's a lot of stuff like that around. The covers are usually much different
compared to interior art. Like, Headlopper which came out last week. Clean
lines, bright color, minimal detail. Here's an example from an interior
spread: [http://andrew-ross-maclean.deviantart.com/art/Head-
Lopper-2-...](http://andrew-ross-maclean.deviantart.com/art/Head-
Lopper-2-Spread-495745695)

------
alexc05
What's interesting to me is that in terms of style guidance, there doesn't
appear to be a lot of exposition.

Save for the colour palette It's just pictures, part of me expected to see
some sort of exposition about what given characters could and couldn't do.

------
scrollaway
Really cool. The images don't look like they were scanned - how were they
digitized?

~~~
stronglikedan
I would guess that they are scanned on a high-end scanner (drum scanner
maybe), and then possibly (probably) retouched.

------
chadgeidel
And it's gone. Did anyone grab it?

~~~
lobo_tuerto
It's still there.

~~~
chadgeidel
So it is. For some reason when I clicked it it said "removed".

------
tacos
I realize that HN leans far to the edge on this issue, but this really is
over-the-top copyright infringement. The whole thing, in its entirety, with
not even an attempt at commentary?

I'm reminded of the time a Spike Lee documentary was on HBO. The Boing Boing
lunatics were outraged that it wasn't available online, so they published 18
links to YouTube (videos were then limited to ten minutes in length). I doubt
anyone even made it to part #6 of 18 before the whole thing got taken down.

Likewise I'm sure they think they invited HBO GO and Hulu as a result of their
radical, innovative behavior. It was not. And they did not.

The post is cool, the art is super cool... and Facebook couldn't be a dumber
place to put it.

~~~
kbenson
I understand you have a point you want to make but... do you actually know
anything one way or the other whether it's actually copyright infringement?
It's posted in a José Luis García-López fan club, and he's an artist that has
had a long running relationship with DC Comics. It's entirely plausible that
it was posted with permission. Why are you jumping to the assumption that it's
copyright infringement?

~~~
sp332
He also has the #3 comment on the page and doesn't seem to see anything wrong
with it.

~~~
NoMoreNicksLeft
Morally, what is wrong with this?

It's not costing anyone any money, not even in the theoretical sense. It's not
exposing any trade secrets.

