I‘ve collected them up to Vol.9 … but now I‘m actually a bit hesitant to continue with 10, because quite frankly: I‘ve just read a very tiny fraction of the stories in the preceding volumes… all great fun, but… the amount of „material“ is just overwhelming
@@earlgrey862 I concur, the material in these volumes is overwhelming to say the least. When my order Vol.10 arrives, I'll own all 10 Golden Age books. These books also take up much room. I'm also looking forward to the Atlas Horror archives Vol.1 due out sometime at the end of October.
From what I've read the first Batman story comes from a trace of the original comic which I think was done twice, once in the 60's and once again and more accurately at a later date. The omnibus version comes from the second trace which is why the knife in the back is present. The other version that you have must come from the 60's trace job.
Huh, it's like someone over used Sharpen in photoshop on the omnibus version of 27. I've got to believe the knife is the original and that it was taken out for silver age reprints because of the comics code... Another great video--thanks!
There was this controversy that marvel had stories in their goldenage masterworks volumes redrawn by low-paid inkers. I think the Batman Chronicles volume might be the same. Batman chronicles could aso just use some older reprint as a source where they made some edits and stuff but there are better sources for em so the artwork is cleaner.
+GoodmansGhost As to detective 27 some lines are actually not cleaner but almost eaten up / discontinous in the omnibus and it seems that this is due to some postediting - like sleepyreader commented: Almost like overused "Sharpen" on Photoshop. But it's not the only odd difference between omnibus and chronicles & all in all - like I said - the omnibus is a pretty good version.
Oh its definately been sharpened or bleached as I like to call it which is when they remove the old color to put in cleaner colors. But I'm 100% sure the chronicles books has done the exact same thing. Just probably with different source images that wernt as hurt by the process. Very few comics from back then has the original art still surviving.
If somebody white-outs some of Van Goghs sunflowers and adds some pansies... imagine what an uproar this would cause! But with det27 they can fiddle around like they want without even a comment. Interesting, to say the least :/ In all seriousness: I would have definitely appreciated a commentary on some of the origins and alterings of the source material in the back part of the omnibus.
+GoodmansGhost Since I've read a lot more in the meantime I stumbled over some more pages where they absolutely overdid the "cleanup" and almost killed the original art. My overall opinion still stays the same though: it's a very nice book.
Great video. When you were comparing the two pages back to back and were talking about overexposure, I noticed something else. It actually looks like the artwork is totally different in some of the panels. Like actually an entirely different drawing. For instance, look at the panel to with Bruce sitting on the left and a tan lampshade sitting to the left of him and the man to the right is lighting a smoke. The lines on the lampshade that represent the shadowing are totally different lines. I mean drawn totally different. The shadowing is actually even further left on the new book. Also in the panel with the car the T in the old book is colored in red and in the new book it isn't colored at all and has a black panel behind it. This goes for all the lettering as a whole. It looks to me like a totally different letterer did each of these. Look at the question marks. Totally different. This perplexes me. This has to be a whole different version of the source material used in both cases.
yes it's strange, you're right there are many differences on many pages. Probably the best explanation is that the "chronicles" used silver-age reprints which were modified because of the comic code, hence the missing knife in the chronicles as an example - see Sleepyreader's comment below.
As I was watching this, I grabbed my copy of Batman Archives Vol. 1 from 1990 for comparison. The chronicles version matches the restoration/recreation from 1990. I suspect that the older one may have been re-inked from microfiche or some other low grade archival source, while the omnibus version is digitally restored from newer photos from an actual copy of Detective 27, and that the differing detail, colors, and lettering in the omnibus are more faithful to the 1939 printing. It comes down to preference, and I prefer fewer touch ups and actually like scanned pages as long as the registration isn't terrible. I've seen blown out, faked, and badly restored versions of Marvel #1 as well (especially the zip-a-tone in Everett's first Sub-Mariner story), but the latest omnibus edition of that is gorgeous and convincing. I was guessing that no original art existed for the first Batman appearance, but I see that four pages of black and white proofs turned up recently, including the knife in the back! “Holding some of these pages next to the printed comic I was struck by the details of the art that are better visible here...”
thanks for the info... like sleepyreader already commented it seems that the restoration for the chronicles (and archives) based supposedly on versions that were altered due to the comics code. And I am with you that I would have prefered a less digitally restored version for the omnibus... even though it's obviously a good choice that they used the original and not the "censored" version (which makes me wonder why they hadn't done that for the chronicles/archives already as well?)
To clarify, I think that the version in the omnibus represents a step closer to the hand of the original artist than we've seen before. As years go by, digital photography and editing get better and cheaper, and more and more ancient comics get captured in high quality digital photographs and released into the digital wilderness. In prior reprints, the art is more likely to be restored and 'improved' from an inadequate analog source to get the best result. Maybe other restorers had no idea that the knife was originally there, since their best available sources didn't include 1939 art or printings. I'm guessing that in the years since the last restoration was done, some owner has volunteered to have his original scanned, and a quality digital restoration was done from that source. Any loss of detail would be due to the original (and long gone) art being too detailed for the 1930s technology that reproduced it, and anything that looks sharper is showing the work of another hand attempting to reconstruct it. It's taken decades of research and effort to get back to the crappy original quality! ...or I could just be wrong. I wonder if the four pages of proofs that showed up in 2011 were used as a source for the line art in the new version? Anyway, thanks for the comparison! I'll shut up now.
Thanks so much for the video it was really helpful. I have scans of the original Detective Comics 27 and I consider that the omnibus is the closest to the original. I think the chronicles and archives are not very faithful to the original comics. They even changed the letterer, crazy
Superlative video, thank you. I just ordered Batman the Golden Age Omnibus Vol. 10.
I‘ve collected them up to Vol.9 … but now I‘m actually a bit hesitant to continue with 10, because quite frankly: I‘ve just read a very tiny fraction of the stories in the preceding volumes… all great fun, but… the amount of „material“ is just overwhelming
@@earlgrey862 I concur, the material in these volumes is overwhelming to say the least. When my order Vol.10 arrives, I'll own all 10 Golden Age books. These books also take up much room. I'm also looking forward to the Atlas Horror archives Vol.1 due out sometime at the end of October.
From what I've read the first Batman story comes from a trace of the original comic which I think was done twice, once in the 60's and once again and more accurately at a later date. The omnibus version comes from the second trace which is why the knife in the back is present. The other version that you have must come from the 60's trace job.
Good day,
The missing knife.
Now there is a mystery to be solved by the world's greatest detective.
The knife was in the original comic
Thanks for reviewing this. I wondered what it looked like and your insight was very useful.
Great review, I want so much this omnibus! It looks awesome!
+Orlando Lopes it looks and it is, ty
Thanks for the video. Now I've got no choice but to buy this one too ;)
Huh, it's like someone over used Sharpen in photoshop on the omnibus version of 27. I've got to believe the knife is the original and that it was taken out for silver age reprints because of the comics code...
Another great video--thanks!
+sleepyreader666 yes, the comics code could be a good explanation
There was this controversy that marvel had stories in their goldenage masterworks volumes redrawn by low-paid inkers. I think the Batman Chronicles volume might be the same. Batman chronicles could aso just use some older reprint as a source where they made some edits and stuff but there are better sources for em so the artwork is cleaner.
+GoodmansGhost As to detective 27 some lines are actually not cleaner but almost eaten up / discontinous in the omnibus and it seems that this is due to some postediting - like sleepyreader commented: Almost like overused "Sharpen" on Photoshop. But it's not the only odd difference between omnibus and chronicles & all in all - like I said - the omnibus is a pretty good version.
Oh its definately been sharpened or bleached as I like to call it which is when they remove the old color to put in cleaner colors. But I'm 100% sure the chronicles books has done the exact same thing. Just probably with different source images that wernt as hurt by the process. Very few comics from back then has the original art still surviving.
If somebody white-outs some of Van Goghs sunflowers and adds some pansies... imagine what an uproar this would cause! But with det27 they can fiddle around like they want without even a comment. Interesting, to say the least :/ In all seriousness: I would have definitely appreciated a commentary on some of the origins and alterings of the source material in the back part of the omnibus.
+GoodmansGhost Since I've read a lot more in the meantime I stumbled over some more pages where they absolutely overdid the "cleanup" and almost killed the original art. My overall opinion still stays the same though: it's a very nice book.
Yeah, I doubt the "big two" will ever do facsimile collections. so it's the best we are likely to get.
Great video. When you were comparing the two pages back to back and were talking about overexposure, I noticed something else. It actually looks like the artwork is totally different in some of the panels. Like actually an entirely different drawing. For instance, look at the panel to with Bruce sitting on the left and a tan lampshade sitting to the left of him and the man to the right is lighting a smoke. The lines on the lampshade that represent the shadowing are totally different lines. I mean drawn totally different. The shadowing is actually even further left on the new book. Also in the panel with the car the T in the old book is colored in red and in the new book it isn't colored at all and has a black panel behind it. This goes for all the lettering as a whole. It looks to me like a totally different letterer did each of these. Look at the question marks. Totally different.
This perplexes me.
This has to be a whole different version of the source material used in both cases.
yes it's strange, you're right there are many differences on many pages. Probably the best explanation is that the "chronicles" used silver-age reprints which were modified because of the comic code, hence the missing knife in the chronicles as an example - see Sleepyreader's comment below.
As I was watching this, I grabbed my copy of Batman Archives Vol. 1 from
1990 for comparison. The chronicles version matches the
restoration/recreation from 1990. I suspect that the older one may have
been re-inked from microfiche or some other low grade archival source,
while the omnibus version is digitally restored from newer photos from
an actual copy of Detective 27, and that the differing detail, colors,
and lettering in the omnibus are more faithful to the 1939 printing.
It comes down to preference, and I prefer fewer touch ups and actually like scanned pages as long as the registration isn't terrible. I've seen blown out, faked, and badly restored versions of Marvel #1 as well (especially the zip-a-tone in Everett's first Sub-Mariner story), but the latest omnibus edition of that is gorgeous and convincing.
I was guessing that no original art existed for the first Batman appearance, but I see that four pages of black and white proofs turned up recently, including the knife in the back!
“Holding some of these pages next to the printed comic I was struck by the details of the art that are better visible here...”
thanks for the info... like sleepyreader already commented it seems that the restoration for the chronicles (and archives) based supposedly on versions that were altered due to the comics code. And I am with you that I would have prefered a less digitally restored version for the omnibus... even though it's obviously a good choice that they used the original and not the "censored" version (which makes me wonder why they hadn't done that for the chronicles/archives already as well?)
To clarify, I think that the version in the omnibus represents a step closer to the hand of the original artist than we've seen before. As years go by, digital photography and editing get better and cheaper, and more and more ancient comics get captured in high quality digital photographs and released into the digital wilderness.
In prior reprints, the art is more likely to be restored and 'improved' from an inadequate analog source to get the best result. Maybe other restorers had no idea that the knife was originally there, since their best available sources didn't include 1939 art or printings. I'm guessing that in the years since the last restoration was done, some owner has volunteered to have his original scanned, and a quality digital restoration was done from that source. Any loss of detail would be due to the original (and long gone) art being too detailed for the 1930s technology that reproduced it, and anything that looks sharper is showing the work of another hand attempting to reconstruct it. It's taken decades of research and effort to get back to the crappy original quality! ...or I could just be wrong.
I wonder if the four pages of proofs that showed up in 2011 were used as a source for the line art in the new version?
Anyway, thanks for the comparison! I'll shut up now.
Thanks so much for the video it was really helpful.
I have scans of the original Detective Comics 27 and I consider that the omnibus is the closest to the original. I think the chronicles and archives are not very faithful to the original comics. They even changed the letterer, crazy
look at this image!
12:06
Batman 655 Grant Morrison
goo.gl/images/5eC6Ji