Early in his career, cartoonist Mort Drucker attracted attention with his drawings of large crowds of personalities:
 |
| Detail |
Drucker was able to summon up an endless supply of faces, characters and visual puns. He dispensed them freely, leaving a feeling of great abundance.
 |
| Detail |
 |
| Detail |
How was he able to fit all those puzzle pieces together so densely without losing the bounce in his line? We get some clues from Drucker's preliminary drawings.
It's clear from his sketches that Drucker was a nimble, talented draftsman. But it's also clear that he worked like a dog. For every sketch of a crowd, he produced dozens of sketches exploring individual faces and expressions that he banked in his private arsenal.
Drucker's atttude about work was, "if you enjoy what you're doing, it's not work."
36 comments:
He was the best. As a kid, I looked for Mad every month just to see Mort Drucker's art. It doesn't need to be explained or justified; it speaks for itself. His work is unmistakable. All these years later, I've never gotten tired of looking at it. There is some kind of magic in those lines.
That Mort was also, by all accounts, a humble, sweet and generous man, is just the icing on the cake.
Agree. He's the best. Good drawing just pours out of him. Makes it look so easy. His folds, wrinkles and texturing of clothing is understood anatomically, like Rockwell or Gruger. So much sculptural intelligence.
Fascinating to compare his work with Searle's. Drucker's drawings seem full of love, appreciation, charity, and delight in comparison. He was the opposite of a curmudgeon. All Drucker's characters seem okay with themselves.
Drucker is awesome. I've never seen his pencil sketches before.
His preliminaries are better than most of the finished work we see today.
David, I'm wondering if you have any insight into Drucker's materials? What specific nibs he used? Paper? Brushes? Inks? Or might you know where that information has been published?
Really nice to see the pencil pictures, you can really get a sense for how he drew. It’s a shame the ink drawings ends up so lifelessly over-referenced and traced over. He could have been pretty good.
Richard
Kev, Stephen Silver made a film about Drucker in 2014 that is well worth watching. It is basically just a lengthy interview with Drucker talking about his life and work, but also includes footage of him penciling, inking and coloring. There is some discussion of materials and methods. Here is the link (it is a rental, only $3.00 for six months of viewing time):
https://vimeo.com/ondemand/mortdrucker
To answer your questions (most of this information comes from the film), Drucker penciled with a 0.5mm mechanical pencil, and his nib was the Gillott 1950. For ink, he used Rotring black for his monochrome illustrations. For color work, he preferred a softer outline and would use Rotring brown, diluted, for the linework (I gather sometimes he would dilute black for the same purpose).
For the coloring itself, he used Dr. Ph. Martin's dyes, and Higgins russet ink diluted as a base for flesh tones, applied with a number 2 or 3 brush for small areas, and 4 or 5 for large areas. He would usually finish color illustrations with colored pencils.
His paper of choice was 3-ply kit finish Strathmore.
Drucker tells a fun story in the film about how he had finished inking an assignment but was afraid to color it, having never worked with color before. He brought it to Frazetta's house and had Frazetta do the coloring!
Kev Ferrara-- it just so happens that I know all about those things because I interviewed Mort in depth for my upcoming biography of him for Fantagraphics. Talking with him was hilarious because he was so out of date. His materials changed over the years; he talked about how he hated the smell of craftint ("rotten eggs") for MAD and how he went through a period where he used gray markers for backgrounds for MAD, but throughout his life his favorite drawing tool was "a pencil," which he used on a battered plank of wood as a substitute for a drawing board (photos of the plank will be in the book). He said he never used a computer-- didn't feel it would help his powers of "observation," which he viewed as central-- but he did want credit for being modern because he started using a mechanical pencil with a F grade lead for his roughs. For inking he used a dip pen in "the thickest Indian ink I can find." Sometimes he has used a fountain pen as a dip pen, for a particularly fine line. His preferred brush is a number 3 red sable. He said he did NOT use a balopticon or a projector or even a lightbox. I specifically looked around his studio for one, and did not see one. I looked again after he passed away when I was helping the family dismantle the studio and there was no trace of one.
YouTube video of interview with Mort Drucker.
https://youtu.be/8zNk6-2c75Q?si=kXSZ0sJVgAvIYws2
Charlie-- there's a fun twist to that story about Frazetta coloring that MAD calendar. Mort was terrified of color because he had no formal art education and had only learned to draw in black and white by looking over the shoulders of Joe Kubert and Alex Toth when he was an apprentice. Then one day Time Magazine came knocking. They asked Mort to do a color cover, so Mort went to his close friend, Nick Meglin, and asked him to color in Mort's black and white drawing.
Meglin did it one or two more times and kept his role a secret, but kept telling Mort he had to learn to use color himself. Finally, Mort got the big MAD assignment, which was beyond Meglin's ability. Mort was in a panic. So Meglin went to his lifelong friend, Frazetta, and asked if he would help another artist out of a jam by coloring in an illustration. Meglin told me the whole story. He said at first Frazetta looked at him with an expression that said, "Are you out of your fucking mind? I'm the great Frank Frazetta. I don't color in the work of other artists." Meglin told him it was for Mort and Frazetta completely changed: "For Mort??? Of course I'll do it. Anything for Mort." It's doubtful that Mort would've had the courage to ask Frazetta himself, but once Meglin paved the way he told Mort, "bring the drawing to Frazetta and he'll take care of it. Everything will be all right." Later, Mort learned to use color himself.
David, thank you for filling out the details of that story! I think it shows Frazetta recognized the incredible talent of Mort Drucker, and also that everyone loved Mort. I look forward to reading your biography of him!
I just want to add that the materials/methods given in my previous post were those used by Mort in the latter stage of his career.
Thanks Charlie!
Happily the Gillott 1950 is still available, so I'm going to give that a go. I'd never heard of it. Everything Neal Adams said about the 290 - which he picked up because Stan Drake was using it when he was apprenticing to him - is true. Super expressive inking instrument. Adams called it an "artisinal" instrument. But without the paper to match, the experience isn't the same...
I wish I knew what "Kit Finish" meant. I'm presuming a very hard smooth surface? I don't see any such finish available currently (cursory search). Frazetta said in the 1980s and 90s, and everybody who still inks complains that you can't get good materials anymore. I never had access to the old timey great materials to begin with, and even the stuff I started with has degraded in quality. Mostly the surfaces aren't as good. Glass-smooth hard paper surfaces are the hardest to come by - where the nib doesn't dig in and accumulate clogging micro-bits of paper; where the nib can skate sensitively on the surface this way and that because of the hard smoothness.
Thanks David! Looking forward to the book!
I've never tried to use a fountain pen as a dip pen. The good ones feel so great in the hand compared to any other inking chassis. (aside: I sincerely don't know how a great method for getting great results can ever be "out of date." Quality is forever.)
I can't imagine how anybody can think Drucker traced anything from photos. Although I am surprised he didn't even trace anything from his own hand. As when one nails something in a sketch and wishing to keep the same gesture exactly on the final traces it directly onto the final paper. He must have been so fluent even that would have been an extra wasteful step.
I love the story about Frazetta. That fills in some blanks about the Drucker-Frazetta collaborations that pop up on ComicArtFans.
In one of the Russ Cochran catalogs - I think - a portfolio of drawings done by the Mad artists as a tribute to Norman Mingo were sold. Drucker's drawing said something like, "To Norman Mingo - the best artist in the whole wide world including Brooklyn!"
I assume that "kit finish" is really "kid finish," which is a 100% cotton paper.
I've heard the same complaints about materials from artists who did high level pen and ink work. Leonard Starr said the only way he could get suitable paper for his strip On Stage by 1970 was through the Tribune syndicate, which special ordered it, had it custom cut to size, and sent him several months worth at a time. As for brushes, companies stopped making the brushes he wanted and no one could replace them. But by the 1990s it no longer mattered; he drew a simpler, smaller strip-- Annie-- and could use pen markers with no flexibility in line because no one cared anymore.
Kev and David,
Yes, I meant to write "kid finish." It is commonly called vellum, and is actually more textured than "smooth" bristol (although it is still a pretty smooth paper). I tried the 1950 nib and found it very much prone to scratching and tearing up the surface of the paper, more so than other nibs I've used. Maybe the quality has declined, or I got a bad batch. If it really is the same nib that Mort used, it's surprising he didn't work with "smooth" bristol instead of vellum. On the other hand, smooth paper would not accept washes and colored inks as well as vellum, so maybe that's the answer.
I've got to try the 290 — thanks for the tip!
I would have thought it was smooth as well, looking at the work, but the strathmore bristol comes in 'vellum', which is often called 'kid' finish (= goatskin). Is there a chance that's what he meant ?
Regarding the nibs, are they still produced the same way ? You'll often read complaints that the methods used in their making now have messed them up in some way, no idea if that's true but I think there was more manual involvement that's now mechanised.
Bill
Thanks (I should read to the end of the page before replying...)
Bill
Kev - not sure if y' know them, but the brause 515 are the smoothest nibs I've come across and never snag. That strathmore vellum bristol is lovely, just coarse enough to give some resistance (and to 'break' your lines - like drybrush) but doesn't fray.
Bill
Bill — Have you tried the Tachikawa G nib? It is both flexible and very smooth, and holds a lot of ink. It might actually be TOO smooth, if you like a bit of coarseness and unpredictability in your lines. I will look into the Brause 515, thanks.
My bad for not using the "reply" function, which doesn't appear in my browser when viewing the post + comments (but does when I click on "comments" from the main blog page).
No, I have a few 'G's (nikko), but not the tachikawa; will get a few now, thanks ! (I use their crowquill-type, though, which I really like. That brause isn't as fine, but -almost- moves in every direction, and gives lovely 'echoppe'-like line-width variation).
Bill
Bill... thanks for the recommend on the Brause 515. Never heard of Brause, but it looks like they go back a long way. Any nib that even almost moves in every direction is of interest.
Though what I'm really looking for is glass-hard paper that will allow for old timey nib gliding. My go-to plate bristol boards have long gotten too toothy and soft. Even the vellums have gotten softer. I'd guess - and this is really seat of the pants talk - the answer is the 'finish' per se isn't the problem regarding digging but the actual density and hardness of the paper itself. So a vellum finish if the paper itself is substantial enough would be just fine.
Walt Reed once suggested I run my fingers over the surface of a piece by Joseph Clement Coll he had to feel how much the pen dug into the paper. The strokes were definitely driving channels into the paper surface. But I think it was more like compression than digging. The channels were pushed into the paper, not dug out of it. They weren't torn up.
"lovely 'echoppe'-like line-width variation"
I don't know this reference. What is a "shop-like" line width?
“Any nib that even almost moves in every direction is of interest.”
Why not just use a brush?
Richard
Richard - Ha ha. Do sometimes, but it's harder to control - you can't feel it against the paper as easily (but, if anyone's interested, there are new-ish imitation kolinskys from Raphael - the series # I think is 83-something - that have stiffer bristles so you at least feel more in control, and so far have kept their point).
Kev - the echoppe etching needle was what I meant - filed/flattened oval-ended tip that's at an angle so that the line widens and narrows as the needle is turned;
but referring to it was convoluted as it was designed to itself imitate the variation in lines from ink drawings made using a quill (so that the etchings didn't have a monotonous line, and looked more like drawings). See Jaques Callot's beggars, eg https://images.metmuseum.org/CRDImages/dp/original/DP833459.jpg
Do you know what Coll could have used - paper and nibs (I thought he mostly used brushes until I saw some of the details David posted here a few months back) - that could have done that pressing into the paper ?
Bill
( a nicer one here https://images.metmuseum.org/CRDImages/dp/original/DP890630.jpg / Bill )
"Why not just use a brush?"
Richard, the issue is I don't like using only brush. I'm wearing out my W&N series 7 #2s. The sharpness and articulation of real pen work gives a nice contrast against the liquidity of the brush. And actual nib pens are much better for creating textures than any disposable out there. Although the Tombow Fudenosuke brushpen is excellent, it is still soft and squishy compared to the crispness of a real pen. All disposables are. Its a textural/articulation thing. I'd love to find something that was as consistent, articulate and simple for finished work as Bic Cristal Xtra Smooth ballpoint on Staples' Premium Color Laser & Copier Paper (98 Bright, 32 lb.) is for sketching ideas. A dream only at this point. (Bic ink is not black and is impermanent)
Backing up a step from pencils and such, Mort must have one helluva portrait image reference collection. Can you supply any detail, David?
"Do you know what Coll could have used - paper and nibs (I thought he mostly used brushes until I saw some of the details David posted here a few months back) - that could have done that pressing into the paper ?"
Bill, there's no mention of Coll's materials in either of the books I have on him. Though it is said that he rarely used brush. There is a photo of his work setup that shows that he drew with the page upright on an easel. David A. owns at least one Coll so maybe he has something to add.
I happen to have xeroxed a Higgins ink ad that appeared in the April 1951 issue of American Artist. The ad shows a coll drawing owned by Henry Pitz and Pitz analyzes it as copy for the ad. Pitz says that coll "Used a medium fine pen, probably a 303 Gillot." Then said that Coll also probably used a "stub pen" (wide lettering pen?) for accents.
Thanks, Kev.
Bill
"My go-to plate bristol boards have long gotten too toothy and soft."
Maybe try a cheaper Bristol? I find the expensive brands are always too soft, but I get a nice glide on the dirt cheap stuff. For example, the Canson XL Recycled Bristol Pad (the yellow one) has a smooth, hard, almost waxy surface.
For sketchbooks, I’ve also switched to junk 90lb sketchbooks from Five Below. They should be horrible, but I’ve had surprisingly good luck with them. My usual pens are Jinhao x750s rigged with Zebra Gs, and while they skitter and scratch on my nice paper, they glide perfectly on the cheap hot press paper from Five Below.
"Ha ha. Do sometimes, but it's harder to control - you can't feel it against the paper as easily"
Sounds like you might be working too small with the brushes? I think brushes are meant for drawing at much larger sizes than we’re often used to, more like "painting sized" dimensions. The larger you work, the more tactile they feel, since you can press harder and engage more of the brush.
Richard
"Sounds like you might be working too small with the brushes?"
Yeah, a4 - a3 for line work, so probably too small. But not that unusual, I think, nor using a short-handled size 00 to 1 for its difference to a nib. You're right about the larger brushes, though.
Bill
I wanted to add to my earlier point about cheaper papers and why they might actually be better.
The quality of cotton has declined over time, not just in paper but in clothing too. We’ve shifted from long-fibered heirloom varietals (e.g., Egyptian or Pima) to modern hybrids that are more drought and disease resistant but produce shorter, weaker fibers.
Because of this, it’s no longer possible to make cotton paper (or even shirts) that hold up like older ones did. Meanwhile, discount paper makers don’t have to stick to the "100% cotton equals quality" idea. They'll use stronger fiber blends, which can actually make their products outperform many of the pricier options.
Thanks Richard. That's very interesting. I do worry about the archival problem with various ways of creating 'artificial' or recycled paper. I know most say "acid free' but we don't know anything until time tests it for real. (I remember that Richard Schmid put new pigments through tests that lasted years before he was confident enough in their permanency to use them.)
I wonder if our ol' friend Laurence John is around? Doesn't he know a thing or two about fiber? (I'm assuming based on his blog.) There must be somebody reading this blog that knows about sizings and paper composition/manufacturing.
I’ve read several blogs that say that many pigments traditionally considered lightfast are actually fugitive when used in quantities typical of watercolors. I haven’t heard of lightfastness issues with traditional pigments (other than the usual suspects like Alizarin and Opera Rose) when used in oils, although it would make sense that if you’re doing thin enough oil washes, you'd encounter the same issues that occur with watercolors. Let me know if you remember where you read about that please.
I'm sure it was in Art of West magazine, from 15-20 years ago. Quinacridone Red (and various new oil colors of that sort) were the types of colors he was researching.
Post a Comment