So who here dislikes the new suit as much as I do?

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

Superman stories by Jerry Siegel continued to appear up until the end of 1947 (the last in World's Finest Comics 32 (Jan/Feb 1948), on sale November 28, 1947. During his war service, the number of stories went down, especially in 1945 when there seems to be only two. Shuster's eyesight was already failing when they first started Superman, which is why the other artists in his studio (under his management) did more and more of the art over the years. One source I checked says Joe also did military service, but it doesn't give details. I'll have to do some more digging, because it seems to me that with his eyesight Shuster should not have been in active service (although many have gotten into the military anyway, despite medical issues).

The first Superboy story, however, is credited to Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster. The argument over Superboy is extremely complex and I can't remember the details off hand. The fact that Jerry was away in the military is part of the reason he said DC didn't have his permission to do Superboy. But I would have to do a lot more research to represent the full argument.

[Lexrules]

Burden of proof's on you, dude.

True, but really who has the proof but Shulster and we really can't reach him right now. I will just say from what I understand is that he did have a roll in the design.

We will leave it at well it's possible but neither of us actually were alive to see it type of thing.

[Esoteric J]

Not as long as Didio and Lee are in charge we won't buddy. maybe someday soon though, We can hope.

Yeah that dudes horrid, all he cares about is money, that Didio dude.

Jim Lee just sucks at designing and only knows about XTREME and doesnt really spearhead anything important other than occasional art.

Burden of proof's on you, dude.

Where is your avatar from btw?

[Lexrules]

Where is your avatar from btw?

Yea. Would look amazing if only it didn't have that damn V neck Collar.. WHY, WHY, WHY DC.... Why has tho forsaken me.

[JoeP]

Where is your avatar from btw?

It's from either Superman #2 or #3. The part where Superman is being questioned by the cops early on.

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

Like I say, the Shuster studio did the bulk of the Superman art between 1938 and 1947. Some artists like Jack Burnley and Fred Ray did work directly for DC, but the majority of the work was being done by Joe and the guys in his studio. As Joe's eyesight got worse and the amount of Superman work increased, the other artists in the studio did most of the work. But Joe was the guy in charge. He supervised the whole thing and he often would draw Superman's head onto the artwork of the other artists. So it seems like Joe would have been aware of any changes to Superman as they happened. Maybe Paul Cassidy or Wayne Boring or one of the others introduced these changes--but Joe must have thought that was okay since he approved the work.

For a funny send up of the Superman production process read "King of the Comic Books" by Jerry Siegel, Joe Shuster and Ira Yarbrough, in Superman 25 (Nov/Dec 1943), on sale September 3, 1943--reprinted in Superman Archives volume 7.



(cover by Jack Burnley)

[Lexrules]

Yea. I have to much time on my hands..

[Esoteric J]

It's from either Superman #2 or #3. The part where Superman is being questioned by the cops early on.

I was going to use the full image to compare Superman there to Superman back then, but I'll just use avatars




You can tell the difference in characterization right there. Angry scowling shiny suit and collar Superyoungman and typical smiling normal Superman.

[JoeP]

I was going to use the full image to compare Superman there to Superman back then, but I'll just use avatars




You can tell the difference in characterization right there. Angry scowling shiny suit and collar Superyoungman and typical smiling normal Superman.

Right. Just like how you can see angry scowling, classically suited Superman here:



Here:



And here:



It has nothing to do with the new suit or the New 52. The fact is, a darker Superman has always been trotted out when the story requires it, and it's not any different now. The first arc of Superman had a darker, not-himself-Clark/Superman because IT WAS PART OF THE PLOT. It was even specifically called out by Lois, Perry, Jimmy, etc. Conversely, Superman couldn't keep a smile off his face in the first few issues of Action. So just stop it.

[Lexrules]

Right. Just like how you can see angry scowling, classically suited Superman here:



Here:



And here:



It has nothing to do with the new suit or the New 52. The fact is, a darker Superman has always been trotted out when the story requires it, and it's not any different now. The first arc of Superman had a darker, not-himself-Clark/Superman because IT WAS PART OF THE PLOT. It was even specifically called out by Lois, Perry, Jimmy, etc. Conversely, Superman couldn't keep a smile off his face in the first few issues of Action. So just stop it.

This is better.

[JoeP]

This is better.

Not bad, but I think the no-collar, exposed trapezius (yes, I had to look it up) area only works if the rest of the suit is of thinner material. Because it's so built up everywhere else it just looks odd.

[davidn15]

This is better.

Why yes it is.

[Lexrules]

Why yes it is.

Your hopeless brother.

[Ntikrst]

You're both kinda right,



Now this is best! Open collar is mandatory, and the blue needs to be two tone so he doesn't look naked because something is missing.

Winner winner, chicken dinner?

[planetman]

No, this, I think, is best: