This is MY COPY of THE FLINTSTONES #20.
Now, I can't speak for the Internet scan, which may have been cropped when scanned, or maybe its FAR LEFT SIDE is rolled or even missing. Note below, the Charlton Logo and Ray Dirgo's signature are cut off... (...No comments on whether or not that's a "good thing", please!)
...But MY COPY is definitely "cut" incorrectly!
The TOP is CUT OFF...
...And the BOTTOM has TOO MUCH BLANK PAPER below the cover image!
Note the Side-by-Side Comparison!
(Click to Enlarge to see the differences)
Charlton had their own press and printing plant in an old factory-like building in Derby, CT... I actually saw it from my car, where they printed, bound, and cut-to-size their own comic books.
And, at least for MY copy - as far as that "cutting" goes - (which brings everything higher and closer to the top, to the point where some of it is even CUT OFF), ya gotta say... "Charlton Aimed HIGHER!", perhaps a bit TOO high... and characteristically missed the mark!
4 comments:
I can't figure if these means Charlton is "a cut above" or "a cut below."
They were not the only ones, of course. I have some later Gold Key issues with extra white space at the top or the bottom. I'm guessing most of the publishing houses had their printing glitches. But I'm sure, from my own observation and experience, plus the company's reputation, that Charlton probably had more of these printing and cutting errors than the majority of other publishers. I have a Pebbles & Bamm-Bamm issue that is folded and stapled off center--pretty drastically off. And don't you love it when the pages didn't get cut--especially when extra paper was left on the top of the page, usually un-separated from its companion page! I know pretty much every house did that from time to time. Sometimes, it was rigged so that if you separated the uncut pages, some content could potentially be lost. And I still have a copy of a Walt Disney Comics Digest where about 30 pages are a repeat of the pages that preceded them! The repeated material replaced what was supposed to go there. Fortunately, when I discovered the error, there was still time for me to find a fresh copy on the stands. The issue in question was sent to me as part of a subscription, which is a tale of woe for another time. (A long, long, long tale of woe, unfortunately!)
The thing I like best about the Charlton Flintstones issues is that they made everything that came before and everything that came afterward look like classic material! Still, they are fun to collect. And I guess eventually Mr. Dirgo's work becomes an acquired taste--but I haven't acquired the taste for it yet!
Thanks for posting!
“ I can't figure if this means Charlton is 'a cut above' or 'a cut below.'”
Oh, that is SO great, Scarecrow, I wish I’d thought of it (or some form of it) for the title of the post!
Of course, every publisher had their share of production problems… But Charlton just seemed to have more of them than the others.
Some were accidental, as they most often are, and some were editorially-self-inflicted, but that’s just one more thing that set Charlton apart from the rest. From this perspective, it’s actually fun to look back on some of them.
Considering that Charlton had its own printing presses and performed its own production processes in-house in Derby, CT, while most others used World Color Press in Sparta, IL – Western being a notable exception, with their plant in Poughkeepsie, NY – things were bound to happen, as the overall quality control at Derby was simply not on a par with Sparta and Poughkeepsie.
Ray Dirgo, for me, has been an “acquired taste” – neither as difficult to down as a dose of Scotch, nor as easy to adapt to as a pineapple pizza – but somewhere in the middle.
You’ll notice my earlier comments on this Blog were more disparaging, and my later ones (as he clearly worked to improve his art as Charlton’s FLINTSTONES title wore on) more accepting, even nudging up against appreciative.
He was no Harvey Eisenberg (prior) or Scott Jeralds (later) but, unlike Kay Wright, he took it upon himself to improve, not “stagnate-in-substandard-land” – and I give him major props for that, regardless of the end result.
Tell me your “Tale of Woe” off the Blog.
Whatever we make of the line-art, I think the shading is interesting. The way it gives shading and volume to Fred and even to the fish — well, it makes me think of much earlier comic covers, more than anything you'd associate with 1970s Hanna-Barbera!
…Actually, YEAH, Achille!
That IS an unusually good coloring effort – especially for the early 1970s – and all the more so for Charlton! Nice observation!
Post a Comment