A Chicago-based store called Atlas Comics has a couple of interesting lists over on their website. One gives their picks of The 100 Greatest Comic Artists. Another itemizes their choices for The 20 Greatest Inkers for American Comic Books. Yet another section features what they think are The 25 All-Time Greatest Covers of American Comic Books, as well as The 12 Dumbest.
Needless to say, I don't agree in full with any of these lists, and you won't either. Lists of this sort are just the opinion of one guy or one small group of guys, and any list you decide to compile will probably be just as valid. No point in getting into specifics but they have artists on their "100 Best" list who wouldn't make my "400 Best" list and vice-versa.
Well, I'll mention one slight specific: They have Carl Barks at #4. Now, even given their stated criteria, I'm not sure I understand a competition that pits Mr. Barks's work against that of Will Eisner and Joe Kubert and "Ghastly" Graham Ingels. But leaving that aside, Barks is the only "funny animal" guy on the whole list. Sheldon Mayer is on it and way, way down (I'd put him much higher) and so is Sergio Aragonés (likewise) but neither is on it for work on that kind of comic. They have John Stanley, who worked on Little Lulu, at #42 and I'm not sure they don't have him confused with Irving Tripp, who did the finished art on most of those comics. But that's it: No Walt Kelly, no Paul Murry, no Harvey Eisenberg, no Warren Kremer, no Frank McSavage, no Owen Fitzgerald, no Jim "Fox & Crow" Davis, no Al Hubbard, no Pete Alvarado, et cetera, et cetera. They don't even include any teen-comic artists like Dan DeCarlo. Are these guys not on the list because someone thought they weren't as good as Dan Adkins? Or is it maybe that the list's compiler(s) wasn't/weren't that familiar with some of those funny artists?
Which would be okay. No one's expected to know everyone and everything. There are probably some great artists I don't know or wouldn't think of if pressed to make up a list. I just mention this because these lists by the Atlas Comics people, while fun, seem to have gotten a number of Internet browsing-folks upset. People look at these lists, forget how subjective they are, and begin debating as if factual errors have been made. The context of a "10 Best" or "100 Best" list seems to bring that out in people. They forget it's just opinions, and that they should enjoy the list on that basis, which is what I did. I sure didn't expect it to match my tastes.
Except, you know, Nick Cardy really ought to be higher.