A bit of both. Different periods definitely had prevalent styles, but there were usually artists doing their own things, as well. The '90s, for example, was mostly men with huge muscles, women with ridiculously huge breasts and small waists, and just generally terrible anatomy and proportions. That was the more popular style of the time. But some artists eschewed it for their own style.
So, yeah. Bit of both.
X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.As time goes on, inking gets better so the colors look less like concrete chalk though even that can be ruined by a terrible penciler.
Yeah, American comics generally seem to be getting more detailed over the years but eras do have their standouts. The 60s have lots and lots of Kirby Dots, and homely Steve Ditko women and mustached Ditko men.
Modified Ura-nage, Torture Rack

So I'm not a huge comic fan. I know a lot about the lore of Marvel and DC but I only read a few comics here and there when my interest is sparked.
Recently I've been reading comics from different periods of time. Now I don't have very good eyesight and as I'm not a real avid comic reader, I wasn't sure if it's just particular artists I'm not too fond of or if it's more "the style of the time".
Firstly I was reading Acts of Vengeance and Streets of Poison. A sample of the art.
While I didn't hate it, I didn't really like it either.
Next I was reading Captain America V5
◊. The more realistic style appealed to me but didn't wow me.
Then I switched to DC and read some Knightfall.
◊ This is definitely my favorite style. To my uninformed eye, it looks not quite as realistic as the previous image but it also isn't as....I dunno how to describe it. Whatever the first image is, this one isn't it, and I like it for that.
So is it just the artists that make the difference? Or is it the "era' in which the comics were made?
edited 15th Jun '12 4:42:51 PM by Nikkolas