Rocket Comics

Latest Articles

A Guide to Organizing a Comic Book Collection for Growth

Organizing a comic book collection seems like it should be easy. Alphabetical order. Problem solved.

At least, that's what I thought.

I've been organizing my comic collection, and my natural inclination has always been to arrange everything alphabetically. But comics have a way of turning even something as simple as the alphabet into an argument.

Consider The Amazing Spider-Man.

Ignoring the word "The," as you normally would when alphabetizing a title, The Amazing Spider-Man belongs under A. But part of my collector brain immediately objects.

Shouldn't Amazing Spider-Man be with the other Spider-Man comics?

It would seem perfectly reasonable to file it as Spider-Man, Amazing. Then Spectacular Spider-Man could become Spider-Man, Spectacular, Sensational Spider-Man becomes Spider-Man, Sensational, and so forth.

Now all my Spider-Man comics are together.

Neat. Logical. Problem solved.

Except I think I just made the problem worse.

When Alphabetical Isn't Really Alphabetical

Once I decided that Amazing Spider-Man could become Spider-Man, Amazing, I had created a rule.

And rules have consequences.

What about Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man? Presumably that becomes Spider-Man, Friendly Neighborhood.

Superior Spider-Man? Spider-Man, Superior.

Ultimate Spider-Man? Spider-Man, Ultimate.

Okay. Still manageable.

Then there's Web of Spider-Man.

Does that become Spider-Man, Web of?

What about Peter Parker: Spider-Man? Spider-Man 2099? Spider-Man Unlimited?

At some point, I'm no longer alphabetizing comic books. I'm creating my own taxonomy for them.

And Spider-Man is actually an easy example.

The Franchise Method

There's an appealing philosophy behind grouping comics this way: organize everything by character or franchise.

All the Batman comics go together. All the Superman comics go together. All the Spider-Man comics go together. For browsing a favorite character, this sounds fantastic.

But where do I put Action Comics?

Under Superman?

Superman is certainly the character most closely associated with Action Comics, but Action Comics is also a series with an identity and history of its own. Even though Superman was introduced in issue #1, he wasn't its only feature. In the 1980s, DC made Action Comics a weekly anthology that didn't always include a Superman story.

The same problem applies to Detective Comics.

Today, Batman and Detective Comics are practically inseparable. But Batman didn't appear until issue #27. Does that mean issues #1–26 belong under D while everything afterward goes under Batman?

Obviously not.

So maybe the entire series goes under Batman. But now I've made another rule.

And then I find Tales of Suspense.

Uh-oh!

Should Tales of Suspense be filed with Iron Man?

That makes sense for a substantial part of its run. But Captain America shared the book with Iron Man. Before either character appeared, Tales of Suspense was an anthology title. So is it an Iron Man comic, a Captain America comic, or simply Tales of Suspense?

Similar problems appear with Journey into Mystery, Strange Tales, Showcase, The Brave and the Bold and countless other titles.

The more comics you own—and the further back into comic-book history your collection reaches — the more these exceptions pile up.

A franchise-based system doesn't eliminate organizational decisions. It requires them.

The Publisher Method

Then there's another organizational method I've encountered among collectors and comic shops: separate everything by publisher and alphabetize within those sections.

Marvel goes over here. DC goes over there. Image gets another section. Dark Horse, IDW, Dynamite and everybody else get their own areas.

Of the common approaches, this one is my least favorite. It adds an unnecessary prerequisite to finding a comic:

You have to know who published it.

That's easy enough if you're looking for Batman or Fantastic Four. Most comic collectors know that Batman is DC and Fantastic Four is Marvel.

But what about a licensed comic, like G.I. Joe?

Which section should I search?

Marvel published G.I. Joe comics. So did Devil's Due and IDW. Today, Skybound publishes G.I. Joe as part of its imprint through Image.

The same thing happens with Transformers: Marvel, Dreamwave, IDW, Skybound/Image.

Star Wars spent years at Marvel, moved to Dark Horse for decades, and eventually returned to Marvel.

A publisher-based system requires me to know not merely what comic I'm looking for, but which company held the license when that particular comic was published.

That's useful information for a collector to know, but it's terrible information to require simply to find a comic in a box.

The Real Problem Is Mental Friction

This is what ultimately changed my thinking.

None of these questions are particularly difficult.

I can decide whether Tales of Suspense belongs with Iron Man. I can look up who published a particular Transformers series. I can develop a perfectly consistent rule for where Web of Spider-Man belongs.

But why should I have to?

Every special rule adds a tiny decision.

When I'm putting away one comic, that's nothing. When I'm organizing thousands of comics, those tiny decisions accumulate. Worse, I have to remember those decisions later.

Did I put Tales of Suspense with Iron Man?
Did I put Web of Spider-Man under W or Spider-Man?
Did I separate my IDW Transformers comics from the Marvel ones?

A good organizational system should reduce those questions, not create them. That's when the boring solution started looking awfully attractive.

Just Sort Them Like a Library

The system I've settled on is almost embarrassingly simple.

Just use the actual published title.

Ignore leading articles — A, An, and The — and otherwise let the alphabet do its job.

So:

Action Comics goes under A.
The Amazing Spider-Man goes under A.
Batman goes under B.
Detective Comics goes under D.
G.I. Joe goes under G.
The Incredible Hulk goes under I.
The Spectacular Spider-Man goes under S.
Tales of Suspense goes under T.
The Uncanny X-Men goes under U.
Web of Spider-Man goes under W.

There's no need to know the publisher, determine the primary character, or decide which franchise owns an anthology title.

You just need to know the name of the comic.

But My Spider-Man Comics Are Everywhere!

This is the obvious argument against this sorting method:

If I'm looking for Spider-Man comics, they're scattered across the collection.

Amazing Spider-Man is under A. Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man is under F. Peter Parker: Spider-Man is under P. Spectacular Spider-Man is under S. Ultimate Spider-Man is under U. Web of Spider-Man is under W.

Initially, I agreed with this argument against pure alphabetization and leaned into the franchise method. But as a I became a convert to the ABC method, I came to see this "bug" as a feature.

The Joy of Finding Something You Weren't Looking For

One of the pleasures of visiting an old bookstore, record shop, video store or comic shop is finding something unexpected while looking for something else. It even has a name: serendipitous discovery.

You head into the stacks looking for one title and notice another one sitting nearby.

"Wait. What's that?"

Twenty minutes later you've completely forgotten what you originally came looking for.

A purely alphabetical comic collection creates some of that same serendipity.

Looking for Amazing Spider-Man means browsing past other titles beginning with "Amazing."

Looking for Detective Comics might take me past Destroyer Duck, Devil Dinosaur, Dreadstar, or some other book I haven't thought about in years.

"Oh, man. I forgot I had this."

If every Spider-Man comic lives in one enormous Spider-Man neighborhood, I go directly to Spider-Man, find the comic, and bounce.

Alphabetical filing makes the major characters mingle with everybody else.

Spider-Man doesn't get a gated community.

I rather like that.

A disadvantage of the library method turns out to encourage one of the things I enjoy most about having a physical collection: browsing the collection itself.

Let the Database Be Smart and the Boxes Be Dumb

There's another reason I don't think the physical collection needs to encode all these relationships.

That's what a database is for.

A physical comic can only occupy one place in a filing system.

Tales of Suspense can't simultaneously sit under T, Iron Man and Captain America.

But in a database, it absolutely can.

A database can tell me:

every comic featuring Spider-Man;
every Batman title I own;
every G.I. Joe comic regardless of publisher;
every Marvel comic from 1977;
every appearance of Iron Man;
every anthology title in the collection;
or every issue I'm missing from a particular run.

The database can understand characters, publishers, franchises, dates, creators, series and relationships.

The long box doesn't need to.

The long box really only has to answer one question:

Where is the comic?

Keeping that distinction in mind makes the physical filing system much easier.

Let the database be smart.

Let the boxes be dumb.

The Future-Me Test

There's one other advantage that may matter more as the years go by.

Will I understand my own organizational decisions twenty years from now?

Maybe I'll remember that I decided Tales of Suspense belongs with Iron Man.

Maybe I won't.

Maybe I'll remember whether I considered Web of Spider-Man a Spider-Man title for filing purposes.

Maybe I won't.

But I'll probably still know the alphabet.

If I'm holding a copy of Tales of Suspense, I don't have to remember a decision I made decades earlier.

Tales.

T.

Done.

There's something reassuring about an organizational system that doesn't require remembering the organizational system.

My Comic Filing Rules

So, for now at least, my rules are deliberately boring:

Alphabetize by the published series title.
Ignore A, An, and The when they appear at the beginning of a title.
Don't reorganize titles around characters or franchises.
Don't separate comics by publisher.
Avoid special filing rules unless they're absolutely necessary.
Let the collection database handle relationships, searching and filtering.

I'm sure comics will eventually throw some wonderfully bizarre edge case at me that forces me to reconsider one of those rules. Comics are good at that.

But that's also part of the point.

The goal isn't to create a filing system with a rule for every possible situation.

It's to create one that needs as few rules as possible.

Trust the Alphabet

I started thinking about all of this because I wanted to improve alphabetical sorting.

Surely putting all my Spider-Man comics together would be better. Surely grouping related characters would make the collection easier to navigate. Surely there was some clever collector's system that would make everything fit together perfectly.

But every improvement required another rule.

And every new rule produced another exception.

Eventually I realized I was solving the wrong problem.

The best organizational system isn't necessarily the one that puts every related thing together.

It's the one that lets me consistently predict where something will be.

For my collection, I think librarians had the right idea all along.

Use the title. Trust the alphabet. Let the database worry about everything else.

And if searching for The Spectacular Spider-Man leads me to some weird forgotten comic sitting three dividers away?

That's not a bug.

That's half the fun of having a comic collection in the first place.

August 17, 2026Read more →

Comic BooksCollectingTips

Top 5 Superman Artists

With his debut in Action Comics #1 in 1939, Superman launched the comic book superhero. During his 72 year history, the Man of Steel's adventures have been illustrated by many of the greatest artists in the comic book industry. These men are not only great illustrators and storytellers but during their tenures as Superman artists they produced the seminal work in Superman's ongoing battle for "Truth, Justice and the American Way!"

5 Neal Adams

Neal Adams was one of the pioneers of realism in comic book illustration. Adams exploded onto the scene in the late Silver Age and by the early 1970s he was one of the most sought after talents in the industry. His contribution to the Man of Steel are hundreds of beautiful covers for Action Comics, Superman and Superboy (not to mention Superman as part of the JLA). Unfortunately, he drew interiors for only one issue of Superman, Issue #254.

4 Joe Shuster

Joe Shuster, with writer Joel Siegel, kicked off the age of the Superheroes (which I’m happy to say is still alive and well). Compared to the art in a modern comic book, Shuster’s work appears less polished (true) and more juvenile (arguable). One thing his art has in spades is energy. Leaf through an early Action Comics or Superman comic and you can see why the Man of Steel captured the imaginations of generations of the young at heart. Joe Shuster made everyone “believe a man can fly”.

3 John Byrne

By the late 1980s, Superman was in a bit of a creative rut. Superman was seen by many fans as hopelessly out-of-date and increasingly irrelevant. He was your GRANDfather's superhero.

After DC's major spring cleaning event, Crisis on Infinite Earths, John Byrne was tapped to modernize the company’s flagship character. Byrne toned-down Superman's god-level powers, scrapped some of the crazier aspects of Superman canon (such as a full spectrum of crazy kryptonite colors). His high-energy artwork (Byrne is a master of superhero battles) leapt off the page in 1986's Man of Steel miniseries and his subsequent reboot of Action Comics and Superman.

2 Curt Swan

Curt Swan is the quintessential Superman artist of the 1950s, 60s and 70s. He drew Superman in Action Comics, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olsen, Superman, and World's Finest, and drew Superboy in Adventure Comics for over 3 decades. His swan song (sorry...this pun was too good to leave in the holster) was the “final Superman story” Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow (Superman #423 & Action Comics #583) in 1985 as DC prepared to reboot of their iconic character in Man of Steel.

1 José Luis García-López

If you own a Superman lunchbox, t-shirt, button or other piece of merch, chances are you own a piece of Garcia-Lopez's artwork.

Besides his stints as penciller on Action Comics, Superman and Superboy and the Legion of Super-Heroes, Garcia-Lopez also defined and refined the look of the DC Universe in DC Comics Style Guide in 1982. Garcia-Lopez is the Artist’s Artist and his mark on the Man of Steel (and the wider DC Universe) endures to this day.

November 24, 2024Read more →

DC ComicsSupermanComics BooksSuperheroesArt

Latest Comic Reviews

All reviews →

Monsters

#1

4 / 5

Worth It

There's something irresistible about the classic monsters. Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, the Wolf Man, and their fellow creatures of the night have been frightening and fascinating audiences for generations. Whether you first encountered them in Universal horror films, Famous Monsters of Filmland, Aurora model kits, or the pages of Creepy and Eerie, these characters have a way of sinking their claws into your imagination and refusing to let go.

With Mark Spears' Monsters #1, writer and artist Mark Spears brings that old-fashioned monster magic into the modern comic book world. The result is an intriguing, visually distinctive opening chapter that owes as much to the horror nostalgia of the 1980s as it does to the gothic traditions that inspired these creatures in the first place.

Set in 1981, the story opens with a series of disturbing events, including a grisly murder, a missing child, and the suggestion that something ancient and terrible is stirring. A mysterious monster hunter known as the Slayer emerges from retirement, while a collection of seemingly unrelated characters find themselves drawn toward an approaching supernatural threat. Before long, it becomes clear that Dracula's return may be at the center of it all.

One of the issue's more intriguing sequences is a flashback revealing that Dracula was previously imprisoned by an unlikely alliance of legendary Victorian adventurers: Sherlock Holmes, Allan Quatermain, Abraham Van Helsing, and the mysterious Slayer. It's a wonderfully pulpy combination of characters, reminiscent of Alan Moore's The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, and exactly the sort of literary crossover that appeals to my fondness for Victorian adventure fiction and classic horror.

Curiously, the flashback is introduced with a caption reading "London, England. 1986." Considering the main story takes place in 1981, I'm inclined to believe this is a typographical error and the intended date is 1896. Not only would that place the events squarely within the Victorian era, but the artwork shifts to black and white, visually reinforcing the sense that we're witnessing a much earlier period. More importantly, it raises an intriguing question about the Slayer himself. If he helped imprison Dracula in 1896 and remains active in 1981, he's clearly no ordinary mortal. Whether this extraordinary longevity is supernatural in origin or something else entirely remains to be seen, but it's one of the more interesting mysteries introduced in this opening issue.

Spears doesn't attempt to explain everything in this first installment. Instead, he introduces several characters and plot threads, allowing the mystery to build as the reader begins to piece together their connections. It's an ambitious approach, although the constant movement between storylines occasionally makes the issue feel more like an extended prologue than a complete chapter.

The artwork is unquestionably the comic's most distinctive feature. Spears employs a highly rendered digital painting style that gives his monsters an almost three-dimensional appearance. His dramatic lighting, rich colors, and elaborate character designs create images that would look perfectly at home on the packaging of a premium collectible figure or the cover of a vintage monster magazine.

Unfortunately, that visual richness sometimes comes at the expense of sequential storytelling. Reading Mark Spears' Monsters occasionally feels like looking at a comic book through a View-Master. Each panel is a beautifully rendered, almost three-dimensional illustration, but the sense of movement between those panels is sometimes missing. Rather than flowing naturally from one moment to the next, the story can feel like a succession of elaborate still images.

Compounding this problem is the occasional absence of traditional comic book sound effects. A well-placed CRASH!, THUD!, or BLAM! might seem unnecessary in artwork this detailed, but those familiar visual cues serve an important storytelling function. They convey impact, suggest motion, and give action sequences a rhythm that even the most beautifully rendered illustrations can't always achieve on their own.

This becomes particularly noticeable when an action is communicated through a series of otherwise disconnected images. Without the visual punctuation of a sound effect, the reader must sometimes work harder than necessary to understand exactly what has happened. The problem isn't that Spears needs to fill every panel with oversized lettering and explosive onomatopoeia. It's that the absence of those elements occasionally makes an already static sequence more difficult to follow.

Comic books are, after all, a unique marriage of words and pictures. The best artists understand that what happens between the panels can be just as important as what appears inside them. When that visual continuity breaks down, even the most spectacular illustrations can struggle to communicate a relatively simple action.

It's an interesting contradiction. Spears' artwork is so meticulously detailed that individual panels practically demand to be studied, yet that same quality can interrupt the pacing of the story. The images are wonderful to look at, but they don't always work together as effectively as they should.

The writing is similarly a mixed bag. There's plenty of atmosphere and an obvious affection for the material, but the first issue introduces so many mysteries that it leaves relatively little room to develop its characters. The result is a story that's easier to admire for its premise and presentation than to become emotionally invested in—at least so far.

What I find most appealing about Monsters, however, is its willingness to embrace the classic horror tradition without treating it as something that needs to be reinvented beyond recognition. There's a sincerity to the project that I appreciate. Spears clearly understands the enduring appeal of these characters and the generations of monster fans who grew up loving them.

In many ways, the comic feels like a spiritual descendant of the monster magazines, trading cards, and illustrated horror collectibles that filled the shelves of hobby shops and comic stores decades ago. That nostalgic quality may ultimately be its greatest strength.

As a first issue, Mark Spears' Monsters offers more questions than answers, and its elaborate visual presentation sometimes overshadows the storytelling. Nevertheless, there's enough atmosphere, mystery, and affection for classic horror to make me curious about what comes next.

For readers who grew up loving the Universal Monsters, Hammer horror films, and the wonderfully lurid monster art of decades past, this is certainly a comic worth investigating.

The verdict: Mark Spears' Monsters #1 is a visually stunning, nostalgia-soaked introduction to a new monster universe. Spears is unquestionably a talented illustrator, but beautiful illustrations and effective sequential storytelling aren't necessarily the same thing. The story hasn't quite found its footing, and the static artwork occasionally makes the action more difficult to follow than it should. Still, there's enough classic monster magic here to make me want to turn the page—even when the artwork makes me want to stop and stare.

Writer: Mark Spears
Artist: Mark Spears
Publisher: Keenspot Entertainment
Year: 2024
Genre: Adventure, Horror
Read: Oct 2026

Batman: Gotham by Gaslight

5 / 5

Essential

Batman: Gotham by Gaslight takes one of comics’ most obvious great ideas—Batman hunting Jack the Ripper—and somehow manages to execute the idea even better than it sounds.

Writer Brian Augustyn relocates Bruce Wayne to the late 19th century, stripping away the Batmobile, computers, satellites, and most of the technological advantages we associate with Batman. What’s left is the part of the character that matters most: the detective.

Batman (err, sorry...The Batman) fits the Victorian setting naturally so the story never feels gimmicky.

Bruce returns to Gotham after years of training just as Jack the Ripper begins murdering women in the city, and he soon becomes personally entangled in the investigation. The story moves quickly, but still feels appropriately foggy, gothic, and grim. Gotham has always looked like it belongs somewhere between a cathedral and a nightmare, so gas lamps and horse-drawn carriages suit it remarkably well.

The mystery itself isn’t much of a baffler. The identity of Jack the Ripper is telegraphed fairly early, but solving the crime isn’t really the point. The mystery is the vehicle that carries us toward the inevitable confrontation between Batman and Jack.

That isn’t a criticism of Augustyn’s writing. Quite the opposite. He does an impressive job of building an entire Victorian Gotham in only 48 pages.

Then there’s Mike Mignola’s artwork, inked by P. Craig Russell.

This was years before Hellboy, but the DNA is already there: heavy shadows, looming architecture, figures emerging from darkness, and the sense that something unpleasant is always waiting just beyond the edge of the panel. His Batman looks less like a superhero than something Victorian criminals might genuinely believe crawled out of Hell.

You can see Mignola developing the visual language that would later reach full maturity in Hellboy and the wider B.P.R.D. universe. It’s a shame he never returned to wander Gotham’s shadowy back alleys.

Gotham by Gaslight would later become the template for DC’s Elseworlds concept, and it’s easy to understand why. Even though the story might have benefited from a little more room to breathe, it remains a remarkably effective combination of mystery, horror, superhero adventure, and atmosphere.

This Batman returned in the Jules Verne-flavored Master of the Future, later appeared in Countdown Presents: The Search for Ray Palmer, and eventually saw his world expanded again in Batman: Gotham by Gaslight – The Kryptonian Age. Those stories range from interesting to very good, but none quite recapture the strange magic of the original.

I’d love to see another creator revisit this version of Batman with a proper Victorian mystery. Put him against H. H. Holmes in the Murder Castle. Pair him with Sherlock Holmes against Professor Moriarty. The gaslit streets are simply too good a setting to leave behind.

Until then, when the weather turns brisk and the shadows grow longer, return to Victorian Gotham and follow the Batman as he hunts a killer who, in another telling, would boast that he "gave birth to the 20th century.”

Writer: Brian Augustyn
Artist: Mike Mignola
Publisher: DC Comics
Year: 1989
Genre: Superhero
Read: Sep 2026