AKA Rick

I've always had good experiences with Ale Garza, whether at conventions or through emails and via online. Here's artwork from my CAF gallery of some of the stuff he's done for me through the years: Most recently, just done last month... Claire from "Heroes": http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=965021&GSub=64442 4 NSFW Pin-Up Girls: http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=873295&GSub=25918 Pin-Up Girl: http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=873290&GSub=25918 Zatanna: http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=791338&GSub=64441 Red Sonja: http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=219237&GSub=25910 Supergirl: http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=163721&GSub=25919 Marvel Girl "Jean Grey": http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=163613&GSub=25908 Marvel Girl "Valeria": http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=163239&GSub=25916 Wonder Woman (colored by Alex Sinclair): http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=163246&GSub=25914 I've been getting artwork from Ale Garza since 2004, first starting off getting free sketches, then collecting commissions, so it's been 8 years of reliable work. Like any artist, he's a perfectionist who has pride in his craft, so once in a while it takes longer to render than anticipated, but only in the name of quality. He often draws free sketches for myself and other fans at the shows, and even, after finding out it was my birthday, drew this for me as a free gift back in 2010 at a convention: http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=624544&GSub=25918 ...he's currently working on a Spider-Man's Mary Jane and Gwen Stacy piece for me (I'll post this one on CAF soon). If you notice, his commissions are continually getting more refined, with strong attention to detail, often using grey wash tones, inking over his pencils, using colored paper, adding effects and background treatment and rather than stoic poses, he musters up some creative and imaginative poses to bring the characters more to life. He's reachable via email and at shows, as he's a frequent guest of many comic conventions.

Also, with any art today, regardless of who's selling it, you should clarify the issues of: Preliminary Pencils Only Inked Over Pencils Original Inked Over Bluelined (Copy) Pencils So, one piece may exist as a single piece of original art, or may exist legitimately as two (2) separate pieces. Some artists use the preliminary pieces as well then lightbox the artwork and ink over that. These prelims are sometimes on smaller paper, sometimes really rough thumbnails, or can be quite tight pencils and elaborate (still part of the production process but not the final art). With the digital age of both artistry and delivery, you'll find some artists send their artwork to inkers electronically, then it's printed out and inked over (reproduced copy), or some artwork only exists as light pencils and it's inked/colored in post-production digitally, so the original can be a shell of what the final published piece looks like. Some pages only have a few panels of original art and other panels that repeat a scene are left blank (before, they'd have paste-up's, and now I'm seeing collectors put their own paste-ups to make the page more complete and aesthetic looking).

I agree with this statement. They seem more like collectors who take their collection on a world tour of conventions for any number of reasons, maybe to brag, boast and feed their own egos as owners of artwork nobody else can own, like a museum. Or maybe they're looking to expose their artwork for trade and laying the bait out there. Or possibly, they're looking for that one buyer who money is no object that's willing to not negotiate and just simply buy on the impulse. At the conventions they're friendly. Some of their prices aren't too outrageous if it's a piece someone has to have. I doubt if you're ever going to find hidden treasure or any opportunity to resell their artwork at the prices they charge, but they're not a clearing house either, so I guess it's their prerogative to charge what they want. Unfortunately for them, they've built a somewhat negative reputation within a rather small hobby, so even when they quote a price, I think many feel it's like entering a used car dealership where, even if a deal sounds good, you're all to suspicious to think the dealer would ever give you a good deal,and something is afoul. I think many feel, when they ask and inquire about a piece these dealers are like sharks sensing blood in the water and no matter if it's cardboard trash or cardboard treasure, they're going to maximize their profit potential by exploiting the fact that they equate an inquiry as a trigger to the laws of supply and demand and react as if they're selling a hot commodity. The "please inquire" model obviously does not sit well nor work with most collectors. They're better off putting up a price that's what they want, but adding "or best offer" if they're willing to negotiate down, so at least there's a baseline context to the pricing of their artwork rather than what's happening now, which is seasoned veteran collectors as well as newbies entering the hobby who have heard the legends of their pricing tactics are now either scared or jaded to the point that nobody will eventually ever "inquire" even if they happen to have fair deal pricing. So, I'm guessing there's a lot of people who've not dealt with Coolines that if you asked them about Coolines would have nothing good or nice to say, not out of experience but based on the viral reputation of what they've read about the Donnelly Brothers, which is a shame they've let this happen to themselves. I don't think it's too late for them to re-invent themselves and endear themselves to the hobby as legitimate dealers that the masses enjoys patronizing. They just need come off their very inconsistent pricing and turn around the negative reputation and perception. Otherwise, I think they should just reposition themselves not as dealers or resellers, but just as collectors with a nice collection of artwork that for the most part is "NFS" Not For Sale, unless someone offers them a price they can't refuse and leave it at that, rather than pretend to have a mainstream business. Or who knows, maybe Coolines was designed as a business for tax purposes, so sole purpose is to acquire art, not sell art with some sort of financial benefit, so in fact they do what they do and act the way they act for a strategic reason. Or they have other sources of income. They've always struck me as collectors more than serious dealers, i.e., someone driven to turn inventory.

I will say this, don't overpay, by definition of paying more than you can afford to pay and more than the artwork is worth to you. What you are willing to pay and what you can afford to pay is what it's worth to you. Never be ashamed or embarrassed by that fact, so long as it's reasonable to state without offending. So, yes it's not smart to lose a piece by being cheap and trying to nickle/dime a deal. But it's also foolish to throw money at something and money you're not comfortable paying. As for art being one of a kind, yes that is so true. As for art, once sold, possibly never coming around again, true again. However, just like anything else, if you can't afford it, don't fret, another opportunity will come along again, maybe even a better one. That's in part why I don't deal with rude art dealers who don't earn my business. I am never without resources to find art I can enjoy nor am I ever not seeing something I want pop up and become available in the marketplace. Some advise against time payments, layaway or putting purchases on credit cards because the nature of what artwork is, is in truth a very non-necessity. It does not feed you. It does not cloth you. It does not shelter you. It does not provide you with any tangible service and value other than aesthetics. I'd agree to a degree on that. There's more important things in life and art is not worth going into debt for. It's funny to see some comic art collectors spend thousands on artwork, then balk at paying for a nice meal and opting for greasy $3 slices of pizza. However, if it's either a piece you have to have and are willing to take a loan out for it and overextend your finances, or if it's an investment grade piece, then I can buy into that. I have many art collecting peers who sees are not only as a collectible, but in truth just another asset into their investment portfolio, like stocks, bonds, a 401k, gold bullion, real estate, etc. In truth, for pieces over $300, that's what it is. You can appreciate artwork by looking at a scan. You can take your artwork and photocopy it. There's no reason why you should have an 8 oz piece of paper that is worth $10,000 laying around your home and deny it's value as an investment. That's why preservation is key, as well as, to a degree the ability to become emotionally detached to the idea of ownership should you need to or want to sell/trade a piece. The art will always exist, you can again, take a photo or make a scan. So, there's something about owning art that fuels the passion and obsession beyond what others may consider reasonable, it's what keeps companies like Heritage alive and thriving.

Was your Captain America done only in pencils? If it is, it looks so tight, it actually looks inked.

Larry's Comics sounds like the reason why brick and mortar comic stores add value where conventions and online sellers sometimes lack that customer service humanity. I'd rather spend a little bit more and support the local merchants like Larry than try to save nickles and dimes online or at conventions. With the right local merchants you get conversations, and the more white glove customer service treatment for a very fun shopping experience. Over in the Los Angeles area, there's a similar store to Larry's with that same customer centric vibe, called The Comic Bug: http://www.facebook.com/thecomicbug They just posted on their facebook page: Why buy Batgirl #13 or Batman #13 for $17.00 on ebay when you can buy them at The Comic Bug for cover price? (limit one per customer please-let's spread the love!) I think the 1 per customer to ensure the fans gets 'em is a good policy to have and avoid resellers ruining it for the masses.

Regarding the artwork of Charlie Adlard, I recall in the 1980's when people first saw Frank Miller's artwork, especially with Klaus Jason inks, there were definite fans but also a population of naysayers (albeit small, still at the time speaking out) who thought the artwork was sloppy and drawn with thick markers and not much detail or "traditional" beauty. It's called art, I guess, and left to the eye of the beholder. I think people started to rationalize Miller's style of art as Film Noir and stylized. The fact is, the artwork did compliment the writing. Put that art style with bad writing, and it probably wouldn't be as popular as it became. This is where I become a big fan of writing and it's influence on the perception of art and that relationship. I sort of feel the same way with Adlard and The Walking Dead. I think Adlard's work as "sloppy" as many may feel it is, it is mood setting and compliments the writing and stories. I prefer the Adlard artwork over Tony Moore's on this specific series for that same reason. I think the artists I'd like to see on this series are more of the artists like Adlard, Mignola, Sean Phillips, Jean Paul Leon, Frank Miller, Steranko, Tim Sale, and the like, more so than an Ed Benes, Jim Lee, J. Scott Campbell or Adam Hughes. I don't know. Inconsistent art still sells books. http://www.comicartfans.com/ForSaleDetails.asp?ArtId=377543&dId=1 that splash isn't half bad..

Best Advice Ever !!! You'll then find out the truth to the quality of the renderings, the consistency of the renderings, which characters he tends to do better with, and most importantly, since art aesthetics is in the eye of the beholder, but time waits for no man (or woman)... if he's able to hit the promised deadlines, so it doesn't end up being one of those situations where multiple people are chasing the artist for their commissions.

The solution to most of these problems is to avoid them by doing CASH IN ADVANCE terms or at best, a deposit where an artist is motivated to complete their agreed obligation if not out of integrity, out of the economics. Once you surrender full payment, you surrender all power and have no leverage other than the typical truthfully negative social media blasts that, truth be told are effective and if artists are smart would avoid those situations, but many artists are more creative folk than business people, so lack that insight.

Is there still an option in Hollywood out for the development of HACK/SLASH? I heard at first it was going to be a major motion picture movie. Then, I later heard it was going to be a TV series, possibly just animated, not live action. Does anyone know what's going with bringing Hack/Slash to the mainstream? I would think, with the whole fairy tales and classic monsters like Warewolves, Zombies and Vampires, Hollywood would be fast tracking comic book properties like "Hack / Slash" as well as Josh Howard's "Dead @ 17" and Mike Allred's "I, Zombie" to cash in on the current trend on TV and in the Movies.

Does anyone know if the Hack/Slash Annual #2 featuring The Suicide Girls was ever published? I like the Jenny Frison proposed cover art, but am not sure if it was subsequently published or remains unpublished. http://hackslashinc.com/1/2010/09/the-chopping-block-annual-2-featuring-the-suicide-girls/

Yes, I think the starting price is kinda high and it probably will take an impulse buyer to pay that high of a price. I think $700 is under market value (what it can realistically sell for) however based on the fact that today, it contains 2 of the TV show's most highly anticipated characters, Michonne and the Governer, and is one of the more powerful scenes and memorable sequence in the storyline. I wouldn't be surprised if a toned down PG version of this capture/torture was scripted into the TV series. Oddly, when you look at some of the older Charlie Adlard Walking Dead comic pages on the Splash Page Art website, there's a lot of pages available priced under $200 (and even in the $100 range) which were priced back when they were released and unsold (albeit some very lackluster in characters and composition), but it seems that the new pages coming out today start out a lot higher out of the gate, even for the mediocre pages, and anything of any notable interest, let alone being epic, seems to start in that $500 starting point. If I had to guess, if the seller started the page at $0.01 with no reserve in a 7 day auction, this page would probably sell for between $1,200 and $1,500 because people like both the hero and the vilian characters. I'm more into Rick, Carl, and Andrea, and did like Abraham (R.I.P.) too... $700 seems a fair price (these days) That's not what I'm hearing. Especially seeing what the current small pages are selling for from Splashpage, $700 is not in the ballpark.

The Walking Dead #1 had an estimated print run of around 7,000 of the same comic book, so to have 2,000 unique one of a kind pages isn't that frightening of a population proposition, generally speaking. And much like how CGC 9.8 quality grade commands higher values, I think in that same way selecting quality pages in rendering, characters and pivital (1st app's, deaths, revelations, turning points, epic battles, etc.) moments equates similarly in determining which pages have greater chances of value/demand longevity. For some reason, it seems pages with random ZOMBIES are priced higher than pages with main characters only sometimes. I'm not sure if those pages are built to last for the long haul.

Size does not matter when it comes to published art other than preference, I think for the most part. For commissions, outside of, of course, detailing and rendering, the size of the paper and size of the image on that paper helps or hurts the value. Silver age "twice up" Kirby and Ditko VS standard 11" x 17" art by the same artists are usually measured by the content (characters, story, etc.) than the size of the paper when it comes to value such as with the Fantastic Four original art. However, there are some collectors who don't like either "small paper" like these pages nor "large paper" such as double-page splashes, twice-up's or anything outside of 11" x 17" Some of the early Walking Dead pages were on standard 11" x 17" paper, but I thought I heard that Adlard wanted to go with a page size closer to what was eventually to be published so the smaller size paper was easier to draw on for storytelling purposes.

The good, bad and ugly of collecting one-of-a-kind items is that although value can be established based on historical precident of similar items, especially in the case of comic book art where you can compare by artist, title, characters and composition, the pricetag is set by the owner and the value is proclaimed by the buyer (value to them that is, it is what it is worth to that individual), and somewhere in that area is the marketplace, dictated by the laws of supply and demand. That's what makes auctions one of the better gauges of the potential value being recognized and actualized within that environment of multiple interest where it takes two to tango (granted it can be biased where there's 2 fanatics with deep pockets or in the same breath an under publicized auction or one that occurs when the planets don't align right to get the necessary action). As an art collection, buyers sometimes need thicker skin to empower themselves and not let sellers get to them. Some sellers are flat out extremely greedy. Other sellers are actually collectors and fans themselves who are simply doing that whole "I want to keep this piece, but if given a gaudy offer, I'm willing to part with it" strategy. In either case, as a buyer, you should always remember you're the one with the economic power and can decide who to spend your money with and what to spend your money on. That's why it's always amusing to see some of these art dealers and artists with quirky personalities alientate their customers with obnoxious, rude or socially inept attitudes. Whenever faced with that, I simply know, for every one piece I pass on, there's 10 others I can opt to buy into, and also know I can't afford or own everything, so sometimes you have to walk away from a piece if it's not meant to be. With "The Walking Dead" it's easy to look at both the comic books and the original art with 20/20 hindsight of what prices used to be. In the same breath it is also easy to become Nostradamus and predict a market crash which may or may not happen. I would agree the value is high and the odds of future increases or a market decline are equally as high in one breath. However, maybe that's what some said about some of the key issues a year ago and are now kicking themselves on not buying their 9.8 #1's and #19's. Keep in mind of course with the comics, the market is more volitile since they're produced in mass quantities where original art is one of a kind so generally retains their value with greater vigor and longevity. It's like the stock market. Look at APPLE stock, back in 2005 it was under $50, then it broke the $100 barrier in 2007 and continued to climb with a few ebb and flows to the pricing where it's now near $600. Is it overvalued? Are there "monday morning quarterbacks" touting they "should have" gotten in at any certain point professing to owning a crystal ball? Are there people on the sideline wanting to jump in but unsure of when to do it? http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=AAPL&a=08&b=7&c=1984&d=05&e=26&f=2012&g=m The golden rule of collectibles of "Buy what you like" and "Pay what you can afford" (and afford does not mean how much money you have in your pocket, but rather, what is is worth "to you") so you'll not have regret. Once you turn your hobby into a business of investing and speculation, then quite honestly, the fun disappears and the anxiety enters the picture. I think you're correct about The Walking Dead always having interest, so it won't be treasure turned trash ever. Whether the original art becomes valued like "The Watchmen", "V for Vendetta" or other story driven series is yet to be seen. The great thing about The Walking Dead is that there's 100 issues and continuing, every month there's 20+ pages entering the market, so you can wait and pick/choose when and where to spend your money. Sometimes there's overzealous investors buying up the art that need to sell it at breakeven (no mark up for profit) or even a loss as well. I think the right price for The Walking Dead today is probably about $2,000 to start for new covers coming out and about $250-300 for average decent/good pages (with mediocre pages going for $100-150 and pages with greater aesthetics (action, storyline, zombies, characters) going for $450-600 and best pages (splash or monumental) going for $750-1,000) if I had to speculate on current valuation.

The question also is... if The Walking Dead is seen as somewhat as a hobby flash in the pan with less sustainable staying power when it comes to current values escalading or maintaining... It seems there's a lot of speculation that the Original Art is overpriced. Will the 1st Printing Back Issues of the comic books (even CGC 9.8's signature series) start to drop just as fast or faster? I keep thinking, although a signature series or high grade, even if there was a 10.0, might be rare, there are no print run or population report more scarce than Original Art, which is "one of a kind", so I'd think that the comic book artwork is a better investment than the comic books themselves for that reason alone. I might be wrong 'tho since it's based on supply and demand, and it sounds like The Walking Dead is a "reader" book with more fans of the comics who read the stories, whereas with the original art, there's less fans of Charlie Adlard's artwork, so therefore less demand for it.

I totally agree. In comic books, at least super hero books, the "death" is sometimes temporary (i.e. Phoenix, Superman, Captain America, etc.), so in fact can be reversed. With 1st appearances, it's like breaking someone's virginity, there's only one true event It only gets tricky when there's cameos and mentions that preceed the actual 1st Appearance (i.e. Mary Jane in Amazing Spider-Man, with her name mentioned and obstructed cameos) The only time a Death issue can be big, is when the story is epic like Jim Starlin's "The Death of Captain Marvel" or classic like The Amazing Spider-Man #121-122 Death of Gwen Stacy and Death of Green Goblin. I think the Death issues do carry a decent premium and are notable, but far from what 1st appearances command, generally speaking when it comes to big characters.

I guess, Abraham Ford is not untouchable... (RE:The Walking Dead Issue #98 Page #3 injured/dying and Page #16 eaten by a zombie) Maybe he'll come back as some sort of hybrid zombie super hero, since they were dragging his body back (RE: The Walking Dead Issue #98 Page #21) I still think he'd be a good character, even 'tho temporary if they follow the comic book mythology for the TV series. Too bad for the comic book 'tho, I liked Abraham Ford as a character. I'm glad to see Rick and Andrea together 'tho.

I like The Walking Dead #91 featuring Andrea with Dale's famed Hat, it's simple yet is emotion filled and a powerful image.

Is Abraham Ford considered by fans to be potentially one of the "untouchable" (who won't get killed off) characters along with what seems to be the core group of Rick, Carl, Michonne, Glenn and Andrea? Is Abraham going to appear in the Walking Dead TV series? POLL: Out of curiosity, which actor would be perfect casting for that role?

Here's a great article in support of Comic Book artists by Forbes. It's entitled "Forget Lichtenstein's $45 Million Sale: Why You Should Buy Comic Book Art from Living Artists" Here's the link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolpinchefsky/2012/05/10/forget-lichtensteins-45-million-sale-why-you-should-buy-comic-book-art-from-living-artists/

Another Lichetenstein piece just sold for $45 Million http://news.yahoo.com/lichtensteins-sleeping-girl-sells-record-45-million-023001600.html

It sounds like the best advice for both Josef Rubinstein (to restore his reputation and shore up his organizational mindset as well as have skin in the game for motivation) and his fans/customers is to convert 100% C.O.D. - Cash on Delivery, no C.I.A. - Cash in Advance type terms. Even more so, as I know many artists will "say" they finished a piece and then really not complete it, or it takes 'em a long time to package the art for fulfillment, the terms should be 50% payment upon completion and the balance due payed upon delivery (after receipt). If Josef Rubinstein's motivation to take on more projects than he has time for is based on financial need to get money up front to cover overhead, I'd probably recommend re-prioritizing his creative process and like those buffet's say "You may eat all you can, but only take what you can eat" - - so, hold off on taking any new assignments 'til he finishes what's on his plate that he owes and is obligated for. If he really really really needs the cash flow coming in, I hope he has some of his original art from the 80's, especially the stuff he did with Frank Miller, John Byrne and others, which he should then just hand over to Heritage to raise top dollar for.

I think art is so subjective, so it truly is what is one man or woman's "trash" is another one's "treasure" That's my stance from an art appreciation, enjoyment and aesthetic perspective. So, I can't really name-call art fans on what they like and wha they don't like. However, from the perspective of any of these pieces mentioned being hailed, critiqued and praised, it does sometimes seem odd when a "remix" so to speak of one person's original creation is reinterpreted with minor modifications and that new creation is somehow called "genius" and seen as uniquely original without much respect in a footnote reference to the original creation. At least even in the small pop culture world of comic books, most artists cite their inspiration with the notatin "after... (original artists name)" when lifting a layout or reimagining a previously drawn scene. Also as far as the pricing and valuation, it does baffle me that some of the modern artists passing their "masterpieces" through the community can command the prices that they do. I guess in this free economy of supply/demand, more power to the marketers and let the buyer beware, so I can't fault them for accepting money people are gladly paying them.

This is a great book, it's refreshing to see a pure book in high grade as opposed to those "Signature Series" which I think the value is more in the autograph than the condition of the comic (and in fact to a condition purist, an autograph is an aftermarket alteration which to some, is considered not only not aesthetic, but undesirable and damaged), and sometimes people have somewhat irrelevant autographs like that of Stan Lee on a comic that maybe he created the character or was editor on, but really wasn't part of the creative process of that issue specifically. I'd almost say, a better trend would be to get inferrior graded comics autographed to help boost the value than have prestige graded comics marred by signatures. But that's more my opinion and preference.