• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

n2wdw

Member
  • Posts

    2,895
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by n2wdw

  1. I was surprised this closed so high on eBay earlier this week, at about $620.  Lady Mechanika is one of the two modern registry sets I compete in (along with the Dave Stevens Covers set).  This is a sexy cover with the stockings flash, but it's by Steigerwald (the regular inker) rather than Benitez, and also I didn't think there was as much interest in LM as a few years ago.  Anyway, my high bid (I think it was around $300) was trounced by the winner.

    s-l1600.thumb.jpg.33bec5c0eb5e017ac331dced26b55cc4.jpg

     

    These sketch covers are very rare.  They were produced for issues 0, 1 and 2 of the original LM series, and only 200 copies were made of each.  I have never actually seen a copy without a sketch, so I wonder where they are.  I once asked Benitez at a con if he had any, and he said he did not (although who knows, maybe he has a stack that he forgot about). 

    Anyway, I have 4 copies with Benitez sketches.  Thanks for reading.

     

    1507891188_LadyMechanika0SS9.8Benitezsketch267--300torso.thumb.JPG.3f5d565e0eb96fd9c81e0af1189a4fdc.JPG365990382_LadyMechanika1SS9.9Benitezsketch267--200bust.thumb.JPG.a2bee97b297c280db276fe99a74e3882.JPG984232117_LadyMechanika2SS9_6220.jpg.336dfb6f386e5c39b80abf6850d01dc1.jpg256615874_LadyMechanika2SS9.6Benitezsketch267--100head.thumb.JPG.b8f9fb4687846e470321bc2a244d560f.JPG

     

  2. I'm like you.  I think a lot about what I buy before I buy.  A big part of it, is a space issue.  I also want to keep my collection focused.  So before I buy, I think about how the comic fits in my collection, and where I'll store it.  

    There are a few titles I'm still trying to finish, but mostly nowadays I'm a covers collector.  Mostly GGA, but even within that genre, there are so many categories.  I've created my own categories to help keep my collecting focused.  So when I think about buying a comic, I say to myself, which category does this comic fit into?

  3. ComicLink Auction March/April 2020

    I haven't bid in any CL auctions in a while, but again since I'm bored at home, I'm looking for any distractions (especially comic related).  I got a couple of wins last night.  First is this Marilyn Monroe cover.  Lately I'm been buying a few Marilyn paper collectibles.  I'll be sending this CBCS to CGC for their trade-in program.

    7009360-aa-013.thumb.jpg.02fa3499186e82d2c9aee06b09a59fd4.jpg

     

    And I also won Young Romance 22.  I like this photo cover.

    00229351635000112005058001.thumb.jpg.6351076f7b855d59602feacadca1ca38.jpg

     

    Also, speaking of Young Romance, a couple of months ago, I picked up one of my grails on eBay, Young Romance 1.  This is the classic Kirby cover.  Thanks for reading.

    601622759_YoungRomance1CGC3_0460.thumb.JPG.f1d7084d3028d70182c46207452477dc.JPG

  4. I haven't posted in a while as I've been busy (like everyone else) with the Coronavirus.  Transitioning to working from home, doing all we can for our young adult kids who are scattered around the country, stocking up on necessities, etc.  Here where we live, I haven't seen toilet paper in stores in over 2 weeks.  And I'm worried about Trump calling this the "Chinese Virus."  I'm Chinese, and I've heard about multiple instances of violence against Chinese Americans.  And we're only into this by a couple of weeks.  What will the country look like 2 months from now? 

    Anyway, the Heritage magazine auction (which closed last night) was a welcome distraction.  The past 2-3 years, I've gotten more interested in graded magazines.  Finding high grade mags is so tough, harder on a relative basis than comics of the same age. 

    I picked up a couple of books for the Lady In White collection.  I had an internal debate with myself over whether the Famous Monsters qualified, because the girl's gown is pinkish.  But I decided that the girl's gown was in fact white, and the pink tones were from the lighting in the room since the walls and floor are pinkish too.

     

    1512183613_FamousMonstersofFilmland61.thumb.jpg.76235d8349788ef27dba202323509fb6.jpg1406375731_Creepy112.thumb.jpg.efbde5d748b3545b3b7a4a2c615710af.jpg

     

    My big purchase of the night was Playboy V2#2.  Lately I've been getting more into Bettie Page collectibles.  This magazine has a Bettie Page centerfold.  Here's Heritage's full description:  "The Bettie Page centerfold makes this one of the most valuable issues in the entire run. Fiction by Ray Bradbury, Erskine Caldwell, and John Steinbeck, and a pictorial of Eartha are highlights. Not listed in Overstreet. CGC census 1/20: 8 in 7.5, 42 higher. From the Wayne A. McDonald Collection."

    The information about the person who put the collection together was also interesting:  "Playboy enthusiast Wayne McDonald begin putting his impressive magazine collection together some nearly 45 years ago. He joined the Playboy Club in Boston in 1971, and shortly thereafter began the ambitious  quest to meet as many Playmates as possible, and more importantly, to meet the Head Playboy himself, Hugh Hefner. Over the years, with the associated issues of Playboy in hand, Wayne not only met dozens of Playmates, he chronicled the meetings with photos and signatures of Playmates on their centerfolds.  Wayne's presence at the events did not go unnoticed by Hef and his Playboy associates. As a result, he was interviewed on multiple occasions, including for a 2008 German documentary "Let's Play, Boy" commemorating Hefner's 80th birthday and for "Las Vegas Round the Clock.""

     

    1308707967_PlayboyV22(HMHPublishing1955).thumb.jpg.07b8b21873d443730e3e6c3dcdcd52dc.jpg

     

    Below is the Bettie centerfold.  It's one of her most famous photos with the Christmas tree.  Apparently, in 2002, Playboy issued a porcelain statue of this photo.  It's on my want list, although it's rare (only 5000 numbered pieces). I've never actually seen it.  Thanks for reading.

     

    Spoiler

    image.jpg.106d66d2e5e57590ea87d916ce2e6b34.jpg9730a64d16edaebae0b6d0ed20f73c4a.jpg.eea2d58761fb418c022e45e81b88d4a4.jpg

     

  5. 3 hours ago, Robot Man said:

    Popular Photography Magazine #1 and #2 May and June 1937

    First magazine dedicated to Photography for the common man. Has some good "girly" nude "art photo" photography. Great ads and features on photography. Back when photography was truly still an art.

    Very nice copies. Both are complete and solid with very little wear. Tight and clean with off white to white slick interior paper.

    $45. for the pair

    popularphotography1.jpg

    popularphotography2.jpg

    I'll take these too. I plan to give to my daughter who is now making her living via photography and videography.

  6. 3 hours ago, Robot Man said:

    Hollywood Dreamgirl Magazine #1 1955

    The beautiful woman of Hollywood. Features Marilyn Monroe (several features), Mamie Van Doren, Jayne Mansfield, Kim Novak, Grace Kelly and many others. Tons of photos.

    A bit rough. Spine splits, some bug holes, tears and creases and other general wear. "10" in grease pencil on cover.

    $10.

    hollywood1.jpg

    hollywood2.jpg

    I'll take this Bob

  7. 52 minutes ago, Iconic1s said:

    I think we agree.  My main point is that CGC needs to make a decision one way or another.  Either books belong in a set or they don’t.  To add slots to competitive sets but not award points is just wishy washy. I only chimed in to offer my perspective, which is that it feels pretty awesome to get a set to 100% complete. It would drive me nuts to have to look at a set listing I really care about, and have worked on for years, just to see slots that don’t actually ‘count’ and MAYBE shouldn’t even be there but that I now have to see empty every time I look at my set.

    I also agree that it would be nice to see what the actual rules/guidelines are on all of this.   I might imagine that whatever the notes say on the CGC Label would be a starting point as to whether a book belongs in a set (i.e ‘Dave Stevens Cover Art’ in this example).  To be very honest, if this new standard was applied to all sets I would probably just delete my sets and go about my business without the Registry, but that’s just me.   

    Regardless of where they are added you have some beautiful books.  

     

    I think, ideally, the question should be "does the cover (either front or back)" represent art?  I think all three of the above back covers qualify as art.  The only questionable one would be Twisted Tales 4, and I wouldn't argue if someone argued it should be removed from the set. 

    This is just my opinion, but I don't think all the Rocketeer Adventures comics with the same house ad on the back cover qualifies as "art".  My issue with those comics is they used the same house ad in so many comics.  That's what I mean by diluting the set, since it's the same house ad in multiple comics. But again, this is just my opinion. 

    I suppose that giving those comics 0 points is a reasonable compromise. I tend to agree with @Iconic1s that it kind of detracts from my enjoyment of the set to see so many empty slots (as I'll never buy those comics).  But I also agree with @Taxmick1 that this is all subjective.

     

  8. On 3/10/2020 at 9:52 AM, Taxmick1 said:

    Please add to the "Dave Stevens Covers" set:

    Rocketeer Adventures #1 Alex Ross Variant Cover (2096431014)

    Rocketeer Adventures #2 Second Printing (2096680019)

    Rocketeer Adventures #3 Alex Ross Variant Cover (2096431015)

    Rocketeer Adventures #3 Retailer Incentive Edition (2096431016)

    Rocketeer Adventures #4 Alex Ross Variant Cover (2096431017)

    Rocketeer Adventures #4 Retailer Incentive Edition (2096680023)

    The BACK COVER of all of these books contain photos of books with Dave Stevens cover art.

    Thanks - Mike

    Rocketeer Adventures #1 Retailer Incentive Edition CGC 9.8 (Back).jpeg

     

    I applaud @Taxmick1 efforts to identify all these comics, both his recent posts and ones in the past in this thread.  He's really added to the Dave Stevens' covers set in a good way.  But with all respect, it seems to me that these back covers -- with the same promotional ads -- kind of flies against the spirit of the Dave Steven's cover set.  I suppose they satisfy the requirement to be added to the set, but I think they dilute the set.  But that just my opinion.

    @n2wdw Thank you for your feedback. The boards are a great way for everyone to communicate their ideas, preferences, etc regarding sets in a public forum. We agreed that the advertisements may dilute the set but the books technically contain Dave Stevens Art. The slots will continue to be added to the set but only as non-competitive which allows everyone to add and manage the books without being detrimental to those who disagree as points will not be awarded.

     

    @Taxmick1