-
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.
drdroom
-
Posts
1,411 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
CGC Journals
Gallery
Events
Store
Posts posted by drdroom
-
-
On 5/4/2022 at 10:36 AM, RBerman said:
It's tough to compare artists of different generations. If Neal sees farther, it is partly because he stands on Kirby's shoulders. I always enjoyed Adams' moody lighting effects in the 70s, and his art retained an admirable level of detail even recently. So I choose him, which in no way diminishes Kirby's crucial role as an industry innovator in genre formation, character creation, layout, posing, and the rest.
Thanks for providing this image, it saves me going to find one. It illustrates my only semi-fresh observation on all this, which is that Adams is not actually a realist any more than Kirby was. He just applied a finish that people associate with realism. Look at him inventing arm and back muscles here, in a much more improvisational manner than Kirby actually. It's not just in these late sketches either, but all through Neal's classic era.
-
On 1/16/2022 at 9:52 AM, Timely said:
I own 2 consecutive pages from HOS 92. I wonder what they are worth these days? The 1st page is also the origin page!
Those are acceptable.
-
-
-
-
-
On 9/6/2021 at 11:00 AM, Rick2you2 said:
There will be very few, if any, ramifications from this. Everyone wants to believe that what they bought was the product of legitimate supply and demand valuation instead of market manipulation. Dealers can hold steady as they have priced their profit into presumed sales based on purchases at a certain price. And, they seem to have sufficient resources not to cut their prices. How else does one explain the huge pile of unsold art which sits for years? So, when the noise dies down, people get back on the merry- go-round, like junkies in need of a fix. The solution? Cap your purchase price for specific pieces, come hell or high water, and shift your gaze elsewhere. You’ll need it if you are buying a new car in the short run.
A couple points on this. As far as the huge pile of unsold art, its all the second rate stuff. In my areas of interest, like 70's Kirby, good pages are snatched up almost as soon as they appear. I assume that's true across the board. I'd like to cap my purchase price at $1000 for an A-page, but then I'd never buy anything. So my personal, considered "cap" is a function of where the market seems to be, and part of my argument to myself involves assurance that I can get my cost out of it pretty quickly if need be. One personal ramification is that I am looking at Heritage sales with a considerably more jaundiced eye–I know many here are way ahead of me on this.
-
On 9/6/2021 at 10:13 AM, Timely said:
I’m not saying shill bidding does not happen. I’m saying OA are one-of-a-kind pieces that are not graded, and subjected to those type of condition manipulations. It is infinitely harder to influence widespread market manipulation on the OA market in this regard. Again, not impossible, just infinitely harder.
That's true, the grading nonsense thankfully doesn't apply. But all the other market manipulation techniques described are available--hyping up record sales, CREATING record sales, shilling in general, buying your own piece (which represents the values of a category you literally hold stock in) from your own auction house at a record price (but with a special discount even?)...
-
- Popular Post
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I'll throw in my two bits, in celebration of one of Jack's signature characteristics: his unquenchable desire to keep going, to find out what else is out there.
- Ecclectica, Andahaion, Twanj and 2 others
-
5
-
Most of these key covers under discussion aren't remotely the greatest comic OA by aesthetic standards (SS 4 & WF 29 excepted). My thoughts went immediately to whole stories: Red Nails, The Pact, Master Race, The Crushed Gardenia, Jennifer... just off the top of my head.
-
A couple "Space Ghosts" animation pitch pieces sold pretty well in the June Heritage. They are signed by Sgroi and don't look like Toth (to me), so why were they sold as Toth/Sgroi? Did Alex do the cut-outs or the color or something?
-
Now that Glen has pointed it out, I'm thinking a re-valuation of Thor pages is in order. Add 10% for each characteristic no-face panel on the page? Plus bonus 20% for no Thor-face at all on a multi-Thor-figure page? I feel my Kirby collection is incomplete without one one...
-
Does anyone know why these pitch pieces signed by Tony Sgroi are also attributed to Alex Toth?
-
-
-
4 hours ago, glendgold said:
The new description has...a lot of passive voice.
I feel a worse person could make a joke here about a train wreck, but luckily I'm not like that.
I imagine they didn't want to tread on my intellectual property rights by using a phrase like "amateur restoration."
-
2 hours ago, dem1138 said:
Well now they pulled it.
A lot you have been tracking, lot # 94083, previously described as: "Jack Kirby and Russ Heath Tales of Suspense #28 Splash Page 1 Original Art (Marvel, 1962). A fantastic splash page that could easily have been used as one of Kirby's famous "monster" covers of the day! This one's extra special with inks by Russ Heath, renowned as one of the great Silver Age pencilers in his own right. Rendered at twice-up scale in ink over graphite on Bristol board with an image area of 12.5" x 18.5". The slightly toned board has adhesive residue along the back edges, with light smudging and staining from handling wear. In Very Good condition. From the Estate of Jeff Gorrell." in the 2020 November 19 - 22 Comics & Comic Art Signature Auction - Dallas, #7236 has been withdrawn from the auction and is no longer available for tracking.
I feel sort of guilty or something.
-
Update: I wrote to HA about the Titan splash and Todd Hignite got right back to me & said they would investigate, update the listing & inform bidders. Might knock a few grand off the price, but I suspect it will still improve greatly on the Ebay sale. A very handsome splash, much nicer than if Ayers had inked it.
-
On 10/20/2020 at 12:49 PM, Grant Turner said:
My X-Men 2 page has a correction note that says Cyclops. I wasn’t sure what needed to be corrected, but on investigating it appears that the figure in the panel was drawn by Kirby as Angel, but Stan had it changed to Cyclops (which was the right call as a panel on the prior page makes it clear that Angel is on the other side of the room with Professor X).
my guess is the inker Paul Reinman made the corrections (you can see an erased line where the wings used to be, and the shadow toward the bottom was modified from what I suspect was meant to be the bottom of Warren’s wings)
pretty cool at any rate. I love seeing the behind the scenes action of how these stories came together
I'm always impressed when someone can read Stan's notes. What does the other one say?
-
On 11/5/2020 at 6:56 AM, RBerman said:
That prohibition must have been removed (along with "no monsters" and "no drugs") in the early 1970s revision of the Comics Code. This would explain the proliferation of DC covers immediately thereafter:
Hey, that Lois 122 cover is coming up for sale somewhere--comicconnect, maybe?
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 10/31/2020 at 5:38 PM, dem1138 said:If I recall correctly, it was auctioned (or Buy it Now/Best Offer) on eBay within the last 5 years and sold for a very reasonable price. But I do believe there was some whiteout or damage or discrepancy with the published image that may have factored into what it sold for.
Yes, it sold on Ebay for 7K something I believe. The Ebay listing was more informative than the current HA listing, including a pic of the published splash. I was involved in a discussion on comicart-L about the apparent amateur restoration, which the seller saw and chimed in on. When Jeff Gorrell (who I otherwise didn't know) posted the page on CAF last year, I wrote this to him:
"Hi Jeff, An absolutely terrific monster splash. Years ago we discussed the mystery of the published variant at some length on either Kirby-L or ComicArt-L. My theory is this: Kirby originally drew this version, with buildings getting crushed, and Heath inked it. Post inking it was decided the page was too violent (maybe CCA rejected it), and someone in the office, not Kirby or Heath, made the change, either with white-out or a paste up now lost. Subsequently, someone, perhaps an early collector, removed either the paste-up or the white out, but in so doing, damaged the original. This required the original linework to be recreated/ re-inked. This is the only way I can explain the odd smeared greys in the unpublished drawing --maybe some chemical solution was tried on the white-out? --and why the inks appear so amateurish in that section (well below the ability of Sol Brodsky or anyone else in-house), whereas the rest of the page is spotless Heath inks. Does the paper surface look different, rippled or abraded, in that section? It would be interesting to get the opinion of Robert Dennis or Gordon Christman on this, if you ever have a chance to show them the page. best, Aaron"
Jeff wrote back very graciously considering I was pointing out a distinct problem with the page:
"Aaron, Thank you for your thoughtful analysis of what probably happened with the Kirby page. I took a close look and think I see what you mean. It's in a frame, but I'll take it out when I get a chance and look even more closely. Then maybe I can answer the question bout whether that section looks abraidded or somewhat different from the rest. I'm impressed that you can tell so much from the image. Again, thanks. I'll let you know what I find out. Jeff"
Then followed up with this:
"Aaron, I took the Kirby splash page out of its frame and did a close inspection of the area that you wrote about. Everything I see there confirms your analysis of what happened. There is some abrasion of the paper in that area and clear evidence of some non-professional cleaning and attempted re-inking. I could feel differences in the smoothness of the paper around that area, too. If you are interested in seeing more, please send me your email address so I can attach a photo. Thanks again for your thoughtful analysis. Best wishes, Jeff"
...and then sent me a close up photo:
"Aaron,
Here's how it looks close up. The clean up and redrawing does look amateurish. I'll keep this photo and your explanation with the art in case I decide to sell it (not very likely).
Jeff"
All of which I'm quoting here partly in memoriam for a collector I didn't know who instantly proved himself to be the real deal. I regret that I never had any further dealings with him. He didn't sound like a guy who was expecting to die in a year. It sounds like if he were here to oversee the sale, maybe the Heritage listing would acknowledge the amateur resto?
- Twanj, Unca Ben, BuraddoRun and 3 others
-
6
-
Steve Ditko - Beware The Creeper Original Art
in Original Comic Art
Posted
Wrightson has appreciated dramatically since his death. Post that one!