DailySuperpower

I like to have 2 nonfictions, a novel, and a comic going simultaneously. My comic right now is From Hell. These are the others:

Almost done with this, it's basically an intro to physics concepts but instead of standard examples(pulleys, inclined planes, etc.) it uses examples from comic books (the Atom shrinking, Spider-Man trying to save Gwen, Flash running through a solid wall, etc).

This is the novel, it's very surreal, not much of a story but definitely a unique experience. I read another book by Coover that was similarly dreamlike.

Just starting this one but pretty excited about it.

Did this one today. Might do a few more.

Heading down south for a week, taking these along with Walking Dead HC 3, 4, and 5.

I knew this thread would have a happy ending.

Eeeeeeeeew

Oh come on......, they do it with their feet.

Scott McCloud defines art as: "Any activity which does not have the primary purpose of survival or reproduction"

The world is a pretty interesting place if you experience it with this idea in mind.

What is Anarchism? by Alexander Berkman. Written in the 1930s but still surprisingly relevant given the current economic situation.

Now, I just find it sad that Lichtenstein & co. made money off the backs of others.

 

Looking back on those works, now, I no longer retain any fondness for them, sorry . . .

 

 

As an artist, it breaks my heart knowing that he directly copied a huge amount of his work, gained notoriety and wealth from it. If I were Bill Gates-style rich, I'd buy the entire lot and destroy it. To me, it has almost zero worth, and the only insight it teaches people is that copying someone else's work can be profitable.

 

It's unfortunate that you call yourself an artist, but would destroy another person's work because you disagree with their view of art.

 

Sometimes it's more about an original idea than an original image.

 

 

Blatantly ripping off someone's work in such a huge, far-reaching manner is not art or expression for that matter. Taking an image the size of a business card and blowing it up 1000% does not constitute as an "original idea".

 

Coming to the defense of someone who's entire reputation is based on infringing on other people's art? I'm pretty sure you're going to be in the minority on that.

 

I'd rather be in an open-minded minority than a closed-minded majority.

 

Have you even read this thread?

 

 

Did you ever read the part of Roy's biography where his kids were looking at a Disney drawing and they challenged their dad saying " I bet you can't draw this that well, Dad." and he proceeded to create his copy of the Disney piece?

 

That's where the "big idea" came from. That's it's origin.

 

All the ivory tower "deconstruct modern society and shine a light on the insignificant corners of it that speak to the basics of humanity" stuff got tacked on at the end by people that had nothing to do with the creation of the art....it was really to win a bet with his kids.

 

I did read that part and it didn't change my view of the pieces. Good ideas come from all sorts of places.

 

That's exactly what Vanilla Ice said before Queen served him with papers.

People keep bringing up music, but these are individual panels picked out of hundreds in any given book, the musical equivalent would be taking 3 seconds of a song and turning it into a slightly distorted version that runs for 5 minutes.

Now, I just find it sad that Lichtenstein & co. made money off the backs of others.

 

Looking back on those works, now, I no longer retain any fondness for them, sorry . . .

 

 

As an artist, it breaks my heart knowing that he directly copied a huge amount of his work, gained notoriety and wealth from it. If I were Bill Gates-style rich, I'd buy the entire lot and destroy it. To me, it has almost zero worth, and the only insight it teaches people is that copying someone else's work can be profitable.

 

It's unfortunate that you call yourself an artist, but would destroy another person's work because you disagree with their view of art.

 

Sometimes it's more about an original idea than an original image.

 

 

Blatantly ripping off someone's work in such a huge, far-reaching manner is not art or expression for that matter. Taking an image the size of a business card and blowing it up 1000% does not constitute as an "original idea".

 

Coming to the defense of someone who's entire reputation is based on infringing on other people's art? I'm pretty sure you're going to be in the minority on that.

 

I'd rather be in an open-minded minority than a closed-minded majority.

 

Have you even read this thread?

 

 

Did you ever read the part of Roy's biography where his kids were looking at a Disney drawing and they challenged their dad saying " I bet you can't draw this that well, Dad." and he proceeded to create his copy of the Disney piece?

 

That's where the "big idea" came from. That's it's origin.

 

All the ivory tower "deconstruct modern society and shine a light on the insignificant corners of it that speak to the basics of humanity" stuff got tacked on at the end by people that had nothing to do with the creation of the art....it was really to win a bet with his kids.

I did read that part and it didn't change my view of the pieces. Good ideas come from all sorts of places.

I'd rather be in an open-minded minority than a closed-minded majority.

 

Have you even read this thread?

 

We can agree to disagree. There is nothing close-minded about vilifying someone who's entire career and reputation is based upon the stealing of other people's work to make a buck. It's an embarrassment, and standing up for it under the guise of being "open-minded" is insulting to most artists. End of story.

Again, happy to be in the minority here as most artists take themselves way too seriously.

I didn't need to read the thread, and I don't care to. The only people who value Lichtenstein's work are people who own it and need to convince themselves that a lifetime of lifting, lightboxing, photo referencing, tracing or whatever he did was "artistic license", people that actually never realized that he stole his compositions from comic books or people who think that stealing others' art and claiming it's your own is an acceptable form of expression.

...

Now, I just find it sad that Lichtenstein & co. made money off the backs of others.

 

Looking back on those works, now, I no longer retain any fondness for them, sorry . . .

 

 

As an artist, it breaks my heart knowing that he directly copied a huge amount of his work, gained notoriety and wealth from it. If I were Bill Gates-style rich, I'd buy the entire lot and destroy it. To me, it has almost zero worth, and the only insight it teaches people is that copying someone else's work can be profitable.

 

It's unfortunate that you call yourself an artist, but would destroy another person's work because you disagree with their view of art.

 

Sometimes it's more about an original idea than an original image.

 

 

Blatantly ripping off someone's work in such a huge, far-reaching manner is not art or expression for that matter. Taking an image the size of a business card and blowing it up 1000% does not constitute as an "original idea".

 

Coming to the defense of someone who's entire reputation is based on infringing on other people's art? I'm pretty sure you're going to be in the minority on that.

I'd rather be in an open-minded minority than a closed-minded majority.

Have you even read this thread?

Now, I just find it sad that Lichtenstein & co. made money off the backs of others.

 

Looking back on those works, now, I no longer retain any fondness for them, sorry . . .

 

 

As an artist, it breaks my heart knowing that he directly copied a huge amount of his work, gained notoriety and wealth from it. If I were Bill Gates-style rich, I'd buy the entire lot and destroy it. To me, it has almost zero worth, and the only insight it teaches people is that copying someone else's work can be profitable.

It's unfortunate that you call yourself an artist, but would destroy another person's work because you disagree with their view of art.

Sometimes it's more about an original idea than an original image.

I just spent a few minutes finding a price guide to get a ballpark on one of the two issues I need. Found this, but I'm not sure how current it is:

PLAYBOY MAGAZINE Price Guide

You made it sound like I was implying that your work was somehow not any good because you use photo reference and made a point to say you weren't tracing a photo, as if that was a bad thing.

Why is there some kind of argument or disagreement here?

There isn't, but someone needs to end the conversation.

How do you define "grail" in the context of comic collecting?

From G.A.tor

Anyone have any good books recommendations? Preferably fiction.

 

What do you like?

Gator ain't about no japanese pocket monsters.

 

But is Gator about big, giant, city-smashing Japanese monsters?

('cause those things are really cool)

I do carry Godzilla (thumbs u

You're strong!

Your point is valid but I pose this to you as I know it's happened to myself and many others:

 

If I'm bidding on multiple items and things start to go higher than expected with a soft end time I would have the option of letting some go to focus my funds on those which I really want. Hard end times often can result in complete shut-outs. Less shut-out bidders results in more people being satisfied overall correct?

 

Once again, I just want the option of deciding for myself.

 

Even on that basis I think there's a much higher potential for buyers remorse. I don't think the heat of the moment when you're this close to grabbing that coveted item is the right time to be making decisions.

 

But even if you dismiss my take on that, the ultimate trump card (again from the buyer's perspective) is higher prices. I've never met a single buyer who doesn't try like hell to get the most bang for his buck when he buys comics. You need to have something seriously compelling if you're going to claim buyers are going to pay more and be more satisfied. I really don't think you've even come close to making that case.

 

Now, a soft end better for the auction house and the seller? Sure.

I'm fine with paying slightly higher prices on books I want if it means having a fair shot at those books, which I think extended bidding offers. I only buy and I would like to see extended bidding on every auction I participate in. More money for sellers means more sellers participating, which means more books offered.

I'm not so sure that soft end times achieves higher prices in an online environment. I think the fact that you don't get a second chance with a hard end time encourages people to put in higher swipe bids than they otherwise might. Historically, I think that, more than anything else, has accounted for a lot of the crazy prices that Clink has produced over the years. I'd have to think that Josh would have changed the Clink bidding system if he wasn't seeing this effect. Same with Ebay.

If I remember correctly, the Atlantic City copy of Action #10 recieved bids during soft end times, resulting in a higher hammer price of over $50,000 or more. Same thing with the Action #13

It's difficult to use any of these items are arguing points. Who's to say the action 10 would not have achieved a higher price with a hard end time? The reason people put in bids during the soft end time is because they were allowed to put in bids, and they knew this before the auction started.

Bid your maximum and let it ride is only a good philosophy if you're bidding your maximum in the last minute. If you put in your max bid early you are just asking to have the item bid up in small increments. I think people also have difficulty distinguishing the highest price they would be happy to pay and the highest price they're willing to pay.

OK, here's something I didn't think of before and it kind of sucks.

 

If there's more than one comic you want, you can NOT just move on to the next comic if you don't win the first, correct? They all end at the same time don't they?

 

multiple browser windows open ??

 

Great idea if you if you can cover possibly winning all of them.

 

It only looks like they end at the same time, they're actually slightly staggered so you can have multiple windows open in the order the auctions close and move to the next easily if you lose the first.

It should also be noted that CL doesn't have a watch feature so for convenience you can put in tracking bids to consolidate all the books you are watching on your active bids page. It's not really a bidding strategy since these bids are so low they're almost irrelevant, but you also get an idea of how many people are "watching" certain books by how many tracking bids are put in.

Dear Gator..

 

If you could only collect one title from each of the following genres, what would they be and why.

 

GA Superhero-

GA War-

GA Romance-

GA Humor-

GA Western-

 

What, no horror?

Won this from Sparkle City on eBay. Liberated from a 5.5 OW/W slab.

I'll still be on the lookout for a nice VF copy, but this one is right now.