iggy

At this point, the “required” field for condition is the vague “Acceptable/Good/Very Good/ Like New/New” field and other grading specifics are optional. I just started a new listing on my phone app. Hopefully that doesn’t change...

Maybe (if anything) you must state a grade... even though 99+% don’t know how.

Sounds like another eBay phone rep not knowing what they’re talking about. I tried to find that “new rule” by googling and can’t find anything...

I didn’t even realize how many of the comic covers posted included the word “Mod” until Mecha mentioned it. Very observant!

Sure, no problem!

I had to google... hope this helps

Love ‘em!

Being called a nerd by Greggy... *PRICELESS* ... but true.

Nope , I think that’s the OA!

Yep getting those too.

It would be fun to see if it turns up and gets sold at Heritage... if it sold for more, the owner of the Armentano original should be ecstatic. In this market...

In my opinion his submitted OA would be more valuable than the recreated art used for print, if it still exists. It would look disjointed with partial line work that’s probably a stat on an art board created from shooting the acetate of traced art with several sheets of ruby- or amber- lith.

Here's the sigs, the difference especially noticeable on the lower loop of the R...

Yeah that is beautiful original art by a true artist who didn’t realize all the steps of the process. The signature is actually different on the printed comic which seems odd. Not just placement.

I haven’t examined that submitted art versus what was printed yet, but looks like a lot more usable as is... maybe take a stat of the whole piece, then x-acto out the color areas and use them for color seps.

The problem was submitting art with marker on it- same problem as the back cover of #5... if it was just light marker colors like yellow and light blue, they could have knocked it out with a camera trick on a stat then touched it up as necessary. Red is the worst- it turns black.

Is there a particular area that’s exactly the same? I’ll go in with the magnifying glass...

Nope... completely redrawn for print. We’ll just have to disagree. I don’t see what’s so hard about tracing with wet media acetate... it’s a form of acetate that accepts ink instead of repelling it. That’s how I would have done it but would have stayed more true to his line work out of respect. Must have been a rush job...

Tell me that line work is the same...

No, I went to college for production art. I’m comparing that art to a close look at the comic in hand... it had to be reworked completely. The art had to be traced to separate out the colors. You’d start with the solid blacks, then go from there. Old school color separation is hard to explain and can be approached multiple ways. The gal on the left- her hair is continuous tone in print. If they would have just shot that art you’d see marker gradations. All of the color fields are continuous tone. The tricky maneuver is creating her eye shadow gradation area. The lips of the red face lady is another tricky area.

The most noticeable difference I see from that art and what was printed is the swirls to the left of the big red face. Then maybe the gold area around the nose of the race car. They also moved his signature. He likely didn’t know much about the mechanics of production art at that stage in his career, so someone had to rework it for print. What I would imagine is placing a sheet of wet media acetate over this and using tech pens and brushing ink to get working line art.

What’s also cool about this issue is it’s one of the few (6 that I know of) romance books with Ditko art (maybe both story & art?).

These examples are pretty weak, comparatively.

Pretty stunning copy, @greggy !!