comix4fun

The cost of paper products spiked 5-6 years ago and a lot of placed stopped carrying the larger boards as they weren't selling many to begin with and their margins were already poor, I don't think they were selling many at a 50-75% price increase. Gerber has the best price I've found on mylar for artwork. My regular source for boards was bags unlimited but their prices on boards went way up in the last 7-10 years. From about $35 for 25 11x17 acid free boards to $64 for the same amount now. Still they make a very nice quality product and are very reliable.

I remember a few examples of actual bronze/copper cover art, with less than clear information about who penciled it or inked it, that was stuck under the nose of some big time artists who signed anything put in front of them....only to have that piece suddenly be called a Miller or whatever by whatever dealer was selling it with the same "See? it's signed by him right on the piece. Why would he sign it if he didn't create it?" It's been a danger and problem for a long long time. The new age of blue lines and inked prelims and less than total disclosure by consignors/dealers/sellers only muddies the water further.

Maybe I can find the moderate midline in this for everyone. The hardest thing for anyone to do, in any facet of life, is to accept someone else's opinion above or in place of their own. That can be true even in situations where the gap in information, knowledge and experience is wide or where the parties stand as equals or near equals. In a hobby such as this, especially when on is just getting started, you don't know who to trust, who to listen to, who to be wary of, and really you just don't know what you don't know. That's why I've always said the most valuable thing I've taken from this hobby are the relationships I've made. That's true even among people in identical collecting demo's, chasing the same pieces, but all enjoying the same art, same memories, same nexus of nostalgia. Only in this hobby have I been able to be shown someone's new addition and my response be "EFF YOU DUDE!" and have it be universally understood as, perhaps, the highest possible compliment. Over time, you learn who to listen to, what to look for, who the good and bad actors are, and a wealth of other facts and details about pieces, people, and niches in the hobby that can only be absorbed in due course. In this case, I see neither bullying, nor -kissing, nor piling on, nor anything other than a disagreement that's likely been exacerbated by word choice. I saw the Facebook post and thread before it was deleted. The poster was excited for his piece, yes. But he chose to diminish another collector's piece (without actual personal knowledge of that piece) in describing his own. As a self-described "Noobie", perhaps he didn't think that through. But, when comments were made on this thread to that effect (not in a mean, bullying, or angry way) on his Facebook post....he immediately called anyone and everyone making note of the fact that he was likely in error in his description, he chose to take it as and describe it as "TROLLING", repeatedly. When the description claiming a diminishment in Malvin's piece was the first "stone" can he really be offended, or surprised, when it was volleyed back and countered. To take cover under "Stop Trolling Me" seems to lack awareness of what he'd done to initiate that back and forth discussion. Again, perhaps the newness of it all was to blame. There was a difficult choice there to make for a new collector. Who were these people posting? Why should I trust their facts over mine? I am sure Malvin, myself and many others have had the same or similar reactions to people when we were fresh out of the oven as baby art collectors. Many of us come to this hobby as successes in the real world in our own spaces. How could we ever take a stranger's word as fact over our own? That takes time and experience and, most importantly, a VERY slow roll in these instances. I wish, when I started collecting, people had told me sooner to just sit back, watch, learn, and take it all in for at least six months, before buying anything, believing anyone, or forming opinions about what I knew or didn't know. I could have saved myself from a ton of mistakes. But in the end. Everyone here is an adult. I've had my small share of internet dust-ups in the past, this one doesn't really register on the scale and has been relatively respectful aside from the unwarranted labeling. I think there's a space where the integrity and attribution of each piece and each owner's property is respected for what they really are without needing to diminish the other and without clouding the factual provenance of both.

I think that's where the line has to be drawn, and publicly, and loudly. Mistaken attribution, left unchecked, becomes the truth either innocently or unethically, when it is not disinfected with the bright light of day. We used to have this discussion in the past over inked recreations or inked prelims where the inker doesn't clearly mark, in the art area (usually by the signature) that they both inked it and that it's "after" someone else or a "recreation", etc. It's not pleasant and people will disagree but it's something that needs to occur and occur where everyone can see it so the air is clear. Lots of horrible things happen in hobbies when details, facts, and alterations to items happen outside of view.

"Greatest Generation of Comic Art Collecting" We don't subscribe to any Wiki-definitions of our status.... I figured, if anything, it would be the "pre-flood" reference that would get a response as exaggerated.

Isn't his CAF page entitled "My Very Humble Beginning" and "Noobie Collection". Isn't that the opposite of telling a 30 year collector (actually him telling...multiple, multi-decade, experienced, veteran, old guard, grey beard, silverback, greatest generation, time-tested, well-seasoned, fully marinated, antedeluvian, crumbly, old-farts-of-the-comic-arts) that he knows better ? * *and Kevin Maguire, and EVERYONE else but him, the auction house, and the consignor?

Clearly he’s a grower

I think he's talking about when the cops got here.

His sidekick could have been named Periodic Mabel. wasted opportunity.

You left the front door open. Andys selling your shiz.

I’ll take it

I’m a standup philosopher.

Clearly the only solution is to slice the piece in half ( I prefer vertically) and sell half now at the lower seller's fee and then sell the other half in the summer signature auction. It's called "Solomon's Dollar Cost Averaging"

Maybe it's Gaiman burnout...after that Heritage where he regaled viewers with tales of years gone by....and fans were emotionally spent. Or that there's no Morpheus. Either way.

One's a double full figure (and full figured ) full splash....and the other is a more close up, less than full figure, more like 1/2 splash with the panels and insets, of the same characters from the same book but one is dramatically more desirable than the other. Feels like logic won out here.....

Did McFarlane ever reply or put out a statement? Not only did he choose an AI winner, that was not supposed to be allowed, but the AI winner is a complete Jag representing himself and the brand he's supposedly representing in the worst way possible

Looks like this one is a can't miss!

I think you win the No Prize for being the first person to go Godwin's Law in the thread.

I had a good friend who was selling a piece...collector to collector....and a dealer/collector who knew the buyer decided to tell the buyer to NOT do the deal because the money might go to support some organization the dealer/collector didn't approve of. Just a wee tad of overreach there.

Customer service issues, personality difference, etc. are one level....maybe you prefer not to give that person/operation the benefit of your business. Maybe they can improve. Maybe they eventually mature. I can see maybe that's not the end of the story. Dishonesty, shady descriptions, entirely unethical or immoral practices (like seeing the dealer rip off an out of touch or older collector by lying about valuation, or intentionally misattribute a piece to defraud a collector) are more what puts pieces in the "lost in a fire" category. There's nothing about acquiring a piece of art that's curing cancer, saving the starving children, or bringing us closer to world peace....so it's never been worth it to me to start compromising myself and rewarding a scumbag with my cash/business. I'd think of it every time I looked at the art. In the end it's just art, and never worth trading integrity for it.

Always an easy call for me. A lot of comic dealers, art dealers, hobby dealers treat their customers like trash, treat ethics like they are for other people, and assume the addicts will keep buying no matter what they do..... No piece is important enough to deal with folks on my personal black list. When I see a piece like that, I lament that it was lost in a fire....

Well, they certainly aren't buying physical copies of comics. Maybe digitally on a subscription, but they are killing print of all kinds. They don't seem to attend films in person, but consume it on a digital basis like mad. Maybe they'll cater to us in the future if they get economic projections telling them to value us more highly. I doubt it. They'll likely do what all advertisers do and cater to the biggest spending demo.

Forgot why I posted that....it was because I just want quality. The original material was meant for a certain time, place, audience, set of consumers. So, I don't mind changes. As long they are quality changes and I get more content to watch, I am thrilled. We've suffered through such garbage that I'll take just about any change or alteration if it's for the better.

Broadening appeal to get more consumers is as old as capitalism...and would fit perfectly into the "mad men" era....Don Draper would be the first person to do it if it meant more eyes on the product, more sales, and a bigger commission. And no one would ever use those terms to define him. Our generation of sweaty mom's basement dwellers only spend a fraction of the licensing and IP dollars needed to keep quarterly reports up to expectations. Can't grow if you're catering exclusively to a rapidly aging, dying and inevitably shrinking demo. Nothing breaks an empire faster than catering to people who are now spending their money on scooters and retirement community dues and ignoring young people with disposable incomes to waste.

Yeah, that would be great. Change the look and tone, even the color palette.....set it in the "Mad Men" era, and they give themselves freedom and distance from everything that's come before it and maybe a chance for something fresh.