paqart

As illustrations, I much prefer Beck's covers to Raboy's. Within Raboy's own work, I much prefer his Flash Gordon material to what he did for Fawcett. Like Jim Starlin, I think Raboy is over-rated. For instance, Frank Brunner's inking style is similar to what Raboy did on Flash Gordon, but Brunner's compositions are much more dynamic. I think of Raboy as a cartoonist, not an illustrator, to the extent those two titles can be separated. The reason is that his sequential art never rises to the level of finish demanded of an illustration. Few comic book artists ever manage to do that, but some have: Frazetta, Mark Shultz, Jeff Jones, Bernie Wrightson, Richard Corben, and Jean Giraud (Moebius) are examples of some who have. The distinction you are making is, I think, different. You may be referring to the quality of "realism" where Beck is in the middle of a spectrum where George Herriman's Krazy Kat is on one end, and Alex Ross on the other. On that scale, Raboy is more realistic than Beck, but that doesn't make him more of an illustrator. Plenty of illustrators make highly unrealistic and even sketchy or loose illustrations. The more realistic an illustration becomes, the less aesthetically appealing it is to me. This is because realism often comes with greater dependence on reference and less compositional flexibility. This is largely because the artists known for realism tend to not understand structure as well as their non-realist counterparts, and cannot make up more dynamic poses, camera angles, or settings. Also, an argument can be made that Beck is more realistic than Raboy. The biggest difference between the two is that Beck mostly ignores lighting, but Raboy emphasizes it. However, Beck emphasizes structure, and I think does so more successfully than Raboy's lighting. The best treatment of lighting I've ever seen by a comic book artist is Bernie Wrightson, with David Mazzuchelli a close second. The problem with lighting in comics is that the convention of black outlines, shadows, and shading works against any level of realism. Black, or even near black, is so rare in any natural environment, even on objects painted black, that it's use in comics immediately reduces their realism. Personally, I find Carl Barks, a "cartoonist" capable of far more "realistic" art than Raboy, an "illustrator." The reason is that the way Barks' duck characters interact with their environments is far more convincing than in Raboy's work, regardless of his use of shadow, because of the way he composes his images.

I just bought three over the last few days. The reason is that I suddenly realized what a good artist C.C. Beck is. It's amazing how under-rated he is. Other collectors can have the Mac Raboy covers. Beck's draghtsmanship reminds me of industrial design. For the level of detail, it's perfect and has more volume per line than anyone out there. At this moment, my two favorite GA artists are Carl Barks and C.C. Beck. For SA, probably Carl Barks and Jack Kirby, then Gil Kane and Johnny Romita in BA. As for the stories, I happen to like them. They are refreshing in contrast to the bleak, dark, and sadistic material that has become so popular since Miller's Dark Knight came out and changed comics for the next 40 years. I also like the fact they aren't filled with all the weirdness found in 1950's horror comics. It's no surprise they outsold Superman; they're more family-friendly than anything outside of Disney, with all the adventure craved by readers of superhero comics.

I'm thinking of buying the comic in the attached image. My question is whether it is a UK edition or a UK reprint. My guess is that it is a b&w reprint on the inside. Anyone know which?

My latest, and favorite CPV, Archie Annual #8

I'm in.

This is an interesting angle that may have merit. I appreciate the apparent goal of CGC's apparent efforts, but if those efforts have 1) aggravated the harm at the same time as 2) blocking an alternate remedy that 3) prevents law enforcement scrutiny of the fraud, then that could be a legitimate complaint against CGC to increase damages.

I got a DM saying my grades were recorded for the last round, but they didn't make it to this spreadsheet. I didn't win, but did pick up 10 points on the last round, for a final score of 38, tying for 16th place.

Me too. Here is a link to my Tour-themed graphic novel in progress, "The Lanterne Rouge." https://www.paqart.com/comics-2/the-lanterne-rouge

That's how I feel about Avengers #93 (my first Marvel), but my favorite story was the Thing gladiator series from FF 90-94.

I haven't shot CGC slabs, but have shot some cards with the same problem, photography-wise.

My wife experienced this in the probate case for her grandfather's estate. Her aunt had managed to come into possession of most of the estate's most valuable items (and cash), claimed to have been stolen by her grandfather just before he died. This resulted in a will contest. Fairly soon after it started, everything halted to give people time for settlement. It never happened. Her grandfather died in 2003. The case was resolved around 2021.

Am I too Late?

Last night I pulled out my FF Annual 6 for a read. I enjoyed the experience so much that I grabbed a few other FFs, starting with issue 130. Again, it was fun, but my 133 is in a slab, so I couldn't finish the story.

I hate to say it, but I'm starting to prefer raw comics, particularly for the most valuable issues. I have a hard time picturing myself buying something like an Avengers 1 in a slab, for fear it was a counterfeit. It hadn't occurred to me until reading this thread, but the slabs invite counterfeiting by concealing comic book interiors.

I once owned a Feature Book NN ( Tracy) that was so brittle, you could barely touch it without the pages turning to dust. It really couldn't be read, but would have looked great in a CGC holder. That was probably the only way to preserve and enjoy it.

If only the MCU could go back to the pre-Disney days, when they still had respect for the characters.

It isn't a "prosecution" because it is civil, not criminal. The civil equivalent is "frivolous" or :harassment." I don't think CGC's case meet these definitions at all. Zanello et al did harm CGC's brand with their fraud and have caused CGC to suffer monetary damages. There is no way around that. CGC is a victim due to the criminal mischief of the defendant.

And this is why law enforcement has to be involved. Every defrauded victim who was defrauded exclusively by Zanello without CGC involvement has no other recourse. CGC will not make them whole, correct the grade, or in any other way assist in dealing with their problem. There are 350 who will be compensated by CGC, but potentially 1,650 who won't be. Those people have to report this as a crime to police/FBI. For the record, I think this makes sense from CGC's point of view, but it also means that victims of the fraud cannot afford to sit around expecting CGC to deal with this on their behalf.

Not CGC. The victims of the fraud go directly to law enforcement. There is no reason for any of them to wait on CGC.

In which case, it goes to law enforcement.

FYI: A strong motion, like the one filed by Zanello, is no guarantee of success. When I sued Fox Television, Chris Carter, and Harris Comics, their reply briefs were excellent. They were also complete baloney. The judge saw through it and told them they should settle with me, which they did. In this case, the Zanello doc is also baloney. It is apparent that the actual CGC mark was used, there is no chance customers wouldn't be confused, and reputational harm is huge when the CGC is implicated in fraud. This has the potential to destroy their business, because trust is a major commodity in a situation like this. Imagine if the Charbucks case wasn't that the offending company had a similar logo/label to Starbucks, but used identical labels and spiked the coffee with LSD or poison. That is what we have here. You don't need thousands of examples to prove harm when the integrity of the service is so thoroughly compromised.

That would require expanding the list all of Zanello/Riva/CBS submissions. I wouldn't buy anything that has passed through their hands at this point.

And this is why this needs to go to law enforcement.

I did the same but got 1 bull and scored 5 for a total of 28. I think that puts me middle of the pack somewhere.

You might be surprised to know this, but I suspected you had done in the last round what you did in this one. I suspected it so strongly that I initially gave all the comics a 5.0. That was a mistake obviously, and led to my worst score of the contest. And then you did it on the next round instead! Arg!