rocket1312

Spinning off from this, does anyone have a reliable online source for museum glass and/or other comparable plexi products? I like to do my own framing, but I've had a hard time sorting through the litany of products out there. Given the expense, I'm not keen to order stuff blind just to see what exactly people are selling.

I don't want to speak out of turn, nor am I 100% sure who the buyer is. It's just an educated guess (that I'm REALLY confident about) based on what I read on these and other boards. I'm not the least bit plugged in beyond that.

In this case I think there was literally only one person who was willing and able to pay even close to the asking price for this cover. Capullo seemingly priced it as high as he did because he DID NOT want to sell it. The buyer more or less called his bluff and even then (if it's who we think it is), was turned away multiple times before apparently breaking through.

Here's the cover in question.

I just received my copy of World's Greatest Artist's Edition and I just finished picking my jaw up off the ground. As someone who is relatively new to the hobby and doesn't really get out to conventions, this was the first time I have ever seen an artist's edition or any of Kirby's two-up artwork (ok, a reasonable facsimile) in person. I'm not exaggerating when I say that seeing this book is a game changer for me. Let's just say I totally get it now! Artist's Editions are awesome! Kirby is awesome! Two-up art is mind-blowingly awesome! I'll likely never own one of these pages myself (although the idea of acquiring one suddenly has become an obsession), but this book is absolutely the next best thing. I work in book manufacturing and for the last decade have specialized in digital preservation and with all modesty feel like I've done some really nice facsimile/reproduction work, but this thing blows away anything I've ever worked on. What a spectacular piece of business. Everything from the high quality of the scans (seriously, it's not easy to reproduce such old, yellowing paper tones like this), to the thick paperstock, to the great binding, to the matte finish on the cover. It's all top notch. I've never even read the comics reproduced in this book (I'm working through the original FF right now and am at #30) and have only become to appreciate Kirby in recent years and yet this book is my new favorite thing ever. Bravo IDW.

It's a way to convert ebay bucks, stolen credit cards or non-American currency into a prepaid debit card usable anywhere.

Beyond the generally accepted notion that Batman is currently more popular than Superman, you kind of have to just treat Hush as an outlier. Whatever one thinks of the overall quality of Hush as a story, it is undoubtedly one of the three or four most popular 21st century big two runs. It may even be number one. Off the top of my head I can't really think of anything that would be ahead of it. So yes, story absolutely does factor into OA valuations, but in the case of Hush, the effect is much greater than you might typically find elsewhere.

For Tomorrow came right on the heels of Hush, during an era which I think a lot of fans (especially those who weren't around in the early 90's) consider to be "peak Lee." He hadn't been doing regular art in a decade at that point and the buzz was off the charts. Unchained is much more recent, obviously, and there's probably little nostalgia for it yet. It's also a New 52 title, which for a lot of people means not the "real" Superman. I don't think either story will stand the test of time the way Hush has, so the two may eventually blur together in terms of market value. I think For Tomorrow will always remain slightly ahead though primarily because of the New 52 thing.

Remember that #275 is also a gatefold. While the image itself isn't as memorable as #268, I would think the size alone would push it over. I do agree that #274 probably wouldn't surpass #268, but I put them both in the upper tier of Lee/Williams X-Men and about even in terms of recognition factor. No Wolverine is a minus, but Magneto/Rogue might make up for that. I know I like the #274 cover better, but that doesn't mean much. All things being equal, I'd take the X-Men #3 cover over all of them, but that's purely a nostalgia thing on my part.

It's funny, I don't disagree with you, but what is it about that #268 cover that makes it so popular/memorable? It only has one X-Man on it and while Cap is Cap, it's not like Black Widow was a particularly hot character at the time. No one's really doing anything. They're just sort of standing there. Is it because the story is so memorable? Is it because it was the first Lee/Williams cover as the regular art team? Either way, I would think at the very least #274 and #275 would give it a run for it's money.

Fair enough, but the FF still has the overwhelming weight of history on their side. Even as a huge 90's X-Men fan, I have a difficult time coming up with a Gambit story that mattered. You could wipe his character from Marvel history and I'm not sure much would change other than Rogue having to find a new on-again/off-again boyfriend. The FF may be marginalized now, but they will always matter. I also fully expect them to have another run in the spotlight at some point. The Disney/Fox stuff won't go on forever.

It's interesting that you say this because when I look at UXM #266, I immediately start thinking about how much more it would fetch if it were by Lee/Williams. It's funny, that cover is firmly in my wheelhouse of wheelhouses and yet it barely elicits a shrug from me beyond the initial excitement that such an important cover is up for public auction. I've never loved Kubert (or that cover) despite the fact that he was the artist during my prime reading years, and I think whatever shine Gambit had back in the 90's was lost long, long ago. As to whether or not I'd rather have it or the Kirby? That's tough. I have no nostalgia for Kirby at all. I couldn't tell you a single thing about FF #77 as I've not read it. X-Men, on the other hand, was the reason I got into comics. At one point in my collecting life my monthly comic buying consisted of every X-Men title and spin-off and nothing else. All that said, the fact that this is even a question that I have to consider says everything that needs to be said about my feelings on UXM #266. As a piece of art I prefer the FF by a wide margin, but ultimately I would probably choose the UXM if only because I would feel obligated to choose it.

My main nostalgia period is from 1991-1993. However, I can boil that down even more specifically to Nov/Dec 1991. I could probably list a dozen Marvel covers from that 2 month period that hit all the nostalgia buttons in just the right way. Here are the three that mean the most to me. It would be a dream come true to own any one of these three. If I owned all three of them, I think I could easily retire from the hobby and feel like my mission was accomplished. Not coincidentally, these are likely the first three comics I ever bought new off the shelf.

The internal bidding is a tricky thing. Do I think the everyday rank and file at Heritage are bidding on items they otherwise wouldn't with the goal of propping up their employer? No, but that doesn't change the fact that there is a clear conflict of interest. At the same time, as long as they're not using inside information to screw the other bidders, I guess I don't really see the harm. One bidder's no different than another, right? I don't know. Like I said, I'd probably feel stronger about it if I had more at risk financially. I know Gene mentions that this practice is illegal in some places, but how is it perceived in other collecting circles where Heritage may not be as big a player? Is this sort of thing completely verboten in, say, the fine art world?

I listened to the first part of the new pod this afternoon and while I appreciate Jim's willingness to discuss various customer concerns, I don't get the sense that what he had to say is going to change anyone's mind one way or the other. The mechanisms seem to be in place for the system to be rigged, it's just a case of whether or not you trust those involved to play fair. I personally do, but I'm probably a little naive. I'm also not throwing around 5+ figures for art. If I were, I'd probably be a little more cautious.

I don't think there's anything wrong with discussing the quality of various artists' work. That's kind of why we're here. I just don't care for the way this particular thread was presented. In my mind there's a big difference between asking the board's opinion of Kevin Nowlan's (or any other artist's) work and starting a thread that basically boils down to "List artists that suck. Number one on my list is Kevin Nowlan."

No way is that Lee/Williams. Travis Charest maybe?

Was the cover trimmed? Looking at both images and comparing the marks in the corners it seems like the board wasn't altered at all. Just for whatever reason the restored art was extended all the way to the edge. Count me in the camp of preferring the look of the restored art but at the same time I can't image doing something like this directly onto the board rather than by way of an overlay.

I've never read this book and I have no familiarity with this era of JLA or Chuck Patton's work, but that cover's just about perfect. It pretty much embodies everything that I think of as a comic book. That it holds such deep personal meaning only makes it that much better. Stories like this are what make this hobby so much fun (as long as your favorite book isn't my favorite book, that is).

You are correct that I did not grow up with Kirby and company. In fact it's only really been in the last 4 or 5 years that I've even begun to go back and read a lot of comics from the 60's and 70's. Some of that has to do with Marvel Unlimited (aka the greatest invention in the history of comics), but a lot of it actually has to do with getting interested in OA and feeling the need to go back and do my homework. While I have absolutely zero nostalgia for the comics themselves, I've actually become a reasonably big Kirby fan. I've also found that despite the early 90's being my nostalgic sweet spot, my tastes in art generally seem to skew a bit older. That said, I'll never spend 5 figures on a piece of Kirby art. It's just not going to happen. But I'm also not likely to ever spend 5 figures on any other art either, so it's kind of a moot point. I suppose that's not good news for the 50 and 60 somethings that will be looking to cash out in the near future, but I'm just one guy, so who knows. In all honesty though, beyond what I can and can't afford on a given day, I don't really worry to much about values. If I were "investing" tens of thousands of dollars in OA I'm sure I'd feel differently, but right now I buy what I like with no intention of getting my money back.

It's crazy how much your experience/situation mirrors mine. I'm 37 and started in on all of this about 2.5 years ago. Our tastes seem to have a lot of overlap and I also don't really know anyone else who's into this stuff. The only difference seems to be that I was much quicker to jump into actually buying art. You're smart to do your research and to be cautious, but my experience over the last year+ is that a lot of the art (especially early 90's) that I'm interested is quickly becoming unaffordable (to me). That's not to say it's wise to get caught up in the bull market and wildly overpay out of fear, but I'm starting to realize that maybe I'm better off overpaying a little now for the stuff I know I really want while prices are still within my budget's stratosphere, rather than finding a deal down the road on something that doesn't completely scratch my itch. Obviously your own budget and priorities will have a lot to say on the matter. I've never dealt with Anthony Snyder before, so I can't comment on him specifically, but I will say that I have been somewhat turned off by the way some dealers/reps communicate in this hobby as well. While the vast majority of my experiences so far with collectors, artists, dealers, and reps have been positive, there is an "exclusive club" sort of vibe that inevitably hovers over the comic art world. It can be intimidating and I've definitely found there to be a learning curve when it comes to knowing how to communicate with certain key players. I can sympathize with dealers in particular who are likely being bombarded with questions/requests on a daily basis and need to be able to weed out the looky loos almost immediately so that they are able to devote time to known quantities, but I also know it can be devastating to a new collector trying to find their way to be given what feels like a cold shoulder. I'm not much of a networker, so I know I'm never going to be on the "inside" with any of these people, but I've generally found that as long as you're direct and confident (without being overbearing), willing to put your money where your mouth is and don't take any of it too personally, you'll be fine.

I was chatting with Rubinstein at a show last year and he told me that he tried to polish up Miller's pencils on Wolverine to make them look more traditional and that he didn't really understand what Frank was trying to do until he saw Ronin a couple of years later. He said that if he knew then what he knows now, that the final book would have looked much different.

Right again. Greg Capullo has said many times that if and when he ever sells his X-Force art (Another nostalgic sweetspot. I'd rather have it than Liefeld X-Force), Kirkman gets first dibs. He doesn't need to be browsing CAF everyday. He already wins.

Good point. If the NYX#3 cover is worth 70k then I'd have to think Youngblood #1 would fetch at least 250k. Probably half a million when the movie finally comes out.

What can I say. I was 12 in 1992. I think everyone here can appreciate where I'm coming from. Kirby might be king, but my local Dairy Mart didn't have any Kirby comics on the spinner rack in 1992 that I can remember. That said, if someone would like to sell me a Kirby Cap or Thor page for the price of an equivalent Youngblood page, I'll have the money in your account by this afternoon.