Lucky Baru

That bottom panel rocks.

Bob Layton finishes over M.D. Bright

How about Jae Lee? The stuff he has put of since 2007ish? His art has grown and matured since the early 1990's when he was drawing more like the Image founders. The work he did on the Dark Tower mini-series starts a new period in his work for me and it is very powerful.

That's a super page!

Rob Liefeld Pencils

Price dropped to $12K Or was it purchased for 12 and being resold for 15? Marc is running his Christmas/Holiday sale. This is the second time that he has run one.

Matt Wagner Grendel

Ron Frenz

2 Pages I won in the HA auction. They slipped under the radar.

Uh, the drawing is obviously a homage to Dirty Harry. So, it isn't a homage to this??

No but this Jusko absolutely is Eastwood. So does Bill's

Anyone else notice that The Punisher looks a lot like Clint Eastwood?

That is a killer cover. I like this cover as well - I figured out why... it seems to be an homage to Zeck's Cap #286 cover with the character that Zeck made popular - the Punisher. Wonder if that's what Sienkiewicz had in mind or it just turned out that way. Also, it makes you think back to ASM 129.

If a classic, engaging cover of Spidey vs. the Green Goblin fills you with so much indifference that you have to check if it's a typo, that quite obviously speaks volumes about your inherent personal preference and bias more than it does about anything else. And, you also referenced a post that talked copiously about things that we are quite specifically trying to exclude from the conversation by just taking the covers at pure face value. The Spidey cover is a 10/10 on the nad-pumping and giving your inner 12-year old a warm fuzzy feeling scale. Like Nelson said - it's a GREAT comic book cover that does what it's supposed to. No discussion of technical artistic merit, historical relevance, influence, market value, or which underlying comic or piece of art is more valuable is required. Or desired. Heading out for the day, but I'll just wrap things up by restating what I've said all along. Preferring the GL76 cover or the Spidey 98 cover is incredibly subjective, despite Gene's protests to the contrary, and I have no desire to convince anyone to see the light. Gene has made the pitch on what he sees as self evident truths, and I would argue that his own "inherent personal preference and bias" guides his judgement just as much as it does mine, whether he sees it that way or not. And that's ok with me. Gene is a friend and I always respect his opinion even when he has his hidden blinders on or when he's wrong. Like in this case. I hope the debate continues because it's fun. And all you guys that complain that this forum only focuses on the financial side of OA should speak up and opine. Your day has come! Peace out Scott Speak up about one cover or the other cover? It is a bit limiting. I don't like either one. However, if you are going to limit to the covers involved in the auction over the last 2 days then the one DocJoe won is the one out of the entire auction I'd want on my wall. That is a and is more in line with the artistry I'd want in a piece. It is a "10/10 on the nad-pumping and giving your inner 12-year old a warm fuzzy feeling scale".

They don't, and that's my point. Look at the ASM #98 cover and it's self-explanatory. Obviously from the style and trade dressing it's old/early/classic. Two very recognizable characters put into an interesting situation that ropes you right in. You don't know how it happened or how it gets resolved, but you know there's an interesting story going on where you know a lot of the details just from looking at the cover. The GL #76 cover sets up an interesting premise, but no one looking at it would know anything about the issue's historical relevance or significance that arguably accounts for the bulk of its appeal. Which is the more visually appealing cover is the entire point. I haven't brought valuations or bidding or anything else into the discussion at all. And, from that perspective, I do think it's relevant what people outside of our little microcosm of die-hard fanboys think/would think. Or, at least people who are able to separate the historical relevance, valuation, and artistic legacy of Neal Adams outside of the simple discussion of which cover is more visually appealing. And, like I said - we can agree to disagree which is the more visual appealing. What I do not agree with is that the GL #76 is clearly superior and that it's "not even close". Let's not judge comic art on the J. Evans Pritchard scale for judging poetry (see "Dead Poets Society"): "Question one rates the cover's perfection, question two rates its importance. And once these questions have been answered, determining a cover's greatness becomes a relatively simple matter by plotting the perfection on the Y axis and the importance on the X axis and taking the area as how great the cover is..." As Robin Williams said in the film: "Excrement"! The ASM #98 cover is incredibly exciting, engaging, evocative and FUN. I would argue moreso than the GL #76. But, even if you disagree, there's no way that it's not at least a real debate. And that is all that I've been trying to tell you art snobs. That's all fine and well (although, ironically, I find your championing of ASM #98 to be similar to the J. Evans Pritchard scale! ), but why is it even a debate? You can find ASM #98 more visually appealing than GL #76, I can find WEB OF SPIDER-MAN #1 more visually appealing than ASM #98, and the general public can find black velvet paintings more visually appealing than all of the above. None of that changes the fact that, for its own reasons, whether you agree or not, the hobby has deemed GL #76 to be the more important cover. The end. +1 When you break it down Barney style your view-point is set in reality, and your last point is the ONLY one that really matters.

Sure. Sounds alot like the fun times in the 1990's comic industry and then.......... THE BOTTOM FELL OUT The memory of Omega Men #3 keeps me from buying the newest hottest book that keeps increasing in price.

LESS.... You'd know better than me, you're probably right. Personally I'd rather have a character drawn by the person that came up with the idea. Being this a mainly nostalgia based hobby, people collecting now probably feel a connection to Romita. Using the 25 year rule you might wanna consider McFarlane as the connection. Even McFarlane is done now, it's all about Bagley (whose work makes me lust nostalgically for the days of ..McFarlane...GAG). Somebody just dropped a crapton of interiors on Romitaman, and...well I guess it is what it is. But the rule is the Twenty Year Rule, not twenty-five Bagley and/or Todd. Depends on what you grew-up with. Romita, Kane, whomever. Each generation doesn't want the one that came before as they were never exposed to it or they got exposed to it through their fathers. In either case it makes that era a none starter for the next generation of collectors. Yes, there are examples of items outside of that generalization but for the most part it holds true. I don't desire to own a Neal Adams page, a Romita page, whomever from that era. I wasn't exposed to them growing up. I don't have the "feel good" memories they bring. They are nice but not what I am interested in having in my collection. I don't have a friend my age that collects OA that is interested in adding them into their collections either. We are interested in the guys who came out of Image, and the era of independent books. The generation after ours is interested in the books they read growing up. While I do have some Finch, Mitch Genard and other newer artist pages I can't say they hold the appeal that a Lee and/or Liefeld page holds for me. I use the 25 years as a rule. Yes, I do know what the 20 year rule is. Why do I use 25 years? The prices of OA art really makes it a 25 or 30 year after the fact before your average guy is gonna plunk down the money to start collecting now a days. I read guys in here discussing purchases starting in the mid-5 figure range and moving up from there. Heck, the major discussion in this auction is about a $454,000 vs. a $ 154,000 cover. Most people can't afford nor will they ever be able to afford that type of hobby purchase in their lifetimes. While I have a pretty nice collection it has been built during a time when OA art was cheaper. I could not rebuild my collection if I started today as it would be cost prohibitive to do so. I totally get what your saying, but there must be some kind of other collector out there....look at the prices for high grade grade comics from the golden age, from my limited observation they continue to escalate, would comic art be that much different? It seems that stuff is before people's area of nostalgia. Dunno, I'm just thinking out loud on this board. The 20 or 25 year rule gets misused by people who think too narrowly. It's supposed to be -- and it is -- the average span that it takes for something to JOIN the ranks of what is collectible. It is not about the time when everything 20 or 25 years old REPLACES everything that came before it. That works only if you're talking about something which has faded away because it hasn't survived to remain relevant in any way decades later and nearly all those who remember it or ever heard about it are gone. But it doesn't work when you are talking about characters that continue to be loved and sought after in a medium and a genre that continues to be relevant and whose original stories remain in print or get adapted in new stories. Most of the people collecting golden age were not around to buy fresh new copies off the stand. And a whole lot of silver age collectors were not around to buy those books off the stand. But they saw those books and that art in reprints, or they've seen the covers reproduced and homaged and referenced countless times. Or they just like the new stuff and find it cool to seek out the old stuff just to see what it's like. If you like ONLY the stuff that literally was published for the very first time in the days of your adolescence, great. More power to you. But to presume that stuff "before your time" will never be sought by any of your contemporaries (or the people who come after you) is to ignore mountains of evidence to the contrary. I guarantee you that every person who has paid over a million for a Honus Wagner card was not around in 1909 when the card was published. But each of them, most likely, collected sports cards when they were a kid, and remembered hearing or reading that the Honus Wagner card was really valuable. So when they grew up and got rich, they decided to get one, based on the nostalgia they experienced hearing about it when they were young. I just purchased a piece of art the other day that was from a time long, long before I grew up or was even born. And it evoked a time period in history that was also well before my experience. But, you know, I like the character, whom I discovered only decades later. And I have heard and read an awful lot about that time in history ever since I was a kid. So even though the piece originated well before my time, by an artist whose work I never once purchased fresh off the stand, the piece still held a nostalgia for me. For most people, nostalgia doesn't happen based on when something was made, but when you first heard about it (or something like it) Umm, if you read my post you will find that I stated their were exceptions to the generalization. I am speaking from the collector car market which is another collector's niche market. Niche markets generally react the same. Sure there are vehicles that continue to increase in value and outperform others. However, most of the generation that collected the vehicles of their youth that came before the current one see their values decrease as they leave the market. There isn't anyone that wants/desires those vehicles as they had been before and there suddenly is a glut of them on the market. General overview/example I can offer is the pre-world war II collectible vehicles. The price rose form the 1970's through the late 1990's. As the collector pool aged and vehicles got snatched up the prices went up. However, when my grandparent's generation who fought WWII began to retire they began to sell their collections off. A glut in the market occurred and prices fell. On the whole they have not recovered. Examples now occurring as the baby boomer's start to sell off their collections as they retire: The 55-57 Thunderbird. Use to be a vehicle that had a solid core following and the prices went higher and higher. Then in 2006 they flat-lined in the 40K range. The generation that collected them and remembered them were selling them off and the interest wasn't there like it had been. You can still pick-up a very nicely restored 55-57 Thunderbird for around 40K and it is almost 2016. Another example, the same years as the Thunderbird Bel-Air. The value on them has remained constant and has slipped during that same period. In other words, since 2006 you can pick one up for 90-95K. The OA market has and is expanding in price. However, the higher end pieces are owned by the baby boomer generation and they are at the point in life where they are looking to start cashing their collections out. It should be interesting to see where prices go as that occurs are a faster and faster rate as they age. This super hero thing is just a fad. In a few years, Batman, Spider-Man and Superman will be relegated to the forgotten dustbin of history. This OA market is similar to what happened with beanie babies Sure, that was my point. Right-y-o

LESS.... You'd know better than me, you're probably right. Personally I'd rather have a character drawn by the person that came up with the idea. Being this a mainly nostalgia based hobby, people collecting now probably feel a connection to Romita. Using the 25 year rule you might wanna consider McFarlane as the connection. Even McFarlane is done now, it's all about Bagley (whose work makes me lust nostalgically for the days of ..McFarlane...GAG). Somebody just dropped a crapton of interiors on Romitaman, and...well I guess it is what it is. But the rule is the Twenty Year Rule, not twenty-five Bagley and/or Todd. Depends on what you grew-up with. Romita, Kane, whomever. Each generation doesn't want the one that came before as they were never exposed to it or they got exposed to it through their fathers. In either case it makes that era a none starter for the next generation of collectors. Yes, there are examples of items outside of that generalization but for the most part it holds true. I don't desire to own a Neal Adams page, a Romita page, whomever from that era. I wasn't exposed to them growing up. I don't have the "feel good" memories they bring. They are nice but not what I am interested in having in my collection. I don't have a friend my age that collects OA that is interested in adding them into their collections either. We are interested in the guys who came out of Image, and the era of independent books. The generation after ours is interested in the books they read growing up. While I do have some Finch, Mitch Genard and other newer artist pages I can't say they hold the appeal that a Lee and/or Liefeld page holds for me. I use the 25 years as a rule. Yes, I do know what the 20 year rule is. Why do I use 25 years? The prices of OA art really makes it a 25 or 30 year after the fact before your average guy is gonna plunk down the money to start collecting now a days. I read guys in here discussing purchases starting in the mid-5 figure range and moving up from there. Heck, the major discussion in this auction is about a $454,000 vs. a $ 154,000 cover. Most people can't afford nor will they ever be able to afford that type of hobby purchase in their lifetimes. While I have a pretty nice collection it has been built during a time when OA art was cheaper. I could not rebuild my collection if I started today as it would be cost prohibitive to do so. I totally get what your saying, but there must be some kind of other collector out there....look at the prices for high grade grade comics from the golden age, from my limited observation they continue to escalate, would comic art be that much different? It seems that stuff is before people's area of nostalgia. Dunno, I'm just thinking out loud on this board. The 20 or 25 year rule gets misused by people who think too narrowly. It's supposed to be -- and it is -- the average span that it takes for something to JOIN the ranks of what is collectible. It is not about the time when everything 20 or 25 years old REPLACES everything that came before it. That works only if you're talking about something which has faded away because it hasn't survived to remain relevant in any way decades later and nearly all those who remember it or ever heard about it are gone. But it doesn't work when you are talking about characters that continue to be loved and sought after in a medium and a genre that continues to be relevant and whose original stories remain in print or get adapted in new stories. Most of the people collecting golden age were not around to buy fresh new copies off the stand. And a whole lot of silver age collectors were not around to buy those books off the stand. But they saw those books and that art in reprints, or they've seen the covers reproduced and homaged and referenced countless times. Or they just like the new stuff and find it cool to seek out the old stuff just to see what it's like. If you like ONLY the stuff that literally was published for the very first time in the days of your adolescence, great. More power to you. But to presume that stuff "before your time" will never be sought by any of your contemporaries (or the people who come after you) is to ignore mountains of evidence to the contrary. I guarantee you that every person who has paid over a million for a Honus Wagner card was not around in 1909 when the card was published. But each of them, most likely, collected sports cards when they were a kid, and remembered hearing or reading that the Honus Wagner card was really valuable. So when they grew up and got rich, they decided to get one, based on the nostalgia they experienced hearing about it when they were young. I just purchased a piece of art the other day that was from a time long, long before I grew up or was even born. And it evoked a time period in history that was also well before my experience. But, you know, I like the character, whom I discovered only decades later. And I have heard and read an awful lot about that time in history ever since I was a kid. So even though the piece originated well before my time, by an artist whose work I never once purchased fresh off the stand, the piece still held a nostalgia for me. For most people, nostalgia doesn't happen based on when something was made, but when you first heard about it (or something like it) Umm, if you read my post you will find that I stated their were exceptions to the generalization. I am speaking from the collector car market which is another collector's niche market. Niche markets generally react the same. Sure there are vehicles that continue to increase in value and outperform others. However, most of the generation that collected the vehicles of their youth that came before the current one see their values decrease as they leave the market. There isn't anyone that wants/desires those vehicles as they had been before and there suddenly is a glut of them on the market. General overview/example I can offer is the pre-world war II collectible vehicles. The price rose form the 1970's through the late 1990's. As the collector pool aged and vehicles got snatched up the prices went up. However, when my grandparent's generation who fought WWII began to retire they began to sell their collections off. A glut in the market occurred and prices fell. On the whole they have not recovered. Examples now occurring as the baby boomer's start to sell off their collections as they retire: The 55-57 Thunderbird. Use to be a vehicle that had a solid core following and the prices went higher and higher. Then in 2006 they flat-lined in the 40K range. The generation that collected them and remembered them were selling them off and the interest wasn't there like it had been. You can still pick-up a very nicely restored 55-57 Thunderbird for around 40K and it is almost 2016. Another example, the same years as the Thunderbird Bel-Air. The value on them has remained constant and has slipped during that same period. In other words, since 2006 you can pick one up for 90-95K. The OA market has and is expanding in price. However, the higher end pieces are owned by the baby boomer generation and they are at the point in life where they are looking to start cashing their collections out. It should be interesting to see where prices go as that occurs are a faster and faster rate as they age.

LESS.... You'd know better than me, you're probably right. Personally I'd rather have a character drawn by the person that came up with the idea. Being this a mainly nostalgia based hobby, people collecting now probably feel a connection to Romita. Using the 25 year rule you might wanna consider McFarlane as the connection. Even McFarlane is done now, it's all about Bagley (whose work makes me lust nostalgically for the days of ..McFarlane...GAG). Somebody just dropped a crapton of interiors on Romitaman, and...well I guess it is what it is. But the rule is the Twenty Year Rule, not twenty-five Bagley and/or Todd. Depends on what you grew-up with. Romita, Kane, whomever. Each generation doesn't want the one that came before as they were never exposed to it or they got exposed to it through their fathers. In either case it makes that era a none starter for the next generation of collectors. Yes, there are examples of items outside of that generalization but for the most part it holds true. I don't desire to own a Neal Adams page, a Romita page, whomever from that era. I wasn't exposed to them growing up. I don't have the "feel good" memories they bring. They are nice but not what I am interested in having one my collection. I don't have a friend my age that collects OA that is interested in adding them into their collections either. We are interested in the guys who came out of Image, and the era of independent books. The generation after ours is interested in the books they read growing up. While I do have some Finch, Mitch Genard and other newer artist pages I can't say they hold the appeal that a Lee and/or Liefeld page holds for me. I use the 25 years as a rule. Yes, I do know what the 20 year rule is. Why do I use 25 years? The prices of OA art really makes it a 25 or 30 year after the fact before your average guy is gonna plunk down the money to start collecting now a days. I read guys in here discussing purchases starting in the mid-5 figure range and moving up from there. Heck, the major discussion in this auction is about a $454,000 vs. a $ 154,000 cover. Most people can't afford nor will they ever be able to afford that type of hobby purchase in their lifetimes. While I have a pretty nice collection it has been built during a time when OA art was cheaper. I could not rebuild my collection if I started today as it would be cost prohibitive to do so.

LESS.... You'd know better than me, you're probably right. Personally I'd rather have a character drawn by the person that came up with the idea. Being this a mainly nostalgia based hobby, people collecting now probably feel a connection to Romita. Using the 25 year rule you might wanna consider McFarlane as the connection.

Internet bidding ended around 2200. I figured it'd go around 5-6, so much for that Hopefully this result will bring out more Timm pages, Heritage auction history shows only 1 item from over 10 years ago. Those prices make the Timm prelim pages offered in the last Comic Link auction a bargain. They sold between $100.00 and $200.00 a page

The 25 year rule applies here along with the Deadpool movie. If you add 25 to 1991 = 2016. Love him or hate him, Rob's pages are cemented into a generation's memories just like all the other Image guys. Suddenly, people that used to read the books can start buying pages of the guys they used to read. Kind of like all the older collector's who seek out Kirby, Ditko, and Romita Sr. The wheel of time is spinning forward with a new collecting generation's expendable income burning a hole in their pockets.

He and the guy he was bidding against are the only ones on the planet at that price. Holy Smokes!

I can't figure that one out. WOW.

Help me understand the Paul Gulacy Logan's Run #6 cover going for $23K.