Mr. Machismo

Outstanding, but not even inquiring given definite 25-35K pricetag.

Stayed away from this OA for the same reason I did the bajillion DKIII covers. But MAN, look at this Lee piece.

Yes, it’s the final version used to print the cover, hand painted by Oliff. — Thanks all for the informative replies. Looks like removing tape is the way to go.

I purchased this piece recently and was in for a surprise when my framer, whom I had it directly mailed to, showed me this significant wrinkling. Unfortunately this was not disclosed prior. He says, “The piece is wrinkling because it has a white tape border around it. The tape has shrunk over time and is causing buckling. I sampled a corner of the tape, it’s not something I’d be comfortable removing, as well I’m not sure it would help. The paper is very sheer, not the kind of stuff that typically bounces back well. There is also tape on the back compounding the problem.” I spoke to Robert Dennis and he said he could remove the tape and flatten it, providing his tests succeeded and his solvents would not affect the paint. Would removing the tape and flattening this piece affect the value of the art? While it’s only a colour guide, it’s also the only Akira cover to ever hit the market, so it’s something I want to be a good custodian of. Preferably, I’d like to keep at least the back tape given the text. Any insight is appreciated, not used to restoring art as I collect very recent works. Thanks!

The Long Halloween, definitely. If you like that, move on to Dark Victory. Classics: Batman: Year One, The Killing Joke, Dark Knight: Returns (just in case you haven’t read them.) Modern books: Batman: The Black Mirror, Batman: Hush (largely divisive), Joker, Batman: Noel, Batman: The Man Who Laughs, Batman: Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader, Batman: Under the Red Hood, to name a few. I’d start with Long Halloween and Black Mirror.

If you think White Knight art is [objectively] bad, that reveals a deep lack of understanding when it comes to art. The amount of artists that appreciate and study Murphy’s work on Batman (and particularly Capullo, for that instance) is staggering. These are trained professionals with a developed eye; people who’s collective opinions are the closest measure of objectivity we have. Doesn’t hurt that the fans went wild for it, too I’m all for difference of opinion and personal preferences when it comes to art appreciation, it just raises an eyebrow when someone’s use of “objective” unequivocally defines “subjective.” Lol.

That’s where I disagree. I’ve strongly disliked every single issue, both in writing and art. But again, just preference. Batman: Year 100 was brutal for me to get through as well, and that’s considered a classic. Ah, that’s totally fair. Jock’s key work is BLACK MIRROR, a psychological thriller I think you’ll be particularly fond of. Snyder’s first DC entry. There’s a NOIR edition if you’d like to read it in B&W. Jock also did a short run of All Star Batman with Snyder, but I’d suggest skipping All Star Batman altogether. I don’t know how you’ll feel about White Knight. I’d wager you’ll be critical with it, but I’d still recommend it. For me, I had a blast with it. The writing lacks finesse and it can sometimes be a bit loose, but it explores a lot of interesting and seemingly obvious (yet undone or under-explored) ideas. It is a bit self-aware, but it’s also refreshing and not bound to the rigidity of continuity. Where it lacks in story, like Hush, it makes up for in art. Murphy’s visuals are a unique blend of American, European, and Japanese influences, and he’s a master at visual storytelling and leading the eye. While I don’t beleive White Knight is the next Dark Knight Returns, it’s ballsy in its own right and has received extreme praise among readers (outside the vocal minority on the boards here.) I do believe it will be a story DC pushes for sometime given it’s uniqueness and how well received it was amongst fans. As a bit of a background, Murphy sold himself as the next Miller to DC, they bought into it, gave him a great rate and he wrote about ~5/8 full issues before they checked in on him. As a result, he got away with doing a lot that DC would normally not approve. They refer to his world as the Murphyverse and may bring certain components into continuity dependent on receptivity. It was a test of sorts for the new Black Label line (self-contained, risqué DC stories), succeeded with ample reprints while going head-to-head with Metal, and two more volumes are “allegedly” planned. It is now the first Black Label book. Regarding the original art, there was a lot of criticism surrounding its pricing (justifiably so.) Funny enough, all the good pieces have already sold! Shocking even to me, having so much of it.

Interesting opinion. I also believe Court of Owls is far and away the best of the bunch, but I really enjoyed the entirety of the run. Surprised you liked Janin’s artwork best. I find it very clinical. Statuesque 3D-like models that look very unnatural (think: ragdoll mannequins), coloured a bit garishly, a constant and comically exaggerated frown on Batman, etc. Over the greats of today like Capullo, Jock, and Murphy, that’s a first to hear. Personal preference is a great component of the hobby, though! Kudos to Janin, he is still talented, like any other artist working for the big two, and I wish him the best. I look forward to your thoughts on King’s run. I’ve read until the end of Jokes and Riddles, and my sentiments towards it mirror yours for the later Capullo/Snyder stories. I’ve read a lot of Batman, and for me, it’s absolutely my least favourite of anything I’ve read, which is why I have no art from it. Hoping they “reboot” it soon, but I’m glad the majority seems to be enjoying it.

Oh, that’s another thing. Plexi in place of glass in earthquake-heavy areas like San Francisco is wise. Drymounting is never archival, so it must’ve been something else. Here’s the definition: Dry Mounting is the process of affixing artwork to foamboard or some other flat, firm substrate by applying of a uniform coat of adhesive between the art and the substrate, and then applying firm, uniform pressure to create adhesion.

You never, ever need to frame art in Mylar if it's being framed archivally. If you're not comfortable with mulberry hinges and rice paste, use corner mounts. Using Mylar will cloud the image. Having the raw art + museum glass means the art can stay in the frame nearly indefinitely, and the glass not only looks invisible in many lighting conditions, but the art will also look the same upon removal, as if you were storing it in a portfolio this whole time. Archival framing isn't what's expensive, it's museum glass. In that case, just use 99% UV. Same UV protection, glass just isn't as clear. I would not go below that unless the art is stupid-cheap or you risk sun-damage. Do not skimp on the archival aspect of framing. I recently got a (thankfully inexpensive) piece which was framed by a chain-store and has sticky tape stains all over the back. While I don't share the sentiment, I understand having an indifference towards condition, but if you ever sell or trade art, I would urge you to start caring, because others do. I also believe it's nice to be a good caretaker of the art by being respectful of it's preservation (we won't be the last owners). I would say the average price of an 11x17" frame with museum glass, premium mat choices, all-archival materials is $300 USD. $200 USD if opting for cheaper frame/mat choices. Mine tend to be $300+ because I opt for multiple mats, textured hand-wrapped linen and satin mats, pinstripe mats, filets (the "mini" frame next to the art), etc. Here's some example photos from my framer, though the texture of the mats is completely lost at this scale. I believe The Long Halloween is ~$400+ as the particular frame choice is pricey, and the Court of Owls around $450 due to the increased size. The simpler your tastes, the cheaper it'll be.

I’m a stickler for this stuff, and people here will disagree with me, but I’m going to attribute that to lack of knowledge regarding the subject Here’s some pointers: Avoid chains like Hobby Lobby and Michael’s; find a reputable privately-owned shop. Yes, there will be exceptions and some will be adequate, but chances are you’re ending up with a rotating door of employees who may or may not damage your art or misunderstand the requirements of archival preservation. If you ever here the word “drymount”, run. Not exaggerating. Frame with all archival (acid-free) materials. Opt for museum glass, best UV protection and clarity. 99% UV is fine for cheaper pieces if you’d like to save a buck. Use archival mulberry hinges with rice paste (preferred method of museums), and second to that: corner mounts. While I know many people who use corner mounts without issue, the adhesive can sometimes give, and the art slips. Better when gravity is working with us. Mulberry hinges can be carefully removed with q-tips and distilled water if needed. Ignoring these tips can result in stains from utilizing adhesive, sun-damage, tears from glue, etc. Regarding your question, the framer will not need your backing or Mylar. They will affix the art (via archival means as mentioned above, and not via adhesive, if done correctly) to a piece of archival foamboard. That said, you should still provide them with that so they can safely store your art in queue. If I’m having a high-value piece framed locally, I go so far as to have them measure ahead of time, and bring the piece once the frame is ready to watch them insert it live. People may think this is overboard, but the first piece I ever got professionally framed (a print, thankfully) was covered with a massive, mysterious streak upon pickup.

19.5 was a bargain, but 20 is outrageous!

Wow, an immediate 5x profit. I’m so sorry you got burned, Mike.

Capullo Batman #1 of course XD

Loooooooool woooooooooooow.

Ugh. A friend traded that and the Calendar Man cover to the Donnelly’s for a Cap White splash (I didn’t know until it was too late.) And that’s with them *pasting* on their own stats.

My first HUSH splash, finally :D http://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=1471595

It’s a great Nightwing DPS. The Batmobiles provide a nice setting for him. Congrats.

As is the Riddler Dark Victory cover, which contains stats PASTED on by them. Unfortunate as I would’ve bid otherwise.

Aw, shucks. If I saw him I would’ve bid 20 :(

I bid 8 and tapped out. I prefer my Batmans non-microscopic.

How much is too much? “Batman on gargoyle” or “Batman throwing batarang” seems fair, no? Not justifying this — personally I believe artists produce their best work when they’re given freedom and an outlet to have fun...but: Some collectors need to state what they want before they can be satisfied; otherwise they have an image in their head they’ve failed to articulate, assume the artist will compose that, and are disappointed when it inevitably differs.

Removes the "original" from "original art" a bit, doesn't it. Why I'm not a fan of recreations, though that's a topic for another day.

I find this unbelievable.

While I’m not against the proposed method, I prefer non digital as it feels: a) more impressive. Knowing how much room for error there is in digital, owning a piece that’s fully traditional speaks to the artist’s craftsmanship, decisiveness, and mastery (i.e., Tradd Moore would not be the beast he is if his work was digital.) b) like an entirely original piece. Even with a preliminary-printed base, there’s a fraction of it that still feels like a print. Now, show me two side-by-side pieces, one fully traditional, one with an under-printed base, and I’ll choose whichever one’s better. I suggest proceeding as you’ve proposed. Better final output.