The Voord

Or he could have enlisted the aid of Rob Liefeld to pencil and ink Drac's feet on the unseen pages!

Craft coupled with nostalgia is the winning combination.

I was thinking he finds the idea of scanning 27 pages of art to be a bit of a chore (8 sample page scans ought to provide a good indication of the story and art) though he should have been less harsh in his response.

Sh*t happens. Glad it worked out okay for you. Your initial posts were a bit scant on full info, which led to speculation on possible scenarios (at least from my POV).

Now up on my CAF with full write-up, larger scan and additional images (including a scan of the preliminary painting): http://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=1492747

They also used a re-jigged chunk of the Movie Poster art for a DVD cover image.

Painting arrived this morning, so here's a better photo.

That sounds very interesting, I'll have another look through ASM 38 with this in mind. The Stanton involvement is a new one on me, also. There's also the business of art-corrections by non-Ditko hands. The splash page to ASM 11, for example, which features a really poor Spidey figure (the cover also had corrections to Spidey's feet, as I recall).

Hey, Dan, you're more savvy with the MTG stuff than I am (even if by your own admission you're not exactly addicted to the game). Out of curiosity, do you know the worldwide audience involved (I'm guessing that it extends beyond the USA)?

Three examples of MTG paintings that I own, just to showcase the work of three different artists (that I hope serve as better examples of the kind of work being produced for the game). In order . . . Volkan Baga, Kev Walker and Steve Belledin.

As I've said numerous times, I know zilch about MTG. What I do know is that there are some gorgeous traditionally-painted artworks fronting those cards. You don't have to play the game to recognize the talent (and imagination) behind the art.

Oh, I agree, 'make an offer' can be a big turn-off for most, me included . . . but it perhaps offers a glimmer of hope for something like this one that was previously unavailable as a NFS item. In lieu of more detailed background information, we can only guess at possible scenarios. Did the OP make a strong enough offer (he suggests that he would have paid, "Whatever" if the rep had only given him a price)? As there was a second buyer in the loop willing to pay more, I can perhaps see things from the rep's side . . . was the artist happy to say yes to the higher offer put to him (which I imagine was the case) . . . or did the rep not want to pizz-off the guy coming in with a stronger offer by making it a bidding war? For what it's worth, I've been placed in the 'make an offer' camp myself on occasion. If I'm seriously interested, I'll put my money where my mouth is and back my interest with a strong offer (knowing full well that if I try to play low-ball shenanigans - that idea could easily backfire on me).

Depends on whether or not you made a strong offer. What you wanted to pay and what the dealer was hoping to achieve might be poles apart? Not saying it's applicable to you, but I do know that low-ball offers can be a big turn-off in negotiations that can often kill exploratory talks cold stone dead (a general observation). Did you ask for a ball-park figure when pitching your offer?

Printed poster . . .

Was privately offered Tom Chantrell's finished painting for the 1962 UK Movie Poster of 300 SPARTANS. Right up my street, I love this stuff. Artwork should be with me sometime next week, but in the meantime here's a photo of the art that was sent to me (I'll improve upon this with a better image when the artwork arrives) . . .

The original art (matted) measures about 7.5 x 5 inches.

The OP has twenty years collecting OA behind him so that's a good sign of time and experience in the hobby to justify his claims. Second thing in his favour is that he's talking about 'goals', as opposed to the oft-used term, 'grails' (which can often seem meaningless . . . best taken with a pinch-of-salt). How often do newbie collectors make posts about finding their 'grails' that for some of us seem far-from-spectacular (and in many cases are casually put back up for sale not long afterwards)? I like 'goals' . . . that's a realistic target to aim for. I also lean towards 'grail-like', which I myself have applied to only a very small handful of acquisitions I've made over the years (been collecting OA since 1982, so I like to think I've got time in the hobby to validate my claims). I pretty much achieved most of my (realistic) goals in comic-book OA collecting some years ago. As values on the stuff I'd collected over the years soared in price (thanks to the advent of the internet, which opened up the market to a wider readily-accessible audience), I discovered a different goal in my life . . . to pave the way for a better lifestyle for myself and my family by way of selling-off the high-end artworks that (as I got older) realised was not something I considered worth hanging onto until the bitter end (I derived a great deal of pleasure out of the art while I had it). Don't think I'm being morbid here, just realistic. Unless you're financially secure and can afford to donate your collection to a willing and appreciative public institution (and here I'm not talking about a collection of sketch-covers, commissions of Mary Jane Watson in revealing poses and the like). Sometime in the future the realization that nothing is forever will dawn on you. Which kind of answers the OP's question, "What happens next?" (in the sense, "What happened next for me?"). You hang onto your collection of achieved 'goals' as long as you can before reality kicks in and you come to the conclusion that if there's still an audience for the stuff you've collected over the years . . . it's time to let someone else be a temporary custodian of it. Oh, how I love making happy posts!

Good luck on that one, E.S, sounds really bizarre.

Interesting thread though I've now left it a bit later than intended to chime in with some thoughts of my own (that have now pretty much been covered by others). Although not comic-book stuff, the Magic the Gathering art market does seem to underline some of Gene's observations in comic-book OA that can perhaps be transposed. I dabbled, briefly, in MTG original artwork . . . not because I ever played the game (I have zero knowledge about it) but because I was attracted to the craft of those paintings that appealed to me purely as painted images. Someone like Bronty has a broader and deeper knowledge of how the MTG marketplace works . . . which, as best as I can ascertain, works on two interconnected main levels . . . nostalgia and strength of the card within the game (the latter components perhaps equating to the compartmentalising of the 'A' and 'B' level ranking system collectors in comic-book OA like to obsess over?). Craft does seem to take on on a lesser importance. Over in Bronty's MTG thread, a 1993 MTG artwork recently came up for auction that sold for $72k. Craft? Seems crude and unappealing to me . . . but the high price-tag seems to be driven by the nostalgia/card strength factors . . .

Fair post, Gene, I think what you're saying is well worth considering and responding to. Unfortunately, right now, I've been out socializing with friends - so perhaps at this moment in time it's not the best time to reply with a reasoned response (which will only be a drunken reply). I'll chime-in with my thoughts tomorrow, when I'm sober (hic!) . . .

It's an 'A', 'S', 'M' page . . .

Sounds like you found Steve Donnelly's offering of the unpublished version of the NUKLA 3 cover. He claims this to be ghosted by Steve Ditko . . . but then again he claims that for every single page of NUKLA art that he owns and is offering for sale. Ditko is only ever credited for pencils on issue 4 (cover and interiors). Here's Steve Donnelly's listing for the unpublished NUKLA 3 cover. He found some later Ditko whale drawings to place alongside the cover. I don't see Ditko on the left-hand NUKLA artwork . . .

I've never played the game either. I'm just attracted to the art.

Wow, you resurrected a 12 year old thread that I'd completely forgotten about! I imagine the (then) high price-tag of the Ditko EERIE # 5 splash would now seem like a good buy in the current marketplace. As for the NUKLA # 4 cover . . . I'm sorry to advise that it won't be hitting your collection anytime soon!