The Voord

Been putting-together this 9-episode story sequence (comprising of 18 pages in total) for a number of years now. Last time I acquired anything was six years ago then last week I lucked upon another page on eBay. THE STEEL CLAW was a series that appeared in the UK's VALIANT anthology comic-book. The 'Max Kruger' storyline saw print in 1965 and is an early and fondly-remembered one for me. Artist is Jesus Blasco and this is for episode 3 page 1. Now up to ten pages . . . with another eight to track-down . . . THE STORY SO FAR . . . "After a ray machine accident Louis Crandell discovered that an electric shock made him invisible except for his artificial steel hand. He became a secret agent and acquired the ability to electrify any conductive material he touched. Professor Landon, a famous scientist, had been kidnapped by a gang of traitors led by Max Kruger and when Crandell tried to enter Kruger's castle headquarters while a fancy dress ball was taking place his invisible body set off an alarm!"

Pink to makes the boys wink!

Sorry to hear this news about Rich. I did communicate with him some years ago in connection with the fraudulent antics of Richard Rae. Rich Buckler was very supportive of my efforts to expose Rae's activities (which hopefully prevented other collectors being scammed). Rest in Peace, Rich, a true gentleman. You will be missed.

My last frame job . . . Tom Chantrell's 1968 movie poster painting for SHALAKO.

Why pink?

Holy Sheeeet!

I give up . . . where's that damned whiskey . . .

After giving this thread some further thought, I've now updated the opening description on my CAF home page to read: "Hi there . . . I'm a long-time UK-based collector of original artwork since 1982. Over the years, I've bought, sold and traded art. I sometimes release artwork from my collection if faced with tempting offers. I'm not a dealer, but occasional sales can take place to help fund other priorities in life. The way it works with me is straightforward. Anything marked as a 'Keeper' is not open for discussion, so please don't ask. If I'm actively looking to sell a piece of art I will affix an asking price. If it's marked as NFS, I might consider a sale, but in most cases I place the onus on the enquirer to make me a worthwhile offer. If you're not prepared to follow-up with a good offer, please don't ask me to sell you anything . . . " Terry Doyle

Back from the framers . . .

Now uploaded onto my CAF is the second of two movie poster paintings that reached me yesterday (in addition to SHALAKO). This other one is Vic Fair's prototype artwork for the 1981 movie, FORT APACHE, THE BRONX. Interestingly, Fair revised his depiction of Paul Newman's face by way of new artwork positioned onto an acetate overlay (that also carries the movie's title). Both before and after photographs of Fair's art can be seen in my CAF update at: http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryDetail.asp?GCat=1865

Did you marry my wife's sister?

Here's all the artwork my wife has ever bought me:

Last year, as my collecting interests moved towards acquiring movie poster paintings (something I’d always been meaning to get round to), I was lucky enough to chance upon a source for Tom Chantrell original artworks for sale. Chantrell had been, for many years, one of the UK’s best known and respected artists working in the field of movie poster advertising campaigns. During the course of my ongoing purchases of Chantrell artworks (with occasional forays into the works of other artists), I often found myself drawn to the image of his poster art for SHALAKO, a 1968 Western movie that saw British actor Sean Connery breaking-away from his more-famous role as the first and the best of the James Bonds. The SHALAKO artwork was (then) listed as being available for possible sale (if the right offer was put forward to Chantrell’s family). Following consultation with Mike Bloomfield, in his capacity as sales agent, I submitted an offer that fell within the ball-park figure advised to me. Sadly (from my perspective), Chantrell’s family decided that this particular painting held too much sentimental attachment for them, preferring to retain it, and my offer got declined. Fast forward to several weeks ago, noted American collector David Mandel contacted me out of the blue enquiring after a piece of artwork I possessed from a British series that he was actively pursuing an example from. The artwork in question was something that I wasn’t too fussed about retaining in my collection, so a deal was quickly and painlessly realised. I then found myself faced with two prospects: should I just bank the monies received from David and consolidate my early-retirement fund (having become a man of leisure two years ago), or should I try one last time to go after the elusive SHALAKO movie poster artwork? I wrestled with my conscience for maybe one or two minutes and then quickly contacted Mike Bloomfield with an improved offer to be relayed to the Chantrell family . . . Within a few days of contacting him once again on the subject of SHALAKO, Mike put forward my revised offer to the Chantrell family, along with a fairly persuasive pitch of how I’d been supporting Tom’s work this past year with multiple purchases of his original art. This time I received the answer I was hoping for and (what I personally consider to be) one of Tom Chantrell’s very best movie poster artworks made its way into my collection . . . The design, as originally painted, was used for the SHALAKO advance poster campaign but for general cinema release was altered in format to accommodate extra caption material (see additional images in my CAF update). The central images of Connery and Bardot are, to my mind, especially pleasing, captivating your attention right away . . . then your eyes roam round the painting to soak-in the outer series of scenes that capture key elements from the movie. Although I’ve no claims on being the biggest fan of Westerns (with the notable exception of the Sergio Leone stuff and maybe a handful of other things), SHALAKO was a movie I rather liked. Not exactly ‘classic’ status, but it has a novel plot that engages the viewer’s interest, is well made and features a top-notch cast of international actors . . . and, boy, Bardot does looks HOT in this one. It’s especially pleasing to be able to land an impressive piece of artwork that ties-into a fairly decent movie product that the artwork was designed to promote. Sometimes I buy these movie poster paintings purely for the image (“Hey, nice painting, pity the movie sucked big time!”), but I think you can transpose that school of thought to something like comic-books where someone like Jack Kirby produced a lot of great comic-books covers that would often front mediocre stories . . . Please feel free to check out this update in my CAF Galleries (link below), which also includes additional images and background information about the movie. http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryDetail.asp?GCat=1865 Thanks for looking. Terry Doyle

Please don't come back here in a few months time telling us how you bought some cool Jack Kirby/Mike Royer originals from an awfully nice Australian named Richard Rae . . .

Those prices, for prints, sound crazy . . .

No harm having exploratory discussions over possible trade opportunities with other collectors or dealers. Any resulting 'done deal' has to work for both parties, in the sense both sides come away thinking they've got the better side of the bargain. If, as the OP suggests, you're getting another collector coming along offering you art that you have little or no interest in collecting, just nip the idea in the bud straight away. Some collectors are deluded into thinking that their cr@p is your potential treasure . . .

GI Combat # 99 is a Russ Heath cover.

From what I recall, all living artists (or members of deceased artists' families) got a cut of the proceeds from the art auctions, as I'm sure Russ would have (in his role as auctioneer). I did, at one time, ask Al Feldstein about this. I no longer have his e-mail response but I think the gist of it was that Bill Gaines bought physical possession of the EC art in addition to reproduction rights (all the artists were aware of this up-front, but EC paid good rates). Someone like Frazetta preferred to keep his artwork, which is probably why he didn't produce much art for the company. He took something like a half-payment for allowing EC to re-use the rejected Famous Funnies cover for Weird Science-Fantasy # 29, and got his artwork back. Russ Cochran is still around. Why ask other collectors, when you can speak directly to Russ?

Nothing a good matt and a healthy dose of whiteout couldn't fix! Although I'm usually heavily against signatures appearing inside of the image, I don't actually mind this one. Might appeal to a WD fan with lots of other examples in his collection. Would make a good conversational piece if on display in your home.

Absolutely no harm in enquiring on stuff marked as NFS in anyone's CAF Galleries, but if you're invited to make an offer you should now be aware that the onus is on you to make it a worthwhile one. Low-ball offers will quickly get you alienated from the owner.

Not a good idea to do business with convicted shop-lifter types!

I sometimes get collectors wanting to buy stuff listed as NFS in my CAF galleries. If I'm possibly interested in selling (as was the case a few weeks ago), I'll provide an asking price. If not, I'll tell the would-be-buyer to make me a tempting offer. That stance rarely gets followed-up on (I did a thread on this some months ago).

Sounds like we're in Keif Fromm territory . . .

You could be right, Eric . . . in an oblique sort of way.

The second of the two paintings I'm getting in is, to my mind, pretty freakin' awesome. More on that one next week . . .