Rick2you2

But, the rates are higher.

Anyone have thoughts on what one of the complete origin stories of the Phantom Stranger by Garcia-Lopez will go for from Secret Origins 10? It has one good image of the main character and everything else is Biblical images. Very nicely done, but still just Biblical images. I do not expect to bid on it. I don't want a whole book.

Was there a page to this thread which was lost somewhere? Regarding Spencer, my dealings have been fine. He has other things to do, and I respect that. The website... what can I say we don't already know? While he is getting his new site in order, maybe he could at least stop the sparkling stars and modify the colors a bit so it is easier to read.

Ah, but the stuff you aren't looking at is 100% accurate. Then it averages out.

I agree it was Adams impact, but I didn't want to add that because it may have sounded a little too fawning. Deadman and GL/GA was breakthrough stuff. Honestly, while I appreciate their work, Kirby and Ditko had their limitations (as do all artists). I would like to see some of the older pieces by EC artists or Eisner or Raboy or Crandall, for examples, get a shot at winning.

But the art, at least the panel art, was changing. The classic 6 panel, with variations, was really being pushed hard by then with much more innovative use of panel design to tell stories. Go back beforehand and look how rarely you saw half-splashes, for example. Yes, I know artists did that before, including Kirby and Anderson, but there seemed to be a lot more breathing space and creativity to the pages after around 1970 which works to the detriment of earlier artists and the quality of their more confined illustrations.

I feel your pain.

If you are going to break up categories by age, I would probably draw a line at 1970. Then, 1970-1990, etc. Golden age and most silver age art just isn't the same as newer art, which I think began to show significant change around 1968 or so.

I do like them, and you are absolutely correct. Apart from “hanging” art, there are surprisingly good finds in jewelry, not the really rare stuff, but good Art Deco and Bakelite, along with mid-century and old pieces. The ones with gold or gems are sometimes valued at scrap, and the workmanship is ignored. But be careful, there is also a lot for garbage there, too.

I think there are some Marvel versions coming up in a few weeks during the weekly auctions, too.

Thanks, Is there much of a percent/price difference if you know?

I Is Taurus Auctions different than Live Auctioneers? That's what comes up if you go to Taurus Auctions.

Yes, the examples you offer are striking, but I never said that colorists weren't artists. I said that a color guide, by itself, is not art. What they input on the final piece certainly effects the final output, which is why I think Heritage distinguishes color guides as "production art". The same can be said of letterers and the fonts they use to project content. I'm not sure I agree with your comment about Abstract Painting No. 5. It's one of a series, and this is what is written about Abstract No. 4 (below): "The matte black surface of Abstract Painting no. 4 is not read quickly, but close examination reveals subtle blue and plum squares arranged in a cruciform shape. Asked to explain his use of black, Reinhardt replied, “It’s because of its non-color. . . . Color has to do with life.” So, a canvas which is part of a series, the last of which is literally a black box, conveys imagry as a whole, that is a lot more than a paint chip. It is the context which matters.

Just because it has important "overall artistic impact" does not, in my view, make it "art". Same with the plates by a good lithographer.

But they are coloring in the lines, like in a coloring book, for publication. The printing colors are presumably going to be the Pantone designations. And while it is handwork and takes some skill, what are they adding which is visionary for the piece? I think it's closer to buying something with an autograph on it: nice to have, but not art.

Once the subject came up, I decided to go to that so-so source of all information, Wikipedia. After learning that the relevant definition of "production art" is the work of a "production artist" (what a surprise), I saw this in the definition: "Per Comic Book historian Mark Evanier, in that industry the position generally has involved into "lettering corrections, art touch-ups, laying out advertising and other editorial material and generally doing whatever in the office required the services of someone who could draw a little." I don't consider clean-up work to be artwork. Now about those color guides, what do they do that really is artistry? Tell the printer exactly which Pantone number to use for publication? Hand coloring won't necessarily match the final output: it's a guide. So calling it "production art" is essentially saying it's not art. It would be like someone was claiming West Virginia is Virginia because they both have Virginia in the name. For that, Heritage is on target. "Unoriginal art" is what I would consider re-creation art or copying. So the phrase "original art" does have some meaning. As far as collecting art by character...it keeps the collection focused. It also lets me appreciate different styles because the variables of a different character or scene are removed. I do buy other things on occasion, but I like my focus, thank you, and it is not a "production." As far as my legal work goes, a lot of it involves contracts. You bet a comma can makes a difference, but the key remains context. The context of the phrase in what I had written was clear. If not then, certainly now.

"Read for content bro " I did. That's why I wrote: "Let me add". So of course it is a negative if I don't think "production art" is art. Neither is an engraving plate, even it were cool to own.

Let me add that I don't even consider it as art, so much as something used to produce a comic. So yes, it is a negative. Frankly, I am not sure that color guides deserve to be considered art.

Just out of curiosity, do you find, in broad terms, that the worse the movie, the better the art? Or is it a coincidence from what's been posted?

How about "naked woman art" and cupcakes? Or fresh melons? Or clams?

To answer your question, she uses photos as references, but they are freehand, not traced.

Happy to read your new post Lee; sorry about the cash flow problem. I don't understand why funds for employees have to be frozen even if they aren't permitted to perform functions while the politicions fight over this. Also happy the Dillon thing died down. Some of the recent prices went slightly under market value in my opinion (I still think market value is too high).

I have yet to find anything I really wanted on Comicconnect. On the other hand, I do watch Comiclink fairly carefully and like the site. Heritage is excellent at commanding top dollar, but they extract top dollar for themselves too.

It's also a violation of copyright law. The only one who can legally do that is the holder of the copyright--the person who drew it, unless ithe copyright was sold or otherwise transferred to someone different. Same with facsimile covers, but the company which published it may also have copyright ownership rights in it as well.

Curiously, this link worked perfectly, but when I tried otherwise, it gave the “be back soon message” 🤯