Rick2you2

Or, just get a copy of Shazam, scan it, and use a program to identify its RGB values. They are easy to get off the internet. Try colorzilla.

Perhaps we now know the real reason Catwoman left Bruce at the alter.

Perhaps someone can just get you the CYMK values from their own scan. Wouldn't that be easier? Let me add that I doubt the people who frequent this particular board would have a copy. You might have better luck with a comic book collector board.

It didn't seem to me to be something which would strike terror in the heart of the criminal underworld (or anywhere else).

Welcome back, Lee. About that Irv Novick page price, where you wrote: "I still can't get over the final price on the Novick Batman #217 pages. Just looking at the art in a superficial way, those pages look like they should be netting several hundred dollars at auction, tops." From an artistic point of view, I think it is only so-so. But, the dialog describes a planned change by Bruce Wayne from the old to the new Batman, and this may be an example of where dialog increases the value of a page. Or perhaps, someone is pushing the price up on old Novick pages?

In most cases, they have repackaged the conventional B movie type theme into war movies with the bad guys having their labels changed from "injuns" to "gooks", "nips", "krauts", or even "the Empire" a la Star Wars. But for Spielberg to take on West Side Story without a repackaging into newer guise sounds horrible. On a brighter note, at least he won't be re-doing Pride and Prejudice.

I wasn't familiar with him, but I am a big panel fan. I particularly like the way he used curves to convey a sense of water and fluidity (for the scenes abutting water). But then, if you look at the piece posted by Ricksneatstuff, he used oddly angled and shaped panels to convey a foreign "jungle" sense you also see in old 1930's and 1940's flicks (like "Red Dust", or even the Tarzan serials). Clean lines, too.

Notice what was not mentioned? Hint: this website.

I prefer option no. 1, but candidly, I think you have too large of a white mat. I would lean towards a larger or single black mat. Alex Johnson has some framing he's done along these lines which he has shown. Also, don't be scared of simple color frames (or simple color mats, either). You can use them as contrast or coordination with walls and furniture, while making the art itself look less cold and stark.

I guess that’s a “white hole” collector?

Unequivocally, yes. In fact, Disney was a prime mover of the extension of the copyright time period and I believe has been a vigorous enforcer of it.

I'm sorry, but this analysis is simply wrong (and this ties in later to the thread). What killed the musical was a change in the country from pre-War to post-War development. The musical was at at its peak in the 1930's when we had the Great Depression. Someone who didn't have enough money for food could still scrape up 25 cents to watch a double bill, plus shorts. And if you saw happy sophisticates like Astaire and Rodgers, or some of those other toe-tappers going at it, with music, it took your mind away from the misery outside the theater. That's why comedy was also so popular--a relief from misery. World War II was another miserable period, too, but once "Our Boys" came home, the economic boom created a different world. Instead of worrying about necessities, which we generally had, it could worry about things like fairness, racial equality, and other social issues. Those play better to drama, like Gentleman's Agreement (anti-Semitism), Blackboard Jungle with Sidney Poitier, or some 1960's movies like Birdman of Alcatraz. Even the best of the latter musicals incorporated social commentary, like West Side Story (gang war), Seven Brides for Seven Brothers (sexual inequality/abuse) and Singin' in the Rain (notice the little stabs at social inequality and anti-corporate attitude?). To claim that musicals were made because there was no competitive market ignores a very basic fact--they are really expensive to make because they require a lot of talented people. And while the studios controlled most of the major talent, it still would have made more sense to use them in small drama's, which cost less, if they brought in the bucks. But, they didn't (usually). Changing social conditions are where the comic super-hero will eventually meet his or her match. We will get tired of Spider-Man fighting Doc Ock because it won't fit into the next wave issues (whatever that may be). And if the next wave doesn't care about comic hero fights, it's not going to be interested in the comic art which helped create them.

I really do like the Mighty Thor page as a panel piece. The artist did a great job of moving the story along in a sequential fashion, even while incorporating 7 panels. And, he didn't use any fancy borders, which, in this case, would likely have been a distraction. I suspect Simonson's artistic skill (for scripting layout) helped.

Good catch. I wasn't around 3 years ago, but this ought to give buyers of big buck OA some pause. First, what has the market for comparables been like since then? Have comparables been sold since they were posted, and were they in that range? What about private deals? Second, I am not impressed by any of them. They are perfectly nice; they did their job of attracting readers to the books by showcasing their content; and I am more impressed by some other cheaper art I have seen. While I am certainly no final arbiter of taste or pricing, I suspect I am not the only one who feels that way.

I'm familiar with almost all of this, but you are not seeing the concern I have. Superheroes represent a pop cultural interest. Comics are a graphic medium which prints stories about superheroes. Pop cultural interests, like western heroes, come and go. The printed medium is slowly shrinking to a small portion of the publishing world (how many newspapers did you read this morning, and were they printed or on line). Add the two up and you produce a small, small market of people who know this stuff in another 20+ years. That's what kills the market.

I think you should be a little less optimistic. The fads of fifty years ago, like Westerns, have basically died off. Its replacement, space opera like Star Wars, is actually showing signs of slowing down at the box office (yes, the numbers still seem huge, but Disney was expecting more, particularly from Solo). In 50 years, I expect people will figure out a way to do a lot of the stuff in the comics, or end up laughing at how absurd some of it is. And don't count on craft mattering either. Great 19th century furniture has dropped in value, as have exceptional quality Persian rugs, for examples. Sometimes, the list price will stay where it is, but the piece just won't sell. Don't misunderstand: I love this stuff. But, I can't see it as being a long term investment vehicle (20+ years) no matter what is going on in the world.

I understand. To be candid, however, I think barter is always risky. Buying or selling requires the selection of a pair of firm fixed prices. You know what you can get, and what you will have to give up to get it, because hard money is on the table. So, bad valuations by an owner are clearer. On the other hand, personal taste is not always reflective of market prices—I love some things way more than their dollar value. So, when a collector overvalues a piece, it may not be bad behavior, just not “marketplace” behavior. That is another reason why the collector’s valuation seems nutty. Barter just doubles up the problem.

For all it's worth, a dealer "deals." That is, he/she wants to make money. I would be reluctant to consider any proposed swap by a dealer because I would assume they were suggesting something more advantegous to their needs than my own, and including an allowance for profit. I would also expect them to have more knowledge than I do about actual market conditions. Can there be exceptions? Sure, but they would be the exceptions, not the rule.

I don't post on CAF because of general privacy concerns. I don't particularly want my preferences so explicitly apparent to a prospective seller, and I certainly don't plan to sell anything. I also know it's a little hypocritical of me because I do like to look at what other people have. So while I will happily post things here if I want to make a point, I'll skip the galleries.

I went, too, and had a good time. Didn't buy anything I saw yet, but maybe later.

I think I would add diversity as a discrete item. I enjoy comparative viewing: different artists with the same basic subject matter (or in a few cases, same artist and subject matter at different career times). You can't do that with a small sample of artwork. So, do you eat the same food every day, or not?

Thank you.

I just tried. This was the responding message: "This page does not exist. Please continue to shop on eBay"

Nothing popped up to look at.

I have to confess my curiosity of how a company specializing in props would obtain comic art. I don't recall seeing any in movies. Anyway, if that's a secret, so be it.