Rick2you2

I've also noticed a drop-off in bidding on "non-trophy" pieces. Also, some of the less interesting pieces seem to sit around on dealer's sites a lot longer, or they have run more "specials" to effectively lower their prices.

This raises a question I have been wondering about over the past year. It looks like some prices, at least at the lower end, have been dropping. Anyone else notice this?

Since you asked, I think the caliber of the illustration is excellent. You can really feel the water. Similarly, his use of variously sized small panels to convey time movement is very good, along with the unbalanced size of the panel overlay to the whole of the underlying image And, I am always a fan of of pop-outs, particularly clever ones like the last panel. If I were going to criticize, I would say that the inset panel border is dull. While some contrast with the splash is needed, it should blend a little more creatively with the splash.

And on a different but related note, I had Amy Reeder sketch my GF, who was kind enough to join me at a convention. Amy didn't think she was good at real people, but she is excellent. I'm regularly surprised at how many top notch artists don't seem to really appreciate their talents and skills. What they do is hard, and they deserve all the praise they get.

Stuff like this is what makes OA collecting fun.

I hope for your sake, she doesn't have Veronica's spending habits. I have a similar story, but it didn't involve a commission. When my daughter was little, I taught her the words to the Chiquita Banana song (original version) because it's really a great little kids song. Cut to around 15 years later. When cruising on Heritage Auctions a while ago, I found some cells from a Chiquita Banana commercial. So I bought them, had them framed and gave them to my now-adult daughter as a present. She loves them.

No. I want to buy a package, not a project. I'd add a few bucks to the purchase price, however, if someone else did it for me.

I spoke to Howard about it, actually (and I am waiting for a commission he did for me). Basically, it gives him some extra flexibility and it's easier to fix a mistake. He did say, however, he misses doing the creative borders. So do I. Some of his border work on American Flagg, in particular, was astonishingly good.

I agree. Many years ago, I had a convention sketch framed. When I recently took it out of the frame, you can see where the yellowing occurred.

To me, it doesn't matter too much because I just collect for the sake of hobby collecting and whether I like the total package. If I had the choice, I would prefer inks over original pencils. I would be equally happy, however, to have separate pages with original inks and original pencils as separate pieces so I can see both artists' separate works. Finally, although not asked, I really miss the old pages with dialog on them. Comic art is supposed to help tell a story, and without the dialog, you can't really appreciate the story. My least favorite is art which consists of scanned in panels that are re-assembled in Adobe Photoshop. You lose the chance for really interesting panel separation artwork that way because the artist doesn't do the creative borders that are one of my favorite bits in a panel page.

This one is scratching at my brain. Was this modelled after a story from her first appearance?

Impressive. You nailed the actress (in a manner of speaking). Louise Brooks?

Have you ever asked an artist to do something a little different than fighting or f'king? As the buyer, you control the scene; why not get creative? I recently went to a convention where Colleen Doran was a guest. Knowing a little of her background, and being a real Phantom Stranger fan, I asked her to draw her version of a female Phantom Stranger. The only requirements were the hat, the medallion, the cape, and her own creativity. It's posted here (and it came out really well, too). If you are wondering, she modelled the design after a famous 1920's film actress (note the bangs in the hair style). So, if any of you out there have your own fun work, let's see it. And if there is a little story to go with it, feel free to add that, too.

I'm no pro, but I do have a degree in economics, and what you have described sounds exactly like the way a bubble develops in pricing. The best known example is the infamous Tulip Bulb mania of the 1630's. Basically, people who were interested in some of the newly introduced bulbs drove the price up. That attracted speculators, who bought and flipped them, recording more and more profit as prices went higher, which was reinvested in bulb purchases. The rising prices attracted outside money from people who didn't care about tulips, and they drove the price even higher. Then one day, at the market where they were bought and sold, no one wanted to buy. Crash. Fortunes were lost. Those people ought to spend some time watching editions of Antiques Roadshow which revisit estimated prices from, like, 15 years earlier. By my very rough estimate, over a third of the prices were the same or lower. Prices for typical "Persian" rugs have dropped 30% since the 1980's. And who is still out there buying antique marbles or toy trains? I had originally figured that CA, as an investment vehicle, would probably be okay for no more than 20 years. If this much money is just being re-circulated, maybe 5 or more years would be more accurate. By the way, I do love this stuff as a hobby. And I expect keep buying it as a hobby. But if I were looking to make money on future collectibles, I'd probably go with mid-Century Modern furniture (the 60's and up) or pre-IBM PC's.

You weren't being rude, and you are right, I'm not a likely customer. I actually study the market before I buy. What escapes me is how "professional" flippers can actually survive. This stuff is not a liquid asset and there is a small market out there. So, logically, they must have an awful lot of money tied up in non-moving stock. And as for the passage of time, have you seen what the stock market has done this year? So, if you know, how do some of the pro's manage their finances?

Will, Could you please take down the ones that are sold? It's time-consuming to check things which have been posted but aren't available. Rick

I would generally be willing to give someone a 10-15% profit (plus shipping) if they bought a piece at auction recently because they did shell out their money and take a risk. So if they paid $30 for shipping and you add 10-15%, I could see spending, say, $520 ($430.21 + $30 for his shipping + 10% of $430, rounded up, plus shipping to me). There are also some pieces that I love to watch languish. Call it schadenfreude. There was a Neal Adams Phantom Stranger cover that the prior owner couldn't move for about $9,000. It sold at auction for around $10,500. The Buyer has since marked it up to $15,000--where it continues to sit in all its mediocre glory.

Just wondering when the CAF tracking will be posted again.

Where is art supposed to be sold on Marketplace? I don't see any specific listing for it.

It doesn't matter what eBay policy is. A contract is a contract. You can sue for breach of contract. Try filing suit and sending it to eBay. That ought to get their attention.

I think that would be a breach of contract and you should contact eBay. You can probably sue him, although, the cost would be nuts.

Chutzpah.

First of all, I really like it. Whether as a parody of Miller's work or just a middle-aged Batguy, it brings a smile. Go one step farther, and you can see the quality of the detailing combined with the way the artist created a mood for an image which is absurd for the mood. It's a lot of fun. So with art appreciation, I think the first question is whether it resonates with the viewer. If the answer is yes, it's good. If the answer is no, it can still be good but it might not be to the viewer's taste. Regarding your comment about Pollack, you are introducing that second level of consideration: the audience. I'm a big fan of Piet Mondrian, and in his own way, you might consider his work to be junk as well. But there, you have to consider the audience. Mondrian's work is deliberately cool: it forces the viewer to focus on the elements he brings to the fore: the balance between lines and shapes, color and shade. So too, but in a different way, with Pollack. There, you are looking for the balance between abstract splashes of color and shape, and the patterns which seem to form from randomness. That's why Pollack is brilliant, and imitators are not--he knew where the balance was. But again, it's the audience. With comic book art, I think you have to similarly look at it in the context of: (1) do you like it; and (2) will someone like it who knows what they are looking at. Moreover, it should be viewed in the context of what it is: something designed to illustrate a story. Artists who showboat are doing a disservice to their readers. They show off their technical skills to the detriment of the package. When looking at comic art, I like to see whether the art is designed to "move" the story. So, I am particularly appreciative of creative panel work, particularly if the artist is stuck with a lot of text. For commissions, I'm more lenient--do I feel what the artist is conveying? If so, it's good. The more I want to see it again, the better it is.

Gee, I wonder what dealer does that? [not really]