Rick2you2

Can you email me his address? He may not understand his client owns the art. If what he is saying is correct, DC’s new view just killed our hobby.

Don”t forget that OA is commercial art—designed to sell a product (comics), not to be a standalone vision of beauty. If the art moves the product, and the publisher can get away with cheapened art at a cheaper price, that’s what you get. But, the “old masters” were in the same boat. That’s how Kirby got to use giant sound effects—they filled the page quickly and easily. Why do a sophisticated series of small panels if one large splash will do, and even earn the artist more when sold later? For pencilling complex expressions, older artists were also limited. Ever notice Sal’s limited expression range for his Hulk? So, instead of focusing on its limitations, take some pleasure at what it offers. The next round may be purely AI drawn.

Pencils shouldn’t fade; inks will fade. I wrote “shouldn’t” because it depends on the pencils’ lightfast rating. To my knowledge, artists involved with OA production use high lightfast rated pencils, so they should not be a problem.

No luck. I tried and was ignored.

Was anyone else paying attention to the Omaha page which just sold on eBay for $2,850? I thought someone got a good deal.

That may qualify as the independent tort known as fraud as it deprives Smith of a future expectancy of profit arising from the transaction. Morally, I agree with you.

The contract language includes language holding the other party liable for the artist’s legal fees and costs. I have my doubts that it would be enforceable because it acts like a restraint on the alienation on personal property by giving the original seller some control over its remote disposition. That, incidentally, is the reason we only rent software (a right to use it) instead of actually buying the program. This was an early Microsoft innovation with Windows. (Bill Gates’ dad was a lawyer). Leasing allows the software company to control its use with remote purchasers which a sale would not. And then, there is that non-disparagement clause (doubtful enforceability).

Lately, this is one of the more interesting things up here.

Why stop there? Should the makers of the Cobra 427 auto get a piece of any sale since it is a collectible which can now sell for millions? What about home builders? The heirs of the Levittown developments would be enjoying a huge income stream with that concept in place. No one forced the artist to sell the originals. They could have sold copies and kept the originals.

What have you got against janitors?

So by this logic, Jamie Moyer should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame? He pitched for 26 years, and thereby accumulated 269 wins. Most fans wouldn't agree. Neither have the Hall of Fame voters.

The short answer is no. It just makes a transactional mess. Does the purchaser of a Birkin Bag have to pay the manufacturer, as artist, in the event of a resale? What about an original Eames chair, or high end Art Deco furniture? I could be wrong about this, but as I recall, that European law is limited to dealers selling things above a certain amount. Come to think of it, what of International sales? Am I expected to fork over a few bucks to Jordi Benet if I buy and sell a Clara page? I don’t think so. Also, bear in mind that the European approach would have the effect of decreasing the value of a purchase, and hence, it’s market price, since it would provide a permanent flow of funds to the artist. Those should act as a deduction to its value. Artists, at least regarding modern OA, already have a stream of revenue to exploit. It’s called copyright law. They generally own the right to reprint and recreate it, subject to a publisher’s presumably retained right to reprint.

We forgot our manners. Welcome to the boards. The rootin-tootinist best chat board on the subject in the whole known universe.

A dealer who shall go nameless (on second thought, Bechara) told me he never raises prices on art after he sets the initial price (which he used to justify why he wouldn’t bargain over lower pricing). For quite a while, he had an Aparo page listed at $1,800. He now has another Aparo page from the same series at $2,200. And guess what just went up to $1,950? Now, I have even less reason to buy it.

Thunderbird. But only because DC beat Marvel out to Scalphunter.

I bid on one Aparo page but dropped out pretty early. Good, but not exciting enough to fight for it. The final price reflected it. Maybe that was symptomatic of other pieces.

I am still not a Kirby fan. To me, most of it still looks too cluttered and rushed.

Or her but t.

I look at color guides in case any of them duplicate OA I have. Makes for a nice pairing.

It may have crossover appeal. The Flashman series was a big deal when it came out. If you don’t know of it, check out Wikipedia. Those books were great, starting with the first one and the British rout in Afganistan. As I recall, didn’t Kirby borrow that name in his Jimmy Olsen run, something like “Funky” Flashman?

Actually, rugs and art, as well as furniture all do share something in common: what did people grow up with and want? The biggest bright spot for furniture collectors is now “mid-century modern”, including 1970’s furniture, with 1950’s and 1960’s stuff peaking. Twenty years ago, it was Art Deco from the mid-1920’s to mid-1940’s. But as you know, old brown furniture is dead. I’m only a casual observer, but in art, things like old portraiture is pretty dead, as is realistic art in general. Our grandparents would likely have loved the stuff. Which pretty much confirms what you are saying, although with Peanuts in reprints, it will have legs. Buy what’s popular when you are young, and with the possible exception of “classics”, the future isn’t bright for what the old timers love. I think I’ll go “gum” on some food.

A third scenario is a slow, initially invisible decline, first in certain limited areas, then more broadly. More reminiscent of a dying hobby or market than a collapse. Various pieces/artists/subjects hit a price point and stop moving. Good pieces don’t attract buyers, and sellers, who got used to prices rising, sit on them. Potential buyers move onto other things, leaving the “market price” stuck. Slowly, the backlog breaks, and some pieces are sold at a lower rate while others sit majestically high, like waiting for Godot’s return, frozen in amber. You can find that sort of curve in the Persian rug market. Prices shot up when the Shah was kicked out and an embargo resulted in sellers telling potential buyers, no more are coming in. Modern weavers in other countries then started producing rugs in those Persian patterns, softening demand (even though the real Persian rugs were qualitatively different). Then tastes changed, and many old collectible rugs dropped, too. At least as of a few years ago, you could find some dealers holding onto their precious half million dollar rugs for decades, since no one would pay those prices anymore. Supposedly, some specimen rugs retained their value, but the bulk of them have not.

“shoeshine boy”? The only slang usage I know doesn’t seem to have much application. I would, however, generally agree with what you wrote. Would you have any idea how the OA market changes compared to the fine art market, as compared to collectibles? I would love to know if OA is getting it’s due through parallel rises and falls to fine art.

Any idea if it correlates to the fine art market?

If I had the money to casually spend, I might take a crack at the Frank Frazetta cover. I was always a fan of the Flashman series, even though tat isn't exactly Frazetta's most exciting work