Rick2you2

Honestly, that is an easy piece to draw nicely. Full splash, flying over the City; he’d have to be borderline incompetent to do a bad job on it (and he certainly isn’t that). The real test is whether he is good at tough subjects: pages filled with dialog, designed as 6 panels, and overstuffed with characters. See my point? At least the second one in your picture has somewhat unusual subject-matter. So, he couldn’t fall back on stale tropes. And yes, it is nicely done. By the way, I do recognize that splashes have more dollar value than most panel pages, but that isn’t the question.

I still don’t care for Kane. There is a coldness to his work, even if technically superior. Regarding Andru, I considered him a solid journeyman artist; that’s all.

Sekowsky liked to “pose” his characters, I think, instead of having them in natural positions. Almost any of his pages has at least one questionable image in it, like a character floating after a punch who shouldn’t be floating, or arms and a leg twisted to get it out of the way, that sort of thing. But for a child, it also made for a better image when reading the book. By the way, I’m told he liked to blame his inkers (not sure how that matters).

I think that you are partially seeing the impact of a “sea change” in economics and management of the economy. The recessions of 2009 and 2020 were fundamentally different than earlier ones. In classic recessions, the economy would contract, usually for 2-3 economic quarters, and then show a strong bounce back. Not the last two. Instead, you had a very slow bounce back taking years to develop real steam from 2009. The 2020 recession was very stratified, with some groups doing horribly and others doing reasonably well. Since some groups, the upper end, did well, they could defy economic gravity and keep prices high on stuff that isn’t exactly a necessity (my apologies to the addicted, but that is the truth). Which brings me to the subject at hand. To the extent OA was purchased as a hobby by the upper financial strata, they won’t need to sell if the next recession behaves like the last two. Only in a “classic” form of recession where the pain is spread more equally will that happen. So instead, pricing will, at worst, freeze as sales slow down. Where pricing will take a hit is when the collector class or its heirs want to unload, and if the unloading takes place at the same rough period of time (in years), while interest in comics among the population declines as does discretionary income due to high housing prices, student loans, children, etc.

I haven't seen too many for sale. Is the zip-a-tone browning in two areas, or is that deliberate? Otherwise okay? (I don't mind the white out)

The singlemost important rule for growing up: Mother is the necessity of invention.

I noticed. Its price moved up quickly since I started tracking.

Grudgingly, as to Kirby. Still don't like a lot of the actual pages.

Mignola, from dislike to appreciate, but still not in love. I never used to like the more impresssionistic style of art (and I use the term "impressionistic" lightly), but favored things more in the Adams/Bryne style. Then gravitated to a more realistic/photorealisic style, before moving towards a freer style (Mandrake, Colan, Jason Shawn Alexander). Mignola's work is more like that, but a little far, at least at times.

Let's straighten this out as between copyright and trademark. For copyright, the creator of the piece owns the copyright, while the purchaser of the piece owns a secondary copyright. Usually, the purchaser of the piece cannot replicate it, as the artist owns that right, but if someone copies the purchased piece there is a violation of his copyright (as well as the original artist's). The trademark would be owned, if there is one (not all characters are trademarked), assuming a Big Two Company, it would be one of them. Everyone in this case has--on the face of it--managed to violate Trademark rights, although, one can argue no violation due to theories like license, waiver or fair use. And, while there is no general work-for-hire assumed anymore, you can still get the full rights to a piece of work from the artist by express written agreement. Damages are generally not available unless the copyright is registered (or, you can demonstrate an actual loss by its violation). Then, they are provided by statute (law). An example of actual loss would be if someone bought a page, plastered it on a T-shirt, and sold the T-shirt which you were also doing.

I think you’re going to do really well his this batch.

Another hot take: you can knock 10% off of almost any price or estimate and it will have no effect on a deal getting done or project being finished. You can add 10% onto almost anything, and it will matter— but only a little and mostly as background noise.

My youngest took a Corona virus year off from regular college to go to community college on-line for a year. My bill went from about $45,000+ to about $6,000. Maybe another year of this wouldn’t be so terrible.

Yes. If you commissioned the artwork, then he infringed on your ownership of the image AND probably the trademark rights in the character. And, the artist retains the right to sell copies of it, which could theoretically be licensed or sold (if anyone cares).

It will end up like oils vs. litho’s. Depends on the art. The way to make it more legitimate is to have some sort of generally recognized body issue the authentication certificate (for a nominal fee), and registration number. Then, the absence of a certificate indicates it is subject to, or may even be, an unauthorized copy.

Only if someone faked the signature, too. That would be forgery. I am assuming they are copying the style.

Did you mean valueless or valued less?

I’m not sure why you are upset. Someone copied a commission you own? Theoretically, that’s copyright infringement, so you could have a lawyer’s letter sent to eBay. But personally, I would take it as a complement.

What about a mono recreation’s value? Original cover inker inked on computer. Artist is willing to recreate what he did in original ink and give a certificate of authenticity that will be his only “authentic” recreation. Given my taste, that’s quite likely to be true. Price is about 60% of his original inked work price. Is that to be valued as no different than a recreation?

Generally speaking, it isn’t a great idea to come in with guns blazing until you know the terrain. You might make the wrong kind of splash.

Can't claim ownership rights, but is this what you had in mind?

How the heck did they come up with auto screening here? I can write “sex”, but not the short-handed reference to Sir Thomas Krapper’s disposal invention, or a nickname for Richard that begins with a D.

You mean, like all that sex cr*p on eBay? Sorry, I don’t buy it. I’ve lived long enough to have enjoyed the real thing.

I think that using that approach, you are missing out on some very good art. While out of costume characters typically are less valuable, that doesn’t address the many panel pages which aren’t splashes.

How do you define a “good” page? Opinions vary widely, and if new collectors aren’t reading the stories, then how can they possibly know whether the artist is doing a good job illustrating the whole story? Particularly with no word balloons? I think most modern professionals already have high illustrative skills, with the page design and layout partially dictated by the writer. So, it sounds to me they are largely picking based on an artist’s idiosyncratic style (with some being better than others).