Rick2you2

For those of you who want to see both sides of a piece of art, I had bought something by Jerry Grandenetti a while ago (for my better half). The artist did a first take of the subject which he didn't like very much (presumably). So, he redid it on the other side and colored it. Since I wanted to have both sides viewed, I went to my local art supply house and found this interesting double-sided glass frame. I then put it on a little easel in front of a mirror she has. Now, both sides can be seen. If you are wondering, it is called "Getting to Know Each Other". I would have simply called it a good date.

I have read that Schaffenberger was moonlighting at the time from his job at DC, and he did so under Stone’s name. You could be right; I may be seeing something that isn’t there.

Here's the Nemesis page I bought. The art: feh. But the dialog and thinking from the 1960's in the bottom two panels is priceless. Women are nothing more than man-traps who want to get married; marrying a dead guy (Nemesis) makes perfect sense to a woman who wants to have children and start a family (as seen in other stories), and in panel 1, we have our hero flying into a 1960's style TV western. Interesting costume choice, too. Long sleeve shirt with a hoodie, and striped shorts

I definitely get that. I have a page from Adventures Into the Unknown with Nemesis on it by Chic Stone (supposedly, but it looks suspiciously like Kurt Schaffenburger). I don’t care for that style much, but as a child, I loved the hero. If you are not familiar with him, try and visualize a cross between a low powered Spectre and a 1960’s era sitcom, with a dash of the 1930’s movie “ Here Comes Mr. Jordan” (Mr. Keeper and the view of Heaven). It was actually charming. Naturally, when a page came up for sale, I grabbed it. I don’t dislike it, but if not for that connection, I never would have bought it. Maybe I’ll post it later.

I would definitely respond. Might make for a lot of fun for us.

How do you know that Albert didn’t post it?

From what I have seen, much of the Kaluta is not of high interest, and some of that has been reflected in the sales price.

I agree with you. I never placed anyone in that situation. On one occasion I approached someone about whether he would consider selling an NSF. He politely responded that he did not intend to, but if someone made a ridiculously high offer, he would consider it. I responded by saying I wasn't in a position to do that, but if he ever does decide to sell, please keep me in mind.

If that California wealth tax ever passes, I imagine the State’s taxing authority would love to see them as estimates of worth.

Any idea what they were trying to get for it?

I don't put anything up because I don't want people seeing my specialized interest and trying to add a little premium to what they want to charge me. Does that mean I get a red flag, too?

The protection issue isn't about dealers. If you pay through Friends and Family, and something goes wrong, you get no protection/refund. That can be a particular problem if you buy direct from some artists who don't produce as promised. Now, if nothing is said, I simply add the difference to what the artist is charging to what I have to pay (Since the artist may not have considered it, and I absolutely do not want to hurt artists who have a tough enough time making a liviing).

What makes you say that? I haven’t had, or heard, a bad thing about him.

I think I should mention that there are common law rules of law which can void restraints on the alienation of property (like that 5 year holding period). If void, the buyer could ignore those limits. Most often, they involve real estate, not personal property like art, so be careful about each State’s law. A different approach would be to auction a 99% interest in the art, with the other 1% retained for 5 years (or even just sell an option to buy, redeemable after 5 years). The most a buyer could get, then is 99%, thereby interfering with any subsequent transfers in less than 5 years.

I thought so, but that fancy, shmancy contract, was carefully designed to protect the auction house, too, or at least not hurt its interests. It maintains the loyalty of each artist by supposedly acting to protect them, helps prices go up by restricting supply for 5 years, and by giving the artist a right of first refusal, create a potential further stream of products to sell (out of loyalty, at least), all while imposing no additional costs on the auction house for its good works. I would love to see the real contracts, not the summary: I bet it has other little Berne’s which help its business.

Personally, I don’t like affixing special contract terms like those to art. It would be better to simply withhold a percentage of art from the market to control the future price. Those flippers who drove up the price would profit on what they bought, but would have limited incentive to trumpet the artist as the “next best thing” and really cause the prices to explode. I also question whether the latest glittery-artist toy will stand up over time. Using past history in OA to what has gone on in the last 10 years may not be a good indication of the future for reasons raised elsewhere ad nauseum.

You shouldn’t be. Those types of contracts can be very hard to interpret in court and enforce. Part of what I do for a living involves the writing and “enforcement“ of commercial and public works contracts for construction. People get very creative when trying to prevent paying a few hundred thousand dollars of “their” money, and that type of lawsuit is not cheap.

Appreciate the sentiment, Kimo Sabe. But, I had him do the commission in the early 1980's. Even then, there was a stiffness to his work (but very good detailing). I vaguely recall some Hawkman page or pages where it was particularly evident.

That is a very good Landgraf. A lot of his work has a certain stiffness to the characters, like they were posed. If you see his stuff on eBay, like his over-the-top drawings (things like “Nazi babes” fighting zombies) you can see what I mean. Really nice guy, by the way. Also, the artist of one of my destroyed Phantom Stranger commissions (from basement flooding).

Sarcasm rarely works in print. It’s too easy to read as a declarative statement.

I don’t generally buy art at shows, except commissions and sketches, but going is what I find invigorating. I miss it.

Will drive them up in the near term. That will change, again, eventually, and more will be published. Regardless as to how highly profitable they are, they still remain a great source of inspiration for movies and TV. The comics are virtually story boards.

I can’t speak for anyone else, of course, but the absence of physical conventions is reducing my collecting drive, at least for now. Part of the fun is going to shows and meeting artists and other collectors, as well as seeing art “in the flesh”. While the Boards and other art venues help, they aren’t a real substitute. Anyone else feel that way?

Wasn’t that one out for auction within the last year? Or something similar? I love it, by the way.

I am not an expert, or particularly knowledgeable, although something similar happened to me. One of my concerns would be that it dries out distorted. I would probably place each one under a large flat object, being careful not to let the ink get smudged during drying, probably below and above a “breathable” cloth. Then, save some money for the restorer. Isn’t there some type of drying powder which can be sprinkled on the ink to prevent smudging?