JC25427N

I think this threw some people off. Usually the expression "I'm afraid XXX is no longer with us" is a way to respectfully say that someone has died (https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=no longer with us). But I think you meant to say you were afraid that she may no longer be with us because you couldn't get any info

You missed quite a bit then, at the end of the show he began to take offers on art listed on his website and made quite a few sales/potential sales from there (there were some pieces he wasn't sure if he still had and accepted offers contingent on him confirming that he still had those pieces). Bill and Anthony liked that format so much they're planning to have shows early next year where Anthony and his assistant will be in their warehouse and they'll take offers and be able to pull the art from the website on the show live.

Real lack of Sick Burns in here lately.....barely even a sniffling scald...

Sorry, I think I'm off on a personal tangent at this point. When it comes to this on-topic context of this thread (The Venom 1 cover) I understand and agree, pieces that are published as pencils should be preserved, and inking on top of them ruins the piece's status as published art. It's just trying to apply the same reasoning that makes that true to other kinds of art that bugs me. But I'll just leave myself to my thoughts, don't want to derail the thread any further

100% I agree, once published it should be treated complete as is. It was just the thought of inks destroying the original pencils that made me go on this thought spiral. For instance, if I get my commission drawn in pencil, then inked by someone else, if I think of inking as destroying pencils, then I've destroyed the pencil art that I originally commissioned. Can it really still be considered the original penciler's art still? I've never thought of it that way until now and that thought makes me uncomfortable in some way which is why I suppose I'm thinking about it this deeply lol.

I agree, but I question that reasoning. Do you always think of any piece getting inked as destroying the pencils? I'm just interested in what that thought leads to What if you like a certain artist who usually only does pencils and then gets their work inked by another artist, would you consider any such OA with separate penciler and inker as solely the inker's work because the penciler's art was destroyed? Would you avoid buying any such OA unless it was only the pencils of the artist you like with no inks or inked by the same person? If it's just because the pencils were what was made pre-production and then the ink was then applied post-production, then I would assume you would still think Published Pencil + Published Inks on the same board to be only Published Ink art, because the pencils are destroyed. In this case, inks over bluelines or inks over graphite would have to be considered the same thing. Just published inks, because either way there either were no pencils to begin with, or they were destroyed and there are no pencils now. Sorry if this comes off as aggressive, I don't mean it to be, your comment just made me think and I wanted to type out my thoughts/questions, because I've never thought of inking in this way and it leads to really interesting conclusions.

Can someone make the "What's the most appropriately-hyped/appropriately-priced comics in your opinion" thread next pls

I use the notes app on my iphone and select the "Scan a document" option. Pretty decent

Toploaders always seem to generate a lot of static/cling for some reason (Don't know the science behind it, just my experience), I don't think you'd get the same clinging effect from leaving art in a portfolio and especially from leaving art in a mylar bag. The comic book you had was just raw in the top loader, not in a bag/board within the toploader?

I feel like Dinesh didn't commit enough to the joke, if he fully committed to it then it would be easily recognizable as a joke. Should have priced it at $69,420,000. But joke or not, I don't see anything heinous or overly malicious here. I don't think theres a new collector out there whos going to deer in headlights run into this cover and pay $5M for it out of impulse. If anything what this is going to cause is some sellers might see it and increase their own prices with the justification "The cover to ASM 300 was advertised for $5M, that makes this page from ____ for X price a deal!" but that might have happened anyway

Did you click the keyword links? The email takes you to a page that has all your keywords on it and you have to click each keyword individually to see the results that it found for each one

Sorry, don't mean to pry, but this caught my attention and my curiosity is getting the better of me, is this an unorthodox frame? It almost kind of looks like its just art in a mylar and affixed to a masonite board.

2000 pages before end of the year? We can do it!

I know nothing of this series, so take this with a grain of salt maybe, but I looked up Cowgirl Romances issue 5 on the comics db and it says Maurice Whitman https://www.comics.org/issue/259424/ Sorry I can't read, thats for the cover. The rest of the information seems to be unknown unless it's part of the last story of the book which is credited to Ken Battefield, sorry

clime but ease a bit

Yeah, BU has these A4 L-Sleeve Mylars, but I was hoping to get something a bit bigger to use for both A4 and actual 9x12 pieces. Plus I'm not sure how I feel about the L-Sleeve mylars, never tried them before. Aside from that, they also have magazine size mylars (about 10 x 13) that should work fine, but they have the flap, so I'd have to cut the flaps in that case too anyway. Was hoping someone who mylar'd their own smaller art knew of a retailer that had something that would be perfect.

Anyone have any suggestions on where to get mylar for A4 to 9x12 sized art? I was thinking of just buying magazine sized mylites from e-gerber and cutting off the flaps, but wanted to ask if anyone else had ideas.

Just to clarify, I don't think its good to think of it as separate camps . An "us" vs " them" situation. People who appreciate comic art as "real" art (I don't think theres really anyone who collects OA who thinks they're collecting something less) can still appreciate aspects of art others find "less than real" for whatever reason. There's no accounting for taste

I still don't believe creating that sort of divide does anyone any good and only serves to create (or further depending on how you feel) a sense of elitism in the community.

You can collect and appreciate art however you want, it doesn't make you a snob or a prude, its when someone tries to push their point of view on you and or suggest your way of thinking is somehow lesser than theirs is when issues come up. The issue with Race was that he didn't like the humor, and then suggested anyone who did was some sort of bigot (Don't think he ever used that exact word, but that was the gist of it) Also, I wouldn't count those as mutually exclusive, I agree with both of those statements

Bump

Really active member in the community (He's around on most of the youtube live shows and on CAF, but not here) known mostly for being the most prolific commenter on CAF, leaves nice comments on most of the new pieces that get uploaded everyday

Yeah, David Finch. Dug up an old image of his convention banner, matches

David Finch?