ShallowDan

What's the story behind this one? It's really interesting. The primitive art look isn't something I normally associate with illustration or comic art.

A more light-hearted one, this illustration was used for the title page of Fastner & Larson's ¨Zombie Sexual: Lust Won´t Die¨. A gal with both beauty and brains!

I had previously taken a peek back at the beginning of the thread when the first few lots were listed, but finally sat down and went through everything being offered up this go-around. It strikes me as one of the best mixes of art that they've offered in a while. That view is admittedly tainted a bit by the comparison to September's lackluster selection, but November's auction seems to have something for all interests and definitely has me tracking more lots than I have in a while.

NOTE: naughty parts on this one are covered by blood and a strategically placed candle, so I think it's okay to post, but if I'm violating board standards let me know. With that out of the way, I'm a fan of the Mexican historietas perversas, which as you may know often leaned in heavily on lurid stories/art. This is the painted cover for the anthology Relatos de Presidio (Prison Stories) issue 504, a story involving a satanic cult. Pencils are by Oscar Bazaldua, when he was one of the workhorses of the Mexican comic industry, and it was painted by Guillermo Peimbert Chavez.

Congrats, Chris! Each one is progress. No problem if you'd rather not show your hand, but do you mind if I ask what series you're trying to reassemble? I'm not exceptionally well acquainted with British strips.and was curious if it's a Jeff Hawke story-line or something else.

Out of curiosity, did the piece not come with any background story / who's who when you bought it? I only ask that because jams have always struck me as fairly personal pieces, and aren't the sort of thing I'd imagine being sold/traded from collector to collector normally.

Why????? The seller has 100% positive feedback, while also selling cowboy boots and anime statues... I did get a laugh out of the "Jack Kirby signed" part of the description/title though. It definitely reads Jack Kirby, so he's got us there.

I definitely agree with that take. Especially against the backdrop of an overall market that has shrunk as it has, a 1 of 4 variant cover seems very unlikely to hold the same appeal that 1 of 1 covers held in the past. I can see situations where there may be a single variant cover that rises above the others (maybe a special guest artist or a particularly eye-catching take, whatever the case may be), but on the whole, it seems like a scenario where the premium that covers have traditionally commanded gets diluted.

Is that with a reserve >$1M or <$1M?

As my avatar/profile pic might suggest, I'm a fan of Rich Larson and Steve Fastner. While comic fans are probably most familiar with their Marvel portfolios from the 80s, I'm partial to their pin-up work. I've long appreciated their knack for combining classic pin-up and pulp imagery with a slightly twisted sense of humor. Earlier this year, when conventions were being canceled left and right, I reached out to them inquiring about a potential commission project, which they were up for. As a bit of background, I don't have any particular characters I collect, so instead I usually try to come up with a general concept/scenario that lends itself to the artist's style while still leaving plenty of room for interpretation. For this project, I pitched a few different ideas and asked them to pick the one they thought would be the most fun. They liked an idea I had named "The Devil's Carousel", which would be their take on the classic "pretty girl on a carousel horse" pin-up trope - the twist being that instead of a horse, she would be riding the carousel version of Cerberus. The piece arrived just in time for Halloween and I was delighted with the final results: I also picked up Rich's finished pencil drawing for the piece (their process has Steve doing the painting/finish work on a printout, so I also wanted this for the collection): The piece will likely be included in their next collection. I was really happy to have played a part in bringing it to life.

Granted this is the side of the pool I don't play in, but I'm with miraclemet. Has there been a single piece of B/W superhero art sell for $1M+ yet? I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around the fact that some folks believe that not only will that milestone be broken, but doubled.

Any idea of how the standard agreement with Marvel/DC reads? I would imagine it grants sole reproduction rights to the publisher (or at least I'm having a hard time imagining them not insisting on this). Interestingly enough, that raises the question of whether the terms of their standard agreements even acknowledge / provide for artists to sell prints at all. For me, the entire subject is just one of academic interest, given how much digital technology has changed the process for all of the players.

I'm imagining a couple of different scenarios here (with the caveat that I'm not a lawyer and don't even play one on TV): - Creator-Owned title: I would see this following very closely to what you're describing. The artist basically agrees to give the publisher the rights to publish the title, under whatever form that agreement might take. In this scenario, I could see the artist retaining rights to sell prints (whether a mono-print, limited edition or open edition) of the art to collectors, and this right being exclusive to them. - Publisher-Owned title: Here, I'm thinking of traditional work-for-hire under Marvel/DC. In the past, the agreement was the the publisher retrained all copyright to the art, but the physical art itself was returned to the artist, who was then able to sell it to collectors. This is the scenario I was alluding to above, where I could see an artist offering a exclusive mono-print of a cover, but having no ability to stop the publisher if they ever decided to license out the image to Mondo or publish their own exclusive/limited edition prints.

Agreed! But it can definitely muddy the waters in a manner that doesn't (or very rarely) occur with O/A.

When I start playing out various scenarios in my mind with regards to these prints, I always come back to the fact that copyright to the O/A is held by the publisher and not the artist. So, while the artist himself my only authorize this particular print, it seems that if DC were so inclined, they could either produce (or license) additional prints. Now obviously that's probably all academic nit-picking, but if Mondo or someone decided to jump in the game, I don't see how the artist could block this.

Dumb question (possibly), but waaaay back when i dabbled in baseball cards as a kid, there were multiple companies putting out product. Topps was always the biggest player, but you also had Donruss, Fleer, Upper Deck, etc. Giving the booming market for cards, has anyone else jumped in the game? It strikes me as something with a relatively low barrier to entry. Or does Topps have an exclusivity deal with the League that has everyone else locked out?

Sticking to the realm of things that are possible without some major change in financial standing (so no Bill Watterson type stuff on this list), I'd say: Bruce Timm - One of those situations where the pricing on the lower tier stuff is such that it's more than I'm willing to pay just to have something, so I'm always holding out for an example I really like. Plus given the sketchy provenance with a lot of the BT stuff that is floating around out there, I'd really prefer a published piece. Art Adams - He's a dream commission artist for me, but that's something that will likely never happen. Regardless, I'd really like to get my hands on one of his retro space girl pieces. Gene Colan - The first comic book I ever bought was an issue of Night Force. For nostalgia alone, I'd like to get something from that issue. George Perez - His 80s run on the Teen Titans with Wolfman was what firmly set the comic hook in me as a kid, so it's always felt like I should get around to picking up a nice example one of these days. Scott Shaw - An admittedly silly one to have on the list, but I was a sucker for goofy/pun-filled stuff as a kid (arguably still am!) and want to eventually find a good Captain Carrot example. Jack Davis - There's a lot available, which sort of works against me since any time something at auction catches my fancy, I end up deciding not to pursue it too aggressively, since I always figure something I like even better will come up later on. David Wright - Another situation where there's a fairly good amount floating around to choose from, but I keep holding out for the perfect one.

To her credit, she's held up better than many. If I remember correctly, she was mid-30s when staring in True Lies and was definitely still in incredible shape at that point of her career.

Mentally, I definitely have some things that I would only let go for either a) some stupid multiple of FMV or, b) something that I like even more (with the b. not being something sitting in some dealer's inventory for sale). I usually assume trade-only pieces hold a similar position in other folks' collections. Basically, with some things trade may get stuff loose where cash won't. I've experienced this with more modestly-valued art where there aren't too many people who collect the artist/series, but there also aren't too many examples available, so the folks who have things want to hold on to them Having said that, what has always really baffled me is that Los Bros. have some pieces on CAF listed as trade-only. And not necessarily really rare/hard-to-find things either.

Agreed (that it's a high hurdle for some). And while I'll never hold against someone how they choose to spend their money/time, I can't abide by those who try to guilt/bully others into joining their boycotts, which is the case more and more often in today's world. Like Brian said, there are some terrific folks who are lousy artists and there are some less-than-terrific folks who are great artists (and there are lots of folks in between) . I collect art, so the art itself is what most concerns me.

I always loved his mascot caricatures. I live just outside of Athens, GA and as some of you may know, Davis was an alumni of UGA and a huuuuge Bulldogs fan who did lots of game-day program covers and other promotional pieces over the years for the school (never accepting payment, as I understand things). Interestingly enough, when I was a kid, Jack Davis was the first artist where I recognized that the same guy who did this also did that, due to the fact that he had such a distinctive style to his work. I was a big fan of MAD magazine and still remember having an epiphany where I realized that the same guy illustrating some of those stories was the one who had drawn this great image of a helmeted bulldog, running roughshod over a gator. Even today, you'll occasionally happen upon a sketch of one of his bulldog mascot pieces in bars and restaurants around Athens.

Children?!? With all that art on the floor? That's a more frightening thought than anything we cooked up!

I'll own up to being the guy who sold off most of his vidya-game stuff waaaay too early. There are lot's of NES/SNES era games as well as PS1/N64 era stuff (including sealed games) that I sold on eBay years ago where I left tons of money on the table with the benefit of hindsight. I was very skeptical of the graded game business early on and can remember even mocking it in some listings ("you can buy this one for $xx, encase it in lucite, then sell it to some sucker for three times as much"...). I did well on it all, but so did the guy who bought AMZN after the dot com crash, then sold it all in '03-'04.

With my luck, I'd be standing on the ladder leaning over to frame the shot, lose my balance, fall and land face first on the spread, then wake up 30 minutes later to find everything soaked with blood!

It's rare for me not to "get" a Peanuts gag, but this one has me scratching my head.