BuraddoRun

This is one of my favorite X-Men covers, personally, definitely top 5. I still remember picking up the newsstand edition in a grocery store (maybe Safeway?) when I was a kid. This Wolvie/Cap/Widow cover we're talking about is not in my top 5, but it is definitely AWESOME, and won't surprise me if it hits or surpasses that 250K we're guessing.

And there's something to say for the fact that the stuff you helped create is in others' hands to enjoy. It's pretty awesome that you're an art collector yourself, but equally awesome that you didn't hold all of your stuff and have shared (even through selling) it with other grateful collectors out there.

If anyone here likes to pick up Blu-rays and wants The Black Hole, it's a Disney Movie Club exclusive. It came out about a year ago I think.

I store mine in portfolios, or rather, my 1 portfolio. LOL. I keep them sorted by comic or character(s), non-alphabetically. There will be some shifting to be done as I get new pages, but my small collection is very manageable at the moment with less than 15 pages. Heh.

And I'm under 50, and yep, never really cared for Kamandi, though I do have an issue or 2 in my comic collection.

I agree with ShalowDan about wanting to know the story behind the change, and with everyone about it not affecting value. Nice page!

I actually considered buying Issue # 250, because I thought it was cool he made it that far. Plus, I do like his art (hope to one day get a Spidey page). But, y comic store was out of them, and it wasn't high enough on my list to hunt it down. Still, it sold out, so someones bought it.

Fun fact: a couple of close friends of mine entered a contest a few years back concerning Gold Digger. They were doing a swimsuit special (they've done a good number, apparently), and wanted submissions. At that time, my friends were aspiring comic book creators (now they're into film), so one drew, inked, and lettered, while the other wrote a short story. And...they were one of the submissions that got published! But, despite the fact that I do own that one issue of Gold Digger, I can't say I actually helped keep it in print. My friends got a few free copies and they gave me one.

Do you have a book to put it in? Itoya, I mean. I had a rolled up large calendar (different material than comic board, of course) that I put in my poster-sized Itoya (that yes, I actually use for posters) for a month with a heavy box on top, and it flattened. I don't know about potential ink smearing with yours, though.

"He told Mr. Redden that he discarded the painting, which he disliked."

As far as dealers are concerned, I got an email saying Anthony will be there.

I think full disclosure is important regardless. If someone is selling a product, they should be upfront with the buyer about what exactly they're selling.

If I were to label myself, I'd call myself a comic art collector. I'm both. I've enjoyed comics because they have heroic and fun characters, interesting stories, and beautiful artwork. Yes, I collected, and still do collect, comic books, but as I've gotten older I've begun to appreciate the artwork more than I did as a kid. I bought my first piece as a comic fan, but when I got it, I looked it over, admiring the details and work put into it, and appreciated it more as an art fan. Also, comic art isn't the only art I collect. Before getting into comic art, I was buying animation cels, and even recently got into Magic card artwork as well (specifically card proof commissions; I don't have any original paintings). These are all things I was a fan of first, so nostalgia is a big part, but the reason I buy these original works now is because I appreciate the art itself. I like to see and appreciate the details, the work, the vision, that an artist has when he creates. That's kind of how I feel as well. Obviously, a complete issue or story would more accurately be the "complete" work of art, and would be ideal in most situations. But, I don't think it's as bad as some people do to break a work up. For instance, the example you give with Foster and Prince Valiant, is a beautiful example, in my opinion, of breaking up a work. Foster created Prince Valiant. He made it for the world to enjoy, and it was his work, his creation. The world got it as intended, in a published comic strip. But big fans, those who took the time to write to him and express their appreciation, were actually gifted original pieces of the comic they enjoyed. Even though the work itself was compromised, did that make the notion less meaningful or devalue its worth? I'd argue that it meant more to these fans, because the creator himself chose to share his original work with them. To be clear, I would never break up anything I own, which at this point is just single pages anyway. If I were to ever get a compete story (hopefully one day), I would keep it intact, or sell/trade/gift it in its complete form. But I don't fault others for splitting books up. And obviously, I'd buy pages from split books. Believe it or not, it's a post I read of yours that prompted me to make this topic. It was just a comment you made in the buy/sell part of the forum I think, but it was clear that you aren't a fan of splitting books. It just got me thinking about the "ethics" of our hobby, even though I didn't use that word in the 1st post, and I thought it was a good discussion point. Even though splitting books breaks the finished work, I maintain that the actual finished product, the published work, is what is intended to be complete. No, it isn't an accurate representation of the original work, but it is still the intended work. I wouldn't put it past some artists to have the foreknowledge that their large, unpublished work would look different when published, to the point that they used artistic tricks that they wouldn't dare use if they considered their large pages completed works. So preserving the finished work, the published comic book, is more akin to your film preservation analogy, I think, than the actual art used to make the comic. That said, I DO believe that keeping the original artwork is important and good. I just think it's a bit different. Preservation efforts now, thankfully, are much stronger, accessible, and feasible than they used to be. Artists or curators can make HQ scans of completed works and duplicate those scans digitally as much as they want, but still sell off the originals. These artists editions that are being made are noble efforts, and it is sad that more complete books aren't available for some artists. Maybe collectors can come together and loan their personal pieces to be scanned, preserved digitally, shared and enjoyed in these collections. I know the video game community is doing a good job with preservation nowadays. Collectors get their hands on prototype editions of games that are different than the finished products, or in some cases not even published, and get the data off their carts downloaded and preserved in ROM format so they can be played and enjoyed by generations to come. They'll literally loan their one-of-a-kind cart out to a person who will carefully download the ROM from it, then get their cart returned to them. You'll always have those collectors that many would call selfish, that want to be the ONLY one to have that game, so they don't share their cart and don't let the ROM get preserved outside their cart. I imagine some comic art collectors are like that as well, but one of the beautiful things about this hobby is that the art we collect already is, generally, widely available in published form. Fine art in general is often photographed and published multiple times over. Preserving the original is important, but natural wear can and does happen, so being able to make "copies" for preservation's sake is good. But we all like, obviously, collecting the originals. That's what art collectors do. Preservationists can preserve in the modern era in more ways that simply holding the original and keeping it safe. And that's the rub. Some of us are concerned with preservation, some of us just want to collect, and some do both. But we all, presumably, care enough for the work that we take care of what we obtain. And even those of us who are just collectors can help preservationists, like in the example I gave above with video game ROMs, and still collect what and how we like. How do you determine whether an artist is a hack or a visionary? Art has always been subjective, and it's no different with comic books. Just bring up Rob Liefield, for example, and you'll get arguments from both sides. I've no doubt that some artists do just bang out pages without much care because it was their job, but even the most respected artists might do that at times. Then you also have artists that have vision, and express themselves deeply, caring about the work they put out, that many people simply don't like. But there are a few fans out there that have that same vision, who do see and appreciate what a "junk" artist put on paper. Art really is a broad field, and it is one of, if not the most, subjective things on this planet. Yes, that is something I really enjoy about this forum! I like seeing different opinions and having good discussions about the hobby along with sharing the hobby itself. It doesn't devolve into bickering back and forth, but instead gives us things to consider and new perspectives we haven't seen. I like this place. Hey, that wasn't me! grapeape said that, though he qualified what he meant in a subsequent post. LOL! Another thing I want to say about comic collectors VS art collectors, is that comic collectors really have done a lot for the art field as well. If not for the people who loved and cared about these books enough to preserve them in the first place, then comics themselves, and by extension even more so the art used to make them, would have remained a consumable product, and not been preserved or cared about like they are today. It's the same with the films that Taylor G mentioned above. If people like Kevin Brownlow hadn't cared about the art that is a silent and black and white film, that art would have been lost. Consume and move on. That's what people do. But collectors and appreciators keep these things preserved so that new fans in future generations might find something they resonate with. Or we just like to relive the things that we love. You know...nostalgia.

What are your opinions on collecting complete stories VS single pages? While it would be nice to own a complete book, I don't think it's a realistic goal for most of us. Heck, even the artists don't get all their pages back if they have a separate inker. Do you think it's a shame that works get split up, or not so much? Personally, I think it's fine. I kind of feel like each page, each panel even, is its own piece of art. Of course, I'd never cut up a page into panels, but you could always tip the balance the other way and say a work isn't complete unless you own every issue. That's the point of buying the mass produced stuff, right? A comic book, or an entire run, is a complete work. The actual original art piece isn't intended to stay complete. It's taken and used, and suffers wear and tear. It even gets extra bits added to it to make it complete, like colors. Collecting pieces, bits, of these books is just a natural part of this hobby. It's the same with movie sets, right? No one owns every costume or prop from a movie. That stuff gets taken, sold, reused, or destroyed. But crazy fans like us appreciate the details that go into a finished work enough that we seek those individual bits. It lets us feel closer to the finished product. It lets us see behind the scenes. And in our specific case, it is still literal artwork. I think breaking up a book lets us appreciate the finer details that went into the very specific pieces of that book that we obtain. I don't know. What do you think?

That's something I hadn't considered. So it was drawn on a computer, printed out, and then inked by hand? Interesting. Did the artist ink his own work or did someone else do it? Comic art is different than fine art in that most of it is done by 2 artists: the penciller and the inker. It's a neat dynamic that I'm just barely starting to really think about and appreciate. I didn't used to ever look at the inker's name in a book, and before recently, didn't care. I just attributed all of the work to the artist, but that's simply not the case. Pencils are still the most important part of a piece to me, but the inks make a huge difference that I'm barely beginning to understand. Then you have the letterers and colorists, too, though it's not often that a piece has all of those original elements on the same board.

But honestly, it's kind of an unremarkable pose. Same character, same costume, common action. It's not something I would think was blatantly copied. I don't think the similarities were premeditated between the 2 artists. *Edit: Now that I look at them, maybe Blevins was referencing Saltares' cover after all? I don't know. I'm not familiar enough with Ghost Rider to know if the stories from issues 10 & 37 were linked in some way.

Saltares did it first.

Now that you've pointed it out, it makes sense with the amount of detail Adams uses that he would work with oversized boards.

Very nice! I was eyeballing this one for a potential future purchase, but you got it before me. Congrats! It's a really nice piece!

Todd McFarlane is considered by many to be a modern master. When he was drawing Spider-Man, he basically fought the editors and drew Spidey how he wanted, and bucked the tried and true trends of old. Even his webbing was stylized in a way that didn't make sense to a lot of the staff. His big, splashy pages had flair, and exuded "cool." He also is very appreciative of and good to his fans. He worked very hard to get to where he is today, and he has and does inspire a lot of aspiring artists. Here's a documentary that SyFy recently did on him.

Those are great! It's nice to see a fellow video game enthusiast on the site as well. Duh, I should've been clued in sooner by your avatar. Haha.

That is insane... ...ly awesome! I wouldn't know what to do with a cover that large if I ever got one. It'd probably have to be framed and hung up.

I'm with you. Every piece I have now is pencilled and inked on the same page, and I just don't see myself ever buying an inked blueline without pencils. I could stomach getting the pencils and inks that are done on separate boards, but I still prefer the all-on-one-board approach.

I'm about to reread a book (graphic novel) I had as a kid and haven't looked at in many years. Back then, I didn't pay attention to what artists drew what comics; I just liked certain characters and art. But since I'm posting here, you already know who drew it. There's a pretty interesting forward in it that I'll share excerpts from, because I think others will appreciate it. "It's all John Buscema's fault! He wanted to create his own Silver Surfer story, and he wanted to illustrate it his own way - using only one illustration to a page!" "Then came the sticky part - getting someone to pen the wondrous words and passionate phrases with which to tie the whole unique endeavor together. Well, apparently all the other writers were out to lunch at the time, 'cause yours truly got the nod." "As for me, my biggest problem wasn't scripting the yarn; it's a picnic writing copy for Johnny's layouts. No, the thing that tore me up was trying to figure out where to place the balloons and captions without damaging any of the Master's artwork! I'm such a fan of his, that each time I had to toss some copy over one of his fabulous figures or brilliant backgrounds, it was a tortuous, heart-rending moment, like sticking a little dart smack into my heart!" - Stan Lee For me, this specific book, Silver Surfer: Judgement Day, is probably my favorite Buscema work.

This is even more off-topic, but I'd love to see that Nintendo art you mentioned in the other topic.