Mighty Hal

A Chester Gould original, though? I enjoyed D. TRACY back in the day, but a Gould pin-up isn't likely to generate a strong number of bids. (So far: 0, but it's a new listing.) Seems like an odd choice for an eBay auction. The "Buckler" isn't particularly well-drawn or interesting (the Gould is better) and "Walter Lantz" isn't drawing much interest, either. It's almost as if the seller wanted to present originals that wouldn't go for over $100. Or $50, for that matter. I don't get it.

Auction wraps tomorrow, on Sunday. Since this was a **no reserve** auction, it will sell -- and, currently, at much less than I paid for it. Thanks for looking!

Man, this is a tough crowd. I've only dealt with comic art dealers via email but my experiences have been largely positive ones. Roughly 25% of my collection has come from dealers, often purchased on time or at a lower price than asked, and I wouldn't hesitate to buy from those guys again. But... Many of the dealers, if not all, are collectors, too, and that's the market they know. From the '80s and down, they can probably give you a solid value. Something more recent? They didn't collect it, they don't know it, and they'll probably undervalue it. It isn't in bad taste to ask them as long as you've asked ahead of time if they're willing to offer their opinion. Yep, you need to ask if you can ask. Then, if they offer their opinion and you strongly disagree, it's bad taste to tell them so. Thank them politely and ask your fellow collectors for a value, instead. You can tell us we're full of bullpuckey all day long.

Always good to get a little encouragement, J. Thanks!

On eBay, ends Sunday: here. I listed this once before, had second thoughts and pulled it. I hate it when I sell a piece of comic art, then wish I'd never been so foolish -- and this cover is so nice, I feared it would fall in that category. Still, the reasons I had for listing it the first time haven't gone away so, this time, the auction goes to completion. Thanks!

A huge congratulations. I'm not a Byrne collector, but I definitely know the heart-pounding excitement/exhilaration/fear of an auction about to close on a highly-desired bit of OA. Right place, right time, and the wisdom to lock in your bid before walking the dogs. Score!

I was going to say, sure, I'd swap it all for the cover artwork to Love & Rockets #1...and I would do so, but only if I were allowed to begin the hunt anew the next day. I mean, a Grail is a Grail but there's a world of wonderful OA out there that's still worth the chase. You, sir, are an art tease.

If your hope was to collect John Byrne production art, I can see why this would discourage you. Otherwise, just consider this craziness and go on. A lot of people will agree with you. It all depends on how you want to approach the hobby. If you're willing to chase other, non-Namor John Byrne original art work, it's out there for relative peanuts. Anthony Snyder alone has more than a dozen published Byrne pages for less than $200. Most are DC, none are FF, but it's Byrne, baby, Byrne.

That's because comic collecting is primarily a man's hobby. The collectors you know are 90%+ male and guys collect sexy covers. Most of the Zenescope stories have a female protagonist, often a female villain, and -- despite the covers -- a female readership. Back in the days of the Comic Buyer's Guide, the story reviews were largely positive, which is when my wife started reading them. She enjoys the comics, especially those by Raven Gregory.

I haven't read COVENTRY but your bygone love for the series -- and your description -- intrigues me. I may have to go hunting for at least the first issue. That is a fine page full of frogs, nicely drawn and worthy of admiration. If I had a frog-based collection, I would be deeply envious. It's pretty cool that you were able to purchase a page from the series.

It might if it's someone's only Jesse page. And think of the value when Bob the Sexual Investigator gets his own Netflix series.

One of my pet peeves is when the dealer keeps the piece he sold to ME on his website. Regrettably, these are not the high dollar super pages that could count as advertising. With a little nudging, they've all come down (in time) but it would be so nice if a nudge wasn't required.

There is clearly a lot of love for Calvin & Hobbes. Not as much love for lithographs among this crowd, though. You are on an original art board, after all.

I'm not fond of the "split", either. It's interesting to look at, though, and see what each artist brought to the table. On the other hand, a rushed or untalented inker might remove some of the art's beauty (just as a talented inker might improve a rushed original). I own a piece that was published from it's pencils. For an additional fee, the artist offered to ink it for me. If inked, though, it wouldn't have been the cover as published, so I declined. Inked, it might have sold for more in the future but I think most collectors would have made the same call.

The 60/40 pencils/inks split is unbalanced to me, too. I'd go 70/30 in favor of the pencils -- or 80/20. In most cases, it's the artist holding the pencil who has provided the greater creative impact for the particular page. IMO, of course. I view it this way: If Jack Kirby penciled a page on one board and Vince Colletta lightboxed the page and provided the inks for the actual published page on another board...and both boards go up for sale... well, who gets your money?

Not just a Vampi, a Tim Sale Vampirella. Such a great cover.

Congrats, Dave. It's a great cover. As a matter of personal preference, I enjoy Art Adams' artwork more than Jim Lee's stuff. I have a special fondness for the 90s stuff, too, so I really think you've found a prize here. But inquiring minds want to know -- what was the Marvel cover?

So very, very cool. Since I won't be anywhere near NYC this summer, I appreciate the opportunity to see these shots.

That Joker image? So good. DC should have hired him off of that alone.

I enjoy Campbell's artwork, so I was happy to stumble onto this thread. I collect original artwork (and, boy howdy, is Campbell's OA expensive!), loved Danger Girl back in the day, but I had no idea JSC had his own mini-empire of exclusives, etc. If you buy from his site because you're a Campbell fan and that's your emphasis, I can see why. Having seen many of the images here, I can understand that. The man does sterling work. I've bought a lot of artwork where I know I'll never get my money back because I love the image. Sometimes, though, I purchase a piece hoping to some day make a profit on the art. This would be almost impossible if every artist offered lots of original art on a monthly basis, partially because the OA community has a smaller fan base than the comics community. I haven't followed comic collecting for years, so please forgive the question that follows if it seems snarky. It's truly only asked out of curiosity. The JSC business venture appears to know what they're doing, and that usually means they intend to scoop up every available dollar. Since Campbell offers his comic exclusives on a regular basis, and there seems to be a good number of every title, do any of you wonder if you'll ever get your money back when the time comes to sell?

Stunning cover. If it were mine, I'd be delighted, too.

Brian, thanks for sharing. No wonder that page (that seller) gave you migraines! May you have better luck in expanding your collection.

Giving thirty years to a comic art quest is darned impressive. Most marriages don't make it that long! So many questions come to mind: Why quit now, instead of next year or a week ago? Did you ever ask Terry Austin about the missing pages? If T.A. has all of the missing pages and will sell them to you this instant but at a price that would keep you from expanding your collection of other artists for, say, five years, would you go for it? In short, is this a divorce or a trial separation? And what's the story behind the page 2 challenge?

Like Alex, I've purchased a piece on timed payments and it showed "on hold" until payment was complete. I've also purchased a piece on timed payments that showed as "for sale" the entire time I was making my payments (although the dealer assured me that it was "mine"). I much preferred the "on hold" situation!

You and I have different definitions of "under-appreciated".