Mighty Hal

It's a mug's game, trying to peek into the future. So let me have a turn. There are some really smart people on these boards and I usually agree with most of what they say, but not in this regard. I tend to be cautious regarding the opinions of those collectors who are heavily into GA/SA/BA artwork. They barely acknowledge modern OA, they rarely buy it, so they assume there can't be much interest in the stuff. Moreover, the interest there is must be about to fade because comic sales aren't what they used to be. Right? Sure, but there didn't use to be graphic novels, either. My small town library adds new graphic novels to the shelf every week. Almost all of them are from new series. Brian Hibbs says it's graphic novels that keep his comic stores afloat. Jim Zub writes a terrific comic called Wayward, per issue sales are fairly garbage, but he says the graphic novel numbers allow his artist (Steven Cummings, great work) to focus on the comic for his livelihood. Mr. Cummings hasn't been able to do that in the past. Unlike floppies, graphic novels don't get slabbed, bagged, or boarded. They're read and re-read, and a new collector is born every day. I know there's an audience for modern comics and its artwork; it's just not in plain sight. And, yeah, all of the old stories have been published as graphic novels, too, but it's the new collections that are ending up on my library's shelves. Not that modern comics are as necessarily dead as advertised, either. Go to the Modern Comic Section on the Message Boards, you'll usually find an audience of viewers that's bigger in number than the comic boards for GA/SA/BA. Almost always. I appreciate modern OA, and it's at the heart of my collection, even if it doesn't get much respect here. I think the artwork of the past decade is often better drawn than the standard-issue art of years ago and the story lines are frequently more intriguing. The more popular artists keep bumping their prices up and up...hardly a sign of a diminishing interest. However, if you're only talking investment, buy the single best original Kirby page you can find. Chances are, the family won't sue you.

Give me the cover OA to Tales of Suspense #49 (Iron Man but guest-starring the Angel) and I'm good. I'll take the paintings off of the walls, give you my portfolios, and we'll call it even. You'll lose money on the deal but, hey, you'll have made a fellow collector very happy. It's all nostalgia. Many years ago, my much older cousin had one wall of his bedroom lined with old comics -- before he hauled them all off to the dump, a couple of years later -- and he let me read the first comic he pulled out. It was, of course, ToS #49. I was, maybe, ten, and the nearly-powerless Angel somehow grabbed my attention. I was a comics fan before the last page turned. An X-Men/Angel fan, too, but only old school; you know, the team that no one else cared about, the one that didn't set any sales records. So, yeah, that one cover, I'm done.

A terrific start. Welcome to the addiction.

Yes, the description needs to be changed. There's not any doubt that GC did the pencils only. I wonder if Colan was asked to do a "reinterpretation" or "recreation" at the time of commission. Looking at the artwork alone, (if the masthead, etc, didn't exist), I wouldn't have suspected he was offering his take on the original published cover.

Much more of a reinterpretation than a recreation. I think Colan is one of the greats, especially when Dracula-themed elements are involved, but we all have off-days. IMO, this was one of his.

Not my area of knowledge, so please forgive me if this is an ignorant question. Why will some people oppose your decision to sell some of Quinton Hoover's artwork?

Exactly how I felt.

Better yet, there's a Canada-based "freelance comic artist" named Jim Somerville on freelanced.com. You can contact him through that site. Good luck!

Dale Keown did some work with Somerville. Keown currently lives in Canada, too. It's a long shot but have you considered messaging him via Facebook, to see if he might know?

My thought was legal hassles = lower prices, as few collectors will be excited at the thought of legal fees in the future. All this will do in the short-term is to drive more pieces underground, leading to more private sales. Filter81, I imagine your PM box will be filling up shortly. For most OA fans, Kirby is king, but there are thousands of other artists worthy of interest. If his estate became increasingly aggressive -- demanding the return of "stolen" art, as a hypothetical example -- who would want the grief? A hobby is supposed to be fun! When that joy is diminished, fewer people want to play and prices fall. Or so I imagine. If there are any BWS collectors out there, maybe they can offer some thoughts. Once Windsor-Smith introduced legalese (and a percentage of future sales) into his art sales, were prices affected?

Saw the auction and should have bid but found myself distracted by a sick wife and a recently emptied wallet. A Sestayo watercolor (wanted x 2 years) took all of my ready cash. Have to say, that cover is a keeper. You done good.

Enjoyed the article, thanks. My professional OA adviser thought it was pretty good, too.

Is that only on Marvel art, that was never returned to the family? Why would they be entitled to any money from a current sale? Is this somehow related to the California Resale Royalty Act? Shouldn't be. That "act" requires sellers to pay five percent (not ten) of the resale price to the artist (or heir), and I thought the seller had to be based in CA at the time of the sale...although I'm not positive about the last bit.

I've always enjoyed Vallejo's work. Bell, too, for that matter. I'd love to see what's out there if anyone else cares to share.

So would I. Although I have very little artwork from that period, I have a great fondness for it. While I understand that it's an easy target for "crapping on"; I wonder if the Felix Comic Art Podcast can look past their own prejudices and find the joy. Scroll up two posts;) Missed the post. Look forward to it...and thanks.

So would I. Although I have very little artwork from that period, I have a great fondness for it. While I understand that it's an easy target for "crapping on"; I wonder if the Felix Comic Art Podcast can look past their own prejudices and find the joy.

If you have a couple grand lying around you can still get one: http://diterlizzi.com/home/magic-the-gathering-original-art-sale/ what are your thoughts on counterfeit cards. I bought a pricey card for the first time in a long time, a mox emerald, and it was a very good fake. Its kind of disturbing to see how close they are getting. Tell a curious non-collector of the cards: How did you discover it was fake? Did you get your payment back?

Don't appreciate the spam.

I'd like to offer a suggestion. It may have been suggested before, but I'd rather not go through all of these posts to find out. Have you considered contacting all of the comic art dealers to see if anyone can provide a lead for you? Offer a finder's fee and they might give your request some effort and attention .

Jay, if you'd like to see the piece taken off of Anthony's site, let him know. I did last week and, within 24 hours, the piece I'd purchased was gone.

It appears that most of the forgeries we see are one-and-done drawings. I can't recall seeing a forged "printed" cover, splash, or panel page, with all of the markings you'd expect from such a thing (DC stamp on the back, company art board, production notes along the border, etc). Have you?

If it's for you, why not? Personally, I would not purchase a cover that has any signatures added to it after the fact of publication, even if it's the signature of the original artist. I have an unsigned cover and would not have the artist go back and sign it since that's how it went up. That's just my own collecting hang-up. I want the art to stay in as close to the same state it was when it left the artist. This includes the margins outside of the art. Like Grails, I prefer to see the artwork as it was originally. If there are signatures in the margins and it doesn't touch the original art, it doesn't bother me -- but I don't view it as a plus.

Hey, you under-$100'ers, does anyone have any DC romance art from the late '60s-early '70s, or am I way off-base?

Fantastic find. What a cover!

Fun cover. Congratulations!