When wouldn't you buy OA?

[Mighty Hal]

I've been looking for a Michael Oeming/Powers cover, having discovered the series a little late in the game. Given the opportunity to pick up a cover (#32, from the Image years), I didn't know whether to buy it or not. Oeming had used a lot of marker on the cover, trying to get just the right effect. It looks great (if you like Oeming's work, as I do) but I didn't know if the markered art would fade or...or do whatever marker does, over the years to come.

 

And it got me to thinking. What keeps people from buying a piece of comic OA that they'd otherwise love to have? Is a penciled piece out of the question, or something with a bent corner or, maybe, a stat logo? What keeps you from buying?

 

(I used to think that marker was a no-go. That said, I ended up buying the cover. Really like it. Still don't know if the marker that was used is some kind of OA time bomb, tho'.)

[Nexus]

When it's out of my price range?:shrug:

 

That's pretty much been it. My preference is for inked artwork, with word balloons, no sharpie. Yet, I've gotten pencil-only art, art without lettering, art inked by sharpie, etc. when that's been my only option. For art I'd love to have, very little deters me. If there's something extraneous that bothers me about the art, I'm probably not that into it in the first place.

[Artemaria]

Hal -

 

Great topic.

 

Depends on the piece. For example, someone just paid $31K for a Killing Joke piece with condition issues.

 

After having seen a bunch of pieces with the supposedly "permanent" marker inks twenty years later, I can tell you I'm not a big marker fan, and probably would not buy a new piece with marker. Because after some time, it WILL turn brown/gray, whatever, but definitely will not remain black (the markers I saw were not Sharpies, so I don't know what a Sharpie will do, it may stay black much longer).

 

A tear in a bad place also would probably really turn me off, but it would depend on a piece. I saw a nice Adams Detective page with a tear in a bad place for which the asking is about half of what it would go for if there was no tear. Haven't pulled the trigger for the Adams piece and I think it's been on the dealer's web site for awhile.

 

Finally, a really brown page would turn me off. Not cream or off white, but really really brown.

 

My preference also remains an inked page (inked with in India Ink), and am not so concerned about the word balloons. On some pages, there are so many word balloons, it detracts from the page. On others, it adds. So the word balloons also really depends on the page.

 

Hope this helps, but just like with so many other things with OA, it really depends on the piece and the collector and his or her preferences.

 

Best regards.

 

- A

 

 

 

 

 

 

[shiverbones]

I don't like marker work, it does turn. Microns which were supposed to be lightfast don't last more then a few years. I would have bought about 6 Fegredo pages by now if they weren't marker pieces.

 

If a cover I REALLY prefer all the stats. That's what makes it comic art. I love panel pages for that reason, it's a comic, so let it be a comic!

[tth2]

And it got me to thinking. What keeps people from buying a piece of comic OA that they'd otherwise love to have? Is a penciled piece out of the question, or something with a bent corner or, maybe, a stat logo? What keeps you from buying?

I find this to be a very interesting discussion. This concern about "condition" seems to show that OA collectors can't shake off the conditioning that they received from their comic collecting days. If every piece is unique, what relevance is the condition such as a bent corner or a loose stat logo? It's not like you're going to find a higher grade copy. If Steve Wynn sold the Picasso that he put his hand through, I don't imagine that the tear and subsequent restoration would factor into its resale price at all.

 

If the cover of AF 15 came up for sale, and had big white-out blotches on it and was browning and had stains and tears, would it sell for less than if it were immaculate?

[dem1138]

Um, yes it did and yes.

 

After Steve Wynn put his elbow through the Picasso, the buyers walked. I don't know if he ever resold it - but I highly doubt he got what he was originally going to sell it for on that fateful night. I do know that he restored it and was a bit of a laughingstock for a week or so (though he will forever get the last laugh, regardless).

 

If the AF #15 cover ever came up for sale and was immaculate, I truly believe that it would sell for more than if it was a mess.

 

Condition with paintings DO matter. Have you ever noticed that each painting in a museum is in immaculate condition? There's a reason why and it goes beyond the importance of the painting.

 

By the way, someone brought this up last night - there are Marvel covers that have surfaced from every title of the 60s - but where/what happened to all of the FF covers from #1-#50?!? Isn't it odd that besides #40, none have ever surfaced?!? And no one seems to have ever seen or heard of any. Conceivably, someone could be sitting on a stack of early FF covers...

[Thomas]

Missing word balloons really turn me off of a piece of art.

[Nexus]

I find this to be a very interesting discussion. This concern about "condition" seems to show that OA collectors can't shake off the conditioning that they received from their comic collecting days. If every piece is unique, what relevance is the condition such as a bent corner or a loose stat logo? It's not like you're going to find a higher grade copy. If Steve Wynn sold the Picasso that he put his hand through, I don't imagine that the tear and subsequent restoration would factor into its resale price at all.

 

I can't speak for all OA collectors, but the opposite happened to me. When I started comic book collecting, I was overcome with "mint-itis". I was the guy who never picked out the new comic at the top of the stack, but in the middle. I was the guy who always checked corners and spines. It got to the point where "mint-itis" pervaded other hobbies as well. This went on for over 20 years.

 

Once I started collecting OA, my mindset changed, seemingly overnight. I sold all my high-grade slabs (and I had a six-figure collection of keys), not only out of financial necessity, but because just collecting for condition didn't interest me anymore. Flaws in the art didn't bug me the way they would have in a comic. Suddenly, I didn't see the need to pay a premium for a pristine book vs. a flawed raw one. It was like a domino effect through my other hobbies as well. Very liberating and surprising. I definitely feel I get more enjoyment out of all my hobbies when I don't place such an emphasis on superficial flaws.

 

Or, to put it another way, when I look at a piece of art now, the content is paramount. The flaws are secondary. Whereas in comic book collecting, you're looking for the flaws first.

 

If the cover of AF 15 came up for sale, and had big white-out blotches on it and was browning and had stains and tears, would it sell for less than if it were immaculate?

 

Probably. I'd say that's true for any OA, if it was as aesthetically problematic as you present. But there'd still be heavy interest, and I doubt it would deter any of the BSD's from dropping some serious cash for one of the true landmarks of the hobby.

 

 

 

[chromium]

Turn-offs for me are

 

- Dedications on the page

- no word balloons

- unpublished pieces

 

On the other hand, I don't really care about condition that much. I also like covers and 1st page splashes to have all the stats just like in the comic.

Maybe it's because I still see an OA piece as a piece of history first and a piece of art second

 

I can understand people really liking commissions, signed sketches etc... because they really dig the artist or the art, but for me it's the page that went through a few artist's hands, then to the editor and then off to Sparta for printing

[aardvark88]

The art does not "move" me due to:

 

1. hero not in costume

2. static, non-action page

3. lousy inker (but good penciller)

4. character is outside of the primary genre that I collect

5. text not in English may be a detriment (though I would buy a Lone Wolf and Cub OA)

[comix4fun]

I can understand people really liking commissions, signed sketches etc... because they really dig the artist or the art, but for me it's the page that went through a few artist's hands, then to the editor and then off to Sparta for printing

 

 

 

[Bronty]

Black and white work.

 

You guys will probably string me up from the nearest tree but to me a black and white piece is never going to be as rich as a well painted piece. So most of the few pieces I do have are paintings.

[chromium]

I can understand people really liking commissions, signed sketches etc... because they really dig the artist or the art, but for me it's the page that went through a few artist's hands, then to the editor and then off to Sparta for printing

 

 

 

[Mighty Hal]

Ah, dedications. I hate 'em.

 

After I received two pieces that the artist had inscribed (even though the dedication was to me, I still hated it), I've made it a point to say: Please DON'T.

 

I'm not saying that I wouldn't buy a Neal Adams'/Deadman page that was inscribed but I know that I'd like it less. I'd pay less for it. And, when the time came to sell (whether by me or my poor, unfortunate heirs), I know it would others would feel the same way.

 

Bend the corner, lose a word balloon or the cover logo stat -- but don't scribble, "To Frankie -- thanks for our 'special weekend'!!!" across the artwork.

[boomtown]

 

Interesting. I'm the exact opposite. Years ago I commissiond Steve Bissette to do a piece for me. He was extremely late on the piece & finally sent it to me with a note that he had upgraded from a black & white to a full color design.

 

I'm color blind.

 

Thanks for nothing.

[delekkerste]

I find this to be a very interesting discussion. This concern about "condition" seems to show that OA collectors can't shake off the conditioning that they received from their comic collecting days. If every piece is unique, what relevance is the condition such as a bent corner or a loose stat logo? It's not like you're going to find a higher grade copy. If Steve Wynn sold the Picasso that he put his hand through, I don't imagine that the tear and subsequent restoration would factor into its resale price at all.

 

If the cover of AF 15 came up for sale, and had big white-out blotches on it and was browning and had stains and tears, would it sell for less than if it were immaculate?

 

Condition is important, just not nearly as important as in the comic book world. Whereas content may be king, aesthetics do matter as well, and damage/wear can obviously detract from that. One of my two favorite Vampirella covers of all-time is the #28 cover by Enric, which was revealed to have a modest amount of paint flaking/chipping around Vampi when it came up for sale about 4-5 years ago (before I had really gotten serious about OA collecting). If that piece were to come to market again, I would probably pay less than half of what I would if the painting were in pristine condition - when I look at it, the first thing my eyes are drawn to is the missing paint. I'd rather have the #29 cover, which is in great condition, even if I like the #28's content better.

 

No question Stevie Cohen valued the Steve Wynn Picasso a lot less after Wynn put his elbow through it, which is why he (quite reasonably) backed out of the deal.

 

Also no question that the AF #15 cover would fetch a boatload of cash in any condition, but I don't think there's any question that it would capture the imagination more and people would have less hesitation about paying krazy money for it in presentable condition versus if it looked like it was rescued from a restaurant dumpster.

[spider9698]

Two words: Steve Oliffe

 

 

[Bronty]

you mean black and white stuff that's later hand colored by somebody like Oliffe? I don't like that either, even though I prefer color work (painted).

[spider9698]

Exactly

 

[delekkerste]

Two words: Steve Oliffe

 

I actually love Steve Oliffe-colored pages...when I go to a Con and flip through all the Itoya portfolios and an Oliffe page comes up, it's like a shining oasis in a desert of black and white dreariness. Unfortunately, he didn't color anything I collect and I do realize it's the kiss of death when it comes to resale. It's funny, though - I bet if the comic production process had called for colorists to perform their wares directly on the original pen & ink board, except for the oddball die-hard here and there we'd all be saying how much those black & white pages of linework with no color or shading were somehow "incomplete", "lifeless" and that "they don't look anything like the published product". Hmmm, I sound like I'm writing a Zagat review for comic art.

 

As for painted art versus B&W (mostly panel) pages, I have mixed feelings. I do agree with Bronty that painted art is inherently superior - it's just an indisputable fact that the artist can do and express more with an entire palate of colors than just pencils and black ink. And, except for some indie titles like TMNT and Cerebus, the Marvel mags like SSOC and the Warren mags which were meant to be published in B&W and thus also used lots of shades of grey, most original pen & ink art just looks to me like anything indicating color/tone/shading was just sucked out of it, leaving a lifeless husk. There's a reason why people enjoy reading the full-color Marvel Masterworks more than the tiresome and drab Marvel Essentials, and why museums showcase their best oil paintings and shunt the B&W drawings into dusty corners.

 

As a brief aside, I was told yesterday that there is an advertisement running in New Jersey criticizing government pork-barrel spending, starting off with "spending $200,000 to bring comic book art to the Montclair Art Museum".

 

That said, what makes original comic art unique is that the originals are large, B&W pages and that the storytelling is done sequentially via panels. So, I have come around to the thinking that if you're going to collect comic art, well, you might as well collect comic art (i.e. B&W panel pages for the most part, along with covers & splashes). I'm with Bronty in thinking that painted comic art looks cooler, but, then again, maybe the right comparison isn't painted comic art vs. B&W comic art at all, but rather painted comic art vs. other painted art (fine art, illustration art, etc.) Just some food for thought on a Monday morning.