The $2000 Riddle

[jjonahjameson1]

In the short few years I've been involved in OA collecting, I, too, have seen lots of "new" people enter the hobby. The thing is, though...they're all around my age!

 

Yes, agreed. And most of these "new" people that have entered the hobby are long time comicbook collectors so I can understand why you placed quotes around "New"

 

 

"Hot" artists like Todd McFarlane, Jim Lee, Dale Keown (sorry, Yoram!) and the like? There will always be other hot artists to replace them.

 

Totally agree with you there Felix.

[Dale Roberts]

In the short few years I've been involved in OA collecting, I, too, have seen lots of "new" people enter the hobby. The thing is, though...they're all around my age!

 

Yes, agreed. And most of these "new" people that have entered the hobby are long time comicbook collectors so I can understand why you placed quotes around "New"

 

 

"Hot" artists like Todd McFarlane, Jim Lee, Dale Keown (sorry, Yoram!) and the like? There will always be other hot artists to replace them.

 

Totally agree with you there Felix.

 

I hate to call out someone here on the boards, but to equate Keown to Jim Lee and McFarlane is not right. Keown is a fine artist, no problem with that. But the other 2 did historic runs on historic characters.

 

McFarlane and Lee along with Michael Turner and Alex Ross are the most significant artists of the last 20 years and are the Adams/Wrightson of the copper age.

[Nexus]

McFarlane and Lee along with Michael Turner and Alex Ross are the most significant artists of the last 20 years and are the Adams/Wrightson of the copper age.

 

Michael Turner??

 

I didn't mean to say that Keown had the same level of popularity as McFarlane or Lee. Just that he was once a "hot" artist in his day, just like Rob Liefeld, Ron Lim, Marc Silvestri, Whilce Portacio, et al were in theirs. I realize my wording was confusing, so mea culpa. And my point was about popularity, not significance.

 

And, um...Michael Turner??

[Mighty Hal]

Hell, I'll argue that in 20 years, Dave Gibbons' (who's never been considered a "hot" artist) WATCHMEN art will be more valued than McFarlane's Spidey art.

 

In the case of Gibbons' work, I agree with Nexus. It's not the artist, it's the story and artwork combined. You can find Gibbons' 2000AD covers for under $1500; you can't find a WATCHMEN panel page for anything like that.

 

But what keeps McFarlane Spidey art in the stratosphere? I think he's a decent artist, not great, and I think he'd agree with me. Here's what he did right, as far as collectors are concerned: He gave a new look to Spidey, he took the book to its greatest popularity, he left the book while he was still hot/hot/hot (drawing less than 50 Spidey-centric issues, I think)...and he went off and created another phenom in SPAWN. But as an artist, he left there, too, with maybe 20 issues under his belt.

 

He left the crowd wanting more.

 

Dollar value of McFarlane art isn't going to drop in the next decade if he remains an artistic recluse. Dave Gibbons' WATCHMEN stuff will continue to sell because of the story. McFarlane will continue to sell because of his impact, his characters respective popularities, and because of the limited supply of art available to a rabid fan base.

 

And Artemaria? You might have reason to fear that OA will drop in value; after all, baseball cards, stamps and coins all took a dump. But none of us have a working crystal ball. At the start of the year, I put my "safe" money in a highly regarded index fund. I've lost more money with that index fund than I've ever spent on a single piece of comic OA.

 

At least, the comic OA makes me happy when I look at it.

[NelsonAI]

Great thread Artemis.

 

I guess my Heckle and Jeckle pages won't be appreciating anytime soon. . Despite Paul Terry's talents, does anyone even remember the 2 lovable magpies?

I buy what I like and if it happens to go up in value, it's a bonus.

 

With that said, art with iconic figures such as Superman, Batman, and Spiderman will always be in demand no matter who the artist is.

 

BTW - I'm glad no one got suckered into believing an unpublished page sold for $2,000 in 1949. Was the pic on ebay of the Post It note suppose to be a receipt? . I believe Post Its were created in the 1980's.

 

Cheers!

Nelson

 

[Dale Roberts]

McFarlane and Lee along with Michael Turner and Alex Ross are the most significant artists of the last 20 years and are the Adams/Wrightson of the copper age.

 

Michael Turner??

 

I didn't mean to say that Keown had the same level of popularity as McFarlane or Lee. Just that he was once a "hot" artist in his day, just like Rob Liefeld, Ron Lim, Marc Silvestri, Whilce Portacio, et al were in theirs. I realize my wording was confusing, so mea culpa. And my point was about popularity, not significance.

 

And, um...Michael Turner??

 

Yes, Michael Turner is probably the most popular artist in comics today, even though he is sick and is rarely putting out anything. You can see this by the many covers he has done for Marvel & DC (and the circulation boost when he does them), and the astounding number of issues of all the Aspen books in circulation.

[Nexus]

I guess it comes down to how we define "significance". I wouldn't argue that Turner is popular. Popularity, though, is fleeting. To me, significance is something else entirely. Adams and Wrightson were both popular AND significant. Their influence has lasted for decades. The other guys (with the possible exception of Ross)? I see them as replaceable.

 

Back to your earlier point...Turner hasn't had a historic run on any historic characters, either. So I'm not sure how he gets included in the McFarlane/Lee class and not someone like Keown.

 

As always, just my

[Dale Roberts]

Uh, have you ever heard of Fathom or Witchblade? Have you ever heard of Superman, Superman Batman, Supergirl, JLA? Turner is the good girl artist of the last 10 years and maybe of the modern age. His books have sold staggering numbers, based on nothing but his art. In fact, I would say more people buy books simply for his art than anyone else today, with the possible exception of Alex Ross.

 

Keown did a 20 issue run on Hulk and basically nothing else significant.....unless you want to include the Pitt

 

 

[Nexus]

Fine...

 

Fathom and Witchblade are as iconic as Superman, Batman, and the JLA...

 

Turner's DC covers are as important to comics as Lee's X-Men run and McFarlane's Spidey run (the popularity of which had as much, if not more, to do with their interiors as their covers)...

 

Turner is the modern Adams/Wrightson...

 

But don't you dare mention Dale Keown in the same sentence as Todd McFarlane and Jim Lee!

 

[comix4fun]

Turner is the good girl artist of the last 10 years and maybe of the modern age.

 

 

Dale alot of what you said makes sense...and I think you area good guy. (thumbs u

 

I can't let this statement stand, however.

 

For good girl artists:

In the last 10 years...Adam Hughes leaps to mind as someone who is head and shoulders above Turner. Frank Cho is up there with Hughes.

 

In the Modern Age you can take your pick: Dave Stevens, Hughes, Cho, Linsner, Chiodo, Serpieri...

 

And we have not even touched the artists that can draw cheescake circles around Mike when it comes to women but aren't considered good girl artists....Bolland, Jusko, Olivia, Bisley, Horley, Timm, Stelfreeze,

 

There isn't a universe where Mike Turner is THE good girl artist of the modern age over Dave Stevens.

 

I know I can't judge the quality of an artist's work based on sales figures....otherwise I would be forced to own pages from Youngblood #1.

 

Chris

 

PS. It's hard for me to diminish the Peter David/Dale Keown Hulk run. It is considered by some to be one of the best runs in the history of that character from a writing and drawing perspective. It was a bit of a perfect storm and it could have been 5 issues instead of 20 and people would still revere it. The quality was that high.

 

If we judged artists solely on how many copies they sold or how many issues they worked on Jim Steranko would be a nobody instead of the Icon that he is.

[jjonahjameson1]

Uh, have you ever heard of Fathom or Witchblade? Have you ever heard of Superman, Superman Batman, Supergirl, JLA? Turner is the good girl artist of the last 10 years and maybe of the modern age. His books have sold staggering numbers, based on nothing but his art. In fact, I would say more people buy books simply for his art than anyone else today, with the possible exception of Alex Ross.

 

Keown did a 20 issue run on Hulk and basically nothing else significant.....unless you want to include the Pitt

 

 

Geez, Dale...I've met you at several conventions and I really like you. You are a good guy and you definately know your back-issue comics, but when it comes to comic art, that's a whole other kettle of fish.

 

First and foremost, Keown did NOT do a 20 issue run on the Hulk. It was 30 issues! Granted there was some fill-ins due to Dale's tardiness, but the number is closer to 30 than 20.

Second, his run on the Hulk was significant, with regard to the character, as it changed the course of the Hulk's evolution and supporting cast for years and years. Perhaps you should read it again.

If you want to talk about sales and how it equates to 'significance' of a creator as a measuring stick, then you can't ignore Dale's run on the Hulk. Using your measuring stick, Dale became very significant.

 

So Dale did basically nothing else significant unless we want to include the PITT? OK, let's include the PITT and tell me how many of Marvel's former creators launched their own titles with Image and cracked the 1 million mark in sales per issue? Wanna know the answer? A grand total of two creators - Todd McFarlane and, you guessed it, Dale Keown. (Liefeld was close with 900,000 for Youngblood)

 

So what else has Dale done that was of any significance? Why, nothing unless you include character design work for the 1st Spidey movie, FF movie and Hulk movie. But I digress...

[buyatari]

Ehh I really don't think numbers from that era of comics mean much of anything. As you said yourself "(Liefeld was close with 900,000 for Youngblood)"

 

I don't think McFarlane is going anywhere. Without him there would have been no Image comics and you can't say that with Dale. Both Liefeld and Keown rode the wave that McFarlane started. From Spiderman to Spawn to his toy lineup people who don't collect comic books know his name and even his face. Keown well those people outside of comic book collecting can't even say his name right.

 

I think he will always be big with Hulk collectors but don't see his "star status" or his overall demand rising over time.

 

 

[jjonahjameson1]

I love how things get fuddled in history with anecodates rather than fact so here's the facts:

 

1. It was Liefeld, not McFarlane that 'Spawned' Image comics (bad pun intended)

2. It was Youngblood that was Image's first release, not Spawn

3. Keown didn't ride anyone's coattails at Image. Jim Lee's Wildcat sales weren't as high as Dale's, nor were Stroman's (remember The Tribe), nor were Grell's (Shaman's Tears, Maggie the Cat), etc.

 

However, I agree that I don't see Dale's star rising in the future, but in the same token, I also don't see Alex Ross as a recognizable name outside of comics. Same thing with Turner.

 

 

 

[pinupcartoonguy]

I love how things get fuddled in history with anecodates rather than fact so here's the facts:

 

1. It was Liefeld, not McFarlane that 'Spawned' Image comics (bad pun intended)

2. It was Youngblood that was Image's first release, not Spawn

 

 

I think this is splitting hairs. Nobody remembers that any one artist started Image let along which comic was the first release. Hec, I wrote the first story about Image for Wizard, and I don't even remember.

 

Even now, I think Image has almost become a footnote.

 

A.

[comix4fun]

I love how things get fuddled in history with anecodates rather than fact so here's the facts:

 

1. It was Liefeld, not McFarlane that 'Spawned' Image comics (bad pun intended)

2. It was Youngblood that was Image's first release, not Spawn

 

 

I think this is splitting hairs. Nobody remembers that any one artist started Image let along which comic was the first release. Hec, I wrote the first story about Image for Wizard, and I don't even remember.

 

Even now, I think Image has almost become a footnote.

 

A.

 

 

 

I think that might be diminishing things just a bit.

I believe all of the creator owned comics that have come into existance since image and the creator-owned programs at the big two might never have existed if Image did not pave the way.

It became far easier (and shown to be far more profitable for established publishers) to have creator owned characters, to get them published, and for everyone to benefit.

Guys like Dave Sim were forced to do it on their own and they know what an uphill battle it was.

When the big two were forced to choose between giving up every great new idea and most of the great talent working in the day or to bend a little....they bent.

Opening that door is something that should never be a footnote.

 

But I think the reason Yoram mentioned Youngblood and its 900k copies was because Dale's post about publication numbers and # of comics sold equated to a measure of overall artistic ability/quality/status and how the number of comics sold doesn't really mean a hill of beans as a measure of how good the comic is.

 

C

[pinupcartoonguy]

I'm not saying the above isn't true (Image paving the way for creator owned comics), what I'm really saying is I don't think the fact that McFarlane was one of the founders of Image has much impact on the value of Spider-Man art.

 

Really the bottom line is that certain artists are tied to very specific characters and storylines, and the bulk of the value of art is based on the nostalgia for that relationship.

 

When that's gone, the value of the art will diminish.

[comix4fun]

I'm not saying the above isn't true (Image paving the way for creator owned comics), what I'm really saying is I don't think the fact that McFarlane was one of the founders of Image has much impact on the value of Spider-Man art.

 

Really the bottom line is that certain artists are tied to very specific characters and storylines, and the bulk of the value of art is based on the nostalgia for that relationship.

 

When that's gone, the value of the art will diminish.

 

 

I totally agree.

 

C

[westform]

[

 

 

Oh sure, we as caring guardians of artwork can will the pages to our children but will they really care enough to hold onto the pages as keepsakes? I suspect most will not so supply will again stream into the marketplace via the offspring of the two largest comicart collecting demographics: Boomers and Gen Xers and guess what??? Today's generation of readers and collectors is a fraction of Gen Xers, and their children will be a fraction and so on and so forth.

 

Anyone remember Barnaby? A brilliant strip from the 1940s with a short run. Highly prized during its heyday, now all but forgotten. I suspect the same will happen with Calvin and Hobbes two generations from now.

 

With regard to Dan's comment about this being a nostalgia driven hobby and buying what you like...yes, I agree. However, I believe your conclusion is incorrect.

 

Ultimate Spiderman has consistently been one of the most popular titles within the last 10 years and Bagley and Bendis' run had a run of over 100 issues on USM. Perhaps today's kids will see their work as their generations Lee/Kirby collaboration and pursue this artwork for nostalgia reasons. How many of today's kids will actually spend the time and money to go back to the 1st 100 issues of FF or ASM if the character is completely different than the one they grew up with? If it is all about nostalgia, then I won't be holding my breath that Kirby and Ditko will maintain their prices in the future.

 

I think 'history' plays an important part of any collectable as well as nostalgia. If a collector gets serious about this hobby now and inthe future he will definately look to Kirby and Ditko. And, as regards Barnaby, I do remember him/it. And, go check the last sale from Heritage. A guy I know bought it and he paid a mint. I was in the running.... but gulp.... one would think it was a Peanuts strip. DF

[buyatari]

I love how things get fuddled in history with anecodates rather than fact so here's the facts:

 

1. It was Liefeld, not McFarlane that 'Spawned' Image comics (bad pun intended)

2. It was Youngblood that was Image's first release, not Spawn

3. Keown didn't ride anyone's coattails at Image. Jim Lee's Wildcat sales weren't as high as Dale's, nor were Stroman's (remember The Tribe), nor were Grell's (Shaman's Tears, Maggie the Cat), etc.

 

However, I agree that I don't see Dale's star rising in the future, but in the same token, I also don't see Alex Ross as a recognizable name outside of comics. Same thing with Turner.

 

 

 

I wasn't saying Spawn was released first. I was saying that only because McFarlane developed his style in books like Spiderman that the fan frenzy around that style of art even existed. I'm going so far to say that fans of McFarlane were so frenzied that they bought the artwork of anyone who was even close to McFarlane.There just wasn't enough McFarlane art to satisfy the demand. So titles like Youndblood sold 900,000 copies and artists like Steven Platt rose to mega-success overnight only because fans just couldn't find enough McFarlane on the shelves.

 

McFarlane's limited output left fans wanting more and there were several artists standing by to fill that demand. Many of these artists thought they were the new hot girl in town but they weren't. They were just the hot girl's best friends who only got dates because the hot new girl in town was booked.

[Mighty Hal]

I wasn't saying Spawn was released first. I was saying that only because McFarlane developed his style in books like Spiderman that the fan frenzy around that style of art even existed. I'm going so far to say that fans of McFarlane were so frenzied that they bought the artwork of anyone who was even close to McFarlane.There just wasn't enough McFarlane art to satisfy the demand. So titles like Youndblood sold 900,000 copies and artists like Steven Platt rose to mega-success overnight only because fans just couldn't find enough McFarlane on the shelves.

 

Not so. YOUNGBLOOD sold on the strength of Rob Liefeld's name. Liefeld was huge, back in the day, and his NEW MUTANTS/X-FORCE titles were some of the biggest comics ever. X-Force #1 sold four million copies, a record for its time. YOUNGBLOOD's success didn't have anything to do with McFarlane.