Baker Romance 43 43

[Point Five]

On 11/15/2023 at 9:09 AM, Darwination said:

So what is the deal with Overstreet (I assume that is where the ID comes from) and all of the Baker misidentifications?

The way artist identification works is that an expert (who often will have an intense focus on a particular artist or area and is also armed with the knowledge of what artists worked for what publishers or titles and when) makes an ID when absolutely positive. Otherwise, we use words like "probable" "likely" "suspected" or "possible." In comics, it is more complicated because of interplay between pencils and inks and studio work but the same rules apply, and we openly discuss the possibilities.

The Baker misidentification situation is perpetually ridiculous and unique, is there an origin story?

With respect, I'm not sure I'd say this is a "unique" situation... even limiting the conversation just to Baker, many attributions made long ago are in doubt. (See e.g. the recent conversation here on the Phantom Lady covers and interiors, which was eye-opening to me.)

Some of these Overstreet notes were made *decades* ago and keep riding on into each year's new edition. Folks on these boards have described trying to correct bits of misinformation in Overstreet and it doesn't sound like a particularly easy/consistent/straightforward process.

 

[Darwination]

Yeah, I guess I don't mean unique in that there aren't attributions out there in comics land (and elsewhere) that are questionable or that the waters aren't super murky in some cases, but the scope and high profile and number of dicey attributions with Baker strikes me.  And the fact that these identifications never seem to go away

Jim Vadeboncoeur, Jr. (rest in peace to the best IDer I've ever known) used to get incensed at all of this during the JVJ project at the digital museums (in which comic scanners like myself were granted access to his fantastic collection including many Baker treasures) to the point where it was kind of funny.

I get that no one wants to see the value of their books decline and that sellers love to tag a book "Matt Baker" (I do!) but there's really no harm in allowing for grey areas. IMO putting it "on the box" is straight up false advertising. You people (excuse the standard snark ) want some sort of assurances about these books in boxes, and this seems to me a very questionable assurance.

Edited November 15, 2023 by Darwination

[LadyDeath]

On 11/15/2023 at 7:57 AM, Point Five said:

The Saint #4 -- It's a lovely cover, and we've posted it here/argued about it here enough that I kinda sorta want one. But yeah, the formal poses/layout and the super-tight inking style are iffy at best. It doesn't feel Baker to me.

 

Well said! The gangster guy's clayish lobster hand gripping the gun is further proof it's not Baker. Usually hands/limbs are a good way to tell.

[LadyDeath]

On 11/15/2023 at 11:41 AM, Darwination said:

But the scope and high profile and number of dicey attributions with Baker strikes me.  And the fact that these identifications never seem to go away

I've mentioned this for a while, especially with the Phantom Lady covers. It's very annoying and suspect. Flyin' Jenny is another I brought up recently that is most likely a Jack Kamen cover misattributed to Baker. There's two graded copies up on ebay both with Baker's name emblazoned on the description. I don't know how it started or why it continues, but it needs to be corrected.

Edited November 15, 2023 by LadyDeath

[Point Five]

On 11/15/2023 at 2:32 PM, LadyDeath said:

There's two graded copies up on ebay both with Baker's name emblazoned on the description. I don't know how it started or why it continues, but it needs to be corrected.

Here's my handy chart again for these gray-area books, hope this helps:

--

If this book is in my collection = for sure not Baker  

If I'm selling it in the forum marketplace = "some attribute this cover to Baker"   

If I'm selling it on ebay = "classic Baker cover!!!"  

 

[LadyDeath]

Impressive.

[adamstrange]

On 11/15/2023 at 11:41 AM, Darwination said:

Yeah, I guess I don't mean unique in that there aren't attributions out there in comics land (and elsewhere) that are questionable or that the waters aren't super murky in some cases, but the scope and high profile and number of dicey attributions with Baker strikes me.  And the fact that these identifications never seem to go away

Jim Vadeboncoeur, Jr. (rest in peace to the best IDer I've ever known) used to get incensed at all of this during the JVJ project at the digital museums (in which comic scanners like myself were granted access to his fantastic collection including many Baker treasures) to the point where it was kind of funny.

I get that no one wants to see the value of their books decline and that sellers love to tag a book "Matt Baker" (I do!) but there's really no harm in allowing for grey areas. IMO putting it "on the box" is straight up false advertising. You people (excuse the standard snark ) want some sort of assurances about these books in boxes, and this seems to me a very questionable assurance.

The miracle is that we have so many creator attributions given the paucity of formal records and the neglect and disinterest of so many participants.

What has been accomplished, pre-internet, by Vadeboncoeur, Hames Ware, Jerry Bails, Michelle Nolan and many others working tirelessly uncompensated for decades, is extraordinary.  They were feeding information to Overstreet, who took advantage of this free resource to the extent he could, but he had enough of a challenge keeping up with what was published and what it's worth to obsess over artists' credits.  CGC is in a similar position and provide creator attributions as a supplement to their service rather than their primary focus.

Grand Comics Database offers a much better platform and supports a more rigorous process and repository than Overstreet.  It is an informal crowd-sourced effort and there are disagreements that can't always be resolved definitively. 

Artist attribution is not unique to comics.  Anyone taking a dip into the fine art market will quickly find a much more complicated process,  involving scientific expertise, historical research, computer-aided stylistic analysis, and Catalogue Raisonnée Committees.

I have enjoyed watching this series that is devoted to examining attribution questions.

 

[adamstrange]

In the art world, the value of an attribution to the right artist can be in the tens of millions.  There have been major court cases going back more than a century because experts disagreed.  It has become so contentious in recent decades that some academics won't even offer their opinion for fear of lawsuits requiring debilitating legal fees.

[comicnoir]

Maybe it's time to sell my copy before its attribution is changed.

[MusterMark]

On 11/16/2023 at 12:31 AM, comicnoir said:

Maybe it's time to sell my copy before its attribution is changed.

Ah, Classic Baker Cover.

[Changer]

hate to ask but what is the consensus on this one ... Kamen? 

[adamstrange]

On 11/16/2023 at 4:16 PM, Changer said:

hate to ask but what is the consensus on this one ... Kamen? 

Definitely Kamen, not that there's anything wrong with that.

[comicnoir]

On 11/16/2023 at 4:23 PM, adamstrange said:

Definitely Kamen, not that there's anything wrong with that.

But wait the two middle fingers held together is a Baker thing. I say inked by Kamen which he did a lot of.

[adamstrange]

On 11/16/2023 at 4:50 PM, comicnoir said:

But wait the two middle fingers held together is a Baker thing. I say inked by Kamen which he did a lot of.

The overall cover design matches Kamen and does not match Baker.  I don't see any Baker involvement.

[LadyDeath]

Don't think I've ever seen a rack like that by Baker.

[comicnoir]

On 11/16/2023 at 5:12 PM, LadyDeath said:

Don't think I've ever seen a rack like that by Baker.

I could show you interior pages.

[Yorick]

On 11/16/2023 at 1:16 PM, Changer said:

hate to ask but what is the consensus on this one ... Kamen? 

What a bummer.  I just looked that one up on GCD.  I was CERTAIN that the interiors would be Baker.  Oh well.

 

Scarce book.

[MBFan]

On 11/16/2023 at 3:16 PM, Changer said:

hate to ask but what is the consensus on this one ... Kamen? 

Looks like Kamen to me. 

[LadyDeath]

Was doing a little digging and found some risqué Baker.

[Darwination]

On 11/17/2023 at 11:57 AM, LadyDeath said:

Was doing a little digging and found some risqué Baker.

Oh, my, love the bottom sketch.  I'm not sure I've seen the last two of these.  Where do they come from?  I recently picked up Manhunt v01n08 and found no Baker (reading it as my gym book this week) which leaves me with I believe one remaining St. John digest I haven't seen with a decent possibility to contain his art (Verdict v01n01).