Sketch Covers vs Original Art Debate

[USArmyParatrooper]

Until this thread started, I hadn't really taken much of an interest in sketch covers.

 

Not knocking them . . . some of the illustrations I've been looking at are really good. (thumbs u

 

However, I could see myself quickly become bored with endless portrait shots of various superhero characters.

 

Not quite sure why you can have a cover with a (pre-printed) X-MEN logo that features a portrait of THOR?

 

What's the reasoning behind that?

 

 

Endless portrait shots? There's a lot more than that out there. Sketch covers are as versatile as the comics you see on the shelf, obviously.

 

Sketch covers give you the ability to have your favorite artist create a custom comic book just for you. If that isn't cool I don't know what is.

 

I'm still baffled by this whole "verses" thing. Sketch covers and traditional OA have their own appeal for different reasons. One isn't better than the other, it's personal preference. I enjoy and appreciate original art, but sketch covers cover both, my appreciation for comics and art.

[Terry Doyle]

Until this thread started, I hadn't really taken much of an interest in sketch covers.

 

Not knocking them . . . some of the illustrations I've been looking at are really good. (thumbs u

 

However, I could see myself quickly become bored with endless portrait shots of various superhero characters.

 

Not quite sure why you can have a cover with a (pre-printed) X-MEN logo that features a portrait of THOR?

 

What's the reasoning behind that?

 

 

Endless portrait shots? There's a lot more than that out there. Sketch covers are as versatile as the comics you see on the shelf, obviously.

 

Sketch covers give you the ability to have your favorite artist create a custom comic book just for you. If that isn't cool I don't know what is.

 

I'm still baffled by this whole "verses" thing. Sketch covers and traditional OA have their own appeal for different reasons. One isn't better than the other, it's personal preference. I enjoy and appreciate original art, but sketch covers cover both, my appreciation for comics and art.

 

Not so obvious to me as I don't readily see the 'versatility' you talk of.

 

Please post some examples that show a wider spectrum over the fairly standard (portrait shot) examples I've seen thus far. Examples that stir the imagination, please.

 

The design of a good cover illustration is meant to intrigue . . . make you want to buy the comic-book and read the story.

 

 

 

[CollectingFool]

Endless portrait shots? There's a lot more than that out there.

 

OK, here's my attempt to answer these points from a traditional comic art collector viewpoint.

 

Regarding the comment above, to me these comic cover sketches look like the free sketches I used to get when I started collecting. At most, they look like $20 sketches. I know many are very intricate and beautiful but based on the size, medium and image this is the type of stuff artists would do for you at a con if you didn't want to pay money or if you didn't want to spring for a "take home" commission. I know things have changed but I'm sure you can understand the inability for some to conceive of spending $300 for a small con sketch in a cheap medium on some of the worst drawing paper possible when they didn't bother getting equivalent pieces for free when they were able to.

 

Sketch covers give you the ability to have your favorite artist create a custom comic book just for you. If that isn't cool I don't know what is.

 

How about having a piece of art that is actually from the published comic that sold 20, 40, 80, 100 thousand or even millions of copies. Yes, that same comic that sparked your imagination when you were 10 and sent your life off in a million different directions, you can own a piece of it. The one and only piece! You can even have that one page that perfectly summarizes every childhood memory. That one page you read over and over imagining you were the hero or just read to lose yourself in the story and escape life because your parents are getting a divorce or you're stuck in a hospital or you're getting beaten up in school. Its that emotional connection that drew many OA collectors I know into the hobby. They can't understand getting all excited about some con sketch some guy they just heard about a couple of years ago did on a blank comic book that in itself seems gimmicky.

 

I'm still baffled by this whole "verses" thing.

 

To me that is the easiest thing to address. Unless you have unlimited funds you have to make a choice about what to buy. One over the other because many times you can't have both. Do I want a marker sketch on a comic or do I want a pen & ink published piece on 11x 17 4-ply Artist's board that I can frame and hang on my wall. Or maybe a nice similar sized watercolor commission that will last hundreds of years if handled correctly. Might not seem like a big deal when you look at the price of one piece but most collectors I know are compulsive and have tons of pieces. Do I want to spend the time and money to get a collection of slabbed sketch covers when I can spend that time and money going for a rare coveted piece for the collection I already have? Seems like a no-brained to me.

 

I don't agree 100% with every point I made here but wanted to show you what I believe other people are thinking. I do agree with most of it though. This isn't meant as an attack on the subset of the hobby you've chosen. I collect a ton of stuff most people here would think is worthless too. It's all good, whatever turns you on. It's just not "original comic art" in the way many people here have understood it to be for decades.

[Weird Paper]

How about having a piece of art that is actually from the published comic that sold 20, 40, 80, 100 thousand or even millions of copies. Yes, that same comic that sparked your imagination when you were 10 and sent your life off in a million different directions, you can own a piece of it. The one and only piece! You can even have that one page that perfectly summarizes every childhood memory. That one page you read over and over imagining you were the hero or just read to lose yourself in the story and escape life because your parents are getting a divorce or you're stuck in a hospital or you're getting beaten up in school. Its that emotional connection that drew many OA collectors I know into the hobby. They can't understand getting all excited about some con sketch some guy they just heard about a couple of years ago did on a blank comic book that in itself seems gimmicky.

 

BOOM! Beautiful, Ruben. I can't imagine it being stated any better than that.

[chrisco37]

As long as everyone stays away from sketch cards

 

Now, THAT'S where its's at

 

 

Love it!

[Weird Paper]

Sketch cards... ughhh... Sketch cards are the cancer of the ebay original art section.

[innocuous]

How about having a piece of art that is actually from the published comic that sold 20, 40, 80, 100 thousand or even millions of copies. Yes, that same comic that sparked your imagination when you were 10 and sent your life off in a million different directions, you can own a piece of it. The one and only piece! You can even have that one page that perfectly summarizes every childhood memory. That one page you read over and over imagining you were the hero or just read to lose yourself in the story and escape life because your parents are getting a divorce or you're stuck in a hospital or you're getting beaten up in school. Its that emotional connection that drew many OA collectors I know into the hobby. They can't understand getting all excited about some con sketch some guy they just heard about a couple of years ago did on a blank comic book that in itself seems gimmicky.

 

BOOM! Beautiful, Ruben. I can't imagine it being stated any better than that.

I agree. Thank you.

 

I have two observations about why sketch covers may be so popular: younger collectors and availability (of modern artists as well as blanks).

 

At conventions, the collectors of current comics, going back maybe 15 years, can readily find their favorite artist. They can meet the artist, praise their work and get something done personally. And, you can still pick up a published page as well.

 

At any given comic convention, how many artists will you find from the Bronze Age or earlier. (Same question about fans and collectors.) Put that number up against artists (fans and collectors) from the last 15 years and there is no comparison.

 

Put another way, if Steve Ditko showed up at a show and offered sketches, the line would have a lot of 40 and 50 year old guys. (Although I would use a backing board and not a sketch cover.)

 

Disclosure: I'll also stand in the long line for modern artists. My Flash sketch from Francis Manapul is awesome.

[Guest Grails]

The lack of humility here from "experienced" collectors is surprising.

[seanfingh]

Until this thread started, I hadn't really taken much of an interest in sketch covers.

 

Not knocking them . . . some of the illustrations I've been looking at are really good. (thumbs u

 

However, I could see myself quickly become bored with endless portrait shots of various superhero characters.

 

Not quite sure why you can have a cover with a (pre-printed) X-MEN logo that features a portrait of THOR?

 

What's the reasoning behind that?

 

 

Endless portrait shots? There's a lot more than that out there. Sketch covers are as versatile as the comics you see on the shelf, obviously.

 

Sketch covers give you the ability to have your favorite artist create a custom comic book just for you. If that isn't cool I don't know what is.

 

I'm still baffled by this whole "verses" thing. Sketch covers and traditional OA have their own appeal for different reasons. One isn't better than the other, it's personal preference. I enjoy and appreciate original art, but sketch covers cover both, my appreciation for comics and art.

 

Not so obvious to me as I don't readily see the 'versatility' you talk of.

 

Please post some examples that show a wider spectrum over the fairly standard (portrait shot) examples I've seen thus far. Examples that stir the imagination, please.

 

The design of a good cover illustration is meant to intrigue . . . make you want to buy the comic-book and read the story.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AKA Rick]

...and in the same breath, if Steve Ditko were appearing at a show charging $300+ and insisted that the only sketches he was doing was only on sketch covers, no commissions on boards, and no original art for sale, I'm sure a lot of the anti-sketch cover art collectors might reconsider their stance a bit and stand in that line (probably filled by eBay opportunists).

 

I think the reason prices seem a bit off balanced if not shocking for the sketch covers is because of those eBay type auctions. It's the supply and demand chain which ended up creating these commission rates. While standing in sketch lines you always hear at least one obnoxious fan boast about how much they're going to sell what they're waiting in line to get off of eBay for massive profit. Even quick doodle sketches on a $5 sketch cover for free can raise the "value" of what a book sells for to at least $10 if not $20 or more, so where else can you invest $5 and get double if not quadruple return on your investment? Not the stock market. Of course, people don't place value on time (sometimes waiting for sketches takes forever, and sometimes people drive distances only to get shut out, so there are inherant risks and no guarantees in the acquisition)

 

I think some higher profile artists not to long ago used to draw on sketch covers for free if not cheaper, only to feel a bit used and jaded when they hear the majority were acquired not by fans wanting to take home a souveir from meeting their favorite artist, but a bunch of comic book pimps trying to treat artists like their hos who are doing all of the work, but not reaping the lion's share of the reward. Tired of seeing that, I think some artists, and I think at one time Neal Adams once said, something such as - I used to do free sketches for people saying they're lifetime fans, only to see that art go up on eBay before the ink even dried" - - So, an artist like thaat seeing his or her art go into the hands of the real fans not able to go to the shows and the rates they command, so reacting to that in raising the prices, people like Neal Adams are simply eliminating the middle man pimps and going direct to the consumer/collector. I can't blame artists for charging what they can. If people are buying, and others are getting paid, why not them.

 

Unfortunately the fun and fandom has been impacted by the few bad seeds who use what used to be a fun fan friendly environment into everyone being bunched in as suspecious folk. Recently, I heard of some guy using his kid to get a free sketch from J Scott Campbell who asked for a "Black Cat" (odd for a child to want that character) which subsequently of course offered for sale. So, you're now seeing people manipulate the system with lies and by any means necessary in the name of economics and greed. I've been in a long line at a convention with some guy in line coaching his ESL wife, who barely spoke English while waiting on what to ask an artist to draw for her, so he was essentially double dipping in a free sketch line by bringing a non-fan. I've heard other fans in line mixed with others getting autographs approach those fans who just wanted an autograph and say "Hey, if I give you $5, would you take this paper and ask for a sketch of ______?" (some don't even offer the $5!).

 

 

[bryan91]

Way to throw in the fingh original there Sean.

[Terry Doyle]

Until this thread started, I hadn't really taken much of an interest in sketch covers.

 

Not knocking them . . . some of the illustrations I've been looking at are really good. (thumbs u

 

However, I could see myself quickly become bored with endless portrait shots of various superhero characters.

 

Not quite sure why you can have a cover with a (pre-printed) X-MEN logo that features a portrait of THOR?

 

What's the reasoning behind that?

 

 

Endless portrait shots? There's a lot more than that out there. Sketch covers are as versatile as the comics you see on the shelf, obviously.

 

Sketch covers give you the ability to have your favorite artist create a custom comic book just for you. If that isn't cool I don't know what is.

 

I'm still baffled by this whole "verses" thing. Sketch covers and traditional OA have their own appeal for different reasons. One isn't better than the other, it's personal preference. I enjoy and appreciate original art, but sketch covers cover both, my appreciation for comics and art.

 

Not so obvious to me as I don't readily see the 'versatility' you talk of.

 

Please post some examples that show a wider spectrum over the fairly standard (portrait shot) examples I've seen thus far. Examples that stir the imagination, please.

 

The design of a good cover illustration is meant to intrigue . . . make you want to buy the comic-book and read the story.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Still not seeing much by way of a 'visual hook' in any of these examples, sorry.

 

Any particular reason that the Sgt Rock sketch is illustrated on an Avengers template?

 

Same with the spider-web doodle appearing on a Cap America?

 

 

 

 

[Baron]

Sketch cards... ughhh... Sketch cards are the cancer of the ebay original art section.

 

"Production Art" (aka acetate copies) are the swine flu of the eBay original art section.

[seanfingh]

Until this thread started, I hadn't really taken much of an interest in sketch covers.

 

Not knocking them . . . some of the illustrations I've been looking at are really good. (thumbs u

 

However, I could see myself quickly become bored with endless portrait shots of various superhero characters.

 

Not quite sure why you can have a cover with a (pre-printed) X-MEN logo that features a portrait of THOR?

 

What's the reasoning behind that?

 

 

Endless portrait shots? There's a lot more than that out there. Sketch covers are as versatile as the comics you see on the shelf, obviously.

 

Sketch covers give you the ability to have your favorite artist create a custom comic book just for you. If that isn't cool I don't know what is.

 

I'm still baffled by this whole "verses" thing. Sketch covers and traditional OA have their own appeal for different reasons. One isn't better than the other, it's personal preference. I enjoy and appreciate original art, but sketch covers cover both, my appreciation for comics and art.

 

Not so obvious to me as I don't readily see the 'versatility' you talk of.

 

Please post some examples that show a wider spectrum over the fairly standard (portrait shot) examples I've seen thus far. Examples that stir the imagination, please.

 

The design of a good cover illustration is meant to intrigue . . . make you want to buy the comic-book and read the story.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Still not seeing much by way of a 'visual hook' in any of these examples, sorry.

 

Any particular reason that the Sgt Rock sketch is illustrated on an Avengers template?

 

Same with the spider-web doodle appearing on a Cap America?

 

 

 

 

If you wouldn't buy a Warlock comic with that Castrillo cover, or a comic with that Heath Sgt Rock cover then you have no hope and you just hate sketch covers, which is fine.

 

I also love the "evolution of the Hulk" but can see that may not be for everyone's tastes.

 

There have never been any DC blanks made, so if you want DC characters you are stuck. It is what it is.

 

I drew the Spider-Man myself, and it was meant to be fun and funny, but I either failed, or you have no appreciable sense of humor.

[Terry Doyle]

Until this thread started, I hadn't really taken much of an interest in sketch covers.

 

Not knocking them . . . some of the illustrations I've been looking at are really good. (thumbs u

 

However, I could see myself quickly become bored with endless portrait shots of various superhero characters.

 

Not quite sure why you can have a cover with a (pre-printed) X-MEN logo that features a portrait of THOR?

 

What's the reasoning behind that?

 

 

Endless portrait shots? There's a lot more than that out there. Sketch covers are as versatile as the comics you see on the shelf, obviously.

 

Sketch covers give you the ability to have your favorite artist create a custom comic book just for you. If that isn't cool I don't know what is.

 

I'm still baffled by this whole "verses" thing. Sketch covers and traditional OA have their own appeal for different reasons. One isn't better than the other, it's personal preference. I enjoy and appreciate original art, but sketch covers cover both, my appreciation for comics and art.

 

Not so obvious to me as I don't readily see the 'versatility' you talk of.

 

Please post some examples that show a wider spectrum over the fairly standard (portrait shot) examples I've seen thus far. Examples that stir the imagination, please.

 

The design of a good cover illustration is meant to intrigue . . . make you want to buy the comic-book and read the story.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Still not seeing much by way of a 'visual hook' in any of these examples, sorry.

 

Any particular reason that the Sgt Rock sketch is illustrated on an Avengers template?

 

Same with the spider-web doodle appearing on a Cap America?

 

 

 

 

If you wouldn't buy a Warlock comic with that Castrillo cover, or a comic with that Heath Sgt Rock cover then you have no hope and you just hate sketch covers, which is fine.

 

I also love the "evolution of the Hulk" but can see that may not be for everyone's tastes.

 

There have never been any DC blanks made, so if you want DC characters you are stuck. It is what it is.

 

I drew the Spider-Man myself, and it was meant to be fun and funny, but I either failed, or you have no appreciable sense of humor.

 

I never said I hated sketch covers, so please don't try to put words in my mouth.

 

All I was suggesting was that the (majority of) portrait shots I've been seeing (up to now) have limited appeal to me and are not very inventive.

 

As for Russ Heath, I own two covers by him.

 

Lots of love for Russ, he's one of the all-time-greats, but the piece you showcase is a character sketch, not a true cover design (intended to sell an interior story).

 

At last, someone has bothered to explain the reasoning behind the conflict of backing template vs. pictorial content. Thanks for that.

 

Still find it incredibly odd, but it's down to personal choice if you want to have that kind of contradiction in your collection.

 

I had absolutely no idea that the doodle was your own work, sorry. I have a great sense of humor, but just didn't get the joke (how is it meant to be funny?). Again, sorry . . .

[seanfingh]

 

I never said I hated sketch covers, so please don't try to put words in my mouth.

 

All I was suggesting was that the (majority of) portrait shots I've been seeing (up to now) have limited appeal to me and are not very inventive.

 

As for Russ Heath, I own two covers by him.

 

Lots of love for Russ, he's one of the all-time-greats, but the piece you showcase is a character sketch, not a true cover design (intended to sell an interior story).

 

At last, someone has bothered to explain the reasoning behind the conflict of backing template vs. pictorial content. Thanks for that.

 

Still find it incredibly odd, but it's down to personal choice if you want to have that kind of contradiction in your collection.

 

I had absolutely no idea that the doodle was your own work, sorry. I have a great sense of humor, but just didn't get the joke. Again, sorry . . .

 

I just don't get why anyone that is as far into published OA would bother to take the time to point out all the flaws with sketch covers. First, they are too "portrait-like," then if they are not portraits, they are not evocative enough.

 

The bottom line is that sketch covers are low end OA. They are cheap commissions (or at least they used to be until some started selling for some tall coin.) There is no comparison to published OA, except (with personal opinion being the governing point) that the best sketch covers are often more attractive than really crappy panel pages.

 

Having guys that own covers from comic masters talk about how sketch covers are is like having the Red Sox come into a Little League and start critiquing batting stances. It's crass.

[Terry Doyle]

 

I never said I hated sketch covers, so please don't try to put words in my mouth.

 

All I was suggesting was that the (majority of) portrait shots I've been seeing (up to now) have limited appeal to me and are not very inventive.

 

As for Russ Heath, I own two covers by him.

 

Lots of love for Russ, he's one of the all-time-greats, but the piece you showcase is a character sketch, not a true cover design (intended to sell an interior story).

 

At last, someone has bothered to explain the reasoning behind the conflict of backing template vs. pictorial content. Thanks for that.

 

Still find it incredibly odd, but it's down to personal choice if you want to have that kind of contradiction in your collection.

 

I had absolutely no idea that the doodle was your own work, sorry. I have a great sense of humor, but just didn't get the joke. Again, sorry . . .

 

I just don't get why anyone that is as far into published OA would bother to take the time to point out all the flaws with sketch covers. First, they are too "portrait-like," then if they are not portraits, they are not evocative enough.

 

The bottom line is that sketch covers are low end OA. They are cheap commissions (or at least they used to be until some started selling for some tall coin.) There is no comparison to published OA, except (with personal opinion being the governing point) that the best sketch covers are often more attractive than really crappy panel pages.

 

Having guys that own covers from comic masters talk about how sketch covers are is like having the Red Sox come into a Little League and start critiquing batting stances. It's crass.

 

Because this is a forum in which exchange thoughts and opinions. That's interesting to most of us, the reason we frequent these boards, and this just happens to be a hot topic. Not everyone's going to see eye-to-eye. So what? No big deal to me if you diasgree with what I have say - you're entitled to your own opinions . . and I'm entitled to mine.

 

You challenged my thoughts on this topic, so I replied to you and provided my points of view. That's all. What's to get peeved about?

 

You brought up the subject of Russ Heath and I explained that I'm a fan.

 

Again, you're trying to put words into my mouth. At no point have I ever referred to sketch covers as being s*h*i*t*t*y. But I did make the point of saying that some of the illustrations I've seen are actually very good. And I even gave a big (thumbs u to signify my approval for the better examples.

[seanfingh]

 

I never said I hated sketch covers, so please don't try to put words in my mouth.

 

All I was suggesting was that the (majority of) portrait shots I've been seeing (up to now) have limited appeal to me and are not very inventive.

 

As for Russ Heath, I own two covers by him.

 

Lots of love for Russ, he's one of the all-time-greats, but the piece you showcase is a character sketch, not a true cover design (intended to sell an interior story).

 

At last, someone has bothered to explain the reasoning behind the conflict of backing template vs. pictorial content. Thanks for that.

 

Still find it incredibly odd, but it's down to personal choice if you want to have that kind of contradiction in your collection.

 

I had absolutely no idea that the doodle was your own work, sorry. I have a great sense of humor, but just didn't get the joke. Again, sorry . . .

 

I just don't get why anyone that is as far into published OA would bother to take the time to point out all the flaws with sketch covers. First, they are too "portrait-like," then if they are not portraits, they are not evocative enough.

 

The bottom line is that sketch covers are low end OA. They are cheap commissions (or at least they used to be until some started selling for some tall coin.) There is no comparison to published OA, except (with personal opinion being the governing point) that the best sketch covers are often more attractive than really crappy panel pages.

 

Having guys that own covers from comic masters talk about how sketch covers are is like having the Red Sox come into a Little League and start critiquing batting stances. It's crass.

 

Because this is a forum in which exchange thoughts and opinions. That's interesting to most of us, and this just happens to be a hot topic. Not everyone's going to see eye-to-eye. So what? No big deal to me if you diasgree with what I have say - you're entitled to your own opinions . . and I'm entitled to mine.

 

You challenged my thoughts on this topic, so I replied to you and provided my points of view. That's all. What's to get peeved about?

 

You brought up the subject of Russ Heath and I explained that I'm a fan.

 

Again, you're trying to put words into my mouth. At no point have I ever referred to sketch covers as being s*h*i*t*t*y. But I did make the point that some of the illustrations I've seen are actually very good. And I even gave a big (thumbs u to signify my approval for the better examples.

 

I'm not peeved at anyone other than JJ. He decided that it would be awesome to have all the big OA swinging weigh in on sketch covers, because there were some retards talking about how sketch covers were going to dominate published OA in the years to come because of the authentication.

 

This led to a bunch of guys with covers worth more than either of my houses to pounce. Of course you guys are right. Published OA is not only the gold standard, but it typically represents more work, a larger area, and most importantly, a link to the comics themselves, which is where the obsession began. Again, it is like Chuck Norris kicking the mess out of a guy with muscular dystrophy.

[Guest Grails]

Not mine, but a great sketch posted in the "other" thread.

[comix4fun]

 

I never said I hated sketch covers, so please don't try to put words in my mouth.

 

All I was suggesting was that the (majority of) portrait shots I've been seeing (up to now) have limited appeal to me and are not very inventive.

 

As for Russ Heath, I own two covers by him.

 

Lots of love for Russ, he's one of the all-time-greats, but the piece you showcase is a character sketch, not a true cover design (intended to sell an interior story).

 

At last, someone has bothered to explain the reasoning behind the conflict of backing template vs. pictorial content. Thanks for that.

 

Still find it incredibly odd, but it's down to personal choice if you want to have that kind of contradiction in your collection.

 

I had absolutely no idea that the doodle was your own work, sorry. I have a great sense of humor, but just didn't get the joke. Again, sorry . . .

 

I just don't get why anyone that is as far into published OA would bother to take the time to point out all the flaws with sketch covers. First, they are too "portrait-like," then if they are not portraits, they are not evocative enough.

 

The bottom line is that sketch covers are low end OA. They are cheap commissions (or at least they used to be until some started selling for some tall coin.) There is no comparison to published OA, except (with personal opinion being the governing point) that the best sketch covers are often more attractive than really crappy panel pages.

 

Having guys that own covers from comic masters talk about how sketch covers are is like having the Red Sox come into a Little League and start critiquing batting stances. It's crass.

 

Because this is a forum in which exchange thoughts and opinions. That's interesting to most of us, and this just happens to be a hot topic. Not everyone's going to see eye-to-eye. So what? No big deal to me if you diasgree with what I have say - you're entitled to your own opinions . . and I'm entitled to mine.

 

You challenged my thoughts on this topic, so I replied to you and provided my points of view. That's all. What's to get peeved about?

 

You brought up the subject of Russ Heath and I explained that I'm a fan.

 

Again, you're trying to put words into my mouth. At no point have I ever referred to sketch covers as being s*h*i*t*t*y. But I did make the point that some of the illustrations I've seen are actually very good. And I even gave a big (thumbs u to signify my approval for the better examples.

 

I'm not peeved at anyone other than JJ. He decided that it would be awesome to have all the big OA swinging weigh in on sketch covers, because there were some retards talking about how sketch covers were going to dominate published OA in the years to come because of the authentication.

 

This led to a bunch of guys with covers worth more than either of my houses to pounce. Of course you guys are right. Published OA is not only the gold standard, but it typically represents more work, a larger area, and most importantly, a link to the comics themselves, which is where the obsession began. Again, it is like Chuck Norris kicking the mess out of a guy with muscular dystrophy.

 

 

I saw that Norris movie...that guy had it coming.