Sketch Covers vs Original Art Debate

[Guest Grails]

 

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.

 

Well said. Goes back to my comment about a surprising lack of humility here.

 

[Nexus]

 

 

 

 

 

I've never gotten a sketch cover before, but those are some nice ones. I especially like the Hulk piece and the Heath.

 

Let's face it...con sketches are, for the most part, a total shoot. Regardless of the size or medium. No one expects to get a masterpiece. I see them as fun mementos and I get the appeal of an unique commissioned piece over run-of-the-mill published OA for the same price. Having said that, I've largely stopped getting con sketches. Individually, there are worse ways to spend a hundy or two in the hobby. But they add up after a while. I've decided I'd rather have one nice panel page than a dozen sketches. Of course, to each their own, as always.

[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, 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.

 

Sounds like my kind of movie!

 

[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, 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.

 

Well said. Goes back to my comment about a surprising lack of humility here.

 

Nature of the beast.

 

We get very passionate and carried away with the momentum of lively debate.

 

Civility and respect are often the first casualties that get jettisoned when passions run high.

 

That should come as no surprise to anyone who frequents these boards.

[Pete Marino]

I feel like this debate has pretty much become like 2 sets of parents trying to prove who's kid is smarter.

 

Some people like coke, some like pepsi. Both are good, just depends on your personal taste.

[comix4fun]

I feel like this debate has pretty much become like 2 sets of parents trying to prove who's kid is smarter.

.

 

 

 

Exactly....and for the record....mine is.

[NelsonAI]

I am an OA collector but have purchased 1 blank cover sketch comic book. It was part of the Heroes Initiative charity auctions on ebay. I bid on a few and won 1.

 

While it may be the last I ever purchase, the reasons which prompted me to enter the auction were:

 

1) It was for charity.

2) the covers were subsequently published in a compilation book.

3) it was sanctioned by Marvel

4) CGC graded the comic and authenticated the sketch for free

5) You were able to see the finished art on ebay as opposed to the hit or miss aspect of a commission.

 

Considering what variant cover comics with no OA sell for, having a sanctioned true 1/1 OA cover is IMHO a better value.

 

Cheers!

N.

 

 

[Terry Doyle]

I feel like this debate has pretty much become like 2 sets of parents trying to prove who's kid is smarter.

 

Some people like coke, some like pepsi. Both are good, just depends on your personal taste.

 

Have you ever tried snorting pepsi???

 

[CollectingFool]

Well said. Goes back to my comment about a surprising lack of humility

Unless I missed something I don't see a "surprising lack of humility" in anyone's responses here. Then again you may be referring to me in which case I can't really judge. I know Terry's style of discourse on this forum is a bit more confrontational than most and maybe that is something you aren't accustomed to.

 

I think what happened is you saw people saying less than glowing things about something you like and it felt like a personal attack. Happens all the time here. It is a discussion group and it would be a pretty boring and pointless place if everyone agreed on every topic.

 

First time I saw one of those blanks at a comic shop I bought one and thought it might be a neat idea. In the end the blank sits in my closet and I didn't feel it was worth my time or effort to get a sketch on it. Never even occurred to me someone might slab it.

 

In a way I did something like this years ago. I collected Marvel and DC cover prelims done on the company paper stock

 

http://www.collectingfool.com/unpublished/severinm-crazyprelim.jpg

 

That evolved into it's own collection and then I made blanks of the Marvel and DC preliminary stock and had artists do sketches on those. I thought it was a way to get a quick sketch from an artist at a con and that the logo preprinted on the paper gave the piece a more finished look. So as you can see I do understand some of the appeal. It's the whole slabbing of it where you lose me. That and when it becomes more than just a quick cheap way of getting a sketch. Once real effort and money is involved my primary obsession kicks in!

 

 

[Guest Grails]

Well said. Goes back to my comment about a surprising lack of humility

Unless I missed something I don't see a "surprising lack of humility" in anyone's responses here.

 

If you don't see it, I won't change your mind.

 

I think what happened is you saw people saying less than glowing things about something you like and it felt like a personal attack.

 

Couldn't be further from the reason why I posted in this topic.

 

[MyNameIsLegion]

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.

 

 

WORD!

 

Sketches, sketch cards, sketch covers, and the like are boils on the posterior of original art collecting

[seanfingh]

 

Assboils.

[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.

 

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.

 

 

 

My first two sketch covers that I'm still waiting on.

 

Stephen Segovia

 

 

Matt Slay (unpublished)

 

 

[JadeGiant]

I like sketch covers and think it is a cool concept. I enjoy looking at those who collect them and have a well done and thought out collection. It does appeal to the OCD in me in that they are themed, always the same shape (slabbed) and have a lot of possibilities. I don't have any myself short of a blank Hulk I picked up at the LCS on a whim. I still prefer more conventional commissions myself. This is just the newest part of the hobby - not sure if it for me but I think they are here to stay.

[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.

 

 

 

My first two sketch covers that I'm still waiting on.

 

Matt Slay (unpublished)

 

 

Look quite nice. But one thing puzzles me . . .

 

Why is the Hulk's head growing out of his chest?

 

[Speedy-D]

I missed this place.

 

Sketch covers blow and are for idjits.

[spideyfan88]

I missed this place.

 

Sketch covers blow and are for idjits.

 

 

i thought you liked mine

[Speedy-D]

I missed this place.

 

Sketch covers blow and are for idjits.

 

 

i thought you liked mine

O yeah, except for the good ones.

[comix4fun]

I missed this place.

 

Sketch covers blow and are for idjits.

 

 

i thought you liked mine

 

 

Love your sketchcovers...however, all those pics of your books aren't really your sigline are they?

[spideyfan88]

im working on getting it smaller.............