New to OA Collecting, Advice, tips? 9 9

[Rick2you2]

On 9/10/2022 at 4:55 PM, Hawkgirl said:

I have another question. I have a couple of pages, and most have the artist’s name on it, but one of the pages doesn’t. In general, I expect the artist’s name to be on the page somewhere, as well as the comic’s title for Marvel and DC work, so I’m not sure what to think about the page that is missing those (it’s from a Marvel comic but is on plain Bristol board instead of the official Marvel art board). 

What are your thoughts on getting a page signed by the artist (either if the page already has the artist’s name or if the name isn’t on there)? Is it normal to buy a page that doesn’t have the artist’s name anywhere on it? 

If you mean written in on the top, it is usually included, but its absence is not likely to matter. The only question I would have, and which is presumably your concern, is whether it is fake. Extremely unlikely, the artist probably ran out of Marvel board, or didn’t like its texture. Just look at the comic and compare tiny details.

[BVladimirHarkonnen]

Anyone have experience with these scanners?

I've been looking for a better at home solution and for the price points ($369 and $469 on Amazon) this seems like it'd fit the bill

Flat bed size is 12x17 

Edited September 21, 2022 by BVladimirHarkonnen

[Dr. Balls]

On 9/10/2022 at 2:55 PM, Hawkgirl said:

I have another question. I have a couple of pages, and most have the artist’s name on it, but one of the pages doesn’t. In general, I expect the artist’s name to be on the page somewhere, as well as the comic’s title for Marvel and DC work, so I’m not sure what to think about the page that is missing those (it’s from a Marvel comic but is on plain Bristol board instead of the official Marvel art board). 

What are your thoughts on getting a page signed by the artist (either if the page already has the artist’s name or if the name isn’t on there)? Is it normal to buy a page that doesn’t have the artist’s name anywhere on it? 

I would say 80% of the pages I have are not signed by the artist. And I feel if I can track down the comic to have as proof it was produced, I consider that good enough provenance.

I will likely never actually meet the artist who drew it, so the signature - for me - has no sentimental value, so I prefer art that is not signed afterwards (but it's seldom a deal-breaker if it is). I feel it disrupts the visual flow of the page, even if it's signed in the margin. However, I totally understand that people meeting the artist or buying the art from them might like them to sign it.

[alxjhnsn]

On 9/21/2022 at 9:21 AM, BVladimirHarkonnen said:

Anyone have experience with these scanners?

I've been looking for a better at home solution and for the price points ($369 and $469 on Amazon) this seems like it'd fit the bill

Flat bed size is 12x17 

I do not, but I've seen my Epson All-in-One WF-7710/7720 for less than either and it prints, faxes, scans, makes soup. Yes, the scanning bed is A3 (bigger
16.5inch x 11.7inch)

https://thedroidguy.com/wf-7710-vs-7720-1134443

[Rick2you2]

On 9/21/2022 at 10:21 AM, BVladimirHarkonnen said:

Anyone have experience with these scanners?

I've been looking for a better at home solution and for the price points ($369 and $469 on Amazon) this seems like it'd fit the bill

Flat bed size is 12x17 

I use a Brother MFC-J6545DW, which is $520 on Amazon. Since it’s also a printer, it saves space, and comes with auto feed for documents. It uses ink tanks, which save money (although, in over 2 years, I still haven’t added ink to the initial supply). I found the software a little annoying, at first, and it was hard to find the hard wired connection on the machine due to poor directions (top quarter lifts up), but the scan qualities and printing, along with the speed are quite good. Be warned that this thing is pretty large for a tabletop unit.

There is a newer version (J6555DW for only $330 or so on Amazon).

Edited September 21, 2022 by Rick2you2

[BVladimirHarkonnen]

On 9/21/2022 at 1:46 PM, alxjhnsn said:

I do not, but I've seen my Epson All-in-One WF-7710/7720 for less than either and it prints, faxes, scans, makes soup. Yes, the scanning bed is A3 (bigger
16.5inch x 11.7inch)

https://thedroidguy.com/wf-7710-vs-7720-1134443

 

On 9/21/2022 at 5:45 PM, Rick2you2 said:

I use a Brother MFC-J6545DW, which is $520 on Amazon. Since it’s also a printer, it saves space, and comes with auto feed for documents. It uses ink tanks, which save money (although, in over 2 years, I still haven’t added ink to the initial supply). I found the software a little annoying, at first, and it was hard to find the hard wired connection on the machine due to poor directions (top quarter lifts up), but the scan qualities and printing, along with the speed are quite good. Be warned that this thing is pretty large for a tabletop unit.

There is a newer version (J6555DW for only $330 or so on Amazon).

Thanks I'll look into those, I have a Brother Laserjet AIO already which has a glass bed but its fairly small.

I also have a dedicated one (CanoScan LiDE 110) but wouldn't mind a not overly expensive larger format. 

[New School Fool]

On 8/16/2022 at 6:28 PM, Hawkgirl said:

Hi! I’m new to this forum. I got started in the OA hobby in 2018 after getting a sketch cover at a con, and I’ve been collecting comics my whole life. I’m slowly easing into getting more serious about collecting OA, both commissions and OA pages. Any advice on budgeting, pacing yourself, targeting certain artists?

I’m late 20s and single, no kids, but want to balance this hobby with saving for the future. I’m currently focusing a bit on ‘quantity’ over ‘quality’, so I’m buying more smaller/less expensive things rather than more epensive/bigger names as I start building out my collection.

Some of my favorite current artists are Dan Mora, Jorge Jimenez, Chris Samnee, Doc Shaner, Tom Reilly, Bilquis Evely, and Elsa Charretier. I would love to hear any recomendations of similar artists, especially ones who have that throwback, simplified comic art, or use negative space in their style. I also want to get into collecting up-and-coming artists if you know of any.

Do you all collect mostly current art or older art, like pages from your favorite comics as a kid, or both?

How do you feel about Artist’s Proofs for current artists who work entirely digitally?

Welcome to the hobby! I started a little earlier than you (2017) and also had similar questions when I started. While this forum is great to get advice on the hobby that you probably won't find elsewhere, I will caution you though that the demograph here represents just a fraction of the hobby in its entirety so the advice you get may not be indicative or the hobby as a whole....that's what I've found out anyway.

I've found the age range also skews a little higher than ours here (40+ to ~70), art interests are reflect this age range. I'm not sure how many here are into modern art but the best advice I can give you is to just buy what you love.

I'm seeing a lot of misinformation thrown at you regarding Artists Proofs in the comic art scene. (Digital Artists reprinting sold work, Monoprints not holding their value etc.) Straight up, this forum is not the place to ask about them as generally, no-one likes them here (for their own reasons) I would ask for evidence on each piece of "information" you get.

If you are buying as an investment, they're probably not the best option to go for at the moment. But as this ever changing market evolves, no one knows what the future holds for Artist Proofs/Monoprints, especially as more and more artists move digital.

I've bought a few monoprints from Jorge Jiminez and a few other artists and I'm very happy with them. I do have a lot more pencil and ink work though. Don't let anyone discourage you from buying art you like because 'they' think it's not up to 'their' standard. Buy what you like and you can't go wrong.

[Rick2you2]

On 9/25/2022 at 1:58 PM, New School Fool said:

I'm seeing a lot of misinformation thrown at you regarding Artists Proofs in the comic art scene. (Digital Artists reprinting sold work, Monoprints not holding their value etc.) Straight up, this forum is not the place to ask about them as generally, no-one likes them here (for their own reasons) I would ask for evidence on each piece of "information" you get.

If you are buying as an investment, they're probably not the best option to go for at the moment. But as this ever changing market evolves, no one knows what the future holds for Artist Proofs/Monoprints, especially as more and more artists move digital.

I've bought a few monoprints from Jorge Jiminez and a few other artists and I'm very happy with them. I do have a lot more pencil and ink work though. Don't let anyone discourage you from buying art you like because 'they' think it's not up to 'their' standard. Buy what you like and you can't go wrong.

Uh, not so much. You sure can go wrong with digital.

If you just want “pretty picheres”, you can also make a copy of what is shown on-line and tack it to your wall. Maybe even take a digital file to a copier for reproduction. Nothing wrong with that. But when you collect “art”, other than posters, it needs an element of uniqueness to qualify. Now, if the digital print came even with a hand drawn sketch, at least it would be somewhat unique. That, IMO would have a bit of value. It should be standard practice; even a 5 minute sketch should be the future.

And as for future value, someone a while ago reported an attempted resale, at an auction I think. As I recall, the ROI was negative. There is so much original art out there, why bother with a print (without at least a Remarque)? One day, things will change. Maybe in 10 years, you’ll break even.

By the way, I like modern art. So do others here. I also think some of the older stuff doesn’t render the value the newer stuff does. And I’m not sold at all. I’d rather throw money at an original sketch.

[New School Fool]

On 9/25/2022 at 10:22 PM, Rick2you2 said:

Uh, not so much. You sure can go wrong with digital.

How can you 'go wrong' exactly? And why? 

On 9/25/2022 at 10:22 PM, Rick2you2 said:

But when you collect “art”, other than posters, it needs an element of uniqueness to qualify.

Yes you're right. All the monoprints I have bought come signed and dated with a COA, and unique hologram. Recently artists are offering remarks with their monoprints. That does it for me but I have a feeling that won't work for you.

On 9/25/2022 at 10:22 PM, Rick2you2 said:

And as for future value, someone a while ago reported an attempted resale, at an auction I think. As I recall, the ROI was negative.

There's hundreds of pen and ink pieces that have sold at a negative ROI...does that mean that all traditionally made pieces are a bad ROI? Recently I've seen two monoprints sold at auction that negate your 'ghost' example so I'm not sure what to make of this...that was told to you by a friend of a friend or whoever.

On 9/25/2022 at 10:22 PM, Rick2you2 said:

One day, things will change. Maybe in 10 years, you’ll break even.

Well, good thing I'm buying the art because I like it then and not to turn a profit  ;)

On 9/25/2022 at 10:22 PM, Rick2you2 said:

And I’m not sold at all. I’d rather throw money at an original sketch.

That's great, whatever floats your boat dude! You do you

[Rick2you2]

On 9/25/2022 at 6:05 PM, New School Fool said:

How can you 'go wrong' exactly? And why? 

Yes you're right. All the monoprints I have bought come signed and dated with a COA, and unique hologram. Recently artists are offering remarks with their monoprints. That does it for me but I have a feeling that won't work for you.

There's hundreds of pen and ink pieces that have sold at a negative ROI...does that mean that all traditionally made pieces are a bad ROI? Recently I've seen two monoprints sold at auction that negate your 'ghost' example so I'm not sure what to make of this...that was told to you by a friend of a friend or whoever.

Well, good thing I'm buying the art because I like it then and not to turn a profit  ;)

That's great, whatever floats your boat dude! You do you

Boy, you like to swing with reckless abandon, don’t you? That “ghost” you mentioned is in the “Monoprint” thread where you offered 2 examples, and were immediately responded to by Twanj who pointed out two examples where the seller lost money. And you were “not sure what to make of this…that was told to you by a friend or whatever”. Really?

As I pointed out on that thread a COI is meaningless; yet the industry won’t offer something with bite in it. What would help, legally, is something signed and sworn to by the artist before a notary public that the print is the only print he will make for artistic purposes (he can still reprint it on a pillowcase or in a book if he wants). Now, if another one shows up, he has committed fraud.

I may be the person here who is the least likely to sell things to make a profit. But most people like to treat their hobby as a bit of an investment and think they could always sell and get their money out of it. So suggesting Monoprints to someone just starting out is dumb. If they decided to focus later, they likely won’t get their money out to buy something else. I guess that “Fool” in your handle is the wisest thing you posted. 😘

[New School Fool]

On 9/26/2022 at 12:17 PM, Rick2you2 said:

Boy, you like to swing with reckless abandon, don’t you? That “ghost” you mentioned is in the “Monoprint” thread where you offered 2 examples, and were immediately responded to by Twanj who pointed out two examples where the seller lost money. And you were “not sure what to make of this…that was told to you by a friend or whatever”. Really?

Read through that thread again. I think you'll find that Twanj was pointing out two examples of Monoprints that sold and that was it.

I accidentally attributed those two sales to them both losing money which I later re-corrected to state that one actually made money in the sale. I know you're desperate for a good example so keep looking my friend ;)

On 9/26/2022 at 12:17 PM, Rick2you2 said:

I may be the person here who is the least likely to sell things to make a profit. But most people like to treat their hobby as a bit of an investment and think they could always sell and get their money out of it. So suggesting Monoprints to someone just starting out is dumb. If they decided to focus later, they likely won’t get their money out to buy something else. I guess that “Fool” in your handle is the wisest thing you posted. 😘

Don't know about you dude but I treat my hobby as a hobby and my investments as investments. Some people collect comic art to just collect comic art...and yes, obviously some pieces can rise in value over time.  Did I not say in my earlier post here that going for monoprints as an investment is probably not the best option at the moment? Are you actually reading what I'm saying or just foaming at the mouth and shooting from the hip?

 

Edited September 26, 2022 by New School Fool

[Rick2you2]

On 9/26/2022 at 10:10 AM, New School Fool said:

Read through that thread again. I think you'll find that Twanj was pointing out two examples of Monoprints that sold and that was it.

I accidentally attributed those two sales to them both losing money which I later re-corrected to state that one actually made money in the sale. I know you're desperate for a good example so keep looking my friend ;)

Don't know about you dude but I treat my hobby as a hobby and my investments as investments. Some people collect comic art to just collect comic art...and yes, obviously some pieces can rise in value over time.  Did I not say in my earlier post here that going for monoprints as an investment is probably not the best option at the moment? Are you actually reading what I'm saying or just foaming at the mouth and shooting from the hip?

 

I went looking for your supposed correction, which I had seen the first time, and the computations weren’t there. At best, that aspect of the market seems pretty flat; not a good place to jump on when starting out.  Oh, and it’s nice to see your recollection about that ghost has come back. 

Foaming at the mouth? No, but I think your behavior is obnoxious. You seem to be promoting a view which most people here don’t accept to a newbie who is simply trying to get into the hobby. The newbie deserves assistance that fits within the mainstream before trying out paths less travelled. 

Edited September 26, 2022 by Rick2you2

[New School Fool]

On 9/26/2022 at 5:17 PM, Rick2you2 said:

Foaming at the mouth? No, but I think your behavior is obnoxious. You seem to be promoting a view which most people here don’t accept to a newbie who is simply trying to get into the hobby. The newbie deserves assistance that fits within the mainstream before trying out paths less travelled. 

I appreciated your honesty...Yet you probably think I'm obnoxious because I don't agree with you. As per my earlier post, I was simply highlighting the fact that the views expressed in this forum are a facet of the hobby as a whole and not the mainstream, despite what you think. Yes, the newbie deserves assistance, but telling them not to buy monoprints because of x and y isn't really assisting them, it's imposing your preference and preconceived notions onto them. I'm simply telling them to buy what they love and be happy. What don't you like about that?

It's clear the majority of this forum are not into Artist Proofs and Monoprints, which is cool but they still sell! Pepe Larraz, Russell Dautermann and Jorge Jiminez have pieces that disappear minutes after the drop....No one here is buying them so who is? Do you still think your advice is the voice of the mainstream?

[RBerman]

I agree that artists would be wise to remarque monoprints. I bought my first monoprint earlier this month-- by mistake. The artist went to great lengths to ensure that his monoprints look like traditional OA, which for him was a matter of quality control but from the buyer's perspective was confusing. He sold it with a hologrammed CoA specifying that it was "1 of 1," which is what "monoprint" means, but it didn't register with me that I was buying a monoprint. It also has a crimped seal in the corner. Another collector pointed out to me that the artist was working digitally these days. I asked the artist, who confirmed that it was a monoprint and offered to buy it back. I asked instead if he could remarque it, and he made a nice big full-figure pencil drawing on the back.side. I'm satisfied that he wasn't trying to bamboozle me, though it would be helpful to use the magic word "monoprint" in sales discussions whenever it might apply. Hopefully he's satisfied that I wasn't trying to squeeze a free sketch out of him.

[Rick2you2]

On 9/26/2022 at 1:59 PM, RBerman said:

I agree that artists would be wise to remarque monoprints. I bought my first monoprint earlier this month-- by mistake. The artist went to great lengths to ensure that his monoprints look like traditional OA, which for him was a matter of quality control but from the buyer's perspective was confusing. He sold it with a hologrammed CoA specifying that it was "1 of 1," which is what "monoprint" means, but it didn't register with me that I was buying a monoprint. It also has a crimped seal in the corner. Another collector pointed out to me that the artist was working digitally these days. I asked the artist, who confirmed that it was a monoprint and offered to buy it back. I asked instead if he could remarque it, and he made a nice big full-figure pencil drawing on the back.side. I'm satisfied that he wasn't trying to bamboozle me, though it would be helpful to use the magic word "monoprint" in sales discussions whenever it might apply. Hopefully he's satisfied that I wasn't trying to squeeze a free sketch out of him.

Let me add that these would deserve more acceptance if the artist signed a “verification” (swearing to its truth under penalty of perjury) that the artist will not make duplicates for private sale, and the Buyer is relying on that promise to make the purchase, but, the artist still retained the right to reprint it for reissuance of the publication, for books containing artwork images or as part of merchandise (thereby protecting the artist’s copyright interest). With a little TLC, fandom and the industry could come up with standard language thereby creating a recognized baseline.

[Rick2you2]

On 9/26/2022 at 12:37 PM, New School Fool said:

I appreciated your honesty...Yet you probably think I'm obnoxious because I don't agree with you. As per my earlier post, I was simply highlighting the fact that the views expressed in this forum are a facet of the hobby as a whole and not the mainstream, despite what you think. Yes, the newbie deserves assistance, but telling them not to buy monoprints because of x and y isn't really assisting them, it's imposing your preference and preconceived notions onto them. I'm simply telling them to buy what they love and be happy. What don't you like about that?

It's clear the majority of this forum are not into Artist Proofs and Monoprints, which is cool but they still sell! Pepe Larraz, Russell Dautermann and Jorge Jiminez have pieces that disappear minutes after the drop....No one here is buying them so who is? Do you still think your advice is the voice of the mainstream?

The fact that people don’t always agree with me is neither new nor disturbing. I don’t mind challenges, and there are times I come around to agree with the other person (at least a little). Those disputes, however, do not include condescending or snide throwaways. That is what I found obnoxious. I have no doubt Monoprints sell (a better name for them, in my opinion). So do copies of Alex Ross’s art—people like it but can’t afford originals. Now maybe, there are other places in cyberspace where people collect them, but not here. The newbie came here. So, if you think there is really an underground market for them, direct the newbie there. Otherwise, it seems like your voice is the one not in the mainstream. I am done with this.I didn’t sign up to act like an old fa*t schoolmarm, and don’t chose to continue it.

[New School Fool]

On 9/26/2022 at 8:05 PM, Rick2you2 said:

The fact that people don’t always agree with me is neither new nor disturbing. I don’t mind challenges, and there are times I come around to agree with the other person (at least a little). Those disputes, however, do not include condescending or snide throwaways. That is what I found obnoxious. I have no doubt Monoprints sell (a better name for them, in my opinion). So do copies of Alex Ross’s art—people like it but can’t afford originals. Now maybe, there are other places in cyberspace where people collect them, but not here. The newbie came here. So, if you think there is really an underground market for them, direct the newbie there. Otherwise, it seems like your voice is the one not in the mainstream. I am done with this.I didn’t sign up to act like an old fa*t schoolmarm, and don’t chose to continue it.

I apologize if you feel I had offended you in anyway, snide commentary really isn't my bag, just stating my opinion. I guess we should agree to disagree...? Thankfully I haven't taken this personally but through our discourse I did wonder what type of collector you actually are. If you have a link to your CAF gallery, it would be great to look through it if you would be so kind as to post the link up. This New School Fool could learn a thing or two ;) - Peace!

[Dr. Balls]

On 9/26/2022 at 10:37 AM, New School Fool said:

I appreciated your honesty...Yet you probably think I'm obnoxious because I don't agree with you.

I'm going to venture a guess is that you're thought of as obnoxious because of the way you blew in here claiming people were spreading "disinformation" and saying they are foaming at the mouth.

(some) Monoprints are the new digital originals. Artists are desperate to achieve original art valuation off of a digital print, that's been going on for 20 years. Remarking your monos? Great idea. Selling them in different sizes as 1/1? Bad idea. Taking the same file that you created your ever-so-special-one-of-a-kind monoprint and making smaller copies to sell at shows? That's going to hurt the idea in the long run.

So, monoprints - as much as people are touting them as great - have what has always been: a inconsistent problem producing digital work because no on has ever/will ever come to agreement on a standard defining way of producing the work as a unique one-of-a-kind piece that is perceived the same way real original artwork is.

Let's get transcendental for a moment. That original digital creation is a non-tangible piece of artwork. You can't feel the word bubbles, or the slight impression of whiteout, or see the faint marks of the marker in the black areas. The process is similar to creating an original. The thought is there, conceptualizing the layout is there, the personal expression is there. I'm not knocking the medium or the tool to create it.

But, digital creation does not exist in the real world. When it is printed out, it is a facsimile of it's original creation. The mere process of creating a facsimile, no matter how rare you wish it to be - is still a copy. And copies will not/should not carry but a fraction of what an original could get.

Artists are free to decide how much their monoprints go for, and they can price them at whatever and sell them to all the people they want to. Some people feel they aren't worth it, some people do. Some people can't afford the originals, and they want to be part of the fun - that is where I recommended a person asking about the process of an artist proof to make sure they're getting what they pay for. That's not disinformation, it's education.

[New School Fool]

On 9/29/2022 at 1:45 AM, Dr. Balls said:

That's not disinformation, it's education.

Nicely put, but I'm not claiming anything you mentioned is disinformation. 

I've been privvy to around seven sales of monoprints on the secondary market, about 3 of these have undersold, and when you see these monoprints, it's easy to see why. They looked awful. To say that monoprints don't hold their value is pure misinformation. In reality it's a lot more nuanced than that.

To also further say that an artist will print another monoprint whenever they're low on funds without any proof that this has taken place is also pure misinformation.

I have no doubt of what monoprints are and I'm actually not comparing them to Original Art, I would just like straight up facts and not fears to be  reiterated to someone new to the hobby.

Finally, I will say this. I will always hold Original Art in higher regard to monoprints. Yet, I read all the fear mongering on this forum but still decided to take the 'risk' on buying a monoprint because the artwork quite frankly blew me away. I was very pleased with what I received. The paper and ink quality was of a very high standard and yes, you can feel the ink raised on the paper. A lot of the opinions on monoprints in this forum seem to be based on heresay rather than actual tangible experience.

[Dr. Balls]

On 9/28/2022 at 7:22 PM, New School Fool said:

I will always hold Original Art in higher regard to monoprints. Yet, I read all the fear mongering on this forum but still decided to take the 'risk' on buying a monoprint because the artwork quite frankly blew me away. I was very pleased with what I received. The paper and ink quality was of a very high standard and yes, you can feel the ink raised on the paper. A lot of the opinions on monoprints in this forum seem to be based on heresay rather than actual tangible experience.

I don't have any examples I've seen in-hand of monoprints, but I saw lots of Giclees back in the day - and they've come a long way. I have one Giclee that I got as a gift and it's really very impressive from texture of the paper to the density of the ink coverage. Giclees are now (and likely have been for at least 10-15 years) printed using archival ink, and if there was a quality problem with them - we'd probably have heard of it by now. I was always fascinated by the Giclee process, because they use multiple colors to create more depth - I think that's quite an achievement in terms of how artwork is reproduced.

Like anything, I suppose - if artists can (and maybe they already have) develop a standardization when it comes to monoprints, it will be good for the art community as a whole. I won't disagree with you that some boardies may snub anything that isn't an original (I mean, it's the Original Art forum, after all) - but the base philosophy of everyone here that I've run into, is that they are usually willing to lend their perspective. Sometimes it's pointed, sometimes is subtle - I'm just glad there is a community here to talk with and even if I personally run aground with someone, I can find myself in agreement with them two conversations later. It would be a shame if I were to hold a grudge against a guy who's been buying original art for 30 years - you can't buy that kind of experience or knowledge.

Hell, if I were you and you cared to express your interest about it - I'd start up a monoprint thread for people to discuss and learn more about it.