Heritage

[drdroom]

Surprised there hasn't been any discussion on the following results:

 

1. Bissette Swamp Thing 29 cover = $20.3K

2. Sal Buscema Subby #28 cover = $6.5K, which is a bargoon compared to recent sales of Subby covers from the same era

 

3. Byrne IF #14 page (1st app Sabretooth) = $16K, is this low, high or just right?

4. Byrne X-Men pages between $4.7K - $6.6K. C-level pages are starting to get pricey!

 

5. Jim Davis Garfield Daily 10/1/83 = $5.1K. This is around 4 - 5x the average daily price. Why?

 

6. Crockett Johnson Barnaby daily = $9.6K. I suppose I was expecting this one to go a lot higher given its scarcity, but perhaps obscurity got in the way

 

7. Keown Hulk 369 unpublished cover = $1.7K. This one's mine and went for less than I paid for it 8 years ago. I thought it was a very strong cover.

 

8. Simonson Thor 348p20 = $3.5K. Kinda cheap considering so few are available, no?

 

9. Daniel Clowes Eightball 23 cover = $23.9K. Whaaaaat?

 

10. Sim Cerebus 185 splash = $2.3K...someone got a deal.

 

Hey Yoram +1, I will take a stab at a few of those.

 

The SOTST Cover was also attributed to Totleben. I don't know what it is but you put Totleben on something in the mid-80s = cash. This cover is more Bissette for sure and the image was just ok. The fact that it cracked 10K is but 20K ya talk amongst yourselves. Its considered the peak period by the peak team, but buy the image not the statistics

 

The Simonson page. Hey 3.5K for a Copper panel, I mean it was a good sequential panel, but at 3.5K which I thought was just right to a bit strong, I'm thinking, "one day Walt is going to cash out and I'm the dumb who spent 3.5K on a panel, when there are so many to choose from now."

 

 

Simonson with inks by someone other than Simonson results most of the time in a remarkably bland product, to the point where I don't even really count it as a Simonson page. So from my POV, the page did very well.

[westform]

 

No doubt obscurity got in the way somewhat. But, I was thinking about why I was able to buy the piece at a mere 10% increase over the sale of the piece 7years ago at Heritage, and have sort of concluded that a piece like this can have a tough time at a big auction like the one Heritage put on. Very often, it seems to me, these pieces get lost in the overwhelming amount of quality material that is available and only available on one given day. I had a hard time choosing which pieces to go after and which to leave by the wayside, as I sometimes do with these 'mega auctions'.

 

I focused on the Barnaby though because I had missed out 7 years ago, and have thought about it ever since. And, I've never ever seen another Barnaby by Johnson strip available in my 20 years of collecting and searching. So, I kicked myself for not going the distance in the previous auction. Usually, I don't regret passing as I'm very content with my collection; but Barnaby was one of the 1st strips I read as a kid. My Dad had one of the reprint books for some unknown reason and I was fascinated early on. I've come to learn in later years that Shultz and Watterson were fascinated as well. For good reason.

 

I'd like to say I would want a Calvin and Hobbes more, I certainly still laugh out loud when reading the strip with my boys. And, I'd like to say I enjoy my Peanuts more, but if I'm honest, the Television specials made much, much more of an impact on me. But, for pure nostalgia coupled with rarity, added together with uncompromising wit and sagacity, thrown in with a pre-cursing plain style artistry its Barnaby for me... all day long.

 

Just goes to show; it all comes back around if you are patient... and lucky!

[drdroom]

You guys are being so overly harsh. I don't hear any of you writing off everything Wally wood ever did simply because he did some crappy work at one point. Boris' work has been sometimes very good , sometimes very bad over the course of his career. That doesn't mean we need to paint it all with the same brush. (zing). Do you write off Wally wood's EC work because cannon was bad? Yeah blah blah Wally was a different case with the alcoholism but its the same basic facts. Some good work and some not so good work. Boris worst work was in the period when his marriage broke up. Is that so surprising? I would bet that's true for a lot of people.

 

Look, I used to have the same opinion as you guys. It's easy to look at some of the cheesy works and write him off completely, and I did so myself. but he and julie did a few pieces where i liked the place of publication and that led to me owning a few and getting a greater understanding of their work, and seeing that they can look very nice in person. Point is, there are some fromagey ones but there are also a great many wonderful works that you have to give the man (and woman) credit for. Ill post some that I like personally a little later. To me the best and worst thing that ever happened to him was the frazetta comparisons. The best because it got his name out there and the worst because its not a comparison he can ever "win."

Bronty I'm afraid you've misunderstood my argument. I'm not writing off Boris because SOME of his work is cheesy, its because ALL of it is. With Wally Wood I write off the cheesy work and enjoy the good work. Simple! As to your examples, they are all horrible. Yes, if you are NatLamp and you need a parody of cheesy fantasy art, Boris is your man. No one is going to mock the form any better than he can just by painting normally. Cheers!

 

Didn't see this until now.

 

Well I just don't agree, and I do think place of publication is a factor.

 

You probably look at this and groan. A dolphin frolicking while chased by a shark and another dolphin high on life and anti depressants following behind the shark. I see something totally different - the cover to cult classic videogame from the early 90s.

 

The game was about dolphins chased by sharks... so WTF was he supposed to illustrate, the moon landing? Its a nicely executed job that illustrated what it needed to, just like most every comic book cover ever made - an image that, stand alone, is cheese but makes sense in context. There's at least some of that going on with his images. Its not true in all cases of course. All I'm saying is he's not above criticism, but cut the guy some slack. There is nice work (and not so great work) in his oeuvre. If this piece is so terrible, then please, by all means enlighten me as to how YOU would have illustrated the cover to a game about a bleeping dolphin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would anthropomorphize the dolphin less, add some drama to the depiction of the water, make it seem like the dolphin wanted to get away from the shark, make the color scheme less namby-pamby (probably lose the pretty fish in the lower section, make the underwater passage more monochrome with one interesting color for the ruins, use a strong warm color in the sky since everything else has to be blue or green), make the composition less symmetrical.

 

But whatever, maybe the manufacturer gave him the layout, who knows? I didn't say he was unprofessional, I didn't say you can't be nostalgic for a product he worked on. I just think its weird that anyone would think this was a good painting. Oh well, eye of the beholder & all that.

[Bronty]

Ugh discussing this with you is hopeless. I tell you it's an illustration for a game for little kids and you wonder why the dolphin is anthropomorphic - kids - why the color palette is "happy" - kids - and why the shark isn't more menacing - kids?

 

I suppose you wonder why Uncle Scrooge doesn't look like a real duck?

 

Ill leave it to others to pick up or better yet drop the discussion, I dont have the energy to beat my head against your preconceptions. There's a lot of awful comic art out there, including by the big names, if you apply the filters you are applying to Boris but you seem to be determined to view everything he's ever done in a bad light.

[drdroom]

Ugh discussing this with you is hopeless. I tell you it's an illustration for a game for little kids and you wonder why the dolphin is anthropomorphic - kids - why the color palette is "happy" - kids - and why the shark isn't more menacing - kids?

 

I suppose you wonder why Uncle Scrooge doesn't look like a real duck?

 

Ill leave it to others to pick up or better yet drop the discussion, I dont have the energy to beat my head against your preconceptions. There's a lot of awful comic art out there, including by the big names, if you apply the filters you are applying to Boris but you seem to be determined to view everything he's ever done in a bad light.

 

So the painting has distinction because the artist did all the patronizing things you'd expect any mediocre hack to do to fulfill the assignment? You choose the strangest examples by the way. & for the zillionth time I AGREE some great artists have also done some cheesy stuff (like everything Neal Adams has done in the last couple of decades). IT HAS NO BEARING ON THE ARGUMENT.

[jjonahjameson1]

 

No doubt obscurity got in the way somewhat. But, I was thinking about why I was able to buy the piece at a mere 10% increase over the sale of the piece 7years ago at Heritage, and have sort of concluded that a piece like this can have a tough time at a big auction like the one Heritage put on. Very often, it seems to me, these pieces get lost in the overwhelming amount of quality material that is available and only available on one given day. I had a hard time choosing which pieces to go after and which to leave by the wayside, as I sometimes do with these 'mega auctions'.

 

I focused on the Barnaby though because I had missed out 7 years ago, and have thought about it ever since. And, I've never ever seen another Barnaby by Johnson strip available in my 20 years of collecting and searching. So, I kicked myself for not going the distance in the previous auction. Usually, I don't regret passing as I'm very content with my collection; but Barnaby was one of the 1st strips I read as a kid. My Dad had one of the reprint books for some unknown reason and I was fascinated early on. I've come to learn in later years that Shultz and Watterson were fascinated as well. For good reason.

 

I'd like to say I would want a Calvin and Hobbes more, I certainly still laugh out loud when reading the strip with my boys. And, I'd like to say I enjoy my Peanuts more, but if I'm honest, the Television specials made much, much more of an impact on me. But, for pure nostalgia coupled with rarity, added together with uncompromising wit and sagacity, thrown in with a pre-cursing plain style artistry its Barnaby for me... all day long.

 

Just goes to show; it all comes back around if you are patient... and lucky!

 

Congrats! That's a really nice strip, and as you stated, I haven't seen another one, either. I wikied thhe Barnaby Comic strip and wasn't aware that its creator was also the author of Harold and the Purple Crayon!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnaby_(comic_strip)

 

[jjonahjameson1]

Surprised there hasn't been any discussion on the following results:

 

1. Bissette Swamp Thing 29 cover = $20.3K

2. Sal Buscema Subby #28 cover = $6.5K, which is a bargoon compared to recent sales of Subby covers from the same era

 

3. Byrne IF #14 page (1st app Sabretooth) = $16K, is this low, high or just right?

4. Byrne X-Men pages between $4.7K - $6.6K. C-level pages are starting to get pricey!

 

5. Jim Davis Garfield Daily 10/1/83 = $5.1K. This is around 4 - 5x the average daily price. Why?

 

6. Crockett Johnson Barnaby daily = $9.6K. I suppose I was expecting this one to go a lot higher given its scarcity, but perhaps obscurity got in the way

 

7. Keown Hulk 369 unpublished cover = $1.7K. This one's mine and went for less than I paid for it 8 years ago. I thought it was a very strong cover.

 

8. Simonson Thor 348p20 = $3.5K. Kinda cheap considering so few are available, no?

 

9. Daniel Clowes Eightball 23 cover = $23.9K. Whaaaaat?

 

10. Sim Cerebus 185 splash = $2.3K...someone got a deal.

 

Hey Yoram +1, I will take a stab at a few of those.

 

The SOTST Cover was also attributed to Totleben. I don't know what it is but you put Totleben on something in the mid-80s = cash. This cover is more Bissette for sure and the image was just ok. The fact that it cracked 10K is but 20K ya talk amongst yourselves. Its considered the peak period by the peak team, but buy the image not the statistics

 

The Simonson page. Hey 3.5K for a Copper panel, I mean it was a good sequential panel, but at 3.5K which I thought was just right to a bit strong, I'm thinking, "one day Walt is going to cash out and I'm the dumb who spent 3.5K on a panel, when there are so many to choose from now."

 

 

Simonson with inks by someone other than Simonson results most of the time in a remarkably bland product, to the point where I don't even really count it as a Simonson page. So from my POV, the page did very well.

 

wow, I never thought about the page in the terms you've outlined. So, if someone other than Simonson were to ink his pencils, you wouldn't count that as a Simonson page, eh? I would have thought the scarcity of his Thor pages would have led to a higher final bid. After all, it was a decent action page with lots of Thor, from a good storyline so it had quite a bit going for it.

[jjonahjameson1]

Surprised there hasn't been any discussion on the following results:

 

1. Bissette Swamp Thing 29 cover = $20.3K

2. Sal Buscema Subby #28 cover = $6.5K, which is a bargoon compared to recent sales of Subby covers from the same era

 

3. Byrne IF #14 page (1st app Sabretooth) = $16K, is this low, high or just right?

4. Byrne X-Men pages between $4.7K - $6.6K. C-level pages are starting to get pricey!

 

5. Jim Davis Garfield Daily 10/1/83 = $5.1K. This is around 4 - 5x the average daily price. Why?

 

6. Crockett Johnson Barnaby daily = $9.6K. I suppose I was expecting this one to go a lot higher given its scarcity, but perhaps obscurity got in the way

 

7. Keown Hulk 369 unpublished cover = $1.7K. This one's mine and went for less than I paid for it 8 years ago. I thought it was a very strong cover.

 

8. Simonson Thor 348p20 = $3.5K. Kinda cheap considering so few are available, no?

 

9. Daniel Clowes Eightball 23 cover = $23.9K. Whaaaaat?

 

10. Sim Cerebus 185 splash = $2.3K...someone got a deal.

 

Hey Yoram +1, I will take a stab at a few of those.

 

The SOTST Cover was also attributed to Totleben. I don't know what it is but you put Totleben on something in the mid-80s = cash. This cover is more Bissette for sure and the image was just ok. The fact that it cracked 10K is but 20K ya talk amongst yourselves. Its considered the peak period by the peak team, but buy the image not the statistics

 

The Simonson page. Hey 3.5K for a Copper panel, I mean it was a good sequential panel, but at 3.5K which I thought was just right to a bit strong, I'm thinking, "one day Walt is going to cash out and I'm the dumb who spent 3.5K on a panel, when there are so many to choose from now."

 

 

I hear you. Every once in a while I stop to think about what Walt is going to do with his stash of artwork. Well, I know what he's going to do with his Manhunter pages, at least, he told me what he was going to do with them jokingly.

 

But I think the same was said about all the Kirby artwork flooding the market in the 80s, and I think the market absorbed those pages rather nicely. Walt has done a lot of non-Thor work that I like very much and I hope to pick up a few examples one of these days. (thumbs u

[disruptive_one]

Great auction Heritage!

 

Now start building your inventory for the one in February.

[CollectingFool]

So the painting has distinction because the artist did all the patronizing things you'd expect any mediocre hack to do to fulfill the assignment?

 

Did you play the game? Have you looked up what the game was like? The painting actually gives you the correct feel for the game. This is not fine art, it's work for hire and I believe he did exactly what the company asked for. We're not debating the merits of a fine art painting here. By now I think you know that and just keep it up to defend your original point.

 

 

[GreatEscape]

 

No doubt obscurity got in the way somewhat. But, I was thinking about why I was able to buy the piece at a mere 10% increase over the sale of the piece 7years ago at Heritage, and have sort of concluded that a piece like this can have a tough time at a big auction like the one Heritage put on. Very often, it seems to me, these pieces get lost in the overwhelming amount of quality material that is available and only available on one given day. I had a hard time choosing which pieces to go after and which to leave by the wayside, as I sometimes do with these 'mega auctions'.

 

I focused on the Barnaby though because I had missed out 7 years ago, and have thought about it ever since. And, I've never ever seen another Barnaby by Johnson strip available in my 20 years of collecting and searching. So, I kicked myself for not going the distance in the previous auction. Usually, I don't regret passing as I'm very content with my collection; but Barnaby was one of the 1st strips I read as a kid. My Dad had one of the reprint books for some unknown reason and I was fascinated early on. I've come to learn in later years that Shultz and Watterson were fascinated as well. For good reason.

 

I'd like to say I would want a Calvin and Hobbes more, I certainly still laugh out loud when reading the strip with my boys. And, I'd like to say I enjoy my Peanuts more, but if I'm honest, the Television specials made much, much more of an impact on me. But, for pure nostalgia coupled with rarity, added together with uncompromising wit and sagacity, thrown in with a pre-cursing plain style artistry its Barnaby for me... all day long.

 

Just goes to show; it all comes back around if you are patient... and lucky!

 

Fantastic buy, congrats. Perhaps, one can say if you remain patient long enough, you'll be lucky eventually.

[tth2]

The game was about dolphins chased by sharks... so WTF was he supposed to illustrate, the moon landing?

[sborock]

Great auction Heritage!

 

Now start building your inventory for the one in February.

 

Already working on it (thumbs u

 

Picked up some "fresh to market" pieces that will blow some minds

[Bronty]

[Silver Surfer]

Surprised there hasn't been any discussion on the following results:

 

1. Bissette Swamp Thing 29 cover = $20.3K

2. Sal Buscema Subby #28 cover = $6.5K, which is a bargoon compared to recent sales of Subby covers from the same era

 

3. Byrne IF #14 page (1st app Sabretooth) = $16K, is this low, high or just right?

4. Byrne X-Men pages between $4.7K - $6.6K. C-level pages are starting to get pricey!

 

5. Jim Davis Garfield Daily 10/1/83 = $5.1K. This is around 4 - 5x the average daily price. Why?

 

6. Crockett Johnson Barnaby daily = $9.6K. I suppose I was expecting this one to go a lot higher given its scarcity, but perhaps obscurity got in the way

 

7. Keown Hulk 369 unpublished cover = $1.7K. This one's mine and went for less than I paid for it 8 years ago. I thought it was a very strong cover.

 

8. Simonson Thor 348p20 = $3.5K. Kinda cheap considering so few are available, no?

 

9. Daniel Clowes Eightball 23 cover = $23.9K. Whaaaaat?

 

10. Sim Cerebus 185 splash = $2.3K...someone got a deal.

 

Hey Yoram +1, I will take a stab at a few of those.

 

The SOTST Cover was also attributed to Totleben. I don't know what it is but you put Totleben on something in the mid-80s = cash. This cover is more Bissette for sure and the image was just ok. The fact that it cracked 10K is but 20K ya talk amongst yourselves. Its considered the peak period by the peak team, but buy the image not the statistics

 

The Simonson page. Hey 3.5K for a Copper panel, I mean it was a good sequential panel, but at 3.5K which I thought was just right to a bit strong, I'm thinking, "one day Walt is going to cash out and I'm the dumb who spent 3.5K on a panel, when there are so many to choose from now."

 

 

I'm about as big a fan as anyone when it comes to the Simonson Thor run but IMO that page was very blah in terms of action scenes and the price is just outrageous. I know Simonson is hoarding all his stuff from his run so I'm sure that had more to do with the astronomical price point than anything else but if that page comes to market again I think if they fetch a third of this price they will be lucky. Maybe this will get Walt's attention and the flood gates will open up?

[drdroom]

So the painting has distinction because the artist did all the patronizing things you'd expect any mediocre hack to do to fulfill the assignment?

 

Did you play the game? Have you looked up what the game was like? The painting actually gives you the correct feel for the game. This is not fine art, it's work for hire and I believe he did exactly what the company asked for. We're not debating the merits of a fine art painting here. By now I think you know that and just keep it up to defend your original point.

 

 

Ruben, no. Don't care about the game, and I completely believe you that the artwork suits the tone of it. My argument does not hinge on whether Boris is a pro who fulfills his assignments. I believe he is. If that is all you require as a collector then great. You'll be able to get a ton of stuff for cheap. Good investment? My guess is no, but that's your lookout.

 

Ultimately I think this community exists because a number of work-for-hire artists in comics and pulp illustration and related fields managed, against the odds, in a ghettoized field, to transcend the requirements of their assignments and over and over again produced work of verve, spark, and originality. A few of them so much so that at times it DOES approach the level of fine art and fine literature. It is that kind of work that I try to collect, within my means. This is a collectors board, not an assignment editors forum. I'm making an argument about whether an artist is good enough that the work transcends its original use as packaging and is worthy of collecting and preserving. I'm sorry if that seems impolite. Its only my opinion and I've been known to change my mind, but I've yet to see even one single Boris painting that didn't gross me out.

 

My ideas for fixing the dolphin painting aren't really relevant to the argument, as I'm not arguing from an I-can-do-better position. Bronty laid down the challenge and I thought, "What the hell, its silly but I'll give it a shot-- maybe it will be a way of explaining that it is not the content that I have a problem with (dolphin vs moon landing!) but the choices the artist makes in depicting the content."

 

Look at the Crockett Johnson strip that's posted in this thread. Its for kids and adults I would say. There's not a whiff of staleness about it. Its utterly fresh, inventive, cliché free. Some more kids art that I like would include Sendak, Suess, Rackham, Barks (comics not paintings), N. C. Wyeth, whatsisname that did Charlottes Web, --there are hundreds!

 

As much as I may seem to be stubborn in my dislike of Boris, others seem equally committed to arguing me into liking his work, on almost any basis but the one I care about, which is artistic quality.

[DocR]

 

I'm about as big a fan as anyone when it comes to the Simonson Thor run but IMO that page was very blah in terms of action scenes and the price is just outrageous. I know Simonson is hoarding all his stuff from his run so I'm sure that had more to do with the astronomical price point than anything else but if that page comes to market again I think if they fetch a third of this price they will be lucky. Maybe this will get Walt's attention and the flood gates will open up?

 

Thank you for saying it. I don't think the price was high for a great thor panel page by Simonson but I just don't see that particular page as fitting the bill. There was a Simonson pencilled page auctioned in a non featured clink auction a few months ago that was won by donnellys and sold for only a few hundred I believe. It had great shots of the enchantress and executioner in battle and sold for like 1/10 the price of this page. IMO I like the composition of that page better even with no thor. Kicking myself for not bidding on it at the time. But no hard feelings to anybody, what do i know?

 

http://www.coollinesartwork.com/featured.asp?Piece=296187

[drdroom]

Surprised there hasn't been any discussion on the following results:

 

1. Bissette Swamp Thing 29 cover = $20.3K

2. Sal Buscema Subby #28 cover = $6.5K, which is a bargoon compared to recent sales of Subby covers from the same era

 

3. Byrne IF #14 page (1st app Sabretooth) = $16K, is this low, high or just right?

4. Byrne X-Men pages between $4.7K - $6.6K. C-level pages are starting to get pricey!

 

5. Jim Davis Garfield Daily 10/1/83 = $5.1K. This is around 4 - 5x the average daily price. Why?

 

6. Crockett Johnson Barnaby daily = $9.6K. I suppose I was expecting this one to go a lot higher given its scarcity, but perhaps obscurity got in the way

 

7. Keown Hulk 369 unpublished cover = $1.7K. This one's mine and went for less than I paid for it 8 years ago. I thought it was a very strong cover.

 

8. Simonson Thor 348p20 = $3.5K. Kinda cheap considering so few are available, no?

 

9. Daniel Clowes Eightball 23 cover = $23.9K. Whaaaaat?

 

10. Sim Cerebus 185 splash = $2.3K...someone got a deal.

 

Hey Yoram +1, I will take a stab at a few of those.

 

The SOTST Cover was also attributed to Totleben. I don't know what it is but you put Totleben on something in the mid-80s = cash. This cover is more Bissette for sure and the image was just ok. The fact that it cracked 10K is but 20K ya talk amongst yourselves. Its considered the peak period by the peak team, but buy the image not the statistics

 

The Simonson page. Hey 3.5K for a Copper panel, I mean it was a good sequential panel, but at 3.5K which I thought was just right to a bit strong, I'm thinking, "one day Walt is going to cash out and I'm the dumb who spent 3.5K on a panel, when there are so many to choose from now."

 

 

Simonson with inks by someone other than Simonson results most of the time in a remarkably bland product, to the point where I don't even really count it as a Simonson page. So from my POV, the page did very well.

 

wow, I never thought about the page in the terms you've outlined. So, if someone other than Simonson were to ink his pencils, you wouldn't count that as a Simonson page, eh? I would have thought the scarcity of his Thor pages would have led to a higher final bid. After all, it was a decent action page with lots of Thor, from a good storyline so it had quite a bit going for it.

 

Well, if I were selling it I would list it as a Simonson page! But I think, more than some pencillers, the Simonson-esque quality comes greatly in the inks. Or maybe he works harder on pages he's planning to ink himself. Wait and see: if a comparable Thor panel page that is ALL Simonson comes up, I bet it will come near double the price.

 

[Bronty]

So the painting has distinction because the artist did all the patronizing things you'd expect any mediocre hack to do to fulfill the assignment?

 

Did you play the game? Have you looked up what the game was like? The painting actually gives you the correct feel for the game. This is not fine art, it's work for hire and I believe he did exactly what the company asked for. We're not debating the merits of a fine art painting here. By now I think you know that and just keep it up to defend your original point.

 

 

I'm making an argument about whether an artist is good enough that the work transcends its original use as packaging and is worthy of collecting and preserving.

 

I'm not going to get dragged into this further but I will comment on this one specific point to help you better understand the differences in our positions. In my view it doesn't need to transcend its original use to be worthy of collecting and preserving. MOST comic art very much does not transcend its original use. People do not pay $$$$$ for romita spideys because they "transcend." Spare me. They pay $$$$$ for them because its their childhood artist on their childhood favorite character. No more no less.

 

[lb jefferies]

Maybe this will get Walt's attention and the flood gates will open up?

 

I think Walter has a good idea of what his art is worth. The amount of money he has turned down is staggering.