Heritage May 2014

[Nexus]

Nice, but not published. I'm sure there are Spidey concept drawings that predate AF #15, Superman drawings that predate ACTION #1, etc., but if they're not published, then they're not even in the same conversation.

[comiconxion]

#180 is the first published appearance - that's what most people care about. Most people would have never seen the Wolverine concept sketches. Although I personally would love to own both the published page or the concept drawings, I'd pay more a lot more for the actual published piece.

[Eric Seffinga]

Nice, but not published. I'm sure there are Spidey concept drawings that predate AF #15, Superman drawings that predate ACTION #1, etc., but if they're not published, then they're not even in the same conversation.

 

 

Indeed, as cool and interesting as those sketches are... ^this.

[lb jefferies]

so no bubble burst then?

[TMNT]

Yea, that's sort of along the lines of a piece I have...

 

These are the first drawings ever of the Shredder

 

It even has a sticky note on the back that Eastman wrote on declaring them as such (signed "Love, K" which makes me feel special... )

 

But I don't consider them the first appearance of the Shredder. First drawings, sure. First appearance though, not until TMNT #1. My

[Zaddick]

Interesting that the Romita sketch is the same pose as the Trimpie #180 page.

[delekkerste]

Nice, but not published. I'm sure there are Spidey concept drawings that predate AF #15, Superman drawings that predate ACTION #1, etc., but if they're not published, then they're not even in the same conversation.

 

With these concept drawings and the like, you're really relying on how collectors view the historical importance of such, as there's not going to be a nostalgia component (how can you be nostalgic for something you've probably never seen before), there's not much in the way of aesthetics, content or context vs. the published page, and oftentimes these won't even be really finished or on standard sized board. So, I'd have to agree - not even in the same conversation.

 

I really like Hari's Marvel house ad/fanzine cover by Miller/Rubinstein which features the first appearance of Elektra (pre-dating DD #168 by months). That said, I'd rather have the DD #168 cover (and would value it much higher in any case) because it's the cover I and everyone else remembers (again, how can I be nostalgic for something that I just saw a couple months ago), it's from the main title, etc. If I don't think that the first published appearance isn't always the be-all, end-all, it's certainly not going to be the case for concept sketches.

[Timely]

Interesting that the Romita sketch is the same pose as the Trimpie #180 page.

 

That was kinda my point, the only panel with Wolverine on it seems to have been traced by Trimpe from the Romita original concept drawing.

[heartened]

#180 is the first published appearance - that's what most people care about. Most people would have never seen the Wolverine concept sketches. Although I personally would love to own both the published page or the concept drawings, I'd pay more a lot more for the actual published piece.

 

These rules we make are just plain silly. If people are willing to argue that the first appearance is important, and 180 is priced in the stratosphere vs. 181 pages, then honestly the concept art which is pretty fleshed out and accurate should be worth a lot and not case aside as "prelim" or "rough". I understand what people are saying, but I'm just calling attention to the fact that these rules we have in this market are all self-imposed and just herd mentality. I'm not selling my Comics Journal cover with the first Elektra appearance, but while we're on the subject shouldn't it be as valuable or more valuable than DD 168? If you answer now, please explain in detail. I honestly think there is no good reason, and if you discussed this issue with anyone outside of the hobby, they would probably say that Comics Journal 58 should be much more valuable: it's actually Elektra, it's actually published in multiple places before DD 168, including other Marvel comics, and it's a great if not greater image. The rule that DD 168 is continuity is all BS. Again, I'm never selling, so it's a moot point to me, but I think we should be open to understanding why it is we place value on items in the first place, and be willing to change our opinions. We shouldn't just magically change our opinions when Overstreet magically changes notations....

 

Just my 2 cents. I think those Wolverine roughs are pretty darn cool.

 

[heartened]

Nice, but not published. I'm sure there are Spidey concept drawings that predate AF #15, Superman drawings that predate ACTION #1, etc., but if they're not published, then they're not even in the same conversation.

 

With these concept drawings and the like, you're really relying on how collectors view the historical importance of such, as there's not going to be a nostalgia component (how can you be nostalgic for something you've probably never seen before), there's not much in the way of aesthetics, content or context vs. the published page, and oftentimes these won't even be really finished or on standard sized board. So, I'd have to agree - not even in the same conversation.

 

I really like Hari's Marvel house ad/fanzine cover by Miller/Rubinstein which features the first appearance of Elektra (pre-dating DD #168 by months). That said, I'd rather have the DD #168 cover (and would value it much higher in any case) because it's the cover I and everyone else remembers (again, how can I be nostalgic for something that I just saw a couple months ago), it's from the main title, etc. If I don't think that the first published appearance isn't always the be-all, end-all, it's certainly not going to be the case for concept sketches.

 

Agreed Gene. And that's why I paid a lot but not what the DD 168 would run. But, these are only lines in the sand drawn within our hobby (with nostalgia). Outside the hobby, different rules would apply. We are nostalgia driven now, but maybe not forever. I think we should acknowledge that some of our distinctions are man-made. In 50 years when nostalgia is gone for Gold, Silver and Bronze, some of these things may turn on their head.

 

[heartened]

Nice, but not published. I'm sure there are Spidey concept drawings that predate AF #15, Superman drawings that predate ACTION #1, etc., but if they're not published, then they're not even in the same conversation.

 

With these concept drawings and the like, you're really relying on how collectors view the historical importance of such, as there's not going to be a nostalgia component (how can you be nostalgic for something you've probably never seen before), there's not much in the way of aesthetics, content or context vs. the published page, and oftentimes these won't even be really finished or on standard sized board. So, I'd have to agree - not even in the same conversation.

 

I really like Hari's Marvel house ad/fanzine cover by Miller/Rubinstein which features the first appearance of Elektra (pre-dating DD #168 by months). That said, I'd rather have the DD #168 cover (and would value it much higher in any case) because it's the cover I and everyone else remembers (again, how can I be nostalgic for something that I just saw a couple months ago), it's from the main title, etc. If I don't think that the first published appearance isn't always the be-all, end-all, it's certainly not going to be the case for concept sketches.

 

By the way, tons of nostalgia for Hulk 181. Hulk 180, not so much. What does that say?

 

[delekkerste]

By the way, tons of nostalgia for Hulk 181. Hulk 180, not so much. What does that say?

 

It says that the first appearance is only one factor out of several to consider - nostalgia, content, aesthetics, etc. all play a role as well. I think the #180 page will do well in part because it's the 1st appearance, but also largely because it's arguably a nicer page than most/all of the #181 interiors. If it had been a page, there would be far less people trumpeting the first appearance aspect and we would instead be judging the #180 page alongside the #181 pages in terms of aesthetics and content (much as we probably would do with FF #48-50 if they all turned up, as you quite rightly noted).

 

Similarly, I own the first ever Red Sonja appearance page from Conan #23, but I'd take any Sonja page from Conan #24 over it, because the aesthetics, nostalgia, content, etc. are all superior to the #23 which was rushed to make the publication deadline and is far from BWS' best artwork - it's not like that one-month head start is the be-all, end-all. This whole "1st published appearance = more historically important" trope is silly to me - everybody already agrees that the 2nd appearance of Wolverine (the Hulk #181 cover) is more memorable, iconic and important, so we're already arguing for 2nd place at best in debating the "importance" of the #180 page vs. the #181 interiors. Same with Conan #23 vs. Conan #24, X-Men Annual #14 vs. UXM #266, etc.

 

Not to mention, "historically important" is really rather relative, isn't it? We're talking about the 1st appearance of a comic book character, not exactly one of the defining moments of Western civilization!

[jjeanius]

#180 is the first published appearance - that's what most people care about. Most people would have never seen the Wolverine concept sketches. Although I personally would love to own both the published page or the concept drawings, I'd pay more a lot more for the actual published piece.

 

These rules we make are just plain silly. If people are willing to argue that the first appearance is important, and 180 is priced in the stratosphere vs. 181 pages, then honestly the concept art which is pretty fleshed out and accurate should be worth a lot and not case aside as "prelim" or "rough". I understand what people are saying, but I'm just calling attention to the fact that these rules we have in this market are all self-imposed and just herd mentality. I'm not selling my Comics Journal cover with the first Elektra appearance, but while we're on the subject shouldn't it be as valuable or more valuable than DD 168? If you answer now, please explain in detail. I honestly think there is no good reason, and if you discussed this issue with anyone outside of the hobby, they would probably say that Comics Journal 58 should be much more valuable: it's actually Elektra, it's actually published in multiple places before DD 168, including other Marvel comics, and it's a great if not greater image. The rule that DD 168 is continuity is all BS. Again, I'm never selling, so it's a moot point to me, but I think we should be open to understanding why it is we place value on items in the first place, and be willing to change our opinions. We shouldn't just magically change our opinions when Overstreet magically changes notations....

 

Just my 2 cents. I think those Wolverine roughs are pretty darn cool.

 

At the end of the day, this is a hobby driven by nostalgia, and nostalgia ties directly to the collector wallet. You might think that these rules are "silly", but they certainly are by no means arbitrary distinctions. Every single "rule" is backed up time and again by realized sales prices.

 

Certain images have been burned into memory from years of collecting/reading comics, and these are the images that command a premium, set record prices, etc. Why? Because the demand is much higher for these pieces as several collectors have the same attachment to it. Everyone remembers Daredevil 168 and the impact it had on the title, and the hobby, upon release. Everyone remembers seeing this book on every dealer's wall at conventions. Everyone remembers coveting this book, saving up to buy it, and the joy and pride of ownership.

 

How many people remember Comics Journal 58? How many people covet it? How much is it worth? For that matter, if we are talking true 1sts, how much is the preview magazine worth that first advertises Walking Dead #1 (and why isn't it worth more than the book itself)?

 

Is the cover to CJ 58 interesting / noteworthy? Sure. Does the very mention of it make collectors break out into a cold sweat of anticipation at the very idea of it coming up for auction? Doubtful. Are the Wolverine character design sketches an interesting part of the history of the character? Sure. But they are more of a side note than anything.

 

Demand in this hobby is tied directly to nostalgia, and nostalgia of the collecting community as a whole is tied directly to the supply / popularity / distribution of the book at the time of publication. So it's not really surprising that ASM art would be more popular / desirable than comparable PPSSM art, which would then be more desirable than comparable Web of Spidey art, which would then be more desirable than comparable Spidey advertising art, etc. Circulation/visibility IS a major factor in nostagia, hence the fact that 99.9% of OA collectors would prefer the DD 168 cover to the CJ 58 cover.

 

Hari - value aside, I'm curious: Given an opportunity to trade the CJ 58 cover straight up for DD 168, would you honestly pass...? If so, then the CJ 58 cover is certainly in the right collection. If not, though, then your argument holds no water.

 

Just my (rather long-winded)

[heartened]

By the way, tons of nostalgia for Hulk 181. Hulk 180, not so much. What does that say?

 

It says that the first appearance is only one factor out of several to consider - nostalgia, content, aesthetics, etc. all play a role as well. I think the #180 page will do well in part because it's the 1st appearance, but also largely because it's arguably a nicer page than most/all of the #181 interiors. If it had been a page, there would be far less people trumpeting the first appearance aspect and we would instead be judging the #180 page alongside the #181 pages in terms of aesthetics and content (much as we probably would do with FF #48-50 if they all turned up, as you quite rightly noted).

 

Similarly, I own the first ever Red Sonja appearance page from Conan #23, but I'd take any Sonja page from Conan #24 over it, because the aesthetics, nostalgia, content, etc. are all superior to the #23 which was rushed to make the publication deadline and is far from BWS' best artwork - it's not like that one-month head start is the be-all, end-all. This whole "1st published appearance = more historically important" trope is silly to me - everybody already agrees that the 2nd appearance of Wolverine (the Hulk #181 cover) is more memorable, iconic and important, so we're already arguing for 2nd place at best in debating the "importance" of the #180 page vs. the #181 interiors. Same with Conan #23 vs. Conan #24, X-Men Annual #14 vs. UXM #266, etc.

 

Not to mention, "historically important" is really rather relative, isn't it? We're talking about the 1st appearance of a comic book character, not exactly one of the defining moments of Western civilization!

 

Completely agree with all this. That's why I was taken aback when this one page from 180 was being discussed like it was the holy grail that we've all been looking for. Don't get me wrong, it's a great page, but my sense was the premium being bestowed upon it was much more than we would give to the other examples you note above.

 

[theflashunc]

 

Completely agree with all this. That's why I was taken aback when this one page from 180 was being discussed like it was the holy grail that we've all been looking for. Don't get me wrong, it's a great page, but my sense was the premium being bestowed upon it was much more than we would give to the other examples you note above.

 

To be fair, some of that was driven by the belief that art for 181 was a pile of ash.

[heartened]

#180 is the first published appearance - that's what most people care about. Most people would have never seen the Wolverine concept sketches. Although I personally would love to own both the published page or the concept drawings, I'd pay more a lot more for the actual published piece.

 

These rules we make are just plain silly. If people are willing to argue that the first appearance is important, and 180 is priced in the stratosphere vs. 181 pages, then honestly the concept art which is pretty fleshed out and accurate should be worth a lot and not case aside as "prelim" or "rough". I understand what people are saying, but I'm just calling attention to the fact that these rules we have in this market are all self-imposed and just herd mentality. I'm not selling my Comics Journal cover with the first Elektra appearance, but while we're on the subject shouldn't it be as valuable or more valuable than DD 168? If you answer now, please explain in detail. I honestly think there is no good reason, and if you discussed this issue with anyone outside of the hobby, they would probably say that Comics Journal 58 should be much more valuable: it's actually Elektra, it's actually published in multiple places before DD 168, including other Marvel comics, and it's a great if not greater image. The rule that DD 168 is continuity is all BS. Again, I'm never selling, so it's a moot point to me, but I think we should be open to understanding why it is we place value on items in the first place, and be willing to change our opinions. We shouldn't just magically change our opinions when Overstreet magically changes notations....

 

Just my 2 cents. I think those Wolverine roughs are pretty darn cool.

 

At the end of the day, this is a hobby driven by nostalgia, and nostalgia ties directly to the collector wallet. You might think that these rules are "silly", but they certainly are by no means arbitrary distinctions. Every single "rule" is backed up time and again by realized sales prices.

 

Certain images have been burned into memory from years of collecting/reading comics, and these are the images that command a premium, set record prices, etc. Why? Because the demand is much higher for these pieces as several collectors have the same attachment to it. Everyone remembers Daredevil 168 and the impact it had on the title, and the hobby, upon release. Everyone remembers seeing this book on every dealer's wall at conventions. Everyone remembers coveting this book, saving up to buy it, and the joy and pride of ownership.

 

How many people remember Comics Journal 58? How many people covet it? How much is it worth? For that matter, if we are talking true 1sts, how much is the preview magazine worth that first advertises Walking Dead #1 (and why isn't it worth more than the book itself)?

 

Is the cover to CJ 58 interesting / noteworthy? Sure. Does the very mention of it make collectors break out into a cold sweat of anticipation at the very idea of it coming up for auction? Doubtful. Are the Wolverine character design sketches an interesting part of the history of the character? Sure. But they are more of a side note than anything.

 

Demand in this hobby is tied directly to nostalgia, and nostalgia of the collecting community as a whole is tied directly to the supply / popularity / distribution of the book at the time of publication. So it's not really surprising that ASM art would be more popular / desirable than comparable PPSSM art, which would then be more desirable than comparable Web of Spidey art, which would then be more desirable than comparable Spidey advertising art, etc. Circulation/visibility IS a major factor in nostagia, hence the fact that 99.9% of OA collectors would prefer the DD 168 cover to the CJ 58 cover.

 

Hari - value aside, I'm curious: Given an opportunity to trade the CJ 58 cover straight up for DD 168, would you honestly pass...? If so, then the CJ 58 cover is certainly in the right collection. If not, though, then your argument holds no water.

 

Just my (rather long-winded)

 

Sigh. Come on guys, people are missing my point. Obviously I'd rather have the DD 168 cover and it's value is much higher, multiples in fact. That's not my point. Imagine 100 years from now when no one has held or read a comic. Don't you think those prelims to Wolverine's first appearance may be considered more valuable than pages from either 180 or 181? Suspend disbelief for a second. It is actually more important. Not now of course, but let's be honest that the reasons we value things in this hobby: nostalgia, seeing things on dealer shelves, etc. are all things that could pass with time. Wolverine may be around in 100 years and people won't have any nostalgia for any books, going to conventions, talking up who can win in a fight Wolverine or Hulk, etc; just the characters themselves. In that world, the first appearance of the character may garner the most bids, regardless of where it was.

 

Next time I won't use something I own as an example, as clearly folks automatically discount it as a biased argument or can't see past it being more personal. I assure you, I am simply voicing an alternate opinion, looking in from the outside, as opposed to looking in from the inside. I get the inside opinion, I've lived it for 30 years. I fully understand the counterargument. But do you understand mine?

 

[Koa]

I made a post in CG last week.

 

Umm... Hate to burst everyone's bubble, but the OA to Hulk #180 is not the actual 1st appearance of Wolverine.

 

WOLVERINE DRAWINGS BY JOHN ROMITA, 1974. BLUE PENCIL ON THIN VELUM. SIGNED AND NOTED BY ROMITA. Yes, this is the FIRST drawing(s) ever of Wolverine (Also see the accompanied drawing). As Art Director for Marvel Comics, it was Romita's assignment to create the visual appearance of the new character (villain) that was written into the --script to battle the Hulk in issue #180 - 181. Called the "Wolverine", Romita envisioned him as small in stature, but ferocious by nature. The pair of velum sheets depict 2 head shots (front and side view), and two full figure shots (action and standing poses). I bought these directly from Romita many years ago. He told me that the head shots were the first drawings, followed by the full figure drawings. He made the notation on the head shots as he signed both sheets. I remember hesitating on making the purchase, as the drawings were no where near the quality of the Spider-Man pages that I was buying from him at the time. Of course, I'm glad that I did decide to buy them.

 

http://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=253574

 

http://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=253576

 

Those sketches are awesome. they are by john romita sr which makes them even more awesome. They are not the first appearance of Wolverine though. Appearance is the printed page.

 

In no way am i putting down those great sketches. they are important but they are prelim. Nobody would consider the prelim to Giant Size X-men 1 the first appearance of the new team. for example

 

 

As for 181 getting more love from fans than issue 180. that's simple. Wolverine's story was in issue 181.

[J.Sid]

It's all about nostalgia and which images/pages/covers are "burned into your brain"

[delekkerste]

Imagine 100 years from now when no one has held or read a comic. Don't you think those prelims to Wolverine's first appearance may be considered more valuable than pages from either 180 or 181? Suspend disbelief for a second. It is actually more important. Not now of course, but let's be honest that the reasons we value things in this hobby: nostalgia, seeing things on dealer shelves, etc. are all things that could pass with time.

 

Under that scenario, I would argue that any notion of those prelim concept sketches being historically important would probably have faded alongside the nostalgia, and that the aesthetics and content of the artwork would be considered more important (in which case the published pages would still blow the sketches out of the water).

[jjeanius]

#180 is the first published appearance - that's what most people care about. Most people would have never seen the Wolverine concept sketches. Although I personally would love to own both the published page or the concept drawings, I'd pay more a lot more for the actual published piece.

 

These rules we make are just plain silly. If people are willing to argue that the first appearance is important, and 180 is priced in the stratosphere vs. 181 pages, then honestly the concept art which is pretty fleshed out and accurate should be worth a lot and not case aside as "prelim" or "rough". I understand what people are saying, but I'm just calling attention to the fact that these rules we have in this market are all self-imposed and just herd mentality. I'm not selling my Comics Journal cover with the first Elektra appearance, but while we're on the subject shouldn't it be as valuable or more valuable than DD 168? If you answer now, please explain in detail. I honestly think there is no good reason, and if you discussed this issue with anyone outside of the hobby, they would probably say that Comics Journal 58 should be much more valuable: it's actually Elektra, it's actually published in multiple places before DD 168, including other Marvel comics, and it's a great if not greater image. The rule that DD 168 is continuity is all BS. Again, I'm never selling, so it's a moot point to me, but I think we should be open to understanding why it is we place value on items in the first place, and be willing to change our opinions. We shouldn't just magically change our opinions when Overstreet magically changes notations....

 

Just my 2 cents. I think those Wolverine roughs are pretty darn cool.

 

At the end of the day, this is a hobby driven by nostalgia, and nostalgia ties directly to the collector wallet. You might think that these rules are "silly", but they certainly are by no means arbitrary distinctions. Every single "rule" is backed up time and again by realized sales prices.

 

Certain images have been burned into memory from years of collecting/reading comics, and these are the images that command a premium, set record prices, etc. Why? Because the demand is much higher for these pieces as several collectors have the same attachment to it. Everyone remembers Daredevil 168 and the impact it had on the title, and the hobby, upon release. Everyone remembers seeing this book on every dealer's wall at conventions. Everyone remembers coveting this book, saving up to buy it, and the joy and pride of ownership.

 

How many people remember Comics Journal 58? How many people covet it? How much is it worth? For that matter, if we are talking true 1sts, how much is the preview magazine worth that first advertises Walking Dead #1 (and why isn't it worth more than the book itself)?

 

Is the cover to CJ 58 interesting / noteworthy? Sure. Does the very mention of it make collectors break out into a cold sweat of anticipation at the very idea of it coming up for auction? Doubtful. Are the Wolverine character design sketches an interesting part of the history of the character? Sure. But they are more of a side note than anything.

 

Demand in this hobby is tied directly to nostalgia, and nostalgia of the collecting community as a whole is tied directly to the supply / popularity / distribution of the book at the time of publication. So it's not really surprising that ASM art would be more popular / desirable than comparable PPSSM art, which would then be more desirable than comparable Web of Spidey art, which would then be more desirable than comparable Spidey advertising art, etc. Circulation/visibility IS a major factor in nostagia, hence the fact that 99.9% of OA collectors would prefer the DD 168 cover to the CJ 58 cover.

 

Hari - value aside, I'm curious: Given an opportunity to trade the CJ 58 cover straight up for DD 168, would you honestly pass...? If so, then the CJ 58 cover is certainly in the right collection. If not, though, then your argument holds no water.

 

Just my (rather long-winded)

 

Sigh. Come on guys, people are missing my point. Obviously I'd rather have the DD 168 cover and it's value is much higher, multiples in fact. That's not my point. Imagine 100 years from now when no one has held or read a comic. Don't you think those prelims to Wolverine's first appearance may be considered more valuable than pages from either 180 or 181? Suspend disbelief for a second. It is actually more important. Not now of course, but let's be honest that the reasons we value things in this hobby: nostalgia, seeing things on dealer shelves, etc. are all things that could pass with time. Wolverine may be around in 100 years and people won't have any nostalgia for any books, going to conventions, talking up who can win in a fight Wolverine or Hulk, etc; just the characters themselves. In that world, the first appearance of the character may garner the most bids, regardless of where it was.

 

Next time I won't use something I own as an example, as clearly folks automatically discount it as a biased argument or can't see past it being more personal. I assure you, I am simply voicing an alternate opinion, looking in from the outside, as opposed to looking in from the inside. I get the inside opinion, I've lived it for 30 years. I fully understand the counterargument. But do you understand mine?

 

My response was primarily directed at the following: " I honestly think there is no good reason, and if you discussed this issue with anyone outside of the hobby, they would probably say that Comics Journal 58 should be much more valuable: it's actually Elektra, it's actually published in multiple places before DD 168, including other Marvel comics, and it's a great if not greater image."

 

I would argue that the uneducated opinion of someone that has no interest in the art in question to begin with is totally and completely irrelevant.

 

To your other point, though, I'll take it one step further: In 100 years, I assume that all comic book art that is coveted today is more likely to go the way of the Hummel, than to continue to increase in value. In other words, if the entire collector market for comics and comic art ceases to exist, and a tree falls in the woods...will it make a sound?

 

Of course, I won't be here in 100 years, so that doesn't concern me so much...but I do think a time will come when comic art is primarily only interesting for academic and historical reasons, rather than because of any particular affection from the masses.