Heritage May 2014

[Bronty]

#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?

 

Its hard to be a comic or comic art collector and not follow the herd to some extent because the competition for the good stuff is fierce and established and patterns and precedents (silly or not) have been set. If you don't want to follow the herd in comics/ comic art, in many (but not all) cases it means you have to collect less desirable items or at least certainly not the prime items, because its impossible to collect those items without being subject to the forces of the herd. People may argue the point, but in a world where comic art done last week is worth thousands, its the truth. Its a developed hobby at this point.

 

If you don't want to be part of the herd you are better off in a younger hobby where there is less precedent and the history is waiting to be written.

 

 

[heartened]

Thanks Court. I agree. Just wanted to make people look at things as if they were not quite so invested in the hobby. Sometimes it's a good exercise to look at intrinsic value, if there is such a thing. I do think the characters will live on, but the medium will be dead (or at least seriously fatally mutated). In that scenario, what will a Wolverine, Hulk, Thor fan go back and seek out? I don't know if anyone knows the answer, which is why I'm pushing back when others claim to (I'm not speaking to you in particular, by the way).

 

[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?

 

Its hard to be a comic or comic art collector and not follow the herd to some extent because the competition for the good stuff is fierce and established and patterns and precedents (silly or not) have been set. If you don't want to follow the herd in comics/ comic art, in many (but not all) cases it means you have to collect less desirable items or at least certainly not the prime items, because its impossible to collect those items without being subject to the forces of the herd. People may argue the point, but in a world where comic art done last week is worth thousands, its the truth. Its a developed hobby at this point.

 

If you don't want to be part of the herd you are better off in a younger hobby where there is less precedent and the history is waiting to be written.

 

 

Hey,

 

I think this is certainly true for the most part, but we've all seen the herd change direction, even in this hobby.

 

[jjeanius]

Thanks Court. I agree. Just wanted to make people look at things as if they were not quite so invested in the hobby. Sometimes it's a good exercise to look at intrinsic value, if there is such a thing. I do think the characters will live on, but the medium will be dead (or at least seriously fatally mutated). In that scenario, what will a Wolverine, Hulk, Thor fan go back and seek out? I don't know if anyone knows the answer, which is why I'm pushing back when others claim to (I'm not speaking to you in particular, by the way).

 

That's cool, we agree on that point. I would take it one step further: If the hobby disintegrates, and there is no longer a premium placed on art from a key issue / first appearance such as Hulk 180 / Hulk 181, then who is going to care about an obscure character design sketch...? IMO, the design sketch appeals more to a diehard fan that covets but cannot afford something like this Hulk 180 page (or perhaps it was just the best available example at the time, etc), and so it's more of a "consolation prize"...and even more likely to fade into obscurity once the original fanbase dies off.

[bluechip]

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

 

 

 

 

If you prefer the published art, that's fine. But it's a bit much to call it an epic fail.

 

The Romita concept drawings have been verified as much as anything like that can be, and the full figure drawing is clearly the model for the first appearance in the splash panel.

 

I think that pieces showing the creative process are sometimes more interesting than the final piece, especially when the final was done by a different or lesser artist. And it's not like the Superman prelim drawings in which the costume's not final etc. The Romita drawing is very precise. Sure, the published piece is well, published but when a big part of the conversation is about what came first, then it's appropriate to point out that the Romita drawings came first.

 

That isn't to say the 180 page isn't worth a fortune. It is and should be. But there is room for all these pieces to have considerable value, and I understand why bidders would want to downplay something before they bid on it but sometimes there is a piling on effect here in which it seems people just want to drive down the interest in something or the price of something, just for whatever joy comes from devaluing things.

 

[alxjhnsn]

Here's a prelim that I'd love to own. To be honest, I'd prefer this to the first cover.

 

Prelim:

 

1st Cover

 

Yes, the first cover is more developed and way cool, but look at that prelim and read the message.

 

 

 

[Mephisto]

I have long loved the Wolverine concept sketches by Romita. It even says his height...which over time they have retconned a few inches but the character mess the bed years ago when they made his healing factor cope with any damage.

[heartened]

Here's a prelim that I'd love to own. To be honest, I'd prefer this to the first cover.

 

Prelim:

 

1st Cover

 

Yes, the first cover is more developed and way cool, but look at that prelim and read the message.

 

 

 

Very cool. Have always loved this piece. I have something handwritten similarly from BWS on the back of my Conan #23 page that really talks about his motivation for the character. It's very special. Only a few people have seen it.

 

[delekkerste]

Here's a prelim that I'd love to own. To be honest, I'd prefer this to the first cover.

 

Yes, the first cover is more developed and way cool, but look at that prelim and read the message.

 

That's something that would make an interesting historical exhibit for, say, The Smithsonian, but, as an art collector, I'd take the published cover OA all day long and twice on Sunday.

[heartened]

Here's a prelim that I'd love to own. To be honest, I'd prefer this to the first cover.

 

Yes, the first cover is more developed and way cool, but look at that prelim and read the message.

 

That's something that would make an interesting historical exhibit for, say, The Smithsonian, but, as an art collector, I'd take the published cover OA all day long and twice on Sunday.

 

This is my point though. For the foreseeable future what we as collectors want, desire, value, dictates price. I totally agree with that; but at some point in the future people who see it only as the medium that brought the world these characters will desire simply the first depiction, in whatever form that took. Hence, your reference to the Smithsonian. I too would take the cover "all day long and twice on Sunday" but what would the Smithsonian do? I'm not sure the answer is as clear as people are making it out to be.

[pinupcartoonguy]

I think "finished"/published art will always be worth more than conceptual art. Does anybody have an example of a more mature art field, say fine art, where conceptual art is worth more?

 

 

[delekkerste]

This is my point though. For the foreseeable future what we as collectors want, desire, value, dictates price. I totally agree with that; but at some point in the future people who see it only as the medium that brought the world these characters will desire simply the first depiction, in whatever form that took. Hence, your reference to the Smithsonian. I too would take the cover "all day long and twice on Sunday" but what would the Smithsonian do? I'm not sure the answer is as clear as people are making it out to be.

 

I think an institution like the Smithsonian would prefer it because it's more of a historical curiosity than a great piece of artwork, and would make for a better exhibit/narrative than just having the published cover on display...not that it would ever be considered in the same realm of value or desirability in the marketplace or that a character's first depiction in prelim/conceptual form is necessarily significant in and of itself.

[Bronty]

While we are on this topic I found that price (70k ?) for the 'first turtles drawing' to be really high for what is was. I was expecting half that if it did well. Thoughts?

[delekkerste]

While we are on this topic I found that price (70k ?) for the 'first turtles drawing' to be really high for what is was. I was expecting half that if it did well. Thoughts?

 

Indeed, but, just because something sells particularly high or low at auction on a given day doesn't necessarily mean that the result is necessarily a good estimate of FMV. I suspect that many/most results like the one you cited above have a group of bidders taking the price up to a certain level and then it's usually just two guys battling it out and taking the price into KrazyLand.

[Bronty]

This is my point though. For the foreseeable future what we as collectors want, desire, value, dictates price. I totally agree with that; but at some point in the future people who see it only as the medium that brought the world these characters will desire simply the first depiction, in whatever form that took. Hence, your reference to the Smithsonian. I too would take the cover "all day long and twice on Sunday" but what would the Smithsonian do? I'm not sure the answer is as clear as people are making it out to be.

 

I think an institution like the Smithsonian would prefer it because it's more of a historical curiosity than a great piece of artwork, and would make for a better exhibit/narrative than just having the published cover on display...not that it would ever be considered in the same realm of value or desirability in the marketplace or that a character's first depiction in prelim/conceptual form is necessarily significant in and of itself.

 

I can't say that Id be excited about either one as a great piece of art. The WW figure is almost childishly drawn, esp with the bullets richocheting in curved lines off the bracelets (and multiple shots in close proximity from the machine gun is one thing, but from a revolver)?

 

They say a lot of GA artists were basically kids at the time and IMO on this one it really shows.

 

I'd say that it's only the current/former comic collector background in us that would desire this piece in the slightest. Aesthetically it's a bit of a train wreck

 

I know that a lot of pieces we desire are only worth anything because of where / when / how they were published, and usually we don't give it a second thought, but I find the poor aesthetics jarring on this one. I can't look a the bullets bouncing off the bracelets without wincing

[delekkerste]

I know that a lot of pieces we desire are only worth anything because of where / when / how they were published, and usually we don't give it a second thought, but I find the poor aesthetics jarring on this one. I can't look a the bullets bouncing off the bracelets without wincing

 

Eh, I think we have to be forgiving of the times, circumstances and the audience for whom these images were drawn. At this point, it's really all about their historical/cultural value and importance...any artistic merit for GA art is merely a bonus.

[stinkininkin]

I know that a lot of pieces we desire are only worth anything because of where / when / how they were published, and usually we don't give it a second thought, but I find the poor aesthetics jarring on this one. I can't look a the bullets bouncing off the bracelets without wincing

 

Eh, I think we have to be forgiving of the times, circumstances and the audience for whom these images were drawn. At this point, it's really all about their historical/cultural value and importance...any artistic merit for GA art is merely a bonus.

 

Which is why I would never be a buyer for 99% of GA art. But that's just me.

 

Scott

[heartened]

I know that a lot of pieces we desire are only worth anything because of where / when / how they were published, and usually we don't give it a second thought, but I find the poor aesthetics jarring on this one. I can't look a the bullets bouncing off the bracelets without wincing

 

Eh, I think we have to be forgiving of the times, circumstances and the audience for whom these images were drawn. At this point, it's really all about their historical/cultural value and importance...any artistic merit for GA art is merely a bonus.

 

Which is why I would never be a buyer for 99% of GA art. But that's just me.

 

Scott

 

Schomberg is probably the only one that would hold up to any extent today. He was in a class of his own, IMHO.

 

[alxjhnsn]

Schomberg is probably the only one that would hold up to any extent today. He was in a class of his own, IMHO.

 

Matt Baker?

Mac Raboy?

Will Eisner?

 

I think a few other GA artists hold up pretty well. Tastes vary, of course.

[lb jefferies]

I agree there's a lot of horrible stuff in the GA but a lot of amazing stuff too.

 

Lou Fine

Schomburg

That Frazetta guy

Charles Biro

Matt Baker

Mac Raboy

Eisner

Basil Wolverton

Bill Everett

Wally Wood

Lou E. O'Melia

Gus Ricca

LB Cole

Toth

etc