DocDave Frazetta Auction

[ThothAmon]

Wow so many trolls. I for one enjoyed having DocDave regale us with stories. Thanks for messing it all up with your endless hater posts.

[Bronty]

I don't think anyone was trolling, just not seeing eye to eye , it happens

[stippy52]

Anyone receive their catalog yet?

[GreatEscape]

Curious, why would an auction house charge a higher premium for online bids vs. phone or fax bids? I would think the online bid requires less 'processing' effort compared to answering the phone or picking up a fax.

 

By comparison, Heritage and ComicLink do not charge a higher premium for online bids.

[wpbooks]

Anyone receive their catalog yet?

 

Mine arrived today. It's a pretty beautiful book on it's own. My issues with it would be it's lack of a nice, non-generic auction house sort of spine, and a censored image (not to mention the lots that aren't depicted due to the content being dubious according to Profiles In History).

 

Other than that it reminds me a lot of the Artist Edition books currently flooding the market these days, very nice size, only with a lot more text and anecdotes from DocDave that go along with the art. All in all I think it's a very respectable book even at the price!

[tth2]

Curious, why would an auction house charge a higher premium for online bids vs. phone or fax bids? I would think the online bid requires less 'processing' effort compared to answering the phone or picking up a fax.

 

By comparison, Heritage and ComicLink do not charge a higher premium for online bids.

I was wondering the same thing. Seems counter-intuitive. Use old-fashioned bidding technology for free. Use any of that new-fangled internet and we'll charge you extra!

 

Maybe they hate technology. Or they're owned by John Verzyl.

[malvin]

Curious, why would an auction house charge a higher premium for online bids vs. phone or fax bids? I would think the online bid requires less 'processing' effort compared to answering the phone or picking up a fax.

 

By comparison, Heritage and ComicLink do not charge a higher premium for online bids.

I was wondering the same thing. Seems counter-intuitive. Use old-fashioned bidding technology for free. Use any of that new-fangled internet and we'll charge you extra!

 

Maybe they hate technology. Or they're owned by John Verzyl.

 

I think it was this thread, or maybe I read it elsewhere, but they are using a third part's online auction "engine", so I am sure they charge them extra

 

Malvin

[vodou]

Correct Malvin. They're using Invaluable to host the online action, and there are extra fees for everybody there.

[pemart1966]

Anyone receive their catalog yet?

 

Mine arrived today. It's a pretty beautiful book on it's own. My issues with it would be it's lack of a nice, non-generic auction house sort of spine, and a censored image (not to mention the lots that aren't depicted due to the content being dubious according to Profiles In History).

 

Other than that it reminds me a lot of the Artist Edition books currently flooding the market these days, very nice size, only with a lot more text and anecdotes from DocDave that go along with the art. All in all I think it's a very respectable book even at the price!

 

So the catalog is $95 and there's censorship AND lots not pictured???

[comix4fun]

Anyone receive their catalog yet?

 

Mine arrived today. It's a pretty beautiful book on it's own. My issues with it would be it's lack of a nice, non-generic auction house sort of spine, and a censored image (not to mention the lots that aren't depicted due to the content being dubious according to Profiles In History).

 

Other than that it reminds me a lot of the Artist Edition books currently flooding the market these days, very nice size, only with a lot more text and anecdotes from DocDave that go along with the art. All in all I think it's a very respectable book even at the price!

 

So the catalog is $95 and there's censorship AND lots not pictured???

 

 

Check Doc Dave's blog...if the pics are still up...and you cans the lots not pictured.

 

I like this catalog as a keepsake for my bookshelf. I am glad those lots aren't pictured in it.

 

Once you see them you'll see what I mean.

[Bronty]

Wow I don't get that Chris. Are you worried about kids picking up the books?

 

Otherwise... it's just cartoon sex, big deal

[comix4fun]

Wow I don't get that Chris. Are you worried about kids picking up the books?

 

Otherwise... it's just cartoon sex, big deal

 

 

It's not what I think of when I think of Frazetta, my own personal taste. I'd like to keep my perceptions of his work the way they are right now.

 

I don't have any overt porn in my collection.

 

I also owned and sold the full torture sequence from Walking Dead #33 and the full page splash of Laurie and Judith being gunned down from Walking Dead #48. I bought them, got them...looked at them...and turned right around and wanted them out of my house.

 

Sometimes art is about how the pieces make you feel.

 

 

Also: If this weren't an artist edition style keepsake type hardcover I wouldn't care, but I'd like to flip through this seeing what I think of when I think of Frazetta.

[Bronty]

Fair enough. I actually like seeing them, it's a reminder that these people have other sides to them and yeah that includes a sexual side.

 

 

[vodou]

Right Bronty. And if anybody didn't like it in their book, they could just razor out the pages. Worked fine for SOTI yeah? I'm all for people avoiding things they don't want to have/see. But let's leave it there for those that do, or posterity, history, etc. It is what it is, to pretend it's not by hiding (or whatever) is...pretending. That's what they make sand for, so you can bury your head in it

 

Of course the lawyers resolved it for us anyway, so moot point. They always seem to ruin the party!

[Silver Surfer]

Anyone receive their catalog yet?

 

Mine arrived today. It's a pretty beautiful book on it's own. My issues with it would be it's lack of a nice, non-generic auction house sort of spine, and a censored image (not to mention the lots that aren't depicted due to the content being dubious according to Profiles In History).

 

Other than that it reminds me a lot of the Artist Edition books currently flooding the market these days, very nice size, only with a lot more text and anecdotes from DocDave that go along with the art. All in all I think it's a very respectable book even at the price!

 

So the catalog is $95 and there's censorship AND lots not pictured???

 

 

Check Doc Dave's blog...if the pics are still up...and you cans the lots not pictured.

 

I like this catalog as a keepsake for my bookshelf. I am glad those lots aren't pictured in it.

 

Once you see them you'll see what I mean.

 

What's a matter Trebeck, you don't fancy the ladies?

[comix4fun]

Right Bronty. And if anybody didn't like it in their book, they could just razor out the pages. Worked fine for SOTI yeah? I'm all for people avoiding things they don't want to have/see. But let's leave it there for those that do, or posterity, history, etc. It is what it is, to pretend it's not by hiding (or whatever) is...pretending. That's what they make sand for, so you can bury your head in it

 

Of course the lawyers resolved it for us anyway, so moot point. They always seem to ruin the party!

 

 

 

 

Oh give me a break.

 

And anyone who wants those images for their personal stash can print them out and scotch tape them inside the covers of the auction catalog as well.

 

I think you can get a pretty good idea of an artists work and the scope of his influence without having to see every perverted notion he decided to put on paper memorialized for all time.

 

It's not putting your head in the sand, it's remembering a man for the decades upon decades of work and not for a week's worth of dalliance with something of a lesser quality than for which he is best known.

 

If Frank had truly wanted this as part of his "history" it would have probably made its way into any one of the dozen plus "art of" books published during his lifetime.

 

 

[J.Sid]

 

It's not putting your head in the sand, it's remembering a man for the decades upon decades of work and not for a week's worth of dalliance with something of a lesser quality than for which he is best known.

 

If Frank had truly wanted this as part of his "history" it would have probably made its way into any one of the dozen plus "art of" books published during his lifetime.

 

 

... yet they didn't have a problem printing a full page image of LOT #6.

 

 

I agree with the guys above: if it's in the auction, it should have been included in the catalogue, which is intended to be a memento of the event.

[wpbooks]

 

It's not putting your head in the sand, it's remembering a man for the decades upon decades of work and not for a week's worth of dalliance with something of a lesser quality than for which he is best known.

 

If Frank had truly wanted this as part of his "history" it would have probably made its way into any one of the dozen plus "art of" books published during his lifetime.

 

 

... yet they didn't have a problem printing a full page image of LOT #6.

 

Shouldn't every artist be allowed their one foray into abstract expressionism? With the censored images, having looked them over on Docdave's blog when he had them posted there, the bulk of them are pretty much your standard smutty nude and lascivious f$%k shots. One in particular, though, seemed like it could foment a bit of race-baiting if seen out of context, perhaps. (I'm unclear on the exact context, but DocDave seemed very sure that FF wasn't trying to capture some 'dark' issue from within.....but every viewer would need to judge that for themselves....alas, not to be, however, unless you show up at the auction in person or check out the website of this guy:

 

http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/2015/11/dont-hide-your-candle-under-a-bushel-mr-frazetta-nsfw/ )

[comix4fun]

 

It's not putting your head in the sand, it's remembering a man for the decades upon decades of work and not for a week's worth of dalliance with something of a lesser quality than for which he is best known.

 

If Frank had truly wanted this as part of his "history" it would have probably made its way into any one of the dozen plus "art of" books published during his lifetime.

 

 

... yet they didn't have a problem printing a full page image of LOT #6.

 

Shouldn't every artist be allowed their one foray into abstract expressionism? With the censored images, having looked them over on Docdave's blog when he had them posted there, the bulk of them are pretty much your standard smutty nude and lascivious f$%k shots. One in particular, though, seemed like it could foment a bit of race-baiting if seen out of context, perhaps. (I'm unclear on the exact context, but DocDave seemed very sure that FF wasn't trying to capture some 'dark' issue from within.....but every viewer would need to judge that for themselves....alas, not to be, however, unless you show up at the auction in person or check out the website of this guy:

 

http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/2015/11/dont-hide-your-candle-under-a-bushel-mr-frazetta-nsfw/ )

 

 

Foray's into abstract expressionism don't leave lingering questions about the artist, nor could they diminish posthumous reputation.

 

Did Wally Wood's foray into the same arena serve to increase or decrease his esteem?

[J.Sid]

Foray's into abstract expressionism don't leave lingering questions about the artist, nor could they diminish posthumous reputation.

 

Did Wally Wood's foray into the same arena serve to increase or decrease his esteem?

 

I didn't say I thought the abstract piece shouldn't be in the catalogue. My point was that the smut SHOULD have been included.