Neal Adams Reimagined Classic DC Covers

[AKA Rick]

I wonder, regarding this news about Neal Adams drawing 25 covers for DC to be released.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2015/11/13/neal-adams-homages-himself-in-25-dc-comic-variant-covers

 

...if the original pencils remain, and the inks will be over blue line, or if they'll be inked over the original pencils...

 

...and who the assigned inkers are (I'd hope it would be Scott Williams, Norm Rapmund, Richard Friend and Joe Weems as some of the names)

 

...and of course the obvious question: Will the OA be available, where and how much?

[chico_suave_58]

If the OA is made available, any thoughts on pricing? It seems these would be priced at modern OA prices with an "Adams" premium...

[AKA Rick]

I'd speculate if sold by Neal Adams, it would be over $15k maybe even in the $25k range. If sold by the inkers and allowing the marketplace to dictate the price with it also priced to move/sell and what a collector would actually pay, maybe in the $10k-15k range, If I had to guess.

[Koa]

I'm really hoping Scott Williams inks the deadman 1 homage featuring batman. Would love to see Danny Miki take a crack at some of these covers.

[kav]

look familiar?

[Bronty]

I'd speculate if sold by Neal Adams, it would be over $15k maybe even in the $25k range. If sold by the inkers and allowing the marketplace to dictate the price with it also priced to move/sell and what a collector would actually pay, maybe in the $10k-15k range, If I had to guess.

 

I truly don't get spending even the lower end of that on a brand new cover. You can buy a pretty nice vintage Adams for that

[Brian Peck]

Seems like a weak selection of covers he chose to do homages to. No backgrounds, besides the GL 76 most are forgettable. Shocked people would pay $15K+ for homage recreations.

[wormboy]

What a cool idea.

[Nexus]

I'd speculate if sold by Neal Adams, it would be over $15k maybe even in the $25k range. If sold by the inkers and allowing the marketplace to dictate the price with it also priced to move/sell and what a collector would actually pay, maybe in the $10k-15k range, If I had to guess.

 

I truly don't get spending even the lower end of that on a brand new cover. You can buy a pretty nice vintage Adams for that

 

Agreed. Now, maybe that will be the range for asking prices, but I don't see them selling for that much, either. Neal's done other variant covers for Marvel/DC in recent years, and I remember a nice one going for about $3-4K at auction. So I'd take the under on $10K for these.

[desertdogg2006]

I think to me it really comes down to what inker is inking what cover. as some are so much better than others, but my question is.? will they only let dc staff artist's ink the covers. or will they think out side the box. and say allow wrightson.

or kaluta. or Windsor-smith or even a steranko or golden . bolland to ink a cover.

 

I would be so much more interested in this project if they let artist that are not per say working for DC. what a great portfolio this would make if they were inked by the greatest artist.s in comics.

 

 

 

larry ;]

[jimjum12]

Personally, this s just me, I'd like to see Jesus Marino (sp?) ink him. GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[artdealer]

DC should print from the pencils.

They should give the inkers blue line to ink over, and not the originals.

It would be a sin to obscure those pencils.

MI

[kav]

I'd rather have an inked OA Adams than a pencil drawing.

[AKA Rick]

DC should print from the pencils.

They should give the inkers blue line to ink over, and not the originals.

It would be a sin to obscure those pencils.

MI

 

100% Agreed.

 

I actually like seeing the art process with pencils and inks (over bluelines or digital printouts of the finished inked piece) separate, but as a collector separate but not separated (sold as a paired set).

 

I think from an art resale/sales standpoint too, it's probably slightly advantageous for the artist(s) to have 2 pieces by such high profile talent than just 1.

[desertdogg2006]

so here,s a question for he board. if dc gives the inkers blueline covers. then what should the market price be, as I,am sure they will give the pencils back to adams and the inkers will get the inked blueline covers.

 

 

 

larry;

[AKA Rick]

so here,s a question for he board. if dc gives the inkers blueline covers. then what should the market price be, as I,am sure they will give the pencils back to adams and the inkers will get the inked blueline covers.

 

 

 

larry;

 

Some inkers sell the inked over blue lines without disclosure, and there's assumptions by buyers that it's inks over pencils, as most pencils today can be printed where you can't even see any traces of bluelines.

 

Other inkers fully disclose inks over digital pencils or inks over bluelines.

 

Most inkers, of course feel, as do some collectors that the original pencils although nice and by in most cases a higher profiled artist than the inker by name, are part of the art process much like layouts and prelims... and that the "final" piece, be it inked over pencils, inked over blue lines, or inked over digital pencils, is in fact the best piece to own since it's the closest resemblance of original art to what gets published, line for line in the greatest detail. It is odd in some ways as Inkers will explain that you can't see the original pencils beneath the inks anyway, whether blue lined or not, so it in theory shouldn't make a difference since the original pencils are essentially non-existent on the final piece.

 

Many collectors place higher value on the separate pencils than the inked over blue lines piece, I think largely depending on who the primary penciling artist is. If it's a top tier artist, the differential is great, but if it's a relatively unknown name, then it may in fact not command a higher value at all (and if the inker is a bigger name, and the pencils are rendered rather weakly and the inker really did a great job embellishing, then the inked piece could sell for higher).

 

For the Neal Adams pieces, I'd say if the inker is a top name like Scott Williams, it would go for the most, since he is considered DC's best by most fans.

 

Then high profile names like Norm Rapmund, Joe Weems, Matt "Batt" Banning, Richard Friend, Danny Miki, Dexter Vines, Jay Leisten, and other similar well known popular inkers would probably be the next tier.

 

If inkers who have been associated with Neal Adams such as Tom Palmer were to do the work or a legend like Terry Austin, or a traditionally primary penciler decides to ink (much like how back in the days Murphy Anderson, Bob Layton and Wallace Wood used to pencil as well as ink other artists work), then that would make the Neal Adams piece go for higher dollars based on that all-star tandem team up.

 

But, if DC decides to crank 'em out and assign them to random inkers who are good at hitting deadlines but aren't great embellishers, then those will deservedly be the least popular and should have fractional value (where the original pencils will then be in greater demand, as many may even feel that inker "ruined" the original to a degree).

 

I've heard generally inks over digital or blue lines have been about 1/3 the price of what the original pencils would sell for. But, that's a very subjective non-quote.

 

[Bronty]

DC should print from the pencils.

They should give the inkers blue line to ink over, and not the originals.

It would be a sin to obscure those pencils.

MI

 

The pencils look fabulous but Id feel more excited about them if they weren't basically recreations. Others may feel differently, but I feel like these have the old magic... Which I want to be excited about but given it's old subjects/compositions, I can't help but wonder how heavily he traced/ referenced his own work. Permissible of course when it's your own work but as a collector I can't help but think the reason they look so nice is because they borrow from the past when he had that old magic in copious supply

[desertdogg2006]

so here,s a question for he board. if dc gives the inkers blueline covers. then what should the market price be, as I,am sure they will give the pencils back to adams and the inkers will get the inked blueline covers.

 

 

 

larry;

 

Some inkers sell the inked over blue lines without disclosure, and there's assumptions by buyers that it's inks over pencils, as most pencils today can be printed where you can't even see any traces of bluelines.

 

Other inkers fully disclose inks over digital pencils or inks over bluelines.

 

Most inkers, of course feel, as do some collectors that the original pencils although nice and by in most cases a higher profiled artist than the inker by name, are part of the art process much like layouts and prelims... and that the "final" piece, be it inked over pencils, inked over blue lines, or inked over digital pencils, is in fact the best piece to own since it's the closest resemblance of original art to what gets published, line for line in the greatest detail. It is odd in some ways as Inkers will explain that you can't see the original pencils beneath the inks anyway, whether blue lined or not, so it in theory shouldn't make a difference since the original pencils are essentially non-existent on the final piece.

 

Many collectors place higher value on the separate pencils than the inked over blue lines piece, I think largely depending on who the primary penciling artist is. If it's a top tier artist, the differential is great, but if it's a relatively unknown name, then it may in fact not command a higher value at all (and if the inker is a bigger name, and the pencils are rendered rather weakly and the inker really did a great job embellishing, then the inked piece could sell for higher).

 

For the Neal Adams pieces, I'd say if the inker is a top name like Scott Williams, it would go for the most, since he is considered DC's best by most fans.

 

Then high profile names like Norm Rapmund, Joe Weems, Matt "Batt" Banning, Richard Friend, Danny Miki, Dexter Vines, Jay Leisten, and other similar well known popular inkers would probably be the next tier.

 

If inkers who have been associated with Neal Adams such as Tom Palmer were to do the work or a legend like Terry Austin, or a traditionally primary penciler decides to ink (much like how back in the days Murphy Anderson, Bob Layton and Wallace Wood used to pencil as well as ink other artists work), then that would make the Neal Adams piece go for higher dollars based on that all-star tandem team up.

 

But, if DC decides to crank 'em out and assign them to random inkers who are good at hitting deadlines but aren't great embellishers, then those will deservedly be the least popular and should have fractional value (where the original pencils will then be in greater demand, as many may even feel that inker "ruined" the original to a degree).

 

I've heard generally inks over digital or blue lines have been about 1/3 the price of what the original pencils would sell for. But, that's a very subjective non-quote.

 

 

 

 

you kinda hit the nail on the head here. that.s what I was thinking if a so so inker did one of the covers. can he charge 1000.s of dollars for a inked blueline of adams because it is the printed version. it is this same reason that I really dont care for modern comic art that much, as unless you get it from the artist or inker. how will you know.

 

larry.

[bellrules]

That Flash image also looks familiar. http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Superman_Vol_1_317