Spiderman 62 cover - get your bets in

[vodou]

And, while we're at it, if we always just take the art as it is, does that mean it's irrational to discount for vellum, marker, stains, foxing, fading, mold, tears, holes punched, pieces missing, borders trimmed/removed, colored-in pieces, characters inked by amateurs with ballpoint pen, etc.?

That stuff only matters if you have a thought to reselling one day. (Since the market dictates opportunity cost, not you or I.) Keepers - none of that matters, even if it's torn in half. Which doesn't mean you shouldn't (always) use every avenue to bargaining something down to your advantage

[Eric Seffinga]

I think we ALL set those hurdles in our own minds to gauge what we will pay.

Be it features of the content, of the production method, abuse or storage, etc and so on. Everyone sets those hurdles at different heights.

 

Never going to be any consensus on that other than the fiscal one that shows in the dollar totals spent.

 

It's why that rule of buy-what-you-love is so important. It's the one thing we can all agree on regarding our individual collections, since it doesn't matter what the other guy thinks of their makeup.

 

Nor should we, though even that bleeds in a bit when factoring what to pay (assuming one is spending those kinds of dollars, and their fiscal status).

 

 

[Bronty]

Oh, like that wasn't what you did to Vampi the moment that nasty old frame came off??

 

 

I would never do that to an Enric Vampi painting.

 

That's what Adam Hughes commissions are for.

 

[Peter G]

And, while we're at it, if we always just take the art as it is, does that mean it's irrational to discount for vellum, marker, stains, foxing, fading, mold, tears, holes punched, pieces missing, borders trimmed/removed, colored-in pieces, characters inked by amateurs with ballpoint pen, etc.?

 

Exactly ! Excellent point. It's the neuroticism of collectiong comic books all over again with its obsession with MINT condition that I always liked OA didn't obsess like that. The art is what it is because it's one of a kind and recognized that it's history was what it was in the production process of the finished comic book.

[vodou]

Ok so then I can spill my coffee on it, rub my junk on it, give my five year old a pair of scissors and tell her to cut it up, give her a roll of tape and ask her to put it back together, but the piece into ashes, and collect those ashes into an urn, and you'll still pay the same either way huh?

 

 

You'll never know unless I tell you

 

As if the majority of (male) artists haven't already done this in the privacy of their own studios...long before the art left the studio

[Bronty]

That's the only logical way to approach these discussions, isn't it? Sometimes it's good to take a step back and assess things objectively from the outside.

 

The art is what it is, but it may not always necessarily jive with the general consensus or opinion. And where art collides with commerce, general opinion is what matters in driving prices where they go.

 

The number of times I've heard a (would be) art collector turn their back on a piece because of the physical quality of the ink (looking directly at Mignola's washed out cloudy ink, for instance)...

 

because of the use of whiteout for a correction as opposed to as an effect...

 

because of a pasteup (even more egregious than whiteout)...

 

My whole interest in this thread though is how these things impact at a piece in the upper spheres, which are viewed as fiscal dings in the general OA market as a whole. Is it so personal as to be totally unpredictable? I'm guessing probably. Hard enough to handicap the pieces in the upper spheres as it is, it seems. Much less quantify out these anomalies in the execution of a work.

 

One of my biggest collecting regrets actually centers around a sort of snobbish mindset back in the 90s. I passed on a number of fantastic pages from Duncan Fegredo's Enigma. It's still a low rent book (and art) by most standards even today, when it comes to fiscal values.

 

But I really loved that story, and those drawings. I wanted art from it badly. When I saw the originals in a huge pile at Scott Eder's table, I excitedly went through them all. And to my great regret today, I passed on every single one. The pages were a total mess of pasteovers, whiteout, etc, and so on. Almost to the point of collage.

 

And there's the rub. My 40-something year old brain sees that work in hindsight not available to my 20-something year old brain. What a magnificently unique example of funny-book process. Some of those pages represented what comic book art is, to an extreme degree. They showed a true and pure process with a complete disregard for what came after. And in some ways the artist's current (at the time) working method. Something lost in today's computer world, with fixes easily accomplished away from the physical piece.

 

And most of those pages have disappeared from the landscape. Only a handful ever circulate, and at such low values as to not pry fresh examples loose. I keep my eye out and holding my breath that some day...

 

Really nicely said. I especially like the reference to some OA being like a collage.

 

I was just thinking recently how Neil Gaiman's art is purposefully crafted as a collage and the fanboys eat it up and love his work but this ASM 62 cover, some here criticize the paste-up aspect because its not done on a single board.

 

As I have previously mentioned, I take the art as I find it. There will never be an Amazing Spiderman # 62 cover on 1 board. It doesn't exist. This piece is the art to the published Amazing Spiderman # 62 cover and I appreciate the art "AS IS".

 

Ok so then I can spill my coffee on it, rub my junk on it, give my five year old a pair of scissors and tell her to cut it up, give her a roll of tape and ask her to put it back together, but the piece into ashes, and collect those ashes into an urn, and you'll still pay the same either way huh?

 

I don't buy art that has bronty junk rubbed on it. Disgusting image.

 

Hey I was just talking about actual junk - old newspapers and such. Anything else was in your mind only. Perv.

[Bronty]

Ok so then I can spill my coffee on it, rub my junk on it, give my five year old a pair of scissors and tell her to cut it up, give her a roll of tape and ask her to put it back together, but the piece into ashes, and collect those ashes into an urn, and you'll still pay the same either way huh?

 

 

You'll never know unless I tell you

 

As if the majority of (male) artists haven't already done this in the privacy of their own studios...long before the art left the studio

 

 

Hahaha Or at least scratched themselves and sniffed it between penstrokes.

 

 

 

 

 

*"it" naturally referring to the flower base on their desk

[delekkerste]

And, while we're at it, if we always just take the art as it is, does that mean it's irrational to discount for vellum, marker, stains, foxing, fading, mold, tears, holes punched, pieces missing, borders trimmed/removed, colored-in pieces, characters inked by amateurs with ballpoint pen, etc.?

That stuff only matters if you have a thought to reselling one day. (Since the market dictates opportunity cost, not you or I.) Keepers - none of that matters, even if it's torn in half. Which doesn't mean you shouldn't (always) use every avenue to bargaining something down to your advantage

 

That's nuts. If I have to worry about markers fading, the worry and the inability to display it as readily as a full pen & ink piece is going to impact my enjoyment of the piece and I'm not going to be willing to pay as much. I was recently offered a page which is squarely in my collecting wheelhouse, but which was probably 60% marker on the board. I still wanted it, but I wasn't willing to pay the price the seller was asking for it, which was as high (maybe even a bit higher) as it would have been if it was full pen & ink. Similarly, if some nobody has inked Hammerhead in ballpoint pen on a cover, that's going to impact my enjoyment of the piece and how much I'm willing to pay for it. Same if a piece has been colored in. Or has serious condition issues.

 

Not that any of these would necessarily kill my desire to own a piece. But, to say that it shouldn't impact value if you're not planning on reselling is just plain I doubt anybody here will agree with that statement if they understand its full implications. If anyone here says they'd pay the same price for a piece that's been colored in after the fact, they are either delusional or lying.

[Peter G]

This conversation took a turn for the weird

[glendgold]

Okay, the bet I'll get in now is that the future owner of the ASM 62 will have a nice, tasteful ceremony, and the next morning hang the Strathmore outside the window so the town can cheer.

[Bronty]

This conversation took a turn for the weird

 

Just a reminder that these are real people Ever picked your nose? Or let one go? Show me a person in the world that hasn't? Well for all you know Kirby was gassy when he drew the page you bought and there's a little "extra" kirby dna seeped into that bristol board.

 

Yeah these are kind of ridiculous statements that are neither here not there. But the point is, while I can be 100x as forgiving on the "condition" of art as opposed to actual books, it does matter some. You can't reduce it to completely meaningless because otherwise you'd buy a cut up foster panel (assume its the only one remaining for that sunday) for the same price as a foster sunday. Its nonsensical.

 

Vodou, I agree with 99% of what you say but yeah I'm with Gene on this one. This stuff matters to my personal enjoyment of pieces, resale or no. Sure, it hurts resale - granted. But even if its only use will be to decorate my wall, it still matters if the issues are egregious enough.

 

 

[suspense39]

Regardless of a piece being good or bad, most people just aren't "collectors", they don't have that mindset or obsession. I know many curators, artists, gallerists with access to all levels of art, galleries and museums and scarcely have a piece of art in their homes, It's not that they don't have an understanding of what they are looking at......they just don't feel that need to own it.

[vodou]

And, while we're at it, if we always just take the art as it is, does that mean it's irrational to discount for vellum, marker, stains, foxing, fading, mold, tears, holes punched, pieces missing, borders trimmed/removed, colored-in pieces, characters inked by amateurs with ballpoint pen, etc.?

That stuff only matters if you have a thought to reselling one day. (Since the market dictates opportunity cost, not you or I.) Keepers - none of that matters, even if it's torn in half. Which doesn't mean you shouldn't (always) use every avenue to bargaining something down to your advantage

 

That's nuts. If I have to worry about markers fading, the worry and the inability to display it as readily as a full pen & ink piece is going to impact my enjoyment of the piece and I'm not going to be willing to pay as much. I was recently offered a page which is squarely in my collecting wheelhouse, but which was probably 60% marker on the board. I still wanted it, but I wasn't willing to pay the price the seller was asking for it, which was as high (maybe even a bit higher) as it would have been if it was full pen & ink. Similarly, if some nobody has inked Hammerhead in ballpoint pen on a cover, that's going to impact my enjoyment of the piece and how much I'm willing to pay for it. Same if a piece has been colored in. Or has serious condition issues.

 

Not that any of these would necessarily kill my desire to own a piece. But, to say that it shouldn't impact value if you're not planning on reselling is just plain I doubt anybody here will agree with that statement if they understand its full implications. If anyone here says they'd pay the same price for a piece that's been colored in after the fact, they are either delusional or lying.

What part of my "Which doesn't mean you shouldn't (always) use every avenue to bargaining something down to your advantage ;\) " made you feel the need to restate it redundantly yourself?

[vodou]

This conversation took a turn for the weird

 

Just a reminder that these are real people Ever picked your nose? Or let one go? Show me a person in the world that hasn't? Well for all you know Kirby was gassy when he drew the page you bought and there's a little "extra" kirby dna seeped into that bristol board.

Exactly. As if every (non-digital!) artist washes their hands every time before leaving the john...in their own home? Suuuuuure

[Bronty]

I'm just not sure I get your position. Ok you want to pay less. So then it what way does it "not matter".

 

A keeper to me that is "ruined" by being torn in half isn't a keeper at all

[bluechip]

It's not the most detailed Romita cover, but probably the sexiest.

 

Babes > backgrounds

[Bronty]

strong counterpoint

 

And as Mugatu would say, "she's so hot right now"

[vodou]

Vodou, I agree with 99% of what you say but yeah I'm with Gene on this one. This stuff matters to my personal enjoyment of pieces, resale or no. Sure, it hurts resale - granted. But even if its only use will be to decorate my wall, it still matters if the issues are egregious enough.

 

I'll backpedal and say I've yet to personally run into the piece that's a keeper (for me) that I cared one whit about the condition, and I've got some dogs (in that regard) in my collection for sure. Sounds like an issue for my heirs more than me though

 

Of course that comes with the given (if you know me) that I never overpay, typically underpay, and that I'm dickering all the harder when there's anything a bit less-than-desirable (in any way). That's my favorite scenario actually, particularly combined with a seller that really needs to sell...oh yes, heaven is the deal struck under those conditions.

[vodou]

I'm just not sure I get your position. Ok you want to pay less. So then it what way does it "not matter".

 

A keeper to me that is "ruined" by being torn in half isn't a keeper at all

Doesn't matter as to me definitively passing. There is no such artwork (that I've seen yet). Price is always a consideration though (duh?!)

 

Yes you and I disagree. Torn in half is hardly a deal-kill for me. Ever heard of restorers?

[Peter G]

This conversation took a turn for the weird

 

Just a reminder that these are real people Ever picked your nose? Or let one go? Show me a person in the world that hasn't? Well for all you know Kirby was gassy when he drew the page you bought and there's a little "extra" kirby dna seeped into that bristol board.

Exactly. As if every (non-digital!) artist washes their hands every time before leaving the john...in their own home? Suuuuuure

 

I guess I don't mind Kirby or ROmita cooties but Bronty cooties skeev me out. I am funny like that.