How much new comic art is digital ?!?

[Nexus]

I'm curious if Felix can explain how anyone would be able to just look at these redrawn digital pages and know immediately they are recreated pages?

 

unless its noted very visibly that these redrawn digital pieces are not from the ACTUAL produced comic book...I think this sets a terrible..TERRIBLE PRECEDENCE for future buying and reselling of this art if buyers do not know beyond a shadow of a doubt that these are not drawings directly from the comics.... but actual recreated pages.

 

...

 

In the case of Nick Dragotta's EAST OF WEST art, there is no ambiguity, because we've made sure to disclose the process:

 

http://www.felixcomicart.com/newsdetail.asp?n=54&ti=A+note+about+EAST+OF+WEST+original+art%2E%2E%2E

 

...

Felix, someone that buys from you will understand, but when that person resells the piece, how will the next buyer know? Without a statement on the back, ambiguity will exist. Please consider a note on the back.

 

 

Like I said a couple of posts ago, it's not just a matter of what I do with EoW art. This concern should apply to virtually all traditional art being created in this new digital age. I suspect very little of what we've been talking about will be disclosed at ANY time. So you either suck it up and accept it, or move on to something else.

 

Also, given what I wrote about recreated vintage art on restored pieces...should there be a note on the back of those pieces describing what was done?

[Nexus]

 

The same goes for the covers that were drawn by Nick in pen/ink for publication, NOT digitally.

Let’s take these two examples.

 

East of West 27

 

East of West 29

 

Since there’s virtually no traditional pen/ink art available from EAST OF WEST to date. How do I know these covers were not originally drawn digitally for publication…or were they?

 

I suppose you don't, except I've been very upfront about what's what. I'll state again here that those covers were drawn traditionally for publication. If that's not good enough for you, then consider everything to have been redrawn post-publication.

 

In the end, as with ANYTHING in this hobby, everyone needs to do their homework (and this is a point that's strongly emphasized by David Mandel in his return to the podcast). So long as I'm around, I'll answer any questions present or future buyers may have. So long as my website is up, the EoW gallery will remain open, and future buyers can see for themselves which art was drawn for publication and which was drawn post-publication. As it is, anything on the internet never truly goes away and everything I've written about this art will be around somewhere.

[Eric Seffinga]

To play a sort of devil's advocate (and bring the conversation around to Felix's great love... )

 

For people that think the EoW pages should be noted on the back re: their origins regarding before/after publication... would you also argue that the Dark Knight pages that are mostly Janson be noted on the artwork? I realize that horse has left the barn, but if people own those pages, they should do the market a big favor and write it right on there in ink, right?

 

How about any other scenario where things get murky as to what the piece is?

 

Where the OA is sold as separate boards of pencils and blueline inks, should the bluelines have notes written on the artwork indicating there's no pencils under there? They can and do get separated for sale all the time.

 

How about when a piece is misattributed in the comic to the wrong artist? Or as an offshoot of that, in cases where artists ghosted for their buddies to get the work done? Should all that be noted on the original artwork, so would be collectors don't ahve to learn the ins and outs of what they are for themselves?

 

Instances were something was changed during publication that makes the OA differ from the published page?

 

Felix asked about restoration already. IMO, that's a good one.

 

What about color guides? Should those have a note added on all of them to hip people that don't know better, that they are not the OA?

 

I ask, because up to this point, in all these topics, it's always been a case of being educated about the art market in which you are interested in collecting. The pitfalls abound, and it's buyer beware.

Always has been, and even with such notes scribbled on the art (I wouldn't want someone writing on the back of my art and definitely not the front), it still always will be. There will always be a scenario in which you have to learn what a given artist's working method was at a certain point in their career, in order to understand a piece being offered.

 

Collecting anything creatively based that is a one-off will always come with certain compromises made, and a learning curve that can't be shortcut. I don't see that changing, and I don't see it being organized, slabbed, price guided, cataloged and quantified for the uneducated to jump in with both feet and feel secure in their purchase. It just can't be wrangled that way. And if that makes someone uncomfortable, there are portions of this scene that would suit those people better, or other collecting hobbies out there for that mindset, but the 1-off market just isn't that. It will always be the wild west to some degree.

 

I do think having some semblance of provenance is a good idea for collectors, or potentially for their heirs. It's funny, because I find a lot of collectors don't LIKE to know who owned a piece before them. Not sure what that is about exactly. But I for one, happen to like knowing things about the work I have. Where it came from, how it entered the market, and what it's history was. If someone wants to get anal about keeping that info noted somwhere, and being able to pass that info onto the next buyer, then that's (IMO) a smart play. But I've never known most collectors to keep any kind of records on what pieces they bought from who, at what show or venue, for how much, etc. But it'd turn me off horribly if all that was written on the art. Might as well all write our names and dates on the backs too, like the title to a car, every time we buy or sell.

 

nah....

 

NOW, that all said, there's nothing saying Felix couldn't include some kind of letter/certificate with each of Nick's physical recreation pages, explaining what they are. It could set a standard, and the market will start to demand such a letter come with their purchases of Nick's work or they won't buy it. It might lend some kind of peace of mind I suppose. But of course if someone wants it, someone will buy it. Cert or no. And certs have a habit of getting misplaced in the log run. And if a given buyer isn't aren't already educated about the situation, they wouldn't know whether there should be a cert, so...

 

IMO the bigger picture is a no win situation (IMO). It will remain buyer beware.

And the more variety there is in the way people make work, the more there will be to keep up with regarding a given situation.

If in doubt, just ask in a venue that knows about such things, and you'll get an answer. With the internet, it's a breeze. Back when we had to make phonecalls on our corded phones to get answers, it was might bit more difficult.