With technology scattering pop culture like never before... 1 1

[BCarter27]

This modern vs vintage argument is ridiculous from an aesthetic point of view. You want word balloons? Fine, go get an overlay made. But I could crash this forum with so much art from the last 17 years that BLOWS AWAY most pre-2000 art. The competition has gotten more and more intense... both internally and with other media such as gaming. Art schools are producing more and more talent. Gaming and concept artists are spilling over into comics. Digital art has helped artists not only work faster, but get better faster while learning from their mistakes. More sharing of techniques on places like deviantart. More publishers hiring. Faster feedback from readership. These all lead to better technique.

 

The bulk of modern comic art is much more skilled than the bulk of pre-2000 art. It's like saying the athletes of yesteryear could compete in the same games today. Most human endeavors accelerate in their growth, building on the foundations that were laid before.

 

And on top of that improvement curve are the outliers... More recognition of comic art as a serious medium worthy of study has led to true virtuosos spending their time in this field. You get guys like Alex Ross or Del'Otto or Bermejo or Suayan or JH Williams or James Jean. These guys would've gone into illustration pre-1960 or Salon art pre-1900, but instead we get them in comics now.

 

Yes, you can show a ballooned page to your aunt and she can read it. But show your aunt an Adams/Novick/Aparo page and compare it to a Finch/Fabok/Lee/Barrows/Capullo page and see which she thinks is more exciting, took longer to complete, and has more appeal to the uninitiated.

 

(And for the record, I would rather own the Adams/Novick/Aparo page for nostalgic reasons, but that is not my point.)

 

And lest I limit my point to more illustrative styles, there are examples of cartoonier artists that are equally ground-breaking. Damion Scott, Nick Pitarra, or Geoff Darrow spring to mind.

 

To think that the bulk of published newer art is not superior to the bulk of published older art is very much reliant on rose-colored nostalgia glasses. There are simply more great artists today than there were great artists of yesteryear. The industry is supporting more talent than ever.

 

[John E.]

 

Science. Bad.

 

Words. Good.

 

 

This beautiful page . And the one before it and after.

 

I've never read the issue so I don't know if there's dialogue on the page and I think most would agree that is speaks for itself without the need for speech bubbles. If there is dialogue, it better be on par with Pablo Neruda. If this was scripted by Stan Lee I'd barf on my Addidas. Paste-ups would ruin this page. Editorial notes on the margins would ruin this page. 1996, 1986, 1976 would ruin this page.

[John E.]

To think that the bulk of published newer art is not superior to the bulk of published older art is very much reliant on rose-colored nostalgia glasses. There are simply more great artists today than there were great artists of yesteryear. The industry is supporting more talent than ever.

 

[Bronty]

I don't agree (or disagree really, all eras have greats and drek) but I like you guys' passion and that there are people here to give the POV of the guy who digs the modern stuff

[John E.]

Gene,

I think your demographics argument about Baby Boomers & Gen Xers propping up this hobby is very convincing and you've won me over with that. I'm either a young Gen-X or an old Millenial (I'm in a liminal space) and perhaps we are the last of the "Spinner Rack People" necessary to keep this hobby healthy. (Or perhaps not; se below). Maybe the hobby doesn't die with us, maybe it'll continue with a needed market correction, we'll see.

 

I think that your habit of reading lots and lots of modern stuff lends to your credibility. But I do wonder, sincerely, because you do read digitally, how often do you frequent comic shops? There are more comic shops in a short radius from my house than there are grocery stores. Even more shops if I cared to drive and extra 10 minutes. It's typical of me to visit 2-3 different shops a week; I visited as many this weekend.

 

Yes, more likely than not you will find white males ages 20-50 in there. Next, non-white males of that same age group. But this weekend alone I've seen: college-age women buying comics, a 12-year old boy buying comics, those identifying as LGBTQ buying comics, dads bringing their first graders to buy comics. I bought my 2-year old daughter a Harley Quinn comic because she wanted something with the Joker (I don't think my wife was pleased about that. In a classic Mom move, she threw away the comic--twice).

 

The reason I bring this up is because I don't think we're in a CHILDREN OF MEN situation where the last (potential) OA collector was born in 1985. I won't deny the numbers that say comic book orders are down. But as a dad who has to haul his kids to places where there are other kids (and as a dad who loves comics and goes to where the comics are), I can testify that these "comic sales are down" numbers don't account for kids or young adults who read trades for free at the library (the graphic novel section has really grown in my library in the last two years as someone else here attested to the same trend) and teens and young adults who pull trades from the shelves at Barnes and Noble and read them without paying for them. It's these observations that keep me optimistic.

 

I just believe that the "numbers" don't tell the entire story. Now, will these "shadow" readers become art collectors. Don't know. That's why I advocate sharing the joys of the hobby. They won't know that the hobby exists if someone won't show them that it exists.

 

But I am wondering--sincerely-- if you do frequent shops and cons and if you account what you see there into your analysis?

Edited January 17, 2017 by Jay Olie Espy

[John E.]

I don't agree (or disagree really, all eras have greats and drek) but I like you guys' passion and that there are people here to give the POV of the guy who digs the modern stuff

 

Yeah, honestly, I enjoy reading ALL perspectives and I think this thread is making me a better collector (although I do trust my taste).

 

[MyNameIsLegion]

Just kidding around;)

 

As I've said before, and just repeated, ideally, OA would include the intended word balloons (McSpidey notwithstanding).

 

I don't agree, however, that older art has a better "middle class" as LEGIONISMYNAME believes, and that that art is always going to be better than ANY modern art, because it's got lettering, compressed storytelling, et al.

 

And ultimately, if quality is equal, and the older page has lettering, and the newer page doesn't, the new reader will still want what's familiar to him. The fact that there are these differences in how the art has been created across eras, only really matters to those of use who have collected over these eras. The new guy, who only knows about new books, and is only interested in new art, doesn't care.

 

I just don't agree with imposing our values on collectors of new art, or on the art itself, for that matter. Our rules don't apply here.

 

 

hmm, where did I say that? I never said ANY Modern OA will be inferior to ANY BA art. That's patently ridiculous. This is what I said, which echoes what Gene has said as well:

 

Basically, older art has a larger "middle class" of good art. You don't have to have Kirby or Ditko LA. You could have an iconic Sal Buscema Captain America or Spidey panel page, or a Cockrum second run X-Men page and have it easily clear 3-4K. why? because the art is "iconic" (hate that the word has gotten diluted, but it remains true) Beyond simple sale auction price performance, just consider the individual pages of art themselves. I bet any one of us that have read a title over the years, when presented with a random panel page from 1965-1993 could ID the exactly issue, or at least within a 5 issues span the exact issue number just by looking at the art without needing to know the artist or inker. Pick a modern decompressed page, even with the artists as a clue, and odds are you will struggle to pin it down. Modern art is BORING, and bereft of context. Outside of the cover, a splash, a pin-up, there simply isn't that much substance to take in. It could be well rendered, and there are some fine modern artists, but they will never be the BWS or Wrightson's of the future, with the same exponential price page growth, because there will be very few pages that stand out.

 

Comic art collecting is a mixture of nostalgia and aesthetics - modern art has diluted both dimensions for the reasons outlined above. Unless you start producing books exactly the way they were done 30 years ago, they will never follow the same market trajectory as they have in the past. This is not merely grumpy old man talk, and we haven't even factored in stratification of entertainment mediums and changes to consumption via technology that will take a bite out regardless.

 

The only "hope" for the future, like with the vinyl resurgence, is that a younger audience will tap into the longing for more genuine, substantive, tactile objects, but the fact remains, as Gene has pointed out - the next generation will have less time, space or money to really accumulate and curate the sorts of collections older guys have now. So that reduces the market to an even smaller niche, with less velocity, I suspect the oldest art, pre compression will retain much more value but Modern art will never break out in a similar fashion at any point in the future.

 

you've missed the main points here, about the iconography of older non-compressed art having a larger middle class, not from an aesthetics viewpoint, but from a nostalgia potential and thus price potential aspect. You guys are getting your modern art panties in a wad needlessly, I'm not trashing the art or the artists, or the stories they tell, I'm trashing the general nature of the physical object's COLLECTIBILITY in a day and age where the confluence of economics, demographics, culture and technology conspire to render, on the whole, a less collectible object.

 

Another person asked about less documented instances of readership via trades and libraries and such, yeah that occurs, but as I said before, there's a BIG difference between consumers and collectors. Casual consumers aren't likely to collect comic art. If they didn't collect the comics, didn't buy the trade paperback, read it online or while waiting for a movie to start at Barnes and Noble, they are not going to take the leap to looking online for that one special page, was seared into their brains, that made such an impression on them in the 30 seconds they glanced at it and turned the page or swiped their finger to the next page. Nostalgia requires familiarly, familiarity requires exposure and repetition. You guys are glossing over the fundamental psychology of collecting. It's one thing to be a fan or a consumer, another to be a collector. OA is the black tar heroin of collecting, but comics are the gateway drug, you skip that step, and its all Nancy Reagan "just say no" to Modern OA.

[MyNameIsLegion]

I'm picturing a modern page. Clean, perfect condition, no oil stains, no white out, no ugly margin notes. Obviously all modern art is better than all vintage art as a result. Thus endeth the lesson

 

24-year old collector receives his "vintage" art purchased off eBay in the mail: "Cool, word balloons. Wait. Why are are half of them peeling off? This one just fell off. Oh man, why are the panels all yellow? I wish the seller had written in the description that these paste-ups were falling off. So do I glue them back on? Is that allowed? Do I use Elmer's glue? Where do I buy rice paste? Do I hire a professional? How much would that cost? Where do I find a professional? Is this conservation or alternation? If I leave it as is, does it affect the value of my art? If I paste the balloons back on, does it affect the value of my art? Do I have to come clean about it or will the Boards tar and feather me if I don't? Oh. I knew I should have bought that wordless Manhattan Projects page."

 

 

 

this happens to be hanging in my room, I chose it at random because I liked the inking. Do you see any yellowed, peeling word balloons here? No you don't because Aparo lettered it himself, right there on the art.

 

 

 

I will concede however, that I've passed on many a page where the pasted on word balloons were all yellow, and it really detracted from the page. One of the reason I've never really coveted covers is because they are often the most likely OA to have stats, glue, corrections, tape, stains, discoloration, etc.

[Eric Seffinga]

I've read every post in this thread top to bottom, and wanted to add that I think there's a ton of insight to be had from everyone participating, for anybody taking the time to read all of it. I wouldn't completely discount anything that's been said actually. There's a merit to all of it, and we can all recognize this to differing degrees, and ultimately it's all good food for thought.

 

Gene's points about the early story compression giving the occasional single page the maximum number of elements/artifacts, touchstones whatever you want to call them is fair, and understandable. Who as a serious collector doesn't often want what feels like captured lightning in a bottle? The essence of a particular book hanging on the wall for all to see. The one that OTHER lovers of a book will see and covet and bow down to? A totem of sorts, that we are able to see and feel and understand as closely to our nostalgia as the original art will take us? I dare say we are all susceptible to that pang and pull, no matter what we are into.

 

What I think is interesting is that, despite not being interested or far less interested in the OA, many will also concede that there are modern books that are as good or better than their vintage counterparts. Better art. Better storytelling. Sometimes both.

 

Who wouldn't want to own some of THAT? I get it some don't, but it doesn't compute for me personally.

 

What I see in modern OA is that some of it really is better than the issues of books I read as a kid. I want a piece of that too. I love comic OA. I just do. I am a fan of the medium. I love seeing original pages from books I know nothing about, just because I can easily admire and respect the work, even the stuff I don't want to own or collect personally.

 

And maybe it's naive and altruistic of me to say that I still enjoy supporting a medium that has given me so much joy over the decades since finding my first OA page, (and the atom bomb of recognition of the stuff being available that it represented.)

 

In a way, anyone that buys modern OA is continuing on as a patron of the form. I welcome that from any and all. Even if it means competition (or eventually less of it as people bow out). I like buying pieces directly from artists (or their reps) because I want to show those creators that I appreciate what they do, and to give them financial encouragement to continue to push the boundaries of the form. I LOVE comic art. I love people that love comic art. Paradoxically I love that much of the world doesn't love comic art. Maybe that's my old punk rock spirit showing? But it's also true. It's a club of sorts. A tribe.

 

Sure, the new pages don't have the text balloons. Neither did most of my painted pages from the 90s. Some occasionally came with the letterers white overlay on tissue paper, but many did not. I bought them anyway. And the stuff I hung, I put clear overlays on a floating layer above the OA in the frame when I felt like I wanted it there.

 

I eventually got over that though. A personal choice. But I could add bubbles to overlays again if I felt the need. It wouldn't take away that the page is a great book from a great story. That fact would still be true sans-bubbles. I'd just have to do the legwork. People don't seem to have a problem doing that legwork on vintage pieces when it suits them.

Though it is important if selling a piece, to note that the overlay is not original from the process, so all is on the up and up.

 

I'll use Sandman as an example, because it was a bridge of the period. My first Sandman page was hand lettered. My last Sandman page was stat lettering, glued to the board. So technically, that board doesn't have the lettering "on it". But it's present. And I like that it's there. I really do. But I'd have bought it anyway, had it not been. Why? Because I love Sandman. The Zulli pencil pages from the last arc? Lettered on tissue overlays. You had to remove them to actually see the delicate pencils properly. All perfectly acceptable in my little world of OA.

 

I see reading new stories as making new "nostalgia" points in my life. In my 40s now, I look back on my 20s and they were very different. And books like Stray Bullets and Madman, and Sandman, etc. I have a large amount of nostalgia for those times. Yet I wasn't 10 years old. I don't need that kiddie connection for the nostalgia to exist. But it is different in the kind of material that I carry as adult nostalgia. Its the kind of material I can enjoy as an adult. I don't mean dirty pictures, I mean intellectually.

 

I don't need new art to be created the way I want it to be, for it to capture my interest. I accept the art form for what it is, and what may lack in it's current state. Would it be nice if the books were still lettered on the page? Sometimes, yeah. But I'll take them as they are vs not having them at all (i.e. digital, etc.)

 

Having a piece of a great book is still lighting in a bottle for me.

For someone else, perhaps those missing elements are just a bridge too far?

 

I treat buying modern OA the same as I did when I started. It's a disposable enjoyment. The glee I get from looking at a piece produced by a creator that I admire far outweighs the few hundred dollars I've spent on the occasional panel page.

 

As far as I'm concerned, most of it is still fairly affordable. I bought a couple pages this year that were $150. That's what I spent on my first Sandman page 20+ years ago. I never thought that Sandman page would get the offers I have PMd to me all the time through CAF. And really I could care less about those offers. I love that art. I never wanted the pages to go up so much. I didn't expect it would then, and I don't expect my new OA to go up either. And they may not. But again, when I get a charge out of seeing that OA? It's worth it every time. I've spent 5 figures for that charge before, knowing much of that could go up in smoke if I sold it. But the thrill, in my lifetime, life is to short to not enjoy these small pleasures that add up so much day to day. It's why I frame and live with so much of my collection daily.

 

IMO if it's great art, from a great story, I'm supporting a great book. I can't fault that in any way, text or no.

Maybe in 10 years time no one will give any about my pages. Or maybe in retrospect the pages will be from something perceived as the next Dark Knight? A paradigm shift in the field could come at any point, even through a fractured market. If a book is brilliant, people will find it eventually. Look at Walking Dead and it's numbers. And I dare say it's a good book, and at times a great book But never a truly brilliant one. But I think a brilliant use of the medium could come along. Truly. And it may not have lettering on the pages.

 

People always say these things can't happen or will never happen. Until they do. Or don't.

I wouldn't ever speculate on this stuff, but it really does always come back to the old adage we all repeat over and over again. Buy what you love. That simple. Always has been.

 

Those of us who can't love Modern OA, for whatever hangups we carry, it's not for us. And that's OK.

 

But I remember a time when people thrashed Kelley Jones for his style on Batman, and lamented how it sucked compared to Adams. And similarly again the love it/hate it style of Tim Sale. There are still people who can't stand his Batman work. But I've seen both go from cult figures to gaining very large acceptance as people grew to enjoy their work, and even long for it nostalgically. I mean for gods sake, Liefeld has a following again. And believe me it's not the word bubbles or his compressed storytelling driving that market. Compressed waists, cheeks and good taste, maybe but... it's still fun.

 

I'm not ready to rule out the acceptance of modern OA over the next decade. As for it's ultimate sustainability beyond? Most all comic art will fall by the wayside eventually, and the stuff from the past we think is important today may be a mere blip compared to something that becomes a phenomenon in the meantime. We might all be thinking Dark Knight, and it turns out to be WD or Scott Pilgrim. Or Blankets getting taught in schools, or who knows?

 

But the rest will largely be landfill fodder and be propped up against walls in antique stores with photos of someones long dead grandparents, and some bronze doodad that was fashionable for a time.

I don't see a way around that larger scenario. It's bound to happen.

 

But barring global catastrophe, just as there are still collectors of Williamson's Secret Agent X9 strip art today, there will still be some 30-something year old guy out there looking for Tradd Moore's Strode pages because they dig it. Even if they didn't get to read it in the original funny pages. Maybe it was in digicopies on Uncle Bill's holopad, and they fell in love with it. Or it was from seeing the Luther Strode 3: The Legacy movie or playing some video game with old-timey characters like Luther as a hidden bonus feature?

 

No, not a ton of comic readers are kids. But I know a bunch who are. The future of comics may be smaller, but it doesn't mean the few that get involved will love it any less.

 

Sorry, I totally started rambling off the road again! I'm sure there was a point in there somewhere when I started.

[NinjaSealed]

I am going to try to shift the conversation a bit. We talked a lot about shifting demographics and their major effect on demand and supply being made available as collectors age out, but what about TOTAL supply of desirable OA?

 

When we look at a basket of published desirable material, what percentage of what was made still exists, sitting neatly in the portfolios of black hole collectors that has not seen the light of day for 20+ years? If most of it is out there, maybe there is more than enough for everybody. However if most of it is lost to the winds, maybe the demand side may never be satiated.

 

Also can over supply ever really occur of the desirable pieces that we know there is low supply of. We know exactly how many KJ pages there are, assuming none have been lost. on the flip side there are potentially thousands of desirable Kirby's out there. Does absolute supply of specific examples play into the future?

[rocket1312]

I don't agree (or disagree really, all eras have greats and drek) but I like you guys' passion and that there are people here to give the POV of the guy who digs the modern stuff

 

That's all well and good, but what's the size of the pie 20 years from now?

[Eric Seffinga]

19.87635%

[delekkerste]

I've read every post in this thread top to bottom, and wanted to add that I think there's a ton of insight to be had from everyone participating, for anybody taking the time to read all of it. I wouldn't completely discount anything that's been said actually. There's a merit to all of it, and we can all recognize this to differing degrees, and ultimately it's all good food for thought....

 

Great post. I don't think it is incongruous to anything I've said - we agree a lot on some points, and just have different degrees of agreement on others, as will the broad spectrum of participants in the hobby.

[MyNameIsLegion]

I've read every post in this thread top to bottom, and wanted to add that I think there's a ton of insight to be had from everyone participating, for anybody taking the time to read all of it. I wouldn't completely discount anything that's been said actually. There's a merit to all of it, and we can all recognize this to differing degrees, and ultimately it's all good food for thought....

 

Great post. I don't think it is incongruous to anything I've said - we agree a lot on some points, and just have different degrees of agreement on others, as will the broad spectrum of participants in the hobby.

 

 

would that be: diffadegreement?

[delekkerste]

So many excellent posts overnight. Some brief comments:

Bronty & Felix:

 

MNILEGION: I think we are very much on the same page, especially with regard to the development of new collectors among the younger generation who are finding different in-roads into the source material and the collectibility of most Modern OA pages.

 

That's a cool Phantom Stranger page - I am unfamiliar with the series, but, with the dialogue and narration and compressed storytelling, there's a lot going on here and it's easy to briefly lose yourself in this snippet of the story. Not so easy to do with Modern OA if you're unfamiliar with the particular story.

 

JayOE: I think there will always be people who discover this great medium and hobby. The hobby will categorically NOT die with us. Though I don't frequent LCSs regularly these days (there are a lot fewer of them in my area than there used to be anyway), I don't doubt that there are young people there. I see a lot of college age and 20-somethings at Forbidden Planet in NYC (I pop in every month or two), the kinds of people you see hanging out at Felix's booth at the NYCC; don't really see a lot of kids younger than that, though.

 

But, it's all about what happens at the margin that will drive what happens to the OA hobby & market. There will always be new collectors, yes. But, the supply of art only goes up over time. And, to date, prices have mostly gone up as well. If the collector base (in terms of aggregate buying power, not just numbers) does not keep up, mathematically, the only way the market clears is by price adjustment. That's Econ 101. And how eager will people be to participate in a hobby which costs them money instead of being in a virtuous circle environment like its experienced to date?

 

Also, I have no idea what is going on with that Manhattan Projects page! I read the first TPB, but it just wasn't for me (sorry, Felix). The page is somewhat interesting, but it's three shots of the same thing at various perspectives. Like you even said - you'd want the page before and after as well. Maybe then people would have a better idea of WTF is going on.

 

 

BCarter: Again, I like a lot of Modern comics. I don't agree, however, that most of the writing and art is better than in the old days, though, because it's not just about the visuals and the fact that comics are more "cinematic" these days or look like they took longer to draw. There's something to be said for originality, creativity, innovation, etc. and I think the older material blows away the newer material (at least Big Two superhero-wise) on those counts. Indies are certainly better today than they've ever been, though (until I signed up for Marvel Unlimited a couple of months ago, I read far more indies than Big Two books) - just wish the art itself captured everything that was on the printed page.

 

As someone said, modern OA often looks like movie storyboards these days. I don't agree that your aunt will find a Capullo Bats page better than an Adams Bats page. Beyond the obvious that I don't agree that the former is better drawn, a piece of OA from the latter is more distinctly something from our hobby. Words + pictures at their best. Just because a Finch page looks like he spent more time drawing it doesn't mean that the OA is going to present better to most people with no writing and less going on.

 

I agree with you that there are some incredible talents in this hobby. I mean, no one can seriously argue that Steve Ditko could draw better than Lee Bermejo if we're just comparing technical skill. But, then again - Lee Bermejo didn't co-create the Marvel Universe. There's a bigger argument to be had.

[vodou]

Omg thank you. It's hard to break past the "this 70s hack (artist or writer) was a genius because I am familiar with him mindset".

 

Lots of high value art isn't that great when you strip away context so discussing the art's collectibility solely on its artistic merits or storytelling style misses the point.

Really deserving of a whole different thread, but yeah the 70s decade of comics and art, mostly sucked @ss. It's only nostalgia for those unlucky enough to be a young teen in those years that props the art up today (of course painting with a big brush here...there are probably a handful of exceptions).

 

My decade is the 80s, and I'm not sure I can strip my nostalgia back either...but the art sure seems prettier and lighter overall, less cluttered with massive dialogue boxes and heavyhanded inking (Chan's Conan over Buscema aside!)

[John E.]

That's a beautiful Aparo page. Yeah, in an ideal world all the lettering would be done directly on the board. Of course, I was just pointing out the downside of lettering through paste-ups, which can detract from the art if they show signs of aging. I own a page from Archie vs. Predator and I was surprised and pleased that the page was hand-lettered with the exception of one balloon. If Archie comics can do it, why can't everyone else?! But overall, wordless art doesn't bother me.

[John E.]

Just kidding around;)

 

 

Another person asked about less documented instances of readership via trades and libraries and such, yeah that occurs, but as I said before, there's a BIG difference between consumers and collectors. Casual consumers aren't likely to collect comic art. If they didn't collect the comics, didn't buy the trade paperback, read it online or while waiting for a movie to start at Barnes and Noble, they are not going to take the leap to looking online for that one special page, was seared into their brains, that made such an impression on them in the 30 seconds they glanced at it and turned the page or swiped their finger to the next page. Nostalgia requires familiarly, familiarity requires exposure and repetition. You guys are glossing over the fundamental psychology of collecting. It's one thing to be a fan or a consumer, another to be a collector. OA is the black tar heroin of collecting, but comics are the gateway drug, you skip that step, and its all Nancy Reagan "just say no" to Modern OA.

 

You make a strong and convincing point here. And if I may double-up and respond to Gene's point/response to me about "aggregate buying power" here's something I didn't consider: I assume that kids and young adults who are reading comics for "free" are doing because they don't have the cash, because, well, they are kids or students. But what if when they do make an income, and even if there's a little discretionary income there, who's to say that their habits of "you don't have to buy something to enjoy" won't follow them to adulthood? And if they aren't splurging on little things, then yeah, buying a $250 piece of art is probably out of the question.

[John E.]

Eric, you nicely sum up my view of art. Thanks for the post.

[vodou]

Kidding and poking fun, but serious too... if we are going to use the old metrics then it's worth mentioning that even with the dialogue and trade dress taken away, modern covers are often the 'perfect shot' that yesterday's collector would want.

 

Yes, if we are strictly evaluating the art on aesthetics alone. But so much more to consider, including nostalgia...which, in the thread, is the greatest variable of all. I'm just not sure how many realize it, or will admit it?

In the face of the Baby Boomer Generation of Big Two OA heading toward the graveyard ...perhaps this is the lifeline for both vintage and modern comic art maintaining (and maybe even growing fanbase/demand and thus prices) - an aesthetic/critical approach to sequential art appreciation that's appealing to the masses, all the closet art fans and art school students that may not know they would buy an comic OA one day for all the reasons stated so far...but they would based solely on "art form" (so not strictly a page out of sequence due to the "action", iconic storyline moment or in-costume aspects)...how genius the sequentiality of it is? Maybe..

 

Of course if this does happen, understand that the deck would be greatly re-shuffled as to what's "hot" and what's "not", with significant price adjustments to follow (e.g. goodbye Wolverine on cover premium!)