Can high-dollar "cover artist keys" maintain their value? 0

[Broke as a Joke]

Every JSC cover looks like Bambi in a g-string to me.

[drotto]

The main cover guys I see the most talk about are Hughes and JSC - what do they have in common? That's right.

 

Hughes has longer lasting appeal in my opinion, I think his talent is broader and more expressive.

 

Who else has drawn some of these 'high-dollar "cover artist keys'? As I said before, it's still a hard topic to discuss because it's so subjective from individual to individual.

 

D'O?

 

Hughes

JSC

Dell'Otto

 

Lets keep it going - identify them, identify the covers in question, then you can have a much more focused talk.

 

Those were the only three I could think of when starting the thread. I doubt there are others, but if there are, there certainly aren't many.

 

Dave Stevens, maybe? He's post-1980 but not modern... maybe Manara? Maybe Stanley Lau in the near future?

 

I think there's also a lot of artists for whom there are a few key covers (like Jock's Detective 880 mentioned above), but the bump doesn't necessarily affect EVERY cover of theirs.

 

I think Jock's Detective 880 is less about the artist than capturing an Iconic image. Not taking anything away from Jock. Another possible book in that Iconic image and not necessarily the artist cover is Batman: Harley Quinn by Alex Ross. The book does have semi key value beyond the cover far more than 880 does however.

[natevegas]

Every JSC cover looks like Bambi in a g-string to me.

+! And don't forget most of the women faces he does look very similar too.

[SquareChaos]

Every JSC cover looks like Bambi in a g-string to me.

+! And don't forget most of the women faces he does look very similar too.

 

I'll have to look for that next time, I wasn't aware they had faces.

[natevegas]

Every JSC cover looks like Bambi in a g-string to me.

+! And don't forget most of the women faces he does look very similar too.

 

I'll have to look for that next time, I wasn't aware they had faces.

You must have been looking at the pair of lungs instead of in the eyes.

[The Madness]

Every JSC cover looks like Bambi in a g-string to me.

 

I don't think I've read a more accurate description of his covers than this

[SquareChaos]

Hughes women can often look the same in the face as well. A certain plastic, perfect narrow symmetry.

 

Still, he had the fabulous idea to do an Audrey Hepburn Catwoman and I do really like those covers, and no, not for the reason that often gets tossed around. The reason I prefer Hughes over JSC (by a very large margin) is because he can convey human emotion in his images. I rarely see JSC even attempt to do that.

 

One of my favorite recent Hughes covers that no one else really seems to care about:

 

[rjrjr]

Over the years, I have seen many hot artists get heavily collected then fall by the wayside. Just a few examples:

 

John Byrne

Mike Grell

Barry Windsor-Smith

Rob Liefeld

Michael Golden

Mike Deodato

Sam Keith

Greg Horn

Alex Ross

 

Now, there are still those who appreciate these artists, but for the most part, the comics with their art no longer command a premium over other issues in a title or other books from the same time period.

 

What those artist didn't have is ratio'd variants or store exclusives, which is a huge factor in the price of many modern comics. Not every Dell'Otto comic commands a premium, mostly those that have a ratio'd distribution or are a retailer exclusive for specific characters. This is true of Adam Hughes and J Scott Campbell too. It is the combination of artist, scarcity, and character. Very rarely is it the artist alone, the scarcity alone, or the character alone.

 

So, I believe today's cover artists "keys" can maintain their value or premium, but it will be on books that have a combination of these 3 things. A book without all 3 things going for it probably won't maintain its value or rather, its peers will eventually catch up to it. (What I mean by this is very rarely does a book 'fall' in value. What happens is that book stagnates and eventually the surrounding books catch up to it in value. Look at Uncanny X-Men prices over the years to see what I mean. At one time, an X-Men comic commanded a premium over other books from the same period because X-Men were "hot". But eventually, those other books caught up to the X-Men books in prices when the X-Men were no longer "hot".)

 

Edited January 27, 2017 by rjrjr

[SquareChaos]

Over the years, I have seen many hot artists get heavily collected then fall by the wayside. Just a few examples:

 

John Byrne

Mike Grell

Barry Windsor-Smith

Rob Liefeld

Michael Golden

Mike Deodato

Sam Keith

Greg Horn

Alex Ross

 

Now, there are still those who appreciate these artists, but for the most part, the comics with their art no longer command a premium over other issues in a title or other books from the same time period.

 

What those artist didn't have is ratio'd variants or store exclusives, which is a huge factor in the price of many modern comics. Not every Dell'Otto comic commands a premium, mostly those that have a ratio'd distribution or are a retailer exclusive for specific characters. This is true of Adam Hughes and J Scott Campbell too. It is the combination of artist, scarcity, and character. Very rarely is it the artist alone, the scarcity alone, or the character alone.

 

So, I believe today's cover artists "keys" can maintain their value or premium, but it will be on books that have a combination of these 3 things. A book without all 3 things going for it probably won't maintain its value or rather, its peers will eventually catch up to it. (What I mean by this is very rarely does a book 'fall' in value. What happens is that book stagnates and eventually the surrounding books catch up to it in value. Look at Uncanny X-Men prices over the years to see what I mean. At one time, an X-Men comic commanded a premium over other books from the same period because X-Men were "hot". But eventually, those other books caught up to the X-Men books in prices when the X-Men were no longer "hot".)

 

A good summation of it, I pretty much agree... if they do have a bump, they'll maintain a bump as long as the artist is in demand. Once no one cares... :shrug:

[Jaydogrules]

Over the years, I have seen many hot artists get heavily collected then fall by the wayside. Just a few examples:

 

John Byrne

Mike Grell

Barry Windsor-Smith

Rob Liefeld

Michael Golden

Mike Deodato

Sam Keith

Greg Horn

Alex Ross

 

Now, there are still those who appreciate these artists, but for the most part, the comics with their art no longer command a premium over other issues in a title or other books from the same time period.

 

What those artist didn't have is ratio'd variants or store exclusives, which is a huge factor in the price of many modern comics. Not every Dell'Otto comic commands a premium, mostly those that have a ratio'd distribution or are a retailer exclusive for specific characters. This is true of Adam Hughes and J Scott Campbell too. It is the combination of artist, scarcity, and character. Very rarely is it the artist alone, the scarcity alone, or the character alone.

 

So, I believe today's cover artists "keys" can maintain their value or premium, but it will be on books that have a combination of these 3 things. A book without all 3 things going for it probably won't maintain its value or rather, its peers will eventually catch up to it. (What I mean by this is very rarely does a book 'fall' in value. What happens is that book stagnates and eventually the surrounding books catch up to it in value. Look at Uncanny X-Men prices over the years to see what I mean. At one time, an X-Men comic commanded a premium over other books from the same period because X-Men were "hot". But eventually, those other books caught up to the X-Men books in prices when the X-Men were no longer "hot".)

 

+1

 

This.

 

This should be stickied on the boards for posterity.

 

-J.

[Lonzilla]

Over the years, I have seen many hot artists get heavily collected then fall by the wayside. Just a few examples:

 

John Byrne

Mike Grell

Barry Windsor-Smith

Rob Liefeld

Michael Golden

Mike Deodato

Sam Keith

Greg Horn

Alex Ross

 

Now, there are still those who appreciate these artists, but for the most part, the comics with their art no longer command a premium over other issues in a title or other books from the same time period.

 

What those artist didn't have is ratio'd variants or store exclusives, which is a huge factor in the price of many modern comics. Not every Dell'Otto comic commands a premium, mostly those that have a ratio'd distribution or are a retailer exclusive for specific characters. This is true of Adam Hughes and J Scott Campbell too. It is the combination of artist, scarcity, and character. Very rarely is it the artist alone, the scarcity alone, or the character alone.

 

So, I believe today's cover artists "keys" can maintain their value or premium, but it will be on books that have a combination of these 3 things. A book without all 3 things going for it probably won't maintain its value or rather, its peers will eventually catch up to it. (What I mean by this is very rarely does a book 'fall' in value. What happens is that book stagnates and eventually the surrounding books catch up to it in value. Look at Uncanny X-Men prices over the years to see what I mean. At one time, an X-Men comic commanded a premium over other books from the same period because X-Men were "hot". But eventually, those other books caught up to the X-Men books in prices when the X-Men were no longer "hot".)

Dead on with the "where are they now" artists list. When I first started seriously collecting in the early 1980's BWS was one of the kings of the high priced back issue bins along with Neal Adams. Still to this day Smith's run on Conan is one of the most beautiful (and modern collector $$$ speaking under appreciated) works of art that Marvel had ever put out. The oversized Marvel Treasury Editions from the 70's with BWS reprints are worth picking up just to appreciate the art and see it larger than usual

[World Devourer]

The moral of the story is nothing is forever. As I said before, some of the classic covers/runs will remain collectible, but not as investment picks. A cynic might claim sites like Comixology remove the need for reading copies, but that's another story.

 

The only X-Factor remaining is to determine if the in-demand variants hold their value - the original question here.

Edited January 27, 2017 by World Devourer

[Reno McCoy]

Hughes women can often look the same in the face as well. A certain plastic, perfect narrow symmetry.

 

Still, he had the fabulous idea to do an Audrey Hepburn Catwoman and I do really like those covers, and no, not for the reason that often gets tossed around. The reason I prefer Hughes over JSC (by a very large margin) is because he can convey human emotion in his images. I rarely see JSC even attempt to do that.

 

This. Always this.

 

Hughes draws great boobs, sure. He he captures emotion in a way that's lightyears better than most other artists. With Hughes covers, it's not hard to imagine what the characters are thinking or what their motivation is for doing whatever they're doing in the image. For the most part, his images are much more than a pretty face and tight body.

[Reno McCoy]

So, it sounds like this would be a good summary of the thoughts in this thread:

 

• Prices for "cover keys" will stay solid and possibly continue to increase as long as the artist is relevant.
  
• Beyond that, values will at least stagnate, but might see a dip.
  
• The classic, iconic covers are more likely to maintain value (by staying relevant).
  
• Covers + beloved characters + scarcity is really the equation you're looking for.
  
• Ratio variants add relevancy through scarcity.
  
• Hughes, JSC, and Dell'Otto are the current hot artists.
  
• Artgerm, Ebas, Clayton Crain, and Francesco Mattina might be artists to see more interest soon.

 

So, yeah, nothing here that's eye opening or new. But still, it's a topic I enjoy discussing.

[SquareChaos]

Good summary.

 

I also have a sneaking suspicion that the ultra uber rare stuff may be hurt, long term, by it's own selectivity, but it's even more speculation than the rest of it.

 

It's based on the assumption that people desire what they actually see, and if there are literally just a handful, they're not going to be seen at cons, shows, or even for sale online. You'll still have a subset that chase them, and that may be all you need considering the supposed rarity and cost.

[aerischan]

Good summary.

 

I also have a sneaking suspicion that the ultra uber rare stuff may be hurt, long term, by it's own selectivity, but it's even more speculation than the rest of it.

 

It's based on the assumption that people desire what they actually see, and if there are literally just a handful, they're not going to be seen at cons, shows, or even for sale online. You'll still have a subset that chase them, and that may be all you need considering the supposed rarity and cost.

With the advent of the internet, just because something is not available for sale doesn't mean people don't see it. Out of curiosity, I checked out the site stats for CBSI.

 

Daily Unique Visitors: 690

Monthly Unique Visitors: 20,700

Daily Pageviews: 1,933 (2.80 per visitor)

 

The site seems to have a pretty rabid following so I reckon certain covers might maintain or increase in value simply by being featured on CBSI (at least until too many of their followers get burned).

[SquareChaos]

Good summary.

 

I also have a sneaking suspicion that the ultra uber rare stuff may be hurt, long term, by it's own selectivity, but it's even more speculation than the rest of it.

 

It's based on the assumption that people desire what they actually see, and if there are literally just a handful, they're not going to be seen at cons, shows, or even for sale online. You'll still have a subset that chase them, and that may be all you need considering the supposed rarity and cost.

With the advent of the internet, just because something is not available for sale doesn't mean people don't see it. Out of curiosity, I checked out the site stats for CBSI.

 

Daily Unique Visitors: 690

Monthly Unique Visitors: 20,700

Daily Pageviews: 1,933 (2.80 per visitor)

 

The site seems to have a pretty rabid following so I reckon certain covers might maintain or increase in value simply by being featured on CBSI (at least until too many of their followers get burned).

 

I'm speaking of the collector market as a whole.

 

We already know the price makes the majority of collectors not even think about these books, and I'm suggesting that not seeing it (as we do other "keys") available puts it out of mind as well.

 

When I say "see" it I mean in a way in which they could actually obtain it... no matter how unlikely that is due to what is a high cost relative to what most collectors currently would spend on a modern book.

 

People simply won't think of these books as often as they do books they actually frequently see.

[Brian48]

Bronze Age Batman related books with Neal Adams covers still command a lot interest despite someone else doing the interior art. I think the really popular artists will also remain popular. May be difficult to say who, but after a few decades, I think it'll become very apparent.

[ygogolak]

How many "classic cover" designations are there for books after 1980? Seems like maybe a small handful, so I wouldn't put much faith in any of these modern covers to get that honor for a long time if at all.

 

What is the source of these designations? That's the much more relevant question, which also basically answers your question.

 

Who is this guy in the gif having his mind blown?

 

Eric Wareheim, duh...

Tim & Eric

Edited January 27, 2017 by ygogolak

[the blob]

Over the years, I have seen many hot artists get heavily collected then fall by the wayside. Just a few examples:

 

John Byrne

Mike Grell

Barry Windsor-Smith

Rob Liefeld

Michael Golden

Mike Deodato

Sam Keith

Greg Horn

Alex Ross

 

Now, there are still those who appreciate these artists, but for the most part, the comics with their art no longer command a premium over other issues in a title or other books from the same time period.

 

What those artist didn't have is ratio'd variants or store exclusives, which is a huge factor in the price of many modern comics. Not every Dell'Otto comic commands a premium, mostly those that have a ratio'd distribution or are a retailer exclusive for specific characters. This is true of Adam Hughes and J Scott Campbell too. It is the combination of artist, scarcity, and character. Very rarely is it the artist alone, the scarcity alone, or the character alone.

 

So, I believe today's cover artists "keys" can maintain their value or premium, but it will be on books that have a combination of these 3 things. A book without all 3 things going for it probably won't maintain its value or rather, its peers will eventually catch up to it. (What I mean by this is very rarely does a book 'fall' in value. What happens is that book stagnates and eventually the surrounding books catch up to it in value. Look at Uncanny X-Men prices over the years to see what I mean. At one time, an X-Men comic commanded a premium over other books from the same period because X-Men were "hot". But eventually, those other books caught up to the X-Men books in prices when the X-Men were no longer "hot".)

Dead on with the "where are they now" artists list. When I first started seriously collecting in the early 1980's BWS was one of the kings of the high priced back issue bins along with Neal Adams. Still to this day Smith's run on Conan is one of the most beautiful (and modern collector $$$ speaking under appreciated) works of art that Marvel had ever put out. The oversized Marvel Treasury Editions from the 70's with BWS reprints are worth picking up just to appreciate the art and see it larger than usual

 

Early Byrne and BWS stuff still command a premium. At some point Byrne was doing so many titles it become not a big deal. As for BWS... he peaked in the early 70s and then disappeared for a while. Weapon X was interesting, but his stuff after that...it was ok, but nothing "wow" like those early Conan books seemed like back in the day.

 

Byrne was not helped by the fact that his stuff just did not look as good without Terry Austin inking it.

 

What Alex Ross stuff was expensive? Was his run on the Terminator books expensive at some point? Marvels wasn't. Popular, yes.