Why comic OA is better than fine art 1 1

[Skizz]

4 hours ago, delekkerste said:

Ad Reinhardt!  Snapped these pics at the Whitney Museum of American Art this past weekend and thought of Kav's head exploding.  

 

But seriously though, this write is such a load of BS.  

Edited October 3, 2017 by Skizz

[Bronty]

They totally should have gone with a red frame

[bluechip]

On 9/15/2017 at 1:46 AM, ESeffinga said:

I'd wager this is why you are seeing folks like Crumb, Burns, Ware, Bagge etc. with more "highbrow" exhibits at museums and galleries. When I see folks wonder why that is, and not Ditko, McFarlane, Miller, etc to the same degree, I'm left with the sense that it is because the "art establishment" sees them as telling stories of the human condition. They aren't playing with the usual narrative tropes, recycled, repackaged and reissued with new first issues, and new costumes, and new galactic space battles. And I realize it's highly reductive and oversimplified description, but you take my point.

I believe the art establishment (if there is such a thing really) sees these other creators as speaking to something more deeply personal, and using what was (and in many ways still is) a throwaway vehicle for streamlined stories, to make a buck.

At the risk of bad anaolgy... in the way that Kubrik, Bergman, Fellini, Kurosawa, etc. have done with film.

Kirby, Ditko, Romita et al. might prove to be the Lumiere Bros., Fritz Lang, Georges Melies of the medium, whose influence is everywhere, and showed ways the medium could be used, and sent the groundwork for all cinema.  I acknowledge a poor comparison, but I think the wider point stands.

 

I have seen a lot of pieces of comic art which I thought went beyond the limits you are describing and which were as evocative as a "fine art" piece not connected to a comic, but rarely have any of those been described in the listings in ways that went beyond reliance on the usual comic book metrics, who is the artist, what was the issue, is it "large art," etc.   And sometimes I have bought them just because they were valued the same as any adjacent or contemporary piece. which had the same metrics but far less appeal.   So as I pulled the trigger I would think to myself "I( can't believe this isn't valued more than that other piece."    At least that has been the case with character-based comic art.   When I've spotted a particularly interesting piece of comic art from a horror title, I bid more than the going price for other pieces with similar credits and of similar vintage, only to find myself outbid by people who apparently agreed with me and weren't going to be limited by the precedents of "similar" items.

 

 

Edited October 4, 2017 by bluechip

[Panelfan1]

1 minute ago, bluechip said:

I have seen a lot of pieces of comic art which I thought went beyond the limits you are describing and which were as evocative as a "fine art" piece not connected to a comic, but rarely have any of those been described in the listings in ways that went beyond reliance on the usual comic book metrics, who is the art, what was the issue, is it "large art," etc.   And sometimes I have bought them just because they were valued the same as any adjacent or contemporary piece. which had the same metrics but far less appeal.   So as I pulled the trigger I would think to myself "I( can't believe this isn't valued more than that other piece."    At least that that has been the case with character-based comic art.   When I've spotted a particularly interesting piece of comic art from a horror title, I bid more than the going price for other pieces with credits and similar vintage, only to find myself outbid by people who apparently agreed with me and weren't going to be limited by the precedents of "similar" items.

 

 

Can you give some visual example. Its hard to understand what you meant.

[Panelfan1]

6 hours ago, Skizz said:

But seriously though, this write is such a load of BS.  

The closest thing i could think of in comic terms was this. But i know it still has too much in the visible spectrum. Would have been better with more white. It's clear from the over abundance of details that Byrne was no fine artist.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Panelfan1

[SquareChaos]

6 hours ago, Skizz said:

But seriously though, this write is such a load of BS.  

Art is often more about who made it than how it presents - that painting is just an extreme example of it, but we see the same principle in practice in our hobby all of the time. Why else would a quick doodle by a legend often demand a higher price than a cover quality illustration from a competent industry newcomer?

[Skizz]

3 hours ago, Panelfan1 said:

The closest thing i could think of in comic terms was this. But i know it still has too much in the visible spectrum. Would have been better with more white. It's clear from the over abundance of details that Byrne was no fine artist.

 

3 hours ago, SquareChaos said:

Art is often more about who made it than how it presents - that painting is just an extreme example of it, but we see the same principle in practice in our hobby all of the time. Why else would a quick doodle by a legend often demand a higher price than a cover quality illustration from a competent industry newcomer?

But really ...

[vodou]

8 hours ago, bluechip said:

I have seen a lot of pieces of comic art which I thought went beyond the limits you are describing and which were as evocative as a "fine art" piece not connected to a comic, but rarely have any of those been described in the listings in ways that went beyond reliance on the usual comic book metrics, who is the artist, what was the issue, is it "large art," etc.   And sometimes I have bought them just because they were valued the same as any adjacent or contemporary piece. which had the same metrics but far less appeal.   So as I pulled the trigger I would think to myself "I( can't believe this isn't valued more than that other piece."    At least that has been the case with character-based comic art.   When I've spotted a particularly interesting piece of comic art from a horror title, I bid more than the going price for other pieces with similar credits and of similar vintage, only to find myself outbid by people who apparently agreed with me and weren't going to be limited by the precedents of "similar" items.

Likewise. To all of the above, including bidding more than FMV for 'similar' (but particularly interesting) horror art. And (sadly) still and often being outbid. Great horror art always seems to have a lot of eyeballs on it. (No pun intended, but it's a fun one anyway!)

[delekkerste]

9 hours ago, Skizz said:

 

But really ...

[Panelfan1]

1 minute ago, delekkerste said:

I am trying to recall. That is not the cover? Is it a polybag with the art/comic inside. Or was it left black due to 911?  Either way there is text.on it - so not abstract enough.

 

If the painting shown earlier were a secret door that you could open - now that would be more like a black polybagged comic in that it is just an obstacle to something inside..  hmm

[Bronty]

13 hours ago, bluechip said:

I have seen a lot of pieces of comic art which I thought went beyond the limits you are describing and which were as evocative as a "fine art" piece not connected to a comic, but rarely have any of those been described in the listings in ways that went beyond reliance on the usual comic book metrics, who is the artist, what was the issue, is it "large art," etc.   And sometimes I have bought them just because they were valued the same as any adjacent or contemporary piece. which had the same metrics but far less appeal.   So as I pulled the trigger I would think to myself "I( can't believe this isn't valued more than that other piece."    At least that has been the case with character-based comic art.   When I've spotted a particularly interesting piece of comic art from a horror title, I bid more than the going price for other pieces with similar credits and of similar vintage, only to find myself outbid by people who apparently agreed with me and weren't going to be limited by the precedents of "similar" items.

 

 

I don't often feel that way but Chris' Stevens piece always did that for me.   If only he'd be kind enough to mail it to me gratis

[Get Marwood & I]

14 minutes ago, Panelfan1 said:

I am trying to recall. That is not the cover? Is it a polybag with the art/comic inside. Or was it left black due to 911?  Either way there is text.on it - so not abstract enough.

 

If the painting shown earlier were a secret door that you could open - now that would be more like a black polybagged comic in that it is just an obstacle to something inside..  hmm

That's the actual cover, no bag. Which begs the question, does the original art for this book actually exist? That's fairly abstract, isn't it? 

[Skizz]

4 hours ago, delekkerste said:

 

[Skizz]

https://www.castlegalleries.com/artists/stan-lee/P12#collection

These are basically blown up posters licensed by Marvel and signed by Stan Lee that are being sold for thousands in a chain of Art Galleries in the UK. 

I wonder how us OA collectors feel about this.  Has anyone here seen or considered buying this. 

 

Edited October 4, 2017 by Skizz

[bluechip]

21 hours ago, Panelfan1 said:

Can you give some visual example. Its hard to understand what you meant.

Here's a few that I own or once owned, or that I never owned because, while I bid well above the FMV of a "similar" piece I still did not bid high enough.

 

 

Edited October 5, 2017 by bluechip

[Panelfan1]

1 hour ago, bluechip said:

Here's a few that I own or once owned, or that I never owned because, while I bid well above the FMV of a "similar" piece I still did not bid high enough.

 

 

These examples all look great.. and as comic fans we dont need a fancy description to tell us that.   I imagine none would sell too cheap. In the end what we keep and what we buy is determined as much by our budgets as what other choices we have.  If other stuff that we covet more is available at the same time while funds are finite - decisions have to be made.  

[Comixculture]

If you have a chance to visit Columbus Ohio you must visit the Billy Ireland Cartoon Museum.  They have an amazing collection of comic art through the decades. Comic art is a serious art form.

[vodou]

9 hours ago, Comixculture said:

If you have a chance to visit Columbus Ohio you must visit the Billy Ireland Cartoon Museum.  They have an amazing collection of comic art through the decades. Comic art is a serious art form.

 

Very nice, thanks for sharing. I've never been but have been aware for a long time, just have to get out there sometime.

Ironic that for an art and design joint, the signage typography and placement is poorly executed.

[suspense39]

2 hours ago, vodou said:

Very nice, thanks for sharing. I've never been but have been aware for a long time, just have to get out there sometime.

Ironic that for an art and design joint, the signage typography and placement is poorly executed.

.....and those gold frames that don’t properly fit the art

[ESeffinga]

Noticed both of those things myself. But still, always interested when places bother to even show work. Even the stuff I don't care for personally. I learn and or glean little something no matter what is on show.