Michaeld Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 I have wondered if it would be a good idea to sign your name in pen (not large but legible) on the back of the art you own with the date of purchase and eventually the date you sold it. The next owner would do the same. This would prove ownership if it is lost and also create a provenance directly on the piece. I don't think it would negatively affect the value and it would be interesting to see who else in your hobby has own your art. I don't see much negative in this. Do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCarter27 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Please don't do this. And don't pencil in prices on the back either. I think knowing provenance is good in theory, but altering the art is off-putting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Machismo Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Please no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kohei Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 There's spreadsheets for this-at a minimum you could just track it all with a word doc or even a damned notebook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquareChaos Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 We're one comment away from CGC slabbing OA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twanj Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 What if there was a way for a third party to guarantee it and give us a COA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaeld Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 So far all I'm reading is knee jerk reactions with no explanation of how it would or could affect value or the desire to own the piece. Would you honestly not by the art if it had this information on the back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malvin Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 I wouldn't do it, but I don't think it would impact value Malvin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquareChaos Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 It wouldn't impact the value at all I would imagine. It wouldn't solve the problem you're talking about either though... Once I owned it, I could write anything I wanted on to the back of it and modify anything anyone else wrote. This may be one of those non-problem problems, people for the most part seem to have managed thus far, this seems primarily like a 'would be nice to know' or in certain rare circumstances 'suddenly needs to know.' But I'm not sure it would matter for the majority of transactions. Just my view on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Browning Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 Would you do that inside your 9.8 NM comics? And, do you care who owned your prized comics before you as long as YOU own it NOW? This is a terrible idea. Just keep a written record in its bag/mylar/portfolio if it's that important to you. And, honestly, does provenance mean that much? Maybe I'm not looking at this issue correctly, but I don't care who owned it before me or who owned it before the previous owner. L.W. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kohei Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 Would you do the same thing if it was fine art? Say, a Picasso? Or the Mona Lisa? Would you do it if it was a comic? Seriously, there's so many other ways to keep track there is literally no reason to do what you are describing. Mister Browning has a fine suggestion just above this post. Michael Browning 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodou Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 I've got no problem with it and even did it recently. We're talking about 'the back' here - get real people! As to fine art, some of the coolest stuff on old paintings are on the back, artist's and gallerist's notes, old gallery, museum and exhibition stickers, stamps, etc. All very interesting, and all the more so the older the piece is and the more 'stuff' is on the back. wormboy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flambit Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 2 hours ago, SquareChaos said: We're one comment away from CGC slabbing OA. This was actually the subject of first ever CGC OA thread on this board back in 2005: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaeld Posted September 8, 2017 Author Share Posted September 8, 2017 1 minute ago, Michael Browning said: Would you do that inside your 9.8 NM comics? And, do you care who owned your prized comics before you as long as YOU own it NOW? This is a terrible idea. Just keep a written record in its bag/mylar/portfolio if it's that important to you. And, honestly, does provenance mean that much? Maybe I'm not looking at this issue correctly, but I don't care who owned it before me or who owned it before the previous owner. If you write on a comic it brings down the value so of course you wouldn't do that. That's a no-brainer. There was an auction of Graham Nash's collection of original art recently. Had he autographed the back of each page I can't help but think that would increase the value or would at least add a WOW factor to anyone you showed it to. When a celebrity has previously owned a piece it becomes more valuable. Just look at the sales of Nick Cage's comics. A COA can be lost but the signature on the back of the art stays with it. How about someone who is prominent in the hobby? Having the name of someone who is well known in original art collecting may make you piece more desirable as well. HA will mention the names of deceased collectors when there pieces become available for auction. So again I ask where are the negatives in doing this other than it being unfamiliar and scary to hobbyists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Readcomix Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 In defense of provenance, I Do think its cool to capture the history of our hobby. Just not on the objects. As many have said, I would record it elsewhere, and pass it along. To answer the OP's post, unless it was a must-have piece for me, I probably would pass. I don't like autographs on comics either, generally. I certainly don't want scrawl on the cover of a key. I'd rather have the autograph separately, and only if it stems from a meanginful personal encounter. (Standing in line to fork over money does not meet my criteria of a meaningful autograph.) But that's just me; I know there's a market. Cool creator, signature inside the book, book not a major key or rarity, I can live with that. I'm thinking as I type here --- kind of apples and oranges, perhaps, as I would not mind a creator signing a piece of OA -- in the margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodou Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 3 minutes ago, Michaeld said: So again I ask where are the negatives in doing this other than it being unfamiliar and scary to hobbyists? No negatives. I'd rather have the the names of thirty collectors date-stamped before me on the back than a single large marker signature by Sal Buscema or John Byrne inside a panel! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Readcomix Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 9 minutes ago, vodou said: I've got no problem with it and even did it recently. We're talking about 'the back' here - get real people! As to fine art, some of the coolest stuff on old paintings are on the back, artist's and gallerist's notes, old gallery, museum and exhibition stickers, stamps, etc. All very interesting, and all the more so the older the piece is and the more 'stuff' is on the back. This happens with comics art too. I got a page of Romita Jr from his first issue of Iron Man, #116, and on the back, uninked, is a bust of Tony Stark. He was clearly working things out, and it makes the page a lot cooler, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Browning Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 16 minutes ago, Michaeld said: If you write on a comic it brings down the value so of course you wouldn't do that. That's a no-brainer. There was an auction of Graham Nash's collection of original art recently. Had he autographed the back of each page I can't help but think that would increase the value or would at least add a WOW factor to anyone you showed it to. When a celebrity has previously owned a piece it becomes more valuable. Just look at the sales of Nick Cage's comics. A COA can be lost but the signature on the back of the art stays with it. How about someone who is prominent in the hobby? Having the name of someone who is well known in original art collecting may make you piece more desirable as well. HA will mention the names of deceased collectors when there pieces become available for auction. So again I ask where are the negatives in doing this other than it being unfamiliar and scary to hobbyists? Are you some kind of celebrity so famous that we just can't live without your signature on the back? And, is anyone going to remember the MichaelD collection? Only for the pieces that came out of it in this day and age. I mean, I love to know the history of stuff as I have been a comics historian and journalist for more than two decades, but I cannot believe anyone would think writing on the backs of art is a good idea. One light pencil doesn't show through, but when you start writing stuff in pen on the back of the art, it can bleed through or show through when you frame it. It's just an all-around dumb idea and I am amazed that it's even a question. On the comicart-l group I argued against a dealer putting his ink stamp on the art he was selling from artists who he represented. I stand by that and argue against writing ANYTHING on the backs (or fronts) of comic art. If someone involved with production of the art didn't write it on there, it has no place on it, plain and simple. Mr. Machismo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Browning Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 26 minutes ago, vodou said: I've got no problem with it and even did it recently. We're talking about 'the back' here - get real people! As to fine art, some of the coolest stuff on old paintings are on the back, artist's and gallerist's notes, old gallery, museum and exhibition stickers, stamps, etc. All very interesting, and all the more so the older the piece is and the more 'stuff' is on the back. You're talking about art on canvas and not WHITE PAPER through which the names can show and through which the ink can bleed. I don't think anyone buys original art because of the previous owner's name written in ink on the back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GotSuperPowers? Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 I enjoy getting in vintage art and sadistically seeing the original (or close to it) sale price written on the back. $250 for that Keown Hulk action page? Cool! $150 for that Nowlan New Mutants page? Awesome! Now I wouldn't do it myself, but it's a nice artifact of a different time. However, seeing a note for a page being blueline inks, that is something I think we should all be after. Simon Twanj 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
