Art Prices 3 3

[Panelfan1]

3 hours ago, delekkerste said:

Wow!  This is even better than the Dr. J. Evans Pritchard method for evaluating poetry!  

 

I had this mad idea that I can come up with my own system - like the famous 'Andy Method'.  But now I know - there will never be another one like that.

[rsonenthal]

57 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

This is very probably true. But you might be able to develop a mean ratio, and then establish deviations off of it to explain why some OA may have more, or less, value. It would be interesting to see if this could be done, as while I think people assume there is no way to quantify it, something can be mathematically represented if most everyone agree on the criteria that needs to be evaluated. And while we all have our different preferences, I think we can all agree (for the most part) on what criteria we each rate when evaluating a piece of OA.

 

I think this thread proves the opposite.

[glendgold]

1 hour ago, comix4fun said:

Is that one of those new Elektra pieces? 

This is the 1.01 of perfect observations.

[Bronty]

9 hours ago, MYNAMEISLEGION said:

where C = Character, A = Artist, N = Nostalgia, P = Popularity and V =Value; For Value, value is impacted by Pub= Published, Nun = Non Published  and ART TYPE.  Art type needs to be weighted somehow ( panel page is x1, splash is x5, Cover is x1

 

hmm I like the concept.   How about:

 

(A*C)^N + (G*S)^CUP / (P+B)  +T   - Y     

A = Artist

C = Character

N = Nostalgia

G = Gratuitousness of female buttshot

S = sexiness of female pose and attire

CUP = female character bra size

P = # of panels on the page

B = Gratuitousness of male buttshot

T = talent of artist and writer team

Y = 'Yellow discount'

 

Edited March 22, 2018 by Bronty

[MyNameIsLegion]

2 minutes ago, Bronty said:

hmm I like the concept.   How about:

 

(A*C) + (G*S)^CUP / (P+B)    -Y 

A = Artist

C = Character

G = Gratuitousness of female buttshot

S = sexiness of female pose and attire

CUP = female character bra size

P = # of panels on the page

B = Gratuitousness of male buttshot

Y = Yellow discount

ahhhh, yes, like so.

[Bronty]

better! 

[MarvelComicsArt]

57 minutes ago, Bronty said:

better! 

Bronty out of curiosity do you own the Gil Elvgren painting that you use for your avatar , the french bulldog painting?

[comix4fun]

1 hour ago, MYNAMEISLEGION said:

ahhhh, yes, like so.

[Bronty]

43 minutes ago, MarvelComicsArt said:

Bronty out of curiosity do you own the Gil Elvgren painting that you use for your avatar , the french bulldog painting?

I wish!    I just really like the image.    I would like to own an Elvgren one day but it would have to be the right one and I'd have to feel more comfortable with the price involved than I do right now.     I could sell some things and buy one, but, its out of my comfort range and I'd hate to sell things and then not end up with the piece I want.     

Edited March 22, 2018 by Bronty

[AnkurJ]

If cup size is a factor, most of these cheap eBay drawings are a bargain! ?

[grapeape]

15 hours ago, delekkerste said:

Wow!  This is even better than the Dr. J. Evans Pritchard method for evaluating poetry!  

 

Ha ha!! I just watched this movie again last night. Totally applies. 

[Rick2you2]

17 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

I thought about doing a comprehensive published OA study that used the more objective values of the comic it was published in as the anchor to determine the value ratio. To explain.

Is the value of an OA published page roughly equivalent to the 9.8+ CGC value of that same comic? If not, why not? If there are 22 OA pages in that comic, do we then compare how many are CGC 9.8+ in the CGC census to get a ratio? Or, is there no relationship at all to the comic's value? I think there is some degree of influence on value, but how much is hard to quantify.

I'd like to sample 10,000 OA sales and comparisons to their comic values, and come up with some kind of general ratio that you can add or subtract to based upon factors such as character and artists, etc.

 

PhD candidate?

[Dick O.]

13 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

I thought about doing a comprehensive published OA study that used the more objective values of the comic it was published in as the anchor to determine the value ratio. To explain.

Is the value of an OA published page roughly equivalent to the 9.8+ CGC value of that same comic? If not, why not? If there are 22 OA pages in that comic, do we then compare how many are CGC 9.8+ in the CGC census to get a ratio? Or, is there no relationship at all to the comic's value? I think there is some degree of influence on value, but how much is hard to quantify.

I'd like to sample 10,000 OA sales and comparisons to their comic values, and come up with some kind of general ratio that you can add or subtract to based upon factors such as character and artists, etc.

 

I took a stab at exploring it in this article:

https://comicbookinvest.com/2016/12/30/first-appearances/

To quote:

"In general, the cheapest OA page from a 1st App issue (or any comic book) costs more than a CGC 9.8 copy of that same book. For example, this non-Apocalypse page from X-Factor #5 (Apocalypse cameo 1st App) sold for $286 in September 2015. Another example is this non-Rogue page from Avengers Annual #10 (Rogue 1st App) which sold for $7,366 in September 2015. For reference, this page from the same issue featuring Rogue sold for $17,501 in September 2015. Avengers Annual #10 may present a slightly skewed pricing picture however, because there is only a small body of prime-era Michael Golden mainstream superhero artwork, and demand for it is extremely high. The stuff is literally “golden”!"

and

"One thing to note is that the 12-month GPA average for IM #55 CGC 9.8 is $6k, which means that a lower-priced OA page from IM #55 could be close in cost to a CGC 9.8 copy (keeping in mind those cheaper IM #55 pages’ sales occurred in 2014, and prices have risen since). My theory for this is that with major vintage keys such as IM #55, CGC top census copies may indeed fetch almost as much as cheaper OA pages from said issue, due to large demand and lower supply of the book."

It's only a 3-book sample size though, so make of it what you will!

 

[delekkerste]

On 3/22/2018 at 6:19 AM, Rick2you2 said:

I agree with you; people buy what they want. But for the OA market, in general, is that a healthy perspective? It has the effect of limiting participants to an ever-shrinking number of comic book readers. Furthermore, it makes cross-comparisons between artists difficult by making their work dependent on the underlying subject matter. 

Perhaps if there were some generally recognized analytics it would help. For example, why is Byrne perceived as better than Cockrum? I think the imagry is stronger, and the characters appear more exceptional, but that's not a lot of analytics. What about panel layouts and borders? Use of image flow to carry the story? That sort of thing.

Well, first of all, I'd say that it is what it is.  But, even if it wasn't, I do think that an emphasis on context actually *is* a healthy perspective.  A set of "generally recognized analytics" would likely favor more technical skill/draftsmanship (outside of character and context), which I do not believe is what attracts people to comic book art and which I also believe is justifiably not the most important measure of value anyway.  We've had variants on this argument both in other threads here and in the Water Cooler section in the past - people who don't like Modern & Contemporary art wistfully longing for the days when painterly skill in rendering portraits and landscapes and Bible scenes was most highly valued, or trying to make the case that photorealistic artists are more talented than anyone who works in more conceptual, abstract, expressionistic, etc. art.  Never mind that there are "artists" who work in the alleys of Vietnam and China who are only too happy to replicate Old Master and Impressionist paintings for a nominal (by OA standards) price. 

My point is, technical skill at the end of the day is cheap.  Jay Anacleto I'm sure could draw a killer realistic Spidey vs. Goblin oozing with technical skill, but, it'll never be worth more than pennies on the dollar of Ditko, Romita, Kane, McFarlane, etc. drawing key moments of the Spidey mythos in the flagship ASM title (and nor should it be any other way).  Does that need to invest hundreds/thousands of hours reading comics to truly understand context potentially limit/cap the growth/size of the OA market?  Of course it does!  I've always said so and think it is self-evident - this is why you will see "auteurs" like Crumb and Clowes cross over into true fine art territory, but why 99.999% of mainstream superhero art (which is already viewed as both commercial and collaborative) never will.  Can you imagine a gallerist pointing to an X-Men #94 page on the wall and explaining to his client why this page is worth so much more than this better-looking page from a few issues later?  Or explaining how such-and-such a page features the first appearance of a character who was somewhat popular in a '90s cartoon series and thus deserves a multiple 5-figure price tag?  Of course not, the thought is utterly absurd. 

We are living in the Golden Age of Original Comic Art Collecting.  Strong prices!  Blogs!  Podcasts!  CAF!  Social media!  More community/connectivity than ever!  Greatest availability of art in history! Conventions everywhere and all the time!  More people talking about superheroes than ever!  Let's just enjoy it for what it is (pretty freaking great!) and for however long it lasts, and not delude ourselves that it's just going to keep going from strength to strength indefinitely (because it isn't).  

Edited March 23, 2018 by delekkerste

[comix4fun]

2 hours ago, delekkerste said:

 

We are living in the Golden Age of Original Comic Art Collecting.  Strong prices!  Blogs!  Podcasts!  CAF!  Social media!  More community/connectivity than ever!  Greatest availability of art in history! Conventions everywhere and all the time!  More people talking about superheroes than ever!  Let's just enjoy it for what it is (pretty freaking great!) and for however long it lasts, and not delude ourselves that it's just going to keep going from strength to strength indefinitely (because it isn't).  

 

[romitaman]

On 3/19/2018 at 12:39 PM, PhilipB2k17 said:

Was there ever a time when Ditko Spider-Man art was not among the most desirable pieces to own in the hobby? No. Those pages will hold their value. I'm not so sure about Romita. There are some A+ Romita pages that will hold value. But, run of the mill Romita spider-man pages, will not, IMHO.

I'd definitely disagree with you on run of the mill Romita CHARACTER LARGE ART ASM pages...I feel that ROMITA (large Art) Gwen and / or MJ character pages with no Spiderman on them will ALWAYS sell for more than Gwen / Betty/ women / Character Ditko ASM character pages as Romita's women are....... well..... beautifully drawn ..... Ditko didnt really draw women with as much detail, and i feel the soap opera stories got a little better under Lee and Romita....but Battle pages...Ditko will always be worth more than Romita......I've sold only 7 Romita large ASM pages ever....and all were sold 3-5 years ago..... ( i've not sold a large art Romita page in the past 3 years) . and 6 of the 7 sold for 65-75K+   But again...Ditko will always be king of our hobby.....  as will Spidey art in general. (based on artist)

Edited March 24, 2018 by romitaman

[romitaman]

On 3/19/2018 at 2:25 PM, PhilipB2k17 said:

1) I have no nostalgia at all for the Capullo Batman #1 cover.  My Nostalgia sweet spot is the late 70's to mid-80's. I just think the people who do have nostalgia for that cover are not even in their earning prime yet, and that is an iconic cover for that generation of collectors.

2) The ASM #100 cover looks far better in color than in black and white. The reason why it's a striking cover (to the extent that it is) is because it has Spidey on top of a black background.

3) It's not that artistic. Its just Spider-Man on top of the headshots of his rogues gallery.

4) You think this is one of the top 4 Romita covers of all time? Really?  Better than 40? Better than 67? Better than 75? Better than 68? Better than 70?

 

to answer your questions.......yes....yes....yes....yes...yes....yes.....and yes.  

[romitaman]

On 3/19/2018 at 2:58 PM, MarvelComicsArt said:

Not at all, I respect everyone's opinions ... so nothing is ever taken personally .

Its always all in good fun!

However you Mr. Bronty claiming that Romita is not a stellar artist.

Come on .... that's just crazy talk. He may not be your cup of tea but he is and will always will be remembered as an exceptional artist.

Why is it that even after all of these years,  his  images of spiderman are still being used on every possible piece of merchandise available to the mass public.

It's because it's visually stunning Art. His idealized version of Peter Parker and Spiderman's whole universe is breath taking! From Gwen to Mary Jane.

(before Adam Hughes there was John Romita . No one could create a more idealized world than he). And thats what makes him such a great artist!

 

Marvel guy....bronty has always expressed on the boards....emphatically.....his opinion that Romita was average at best....... Maybe bronty would like romita more if he drew naked men like Boris.. (Just teasing there of course)  

[romitaman]

On 3/19/2018 at 2:58 PM, J.Sid said:

McFarlane certainly deserves to be "highly-valued". But for a short while his stuff was the "highest-valued" american comic art.

Nope...McFarlane was never "HIGHEST VALUED ONLY....... he was tied....with HERB TRIMPE!

Edited March 24, 2018 by romitaman

[romitaman]

On 3/19/2018 at 2:59 PM, Bronty said:

Yes it does.   Which is precisely the point.    If someone else had drawn replaced Romita for all those issues of Spidey, Spidey 100 would be just as valuable.    And if he had drawn the cover a little better, or a little worse, it would have still hammered for pretty much the same amount.

That is arguably the most ill informed or misinformed comment i've ever read on these boards.........

Most People don't know this.... But there were 2 artists Stan Lee was considering to replace Powell / Wood On DD when it was clear Wood was leaving the title....... It was John Romita...or Ayers!!!!....... Stan Had Ayers draw a DD pinup...then Romita draw a pinup (which I still own to this day)

Romita got the job on DD...a no brainer as they say by simply looking at both artists drawings.

.....and 4 months later.....Stan Lee had John Romita AUDITION for the ASM title by having Spider-Man cross over into DD 16-17........ and once Stan Lee saw Romita's artwork he knew he had his NEW ASM ARTIST once Ditko left!!!  

and I'll bet Bronty my entire Spidey art collection against his 5 dollar bill that ASM #100 cover would not sell for half what it hit at auction had it been drawn by Ayers!

Edited March 24, 2018 by romitaman