Would you rather Splash vs. Interior Page 0

[Rick2you2]

1 hour ago, Drummy said:  I've always been foolishly admiring of the Stilt-Man, 

Why? Because he didn’t topple over on those ridiculous things? Or trip on something underfoot and get flattened?

[Drummy]

Believe me, I understand what a joke this guy is -- but as a kid, there was something visually appealing about him. 

And Byrne did a nice job presenting him in Champions #12...such are the terrible dangers of nostalgia.  

[bluechip]

Several people used variations on the phrase "self-contained" and I agree that a piece of art on the wall is more interesting to me if it stands alone.  Panel pages that contain a complete thought or sequence are also more interesting to me, in general.  Covers and splash pages and pin-ups are designed specifically to be appreciated as self-contained pieces.  And since they're comic books, created to contain both pictures and words, I consider an interesting use of words or blurbs or titles or even credits to be a plus.

[adamstrange]

On 7/15/2020 at 7:57 AM, Foolkiller said:

I prefer the panel page.  It has a marquee action sequence and it's very well drawn.  The splash is nice too, but no villain really, so probably a close tie since Colan is more associated with DD than spidey, though with Spidey in the action sequence is impressive.  The pin up does nothing for me.  The rendering and images themselves are just ok, and not particularly well drawn.  

The panel page is a symphony of action, superbly drawn, that culminates in climactic final panel.  Seems cheap compared to the others given that it's Spidey.

[The Voord]

To be honest, I don't think there's much between any of the three pages and I can see merit in each and every one.  Why make a contest?  Just enjoy each and every page for the range they bring to your collection.

[sfilosa]

Thanks to everyone that posted. Great insight all around.

And the consensus is....there is no consensus. And that's what makes collecting so interesting. If we were all collecting the same art, only the people with the most amount of money would have the "prize/grail art".

A couple of quick thoughts.

POINT ONE: It was interesting to hear that some collectors didn't like the interior page because it was either drawn by Colan or in a DD book (with no DD in any panels). I could clearly understand if Colan is not an artist you collect but I collect in this order (which obviously others do not).

Forget cost/money or historical significance in this equation.

1) Artist

2) Character(s)

3) Visual content of the art

In other words, I like Neal Adams (1) but I'm never going to buy a Ben Casey strip page he did because I couldn't care less about the character (2). I would also pass on Green Lantern/Green Arrow page if they were just talking and nothing happened interesting on the page (3).

I might buy a Red Sonja (2) painting or artwork by an artist I don't know, if I think it is well/uniquely drawn (3). I skipped (1), but because (2) and (3) interest me, I might have just found another Artist (1) I like (obviously I did if I bought the art).

What I don't collect would be a specific TITLE. Unless I was trying to put a complete book back together, I'm not sure why I care what title it is in, unless I thought from an investment standpoint it would matter. That's an entirely different issue and gets back to the money thing (which I'm ignoring in this equation). Said differently, I now realize that some collectors might rather have a Spider-Man page that is rather bland because it is in ASM, than have an excellent page (which is subjective) in another title (assuming similar vintage). I WOULD NOT. To me the art should stand on it's own.  

POINT TWO: It didn't seem to me that anyone but myself seemed to care that the Title/Wording/Stat took up a lot of space on the splash page. While I can see the intrigue of having the STAT, I would actually bet that a lot of people would not want to collect or at least pay as much, if the top third of the art was just blank space. Then again, I don't buy many first page splashes or covers for that reason. But I also know I'm in the minority on that one.

Once again, thanks to everyone for the enjoyable discussion.

[delekkerste]

14 hours ago, sfilosa said:

Thanks to everyone that posted. Great insight all around.

And the consensus is....there is no consensus. And that's what makes collecting so interesting. If we were all collecting the same art, only the people with the most amount of money would have the "prize/grail art".

A couple of quick thoughts.

POINT ONE: It was interesting to hear that some collectors didn't like the interior page because it was either drawn by Colan or in a DD book (with no DD in any panels). I could clearly understand if Colan is not an artist you collect but I collect in this order (which obviously others do not).

Forget cost/money or historical significance in this equation.

1) Artist

2) Character(s)

3) Visual content of the art

In other words, I like Neal Adams (1) but I'm never going to buy a Ben Casey strip page he did because I couldn't care less about the character (2). I would also pass on Green Lantern/Green Arrow page if they were just talking and nothing happened interesting on the page (3).

I might buy a Red Sonja (2) painting or artwork by an artist I don't know, if I think it is well/uniquely drawn (3). I skipped (1), but because (2) and (3) interest me, I might have just found another Artist (1) I like (obviously I did if I bought the art).

What I don't collect would be a specific TITLE. Unless I was trying to put a complete book back together, I'm not sure why I care what title it is in, unless I thought from an investment standpoint it would matter. That's an entirely different issue and gets back to the money thing (which I'm ignoring in this equation). Said differently, I now realize that some collectors might rather have a Spider-Man page that is rather bland because it is in ASM, than have an excellent page (which is subjective) in another title (assuming similar vintage). I WOULD NOT. To me the art should stand on it's own.  

POINT TWO: It didn't seem to me that anyone but myself seemed to care that the Title/Wording/Stat took up a lot of space on the splash page. While I can see the intrigue of having the STAT, I would actually bet that a lot of people would not want to collect or at least pay as much, if the top third of the art was just blank space. Then again, I don't buy many first page splashes or covers for that reason. But I also know I'm in the minority on that one.

Once again, thanks to everyone for the enjoyable discussion.

I think the reality is that most experienced collectors consider more than just the visual content of the art and the artist attached to it.  Just a few (of many) of the other things I would consider:

- is this what the artist is known for?  One of my good friends in the hobby predicted that the Frank Miller Dr. Strange cover in the last Heritage sale would hit $60K.  My prediction, which was proven correct, was that it wouldn't even hit half that number.  Why?  Because nobody really associates Frank Miller with Dr. Strange.  Nobody really associates Gene Colan with Spider-Man either. 

- is this the "right" creative team (writer/penciler/inker) for the example in question?  Bob Layton is a terrific inker, but, Layton (instead of Terry Austin) inking John Byrne on the Uncanny X-Men #113 cover reduces the desirability to collectors significantly because it's not the Dream Team.  Similarly, the most desirable Frank Miller Daredevil art is concentrated from issues #168-184 (Miller writing, Miller pencils on board, Janson inking).  Gene Colan drawing a Daredevil page with no Daredevil and where he's not known for drawing Spider-Man...well, I'm certainly not taking that page over a well-drawn Gene Colan Daredevil splash page.  

- is it the "right" title?  Main run is usually more desirable, all other things being equal.  McFarlane ASM vs. McSpidey - one might think that there wouldn't be much of a difference in desirability, since the latter was hugely popular and they are very close to each other time-wise, but there is an ASM premium. Art from guest appearance issues almost always suffer in desirability compared to their main run equivalent, whether we're talking about PPSS #27-28, Iron Fist #15, etc. (oftentimes guest appearance issues pair the penciler associated with the guest appearing character with a different inker as well, which is a double whammy for the discerning collector).

I don't think it's possible to ignore cost/money, historical significance, or, pretty much any nuance that has to do with putting a piece into context.  Wrong artist, wrong time period for the artist, wrong inker, wrong title, wrong material (e.g., vellum, marker), wrong content, wrong level of quality...in my earlier collecting days, I was able to look past a lot of these things, but, not anymore - unless I have a deep nostalgic collection with a piece that allows me to look past any of these factors, I'm almost always going to pass and wait for the "right" piece to come around.  Those who have asked for my advice on art can confirm that I am ruthless about waiting for the right piece as opposed to jumping on just whatever's available, especially if one or more of the above conditions apply.  

[sfilosa]

Not sure I agree with all your statements (but hey, we all collect different things).

The Spider-Man page, at least on Heritage, is Gene Colan's highest selling panel piece in a DD book (there is an awesome TOS page that sold for more a few years ago). Even if I hadn't purchased it, the underbidder would have and it still would have been the highest selling panel piece in a DD book. There were also a lot of bidders, a lot of people (including myself) weren't sure what it would sell for. Since I had the frame of reference of the TOS page that I really wanted and it sold for way more than double I thought it would at the time, I felt pretty sure the Spidey page was going to have a lot of action.

Which leads to your other comment that the Frank Miller cover with Dr. Strange sold for a lot less than another collector would have thought it would. Isn't that more a function of Doctor Strange. An excellent cover by Gene Colan (Dr. Strange #14) only sold for $26k in the same auction. And Gene Colan is associated with Doctor Strange. And while Frank Brunner Dr. Strange covers go for double, that's because if you like Brunner's art, then you are going to buy Dr. Strange because he didn't do many other many stream titles. 

In terms of you being ruthless about waiting for the right piece, that's a great strategy that works well for you. I pretty much feel the same way. Other collectors might feel that it's worth getting an average piece now, with the idea that at some point they might find a more desirable piece. If that wasn't the case, 90% of all art would have no demand, and every comic book collector would wait until they could get a 9.4 (or higher) copy of a book. Instead low grade copies, especially of Keys have no problem selling. And panel pieces with characters not in their suit still have demand (much less, but still some).

Once again, love to here different thoughts on all topics so it's all good.

 

[Rick2you2]

17 hours ago, delekkerste said:

I think the reality is that most experienced collectors consider more than just the visual content of the art and the artist attached to it.  Just a few (of many) of the other things I would consider:

- is this what the artist is known for?  One of my good friends in the hobby predicted that the Frank Miller Dr. Strange cover in the last Heritage sale would hit $60K.  My prediction, which was proven correct, was that it wouldn't even hit half that number.  Why?  Because nobody really associates Frank Miller with Dr. Strange.  Nobody really associates Gene Colan with Spider-Man either. 

- is this the "right" creative team (writer/penciler/inker) for the example in question?  Bob Layton is a terrific inker, but, Layton (instead of Terry Austin) inking John Byrne on the Uncanny X-Men #113 cover reduces the desirability to collectors significantly because it's not the Dream Team.  Similarly, the most desirable Frank Miller Daredevil art is concentrated from issues #168-184 (Miller writing, Miller pencils on board, Janson inking).  Gene Colan drawing a Daredevil page with no Daredevil and where he's not known for drawing Spider-Man...well, I'm certainly not taking that page over a well-drawn Gene Colan Daredevil splash page.  

- is it the "right" title?  Main run is usually more desirable, all other things being equal.  McFarlane ASM vs. McSpidey - one might think that there wouldn't be much of a difference in desirability, since the latter was hugely popular and they are very close to each other time-wise, but there is an ASM premium. Art from guest appearance issues almost always suffer in desirability compared to their main run equivalent, whether we're talking about PPSS #27-28, Iron Fist #15, etc. (oftentimes guest appearance issues pair the penciler associated with the guest appearing character with a different inker as well, which is a double whammy for the discerning collector).

I don't think it's possible to ignore cost/money, historical significance, or, pretty much any nuance that has to do with putting a piece into context.  Wrong artist, wrong time period for the artist, wrong inker, wrong title, wrong material (e.g., vellum, marker), wrong content, wrong level of quality...in my earlier collecting days, I was able to look past a lot of these things, but, not anymore - unless I have a deep nostalgic collection with a piece that allows me to look past any of these factors, I'm almost always going to pass and wait for the "right" piece to come around.  Those who have asked for my advice on art can confirm that I am ruthless about waiting for the right piece as opposed to jumping on just whatever's available, especially if one or more of the above conditions apply.  

If you are looking at the “ money” end of the hobby, that’s a good list, but a lot of us just buy what we like for the fun of it, and little regard for future value. I actually prefer the wrong book, artist, time, etc., since I like the variety. A Scribblenauts cover with the Phantom Stranger was a virtual grail for me for years for the very reason that the character is the antithesis of cute.

If memory serves me, didn’t you used to collect Vampirella images? Did you apply those standards to them?

[grapeape]

17 hours ago, delekkerste said:

I think the reality is that most experienced collectors consider more than just the visual content of the art and the artist attached to it.  Just a few (of many) of the other things I would consider:

- is this what the artist is known for?  One of my good friends in the hobby predicted that the Frank Miller Dr. Strange cover in the last Heritage sale would hit $60K.  My prediction, which was proven correct, was that it wouldn't even hit half that number.  Why?  Because nobody really associates Frank Miller with Dr. Strange.  Nobody really associates Gene Colan with Spider-Man either. 

- is this the "right" creative team (writer/penciler/inker) for the example in question?  Bob Layton is a terrific inker, but, Layton (instead of Terry Austin) inking John Byrne on the Uncanny X-Men #113 cover reduces the desirability to collectors significantly because it's not the Dream Team.  Similarly, the most desirable Frank Miller Daredevil art is concentrated from issues #168-184 (Miller writing, Miller pencils on board, Janson inking).  Gene Colan drawing a Daredevil page with no Daredevil and where he's not known for drawing Spider-Man...well, I'm certainly not taking that page over a well-drawn Gene Colan Daredevil splash page.  

- is it the "right" title?  Main run is usually more desirable, all other things being equal.  McFarlane ASM vs. McSpidey - one might think that there wouldn't be much of a difference in desirability, since the latter was hugely popular and they are very close to each other time-wise, but there is an ASM premium. Art from guest appearance issues almost always suffer in desirability compared to their main run equivalent, whether we're talking about PPSS #27-28, Iron Fist #15, etc. (oftentimes guest appearance issues pair the penciler associated with the guest appearing character with a different inker as well, which is a double whammy for the discerning collector).

I don't think it's possible to ignore cost/money, historical significance, or, pretty much any nuance that has to do with putting a piece into context.  Wrong artist, wrong time period for the artist, wrong inker, wrong title, wrong material (e.g., vellum, marker), wrong content, wrong level of quality...in my earlier collecting days, I was able to look past a lot of these things, but, not anymore - unless I have a deep nostalgic collection with a piece that allows me to look past any of these factors, I'm almost always going to pass and wait for the "right" piece to come around.  Those who have asked for my advice on art can confirm that I am ruthless about waiting for the right piece as opposed to jumping on just whatever's available, especially if one or more of the above conditions apply.  

All your points well taken and as a collector I think the things you talk about here are very important to know. 
That said I truly believe that buying what you love should trump any other consideration for obtaining art. In this instance I believe the OP made a sound financial purchase in spite of the “turn offs” mentioned on the replies. 
* Don’t like Stiltman

• No DD on page

• Colan not known for Spiderman

valid points....

In this case ( I am biased always loved this issue of DD) I believe the buyer made an outstanding purchase. He really loved the page and the content. He endured the trauma of bidding and winning a contested prize. It’s large size art that just looks awesome in its presentation. 
 

As always Gene your insight are always welcome here. Your gallery on CAF speaks for itself. When Gene speaks, people listen!!!

My guess nostalgia + desire for the look and feel of the page won this guy over. He had the will and the $ to get it done.

Great thread.

🍇  🦍 

 

 

[grapeape]

24 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

If you are looking at the “ money” end of the hobby, that’s a good list, but a lot of us just buy what we like for the fun of it, and little regard for future value. I actually prefer the wrong book, artist, time, etc., since I like the variety. A Scribblenauts cover with the Phantom Stranger was a virtual grail for me for years for the very reason that the character is the antithesis of cute.

If memory serves me, didn’t you used to collect Vampirella images? Did you apply those standards to them?

I think Gene is flexible when nostalgia for certain pieces takes hold. I’m sure he’ll speak to that better than I.

Buying what you like (love) I agree is paramount in my decision making.

 

[grapeape]

17 hours ago, sfilosa said:

Not sure I agree with all your statements (but hey, we all collect different things).

The Spider-Man page, at least on Heritage, is Gene Colan's highest selling panel piece in a DD book (there is an awesome TOS page that sold for more a few years ago). Even if I hadn't purchased it, the underbidder would have and it still would have been the highest selling panel piece in a DD book. There were also a lot of bidders, a lot of people (including myself) weren't sure what it would sell for. Since I had the frame of reference of the TOS page that I really wanted and it sold for way more than double I thought it would at the time, I felt pretty sure the Spidey page was going to have a lot of action.

Which leads to your other comment that the Frank Miller cover with Dr. Strange sold for a lot less than another collector would have thought it would. Isn't that more a function of Doctor Strange. An excellent cover by Gene Colan (Dr. Strange #14) only sold for $26k in the same auction. And Gene Colan is associated with Doctor Strange. And while Frank Brunner Dr. Strange covers go for double, that's because if you like Brunner's art, then you are going to buy Dr. Strange because he didn't do many other many stream titles. 

In terms of you being ruthless about waiting for the right piece, that's a great strategy that works well for you. I pretty much feel the same way. Other collectors might feel that it's worth getting an average piece now, with the idea that at some point they might find a more desirable piece. If that wasn't the case, 90% of all art would have no demand, and every comic book collector would wait until they could get a 9.4 (or higher) copy of a book. Instead low grade copies, especially of Keys have no problem selling. And panel pieces with characters not in their suit still have demand (much less, but still some).

Once again, love to here different thoughts on all topics so it's all good.

 

It sounds to me like you did your homework and you out hustled many of us. Well done.

Ive only seen two other pages from this book in twenty years. My buddy has (had) a great page and I was willing to give him 5 K back in 2004-2008. He wasn’t interested in selling.

So when the 2 pages here came up (I liked both but preferred yours) I had trouble deciding how high to go. 
You won a great page. You showed fortitude. I’m sure that page looks amazing in person.

Congratulations

🍇 🦍 

[delekkerste]

1 hour ago, Rick2you2 said:

If you are looking at the “ money” end of the hobby, that’s a good list, but a lot of us just buy what we like for the fun of it, and little regard for future value. I actually prefer the wrong book, artist, time, etc., since I like the variety. A Scribblenauts cover with the Phantom Stranger was a virtual grail for me for years for the very reason that the character is the antithesis of cute.

If memory serves me, didn’t you used to collect Vampirella images? Did you apply those standards to them?

I don't think it's just a "money" thing.  Discerning collectors often want to own things that go beyond just aesthetics or nostalgia, they want pieces that are thoughtfully curated and take into consideration things like the factors I listed above (and others that I did not).  Like my friend Ken, who does not have the bankroll of a whale, but, through whose collection has flowed some of the best panel pages in the hobby over the past 10-15 years.  Though he has not managed to hold on to most of those pages, the keen eye for quality (not only what's on the page, but, also from a curation point of view) has been evident, and has earned my respect more than many bigger spenders with less discriminating tastes.  

I've already said that I did not apply those standards earlier on in my collecting career, so, when I was collecting Vampirella back in 2002-2011, the answer would be no, I often did not apply those standards to them.  But, I certainly have in the past 5 years, where I have trimmed my Vampirella collection by about 2/3rds in size (while a lot of good stuff went out the door, so did most of the pieces that I probably should not have bought in the first place relative to the size of the holdings I wanted to keep). 

[Bronty]

Interesting examples.   Pros and cons to each ; I can see why they sold for about the same.   I’d take the pinup as it’s most representative, to me, of that era of daredevil.   Not too interested in the panel and Michael has ruined the splash for me by pointing out the male bumshot

Edited July 21, 2020 by Bronty

[JadeGiant]

Great thread and some thought provoking posts. I don't tend to think in terms of splash vs panel vs cover, etc. but rather focus on what's on the page. Outside of chasing nostalgia, I buy what appeals to my eye and tastes. I also like the idea of curating a collection and that has definitely come into play in the more recent years of collecting. 

[vodou]

4 hours ago, grapeape said:

When Gene speaks, people listen!!!

 

[sfilosa]

4 hours ago, grapeape said:

It sounds to me like you did your homework and you out hustled many of us. Well done.

Ive only seen two other pages from this book in twenty years. My buddy has (had) a great page and I was willing to give him 5 K back in 2004-2008. He wasn’t interested in selling.

So when the 2 pages here came up (I liked both but preferred yours) I had trouble deciding how high to go. 
You won a great page. You showed fortitude. I’m sure that page looks amazing in person.

Congratulations

🍇 🦍 

Thanks for the kind words. Just to be clear to everyone, I don't have unlimited money by any means. And unlike a lot of long time collectors, I'm not playing with house money (e.g. bought art 20 years ago for a fraction of today's prices).

In terms of the specific piece, I "really, really" wanted one of the two pages for sale. I literally look at Heritage Signature Auction pages, once if not multiple times a day as soon as they show the previews. Therefore, I stared at these pieces for at least two months every day. If everyday I still am interested and the day of the auction, I'm still really interested, I then know this is a piece I need to make a real run at. That doesn't happen very often. In this case, I made a run at the page before (which is really nice), but stopped when it was over $10k with the idea that I would make a run at the piece I obtained. When the other piece went for $12k, I expected this piece to go for $14-16k, but I was already "committed" to it. I don't think I would have gone any higher (but that I don't know). 

I collect a lot more "paintings" then most on this board (it seems), so there are very few comic pages that make me say "you need to get this". I think the last one I felt that way was two years ago when I picked up a X-Men Steranko page. Most of the time, even if I really like a piece of comic art, especially being in an auction, I kind of convince myself another "similar" piece will come along again sooner or later, so I usually don't get those pages.

Lastly, twice-up art (and of course with this page) just makes a great page TWICE AS NICE!

 

[Rick2you2]

4 hours ago, delekkerste said:

I don't think it's just a "money" thing.  Discerning collectors often want to own things that go beyond just aesthetics or nostalgia, they want pieces that are thoughtfully curated and take into consideration things like the factors I listed above (and others that I did not).  Like my friend Ken, who does not have the bankroll of a whale, but, through whose collection has flowed some of the best panel pages in the hobby over the past 10-15 years.  Though he has not managed to hold on to most of those pages, the keen eye for quality (not only what's on the page, but, also from a curation point of view) has been evident, and has earned my respect more than many bigger spenders with less discriminating tastes.  

I've already said that I did not apply those standards earlier on in my collecting career, so, when I was collecting Vampirella back in 2002-2011, the answer would be no, I often did not apply those standards to them.  But, I certainly have in the past 5 years, where I have trimmed my Vampirella collection by about 2/3rds in size (while a lot of good stuff went out the door, so did most of the pieces that I probably should not have bought in the first place relative to the size of the holdings I wanted to keep). 

Now that I have been exposed as a collector who is not discerning, I remain comfortable with my standards. Why buy another Aparo Phantom Stranger page just because he is known for his work on that book? 

The standards you are advocating make sense for someone who is interested in buying things that are likely to increase in value, but to suggest any other standard shows a lack of discernment is insulting (even though you did not mean it). And yes, I consider aesthetics to be extremely important to this nostalgia-driven hobby, as have large numbers of collectors who, for example, buy commissions. I suggest there may be a lot of those non-discerning types who can actually be quite discerning about taste. They know what they think is good: even Artgerm.

We  have both agreed that the long term trend of comic art is not favorable. Those non-discerning types are likely to be carrying the hobby because they know what they like.

[grapeape]

2 hours ago, vodou said:

 

Haha some will know the reference some won’t haha. Going on 53 I remember these commercials well!!!

Touché my friend ***

[sfilosa]

On 7/20/2020 at 1:24 PM, delekkerste said:

I think the reality is that most experienced collectors consider more than just the visual content of the art and the artist attached to it.  Just a few (of many) of the other things I would consider:

 

I'm assuming I'm looking at the correct CAF gallery of yours. You have a great collection (very envious). 

But I did take note that you have a Barry Windsor Smith piece and a Frazetta piece (though both are for sale). While I haven't looked at your whole gallery, I would guess you paid a lot more for these pieces than many other pieces in your collection. And especially the BWS piece, I think the only context to that piece is Artist and Visual Content. It's not from a story.

There can be many reasons to want to collect a certain piece. I grew up reading the Charlie Brown strip in the newspaper everyday. The art does nothing for me, hence I wouldn't pay $50 for a page (other than I know that would be a great investment if I could buy it for $50). I have a lot of cover paintings to books (paperback or comic) I have never read (nor will ever read). I love the art, so I pay $1,000's to own them. I don't think that makes me an "unexperienced collector".

It's all good as you always make a lot of points to consider (and that's what these forums are about).