SHE-HULK # 1 COVER ART -- RUINED ?

[krazykat-migration]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6558106990&fromMakeTrack=true

 

Any way to bleach out the water colors ?

 

Damn you Oliffe !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

[delekkerste]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6558106990&fromMakeTrack=true

 

Any way to bleach out the water colors ?

 

Damn you Oliffe !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Seeing the ComicArt-L listers throw a hissy fit over this is freakin' hilarious. These people need to pay $2.50 and buy a grip at Pep Boys. Except for B&W art that employs tone and/or wash, OA is not how the product was meant to be presented. You can rattle on about line and brush work all you want, but at the end of the day we're really just talking about the incomplete by-product of a commercial publication geared towards adolescents and young adults that a lot of us enjoy out of nostalgia and fandom.

 

From a presentation/aesthetic perspective, I am, in many cases, all for adding color to help complete the art. I've seen dozens of Oliffe-colored pages and they are almost always an improvement over the incomplete B&W art, IMO. You might be amazed what a little color can do for those thousands of Buscema Conan pages that all look alike, for example. This She-Hulk #1 is no different. Let's face it - the published version is as bland as week-old Wonder Bread and this coloring job makes the cover look much more vibrant than both the published art and certainly more than the very hum-drum B&W line art.

 

What OA collectors are really bemoaning is that coloring doesn't appeal to purists and thus hurts the potential market/re-sale value of the art. Also, they need to have the art stay in B&W so they can blow smoke out of their @$$es about how beautiful the line & brushwork looks, to legitimize comic book art as some kind of high art form. One ComicArt-L lister compared this professional coloring job to a kid using his Crayolas to color a coloring book. Apparently, coloring in images of muscle-bound guys and buxom ladies running around wearing their underwear on the outside somehow reduces the comic art form to something a 6-year old kid with crayons can do, whereas leaving it in pure B&W elevates it to the status of fine art. This is why I don't post much on the ComicArt-L list - most of the people there have lost all touch with reality.

 

Damn Steve Oliffe? They should give that guy a Lifetime Achievement Award instead.

[krazykat-migration]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6558106990&fromMakeTrack=true

 

Any way to bleach out the water colors ?

 

Damn you Oliffe !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Seeing the ComicArt-L listers throw a hissy fit over this is freakin' hilarious. These people need to pay $2.50 and buy a grip at Pep Boys. Except for B&W art that employs tone and/or wash, OA is not how the product was meant to be presented. You can rattle on about line and brush work all you want, but at the end of the day we're really just talking about the incomplete by-product of a commercial publication geared towards adolescents and young adults that a lot of us enjoy out of nostalgia and fandom.

 

From a presentation/aesthetic perspective, I am, in many cases, all for adding color to help complete the art. I've seen dozens of Oliffe-colored pages and they are almost always an improvement over the incomplete B&W art, IMO. You might be amazed what a little color can do for those thousands of Buscema Conan pages that all look alike, for example. This She-Hulk #1 is no different. Let's face it - the published version is as bland as week-old Wonder Bread and this coloring job makes the cover look much more vibrant than both the published art and certainly more than the very hum-drum B&W line art.

 

What OA collectors are really bemoaning is that coloring doesn't appeal to purists and thus hurts the potential market/re-sale value of the art. Also, they need to have the art stay in B&W so they can blow smoke out of their @$$es about how beautiful the line & brushwork looks, to legitimize comic book art as some kind of high art form. One ComicArt-L lister compared this professional coloring job to a kid using his Crayolas to color a coloring book. Apparently, coloring in images of muscle-bound guys and buxom ladies running around wearing their underwear on the outside somehow reduces the comic art form to something a 6-year old kid with crayons can do, whereas leaving it in pure B&W elevates it to the status of fine art. This is why I don't post much on the ComicArt-L list - most of the people there have lost all touch with reality.

 

Damn Steve Oliffe? They should give that guy a Lifetime Achievement Award instead.

 

Delicatessen,

 

Do you TRY to sound ignorant ?

 

Firstly, ....your cheesecake girlie porn collection is adolescent collecting at its finest. For YOU to bemoan the basis upon which others collect is a total joke because you have some of the worst taste Ive ever seen.

 

Secondly, ...we've already had the discussion about comic art as fine art,...you are on the wrong side of history,...and as comic art becomes (A) recognized as a true art form and (B) continues to soar in value,.....I will be laughing my arse off at loser- like yourself who 'missed the boat' (actually, youve already missed the boat and thats probably why you continue to 'put down' comic art).

 

Thirdly, the Hulk # 1 is arguably ruined but defintely marred by the reckless defacement of Oliffe. And it is more than the fact that the market value is decreased,...your putting the cart before the horse,....the market value is decreased BECAUSE people recognize that art has been diminished. Amazes me you think you know how markets work.....stick with your Ameritrade account !!!

 

 

Fourthly,....you are a troll on the subject,..and nobody likes a troll.

 

KK

[sborock]

Kat-

Please stop with the personal attacks, it is against board policy as well as just plain bad manners. It can also get you kicked off the boards. Gene did not say anything personal about you, he just expressed his opinion. Gene has been on this board for a long time, conducts himself very well, and treats others the way he would want to be treated. Hell, Gene and I don't always agree on things, but he and I get along fine, no reason to get personal when you disagree with someone.

So, just for the record, STOP WITH THE PERSONAL ATTACKS.

[THE_BEYONDER]

[krazykat-migration]

OK Steve. Sorry.

[sborock]

X 2

[THE_BEYONDER]

X 2

Toronto in April. Be here.

[sborock]

Will try........

[THE_BEYONDER]

Will try........

 

[krazykat-migration]

Will try........

 

 

I will try. I honestly want to live by the norms of the board. That said, Delicatessen's post wasn't personal perhaps,..but pretty condescending and mean-spirited to OA collectors.

 

BBBBUTTT,...I will leave him alone,..as I wanna live by the Sheriff's law.

 

Again,....sorry Steve.

[delekkerste]

Thanks, Steve.

 

I have very strong opinions about this issue of coloring original art. I think it's irrational how so many collectors dismiss ALL coloring jobs as defacement or hack work or the equivalent of having a kid mark-up a coloring book with crayons. To be sure, a lot of artwork should probably be left in B&W, if only to preserve the art in its original form for historic/conservation reasons. However, to deny that much B&W artwork can be aesthetically improved by adding color is, to me, an incredibly ridiculous conceit on the part of the OA collecting community.

 

BTW, are those Truman Grateful Dead pieces in color? I can't imagine that those beauties would look better in B&W.

[krazykat-migration]

Thanks, Steve.

 

I have very strong opinions about this issue of coloring original art. I think it's irrational how so many collectors dismiss ALL coloring jobs as defacement or hack work or the equivalent of having a kid mark-up a coloring book with crayons. To be sure, a lot of artwork should probably be left in B&W, if only to preserve the art in its original form for historic/conservation reasons. However, to deny that much B&W artwork can be aesthetically improved by adding color to be is, to me, an incredibly ridiculous conceit on the part of the OA collecting community.

 

NO COMMENT

[Norrin_Radd]

Thanks, Steve.

 

I have very strong opinions about this issue of coloring original art. I think it's irrational how so many collectors dismiss ALL coloring jobs as defacement or hack work or the equivalent of having a kid mark-up a coloring book with crayons. To be sure, a lot of artwork should probably be left in B&W, if only to preserve the art in its original form for historic/conservation reasons. However, to deny that much B&W artwork can be aesthetically improved by adding color to be is, to me, an incredibly ridiculous conceit on the part of the OA collecting community.

 

NO COMMENT

 

[sborock]

Thanks, Steve.

 

I have very strong opinions about this issue of coloring original art. I think it's irrational how so many collectors dismiss ALL coloring jobs as defacement or hack work or the equivalent of having a kid mark-up a coloring book with crayons. To be sure, a lot of artwork should probably be left in B&W, if only to preserve the art in its original form for historic/conservation reasons. However, to deny that much B&W artwork can be aesthetically improved by adding color to be is, to me, an incredibly ridiculous conceit on the part of the OA collecting community.

 

BTW, are those Truman Grateful Dead pieces in color? I can't imagine that those beauties would look better in B&W.

 

Yep! Those are full color and look amazing! Even better then the scans. Even though I would still want them in B/W, they are much better with the color. Heck without the color, it would not be as easy to tell that the young girl in the piece is my daughter. Truman is not just a great penciler, he is an amazing colorist. Oh, and a great guy to boot!

[sborock]

Thanks, Steve.

 

I have very strong opinions about this issue of coloring original art. I think it's irrational how so many collectors dismiss ALL coloring jobs as defacement or hack work or the equivalent of having a kid mark-up a coloring book with crayons. To be sure, a lot of artwork should probably be left in B&W, if only to preserve the art in its original form for historic/conservation reasons. However, to deny that much B&W artwork can be aesthetically improved by adding color to be is, to me, an incredibly ridiculous conceit on the part of the OA collecting community.

 

NO COMMENT

 

See, now isn't that easy........THANKS!

[Ares]

Will try........

"No, Do, or do not. There is no try."

[desertdogg]

is it just me. or has anybody notice that this is not the published cover.

 

what happened to the back ground. maybe they were stats ? ok why does she hulk has toe nails on the printed version. and look at the right side of the cover

behind she hulks leg on the printed cover you will see ink lines that were shadow lines between the legs of the two men are not present on the color peice.

 

you can.t color out ink lines. unless you use black . so there has to be a another cover which was a stat and re touched with ink lines . that are not on the color cover version as the the back ground city scape was most likely added to the production cover instead.

 

so fear not there could be another production cover out there which is the printed version. as for the color thing. if you want to color your art. 1st make a stat of the piece. then have the stat colored. that way you don,t destroy the original . and everybody is happy. larry ;]

[heartened]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6558106990&fromMakeTrack=true

 

Any way to bleach out the water colors ?

 

Damn you Oliffe !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

What OA collectors are really bemoaning is that coloring doesn't appeal to purists and thus hurts the potential market/re-sale value of the art. Also, they need to have the art stay in B&W so they can blow smoke out of their @$$es about how beautiful the line & brushwork looks, to legitimize comic book art as some kind of high art form.

 

Hi Gene,

 

Well, you and I are friends, good friends in fact, but I have to say that you're making some strong assumptions and stereotypes about others' collecting motives based on your own pre-conceived notions. Many of us prefer the B&W art for the depth and detail that it provides over the finished comic book product. I can understand why others, such as yourself, would not feel the same way. However, just because you don't understand something doesn't mean you can discount it as illogical or, worse, solely financially motivated.

 

Best,

[krazykat-migration]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6558106990&fromMakeTrack=true

 

Any way to bleach out the water colors ?

 

Damn you Oliffe !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

What OA collectors are really bemoaning is that coloring doesn't appeal to purists and thus hurts the potential market/re-sale value of the art. Also, they need to have the art stay in B&W so they can blow smoke out of their @$$es about how beautiful the line & brushwork looks, to legitimize comic book art as some kind of high art form.

 

Hi Gene,

 

Well, you and I are friends, good friends in fact, but I have to say that you're making some strong assumptions and stereotypes about others' collecting motives based on your own pre-conceived notions. Many of us prefer the B&W art for the depth and detail that it provides over the finished comic book product. I can understand why others, such as yourself, would not feel the same way. However, just because you don't understand something doesn't mean you can discount it as illogical or, worse, solely financially motivated.

 

Best,

 

NO COMMENT