SHE-HULK # 1 COVER ART -- RUINED ?

[JohnBull]

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

 

Try and hold that thought.

[delekkerste]

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.

 

 

Hey Hari,

 

I would say it's actually less financially motivated (though that certainly plays a role) and more this need to elevate comic art closer to fine art status by gushing over the line and brush work, as if coloring over such detail somehow brings the OA closer to the published version which is for the kiddies while OA collecting is for well-heeled adults. Yes, there's something to be said for line and brush work, but let's not forget that, in most cases, we're talking about pictures of characters with impossible anatomies running around in spandex tights!

 

While such blanket statements may be somewhat unfair to B&W art purists, I think it's also unfair to say that I don't understand the situation when the ComicArt-L listers are all but hanging Steve Oliffe in effigy and using language like "defacement", "ruined", etc. to describe colorized art. I especially love the Crayola analogy that one Lister used, as if the work of a professional colorist is somehow equivalent to a 6-year old scribbling in a coloring book with crayons. Whether you prefer B&W art or colorized art, I think a neutral bystander would be highly put off by some of the viewpoints expressed there. That's all I was really trying to say.

 

Gene

[krazykat-migration]

I don't understand

 

Uh yeah,..I think its kinda obvious you "dont understand".

 

Perhaps it is because you are European ?,..although its more probably the result of the fact that you are not a serious OA collector,..and, uh,....Dont know what you are talking about.

 

Your acknowlegement that "you dont understand" is about the only thing I agree with . . . .

 

KK

 

PS - You hit the nail on the hard with respect to your acknowledgement "though that plays a role" [RE: THE FACT YOU ARE TOO POOR TO AFFORD GOOD MATERIAL].

 

PPS - Nobody that I know, that loves OA, "gushes over the linework",..that is your own imaagination as to what collectors value with respect to OA. I never read or hear about OA collectors "gushing over line-work" -- YOUR OWN FAULTY UNDERSTANDING OF the dynamics of the OA community is soooooo apparent, almost child-like.

 

Based on your logic, any art that can be "subjectively improved upon" is 'of a lower order" ---DO YOU RECOGNIZE HOW FOOLISH YOU SOUND ?,...I mean heck,..why dont we allow every shmuck to improve upon the works of Michelagelo, Degas, or Warhol with a sledge-hammer and a paint brush,...based on your SILLY logic.

 

PPS -It must suck having OA go ,..UP,.UP, UP in value in in direct contradiction to your belief that it is not significant/ relevant as art.

 

Sucks to be u Deli !

 

[delekkerste]

I don't understand

 

Uh yeah,..I think its kinda obvious you "dont understand".

 

Perhaps it is because you are European ?,..although its more probably the result of the fact that you are not a serious OA collector,..and, uh,....Dont know what you are talking about.

 

Your acknowlegement that "you dont understand" is about the only thing I agree with . . . .

 

KK

 

PS - You hit the nail on the hard with respect to your acknowledgement "though that plays a role" [RE: THE FACT YOU ARE TOO POOR TO AFFORD GOOD MATERIAL].

 

PPS - Nobody that I know, that loves OA, "gushes over the linework",..that is your own imaagination as to what collectors value with respect to OA. I never read or hear about OA collectors "gushing over line-work" -- YOUR OWN FAULTY UNDERSTANDING OF the dynamics of the OA community is soooooo apparent, almost child-like. Based on your logic, any art that can be "subjectively improved upon" is 'of a lower order" ---DO YOU RECOGNIZE HOW FOOLISH YOU SOUND ?,...I mean heck,..why dont we allow every shmuck to improve upon the works of Michelagelo, Degas, or Warhol with a sledge-hammer and a paint brush,...based on your SILLY logic.

 

PPS -It tmust suck having OA go ,..UP,.UP, UP in value in in drect contradiction to your belief that it is not significant/ relevant as art.

 

Sucks to be u Deli !

 

 

 

Let me just copy your post here (see above) as a testament to your insanity, before you come to your senses and delete it.

[krazykat-migration]

Thats your argument ?...kinda WEAK. But you really have no IDEAS so,..it is all in accord with my understanding of your already WEAK analysis.

[delekkerste]

Arch, can we please give this troll and his litany of slanderous libel a strike, please?

[Solar]

Personally I like the cover better colored. Some pieces certainly look nicer after the coloring. My personal issue with the practice is that a third party is modifying a work of art that they have absolutely nothing to do with.

 

I know that most pieces of comic art are collaborations in the first place, but I don't think that a coloring job by a third party not involved in the original creation of a collectible should ever increase it's value.

 

If you own a piece that you feel would be improved by color, definitely get it colored; however if you're interested in resale I wouldn't even think about it.

 

IMHO, the best way to go would be to have the colorist work on a high quailty copy/print of the work. That way each artist's original vision is preserved and the colorst's interpretation of the work can stand on it's own merit.

[krazykat-migration]

Arch, can we please give this troll and his litany of slanderous libel a strike, please?

 

Delicatessen,

 

Where did I slanderously libel you ?,..MOREVER,..I disagree with you. That doesnt make me a troll.

 

I am merely expressing MY OPINION, like you. And if you note,...I have refrained from personally attacking you.,..only rebutting your imho ridiculous ideas.

 

And calling on Mommy and Daddy to give ' a strike' is soooo 3rd grade. Grow Up !!!

 

If you dont like,...MY OPINIONS,...why dont you simply put me on ignore,..

 

KK

 

PS - You keep posting on MY THREADS ? ? ?,..it should be appraent to Arch,..You are antagonizing me !!!!!,..I "No comment"ed TWICE,....but you persist in trolling ME !!!!!!....Arch,,,...CAN WE PLEASE give DELICATESSEN a strike ...PLEASE !

 

PPS - He is encouraging the defacement of OA,..if thats not trolling,..I dont know what is on the OA forum !?!?!?!?!?

[krazykat-migration]

Personally I like the cover better colored. Some pieces certainly look nicer after the coloring. My personal issue with the practice is that a third party is modifying a work of art that they have absolutely nothing to do with.

 

I know that most pieces of comic art are collaborations in the first place, but I don't think that a coloring job by a third party not involved in the original creation of a collectible should ever increase it's value.

 

If you own a piece that you feel would be improved by color, definitely get it colored; however if you're interested in resale I wouldn't even think about it.

 

IMHO, the best way to go would be to have the colorist work on a high quailty copy/print of the work. That way each artist's original vision is preserved and the colorst's interpretation of the work can stand on it's own merit.

 

AGREE SOLAR !!!

 

Coloring OA is IMHO mutilation.

 

Moreover,...Oliffe isnt even particularly good at it.

[delekkerste]

If you own a piece that you feel would be improved by color, definitely get it colored; however if you're interested in resale I wouldn't even think about it.

 

Brett, I think that is an accurate description of market reality and I agree 100%. I'm talking purely from an aesthetic standpoint that many pieces could benefit from the addition of color, even if their collectibility/market value might be impaired.

 

 

IMHO, the best way to go would be to have the colorist work on a high quailty copy/print of the work. That way each artist's original vision is preserved and the colorst's interpretation of the work can stand on it's own merit.

 

That's probably a fair point too, though I probably wouldn't hesitate to get lower dollar-figure pieces colored directly. For higher dollar figure and "important" pages, I can see that there is something to be said for maintaining the art in its original state.

 

Here's a page that is probably too valuable now to get colored (if it hadn't been colored already back in the day; this is from the online ComicArtFans.com gallery of John Papandrea) I know the knee-jerk reaction of many would be to bemoan the "defacement" of this Byrne/Austin art, but I would much rather have this version hanging up on my wall than if it were in plain ol' black and white:

 

[shadroch]

lets see......

Gene is from California,got his post-graduate degree in Pennsylvania,lives in NYC..... yep,about as European as they come.

He spent what I consider to be an insane amount to buy the entire OA from GI Joe 21,simply because it reminds him of his youth,but is too poor to appreciate fine art that is the cover of She-Hulk #1.

 

If someone professes to love original art for itself,why would it matter if it went up,up,up in value? I love Peter Max paintings and it bugs the [embarrassing lack of self control] out of me that I need to pay 10X what I did in the mid-80s for them.Since I have no plans to sell them,the fact they have gone up in value hinders,rather than helps, my collecting them.

[krazykat-migration]

lets see......

Gene is from California,got his post-graduate degree in Pennsylvania,lives in NYC..... yep,about as European as they come.

He spent what I consider to be an insane amount to buy the entire OA from GI Joe 21,simply because it reminds him of his youth,but is too poor to appreciate fine art that is the cover of She-Hulk #1.

 

If someone professes to love original art for itself,why would it matter if it went up,up,up in value? I love Peter Max paintings and it bugs the [embarrassing lack of self control] out of me that I need to pay 10X what I did in the mid-80s for them.Since I have no plans to sell them,the fact they have gone up in value hinders,rather than helps, my collecting them.

 

Gene name drops his Euro connections left and right,..so if I interpret his persona to be largely the product of what he himself professes to be his Euro-roots/Euro-experiences,..that seems reasonable [Heck, I wouldnt even know he was a European if he didnt allude to it so often]? I am only going by the information Gene himself gives the board (ie: His avatar being some Euro-guy). Moreover, I only hypothesized his analysis is the prodcut of a European perspective,...and hence,..IMHO,..not contemporary with the American Art movement.

 

Moreover,..Gene is encouraging the defacement/ mutilation of OA. You comic guys bit#h and moan about pressing....one would think you would sympathize with someone mutilating OA ? ? ? I dont see any difference,..in fact,..coloring OA is worse than pressing a comic,..IMHO,...all IMHO.

[delekkerste]

Here are a couple of Buscema Savage Sword of Conan pages from the www.collectingfool.com website that appear to have been colored by Oliffe. Do you guys realize how boring these pages would have looked like in black & white? Do you guys realize how many Conan pages Buscema did and how many of them are dull as hell? Look at how much better these pieces look like in color:

 

 

[shadroch]

Not only do I support the coloring of OA,I encourage dealers to slice the pages up and sell the individual panels,hence making it affordable to the great unwashed masses.

Whats the difference between selling 1/24th of an entire story or 1/6th of an entire page?

[delekkerste]

Here are a couple of excellent posts from the ComicArt-L list:

 

Message: 3

Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 18:08:39 +0200

From: "Thomas Vanderstappen" <comicartcraze@hotmail.com>

Subject: Re: Re: Curse you, Steve Oliffe!!!!

 

If everyone is so bothered by these colors, then why are so many people on this list bidding on it........

 

It's the original cover, many people remember that issue, I personally don't dislike it, so I see it fetching a nice price for a second rate Marvel character.

 

Since so many people seem offended that a (professional) colorist did what he was paid for, then why aren't they offended by inkers, ruining the pencils of penciller. I'm talking about some inkers ruining the detailed pencils of eg. a Charest in his early days, some inkers on Gil Kane, etc. but also the fact that inking over the original pencils plain and simply destroys any sign of the hand of penciller.

 

In most cases, the little original crayons which remain after inking, are erased, so most art we've got on our wall, is from the hand of the inker, not from the original penciller.....Why don't they just lightbox for the inking process?

 

When you saw how loosely Kirby and John Buscema pencilled at some point in their careers (I would even have had trouble of calling those breakdowns), then a lot of these pages are 95% work done by the inkers. They should get a lot more credit (just as the colorists, a lot of the covers/interiors I remeber are due to the use of specif colors, eg. the colors on the Jean Grey/Cyclops cover during the Byrne run).

 

But I don't care about all that stuff, I just accept it. I prefer haviung a Byrne page inked by Byrne, or a Sal Buscema inked by himself. But if it's not, who cares..... tastes differ, luckily......If I'd like to have some pages/covers colored, I'd do cause I'd like to have a colored piece on my wall (been thinking of having it done on my Leonardi Surfer Pin-Up, but probably on a blueline copy).

 

Whenever people come into my house and see the art on my walls, they instinctively go to the colored/painted pieces. They (usually) have more appeal to non-collectors. It's just a fact.

 

Best

Thom

http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryDetail.asp?GCat=5676

 

 

Message: 1

Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:13:36 -0000

From: "ytb83us" <ytb83@hotmail.com>

Subject: Sell me your Colored artwork (was Steve Olliffe thread)

 

So, there's a lot of folks out there that don't want/like hand colored original artwork becuase it ruins the beauty of the black and white art and/or lowers the value of the artwork. So be it.

 

I love the stuff, especially pages colored by the GREAT Steve Olliffe, so sell me your low priced hand colored artwork...I'll be more than happy to take it off your hands.

 

Kind Regards,

 

-Yoram

[desertdogg]

SHE-HULK # 1 COVER ART RUINED.

 

DID YOU GUYS READ MY POST " THIS PIECE ON EBAY IS NOT THE PRINTED VERSION. LOOK AT THE SPACE BETWEEN THE HEAD AND SHE-HULK,S BREAST. ON THE COLOR PIECE AND THE PRINTED COVER..

 

SO THERE SHE HULK # 1 COVER IS NOT RUINED. SO EVERYBODY CAN RELAX AND SHAD-UP, IT CLEARLY THAT PIECE ON EBAY IS A PRELIM TO THE PRINTED COVER . SO IT NOT GOING TO DESTROY THE MARKET.

 

IF SOMEONE WANTS TO HAVE SKETCH OR PRELIM DRAWING COLORED. LET THEM. WHO CARES. AS FOR THAT X-MEN PAGE. NOW THAT IS A SHAME.

LARRY.

[krazykat-migration]

SHE-HULK # 1 COVER ART RUINED.

 

DID YOU GUYS READ MY POST " THIS PIECE ON EBAY IS NOT THE PRINTED VERSION. LOOK AT THE SPACE BETWEEN THE HEAD AND SHE-HULK,S BREAST. ON THE COLOR PIECE AND THE PRINTED COVER..

 

SO THERE SHE HULK # 1 COVER IS NOT RUINED. SO EVERYBODY CAN RELAX AND SHAD-UP, IT CLEARLY THAT PIECE ON EBAY IS A PRELIM TO THE PRINTED COVER . SO IT NOT GOING TO DESTROY THE MARKET.

 

IF SOMEONE WANTS TO HAVE SKETCH OR PRELIM DRAWING COLORED. LET THEM. WHO CARES. AS FOR THAT X-MEN PAGE. NOW THAT IS A SHAME.

LARRY.

 

Hey Larry !!

 

Actually,..I dont think its a pre-lim. And is in fact the original art.

 

Even recognizing your points (ie: Spce between She-Hulks breasts),..the likely scenario is the original art (Oliffe art) was statted and moved around for ultimate production. Hence, the Oliffe piece IS the original art,..the discrepancy is merely the consequence of the fact that the piece was statted and 'manipluated' for ultimate production.

 

T o my mind,..there is no doubt,..the Oliffe piece is the Original art,..mutilated yes...but original.

 

KK

[delekkerste]

Even recognizing your points (ie: Spce between She-Hulks breasts),..the likely scenario is the original art (Oliffe art) was statted and moved around for ultimate production. Hence, the Oliffe piece IS the original art,..the discrepancy is merely the consequence of the fact that the piece was statted and 'manipluated' for ultimate production.

 

That's possible, or else this could have been a rejected version of the cover. Just remember the 3 versions of the Conan #100 cover that popped up on eBay simultaneously last year, two of which looked as similar to each other as the piece on eBay does to the published version of She-Hulk #1.

[desertdogg]

kk. it more than that. even if the figures had stats made and were moved around. they are on another cover. plus the printed cover was re-inked. look at she-hulks toes. she has nails on the printed cover as well as shadow lines all over the cover.

 

and iam sure that background was added to the printed cover. so if you add ink lines to a cover does that not make that cover an original. maybe maybe not. but how many covers have you seen . kk with stats of figures. yet they are called the original cover..

 

my point is there is another cover. that is the printed cover. that all. as for the color thing i agree 100 % if you color a piece that was in black & white yes you have defaced the original. that a no brainer. as for making the item look better.

 

would it not make better sence to make a stat of the page and color the stat. so if you go to sell the peice the art won,t be tainted. and will still retain it full market value. larry ;]

[krazykat-migration]

kk. it more than that. even if the figures had stats made and were moved around. they are on another cover. plus the printed cover was re-ink look at she-hulks toes. she has nails on the printed cover as well as shadow lines all over the cover.

 

and iam sure that background was added to the printed cover. so if you add ink lines to a cover does that not make that cover an original. maybe maybe not. but how many covers have you seen . kk with stats of figures. yet they are called the original cover..

 

my point is there is another cover. that is the printed cover. that all. as for the color thing i agree 100 % if you color a piece that was in black & white yes you have defaced the original. that a no brainer. as for making the item look better.

 

would it not make better sence to make a stat of the page and color the stat. so if you go to sell the peice the art won,t be tainted. and will still retain it full market value. larry ;]

 

 

Hey buddy !!

 

The truth of the matter is that while the general rule is "Collector's want the published Cover",...The exception to the rule is "Collectors want ORIGINAL ART".

 

Hence, the special rule,....."A Cover which has the major elements being original, while not necesarily the published version is more valuable than a published version with minimal elements that are original"

 

Ya get it : )

 

KK