New Action #1 CGC 8.0 and New Detective Comics #27 CGC 8.5 in the Census 4 4

[tth2]

On 10/9/2021 at 3:59 AM, rob_react said:

I forgot the other 9.0 (which was only a 9.0 briefly)

1. $126,500.00 at Heritage on 2003/03/06 (8.5)
2. $161,000.00 at Heritage on 2005/10/14 (9.0)
3. $1,260,000.00 at Heritage on 2019/11/21 (9.4)

Now THAT's what I call a ROI. 

[lou_fine]

On 10/8/2021 at 1:07 PM, rob_react said:

On 10/8/2021 at 1:06 PM, Aman619 said:

Great stuff Rob!  Medicine went drown smoothly..  Hey, now defend Lichtenstein!  Lol

lol. That's one bridge too far!

Now, now you guys...............................what's wrong with Roy's Masterprice artwork:  

Somebody must have really liked it enough to fork over $165M for it a few years ago, when they could have brought the OA for the comic book panel which it was copied from for a whole lot cheaper if it still existed.  

Edited October 9, 2021 by lou_fine

[Aman619]

Ugh. Here we go. 

[BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES]

On 10/8/2021 at 1:06 PM, rob_react said:

He was a terrible human being! Fascinating story, incredible breakthrough and just a horrible person. 

And yes, I said exactly the same thing earlier about the way that art is valued now. This is especially true of contemporary art (art being created now) but is also true of artists like Rothko. This isn't a secret. This is exactly the conversation that takes place in contemporary art circles. It's not a negative to say that a lot of value is based on the story. It's like pointing out that comic book collectors are obsessed with condition or that water is wet.  There are artists that transcend the conceptual trap and make art of real beauty, but they still have a conceptual framework that underpins what they're doing. 

I am not in disgreement about the stories or the techniques driving value, when the stories and the techniques came about from something other than a cynical ploy essentially to concoct a story or to hype a technique that was literally created for no apparent reason other than so they could hype the technique.

What drives me nuts in modern art museums is not when a piece is odd or even simplistic but when the pieces clearly required little to no artistic skill and scream that they are little more, and somethings nothing more, than a simplistic con job.  It doesn't help when the labels appear to be written by people throwing darts at a word cloud of art terms to create descriptions that are completely meaningless.  Went to the Broad Museum with the wife and found plenty to enjoy, and I could appreciate the stuff I didn't like but which clearly required effort and skill to accomplish.  But without exception, every label (the descriptions accompanying the art) was an affront to the English language and made me feel like either 1) the person who wrote it was babbling incoherently in another language and then translated via some outdated language app, or 2) the person who wrote it knew it made no sense whatsoever and was laughing at the pretentious rich idjits who paid them big bucks to write it.     

 

 

Edited October 9, 2021 by BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES

[Mr bla bla]

On 10/9/2021 at 12:16 AM, rob_react said:

I'm both. I have more money in art than i have in comics, at this point. I'm also involved with a local contemporary art museum and am a painter myself. 

I'm also not pissed! I just know both worlds and want to educate to the best of my ability. You can hate this work all you want, that's fine with me. I just like to fill in some of the gaps where i can.

Rob I respect you and your contribution to our hobby 110% This modern art just doesnt do anything for me. Thus, everyones mileage may vary. I am sorry if I came across too rude👍

[rob_react]

On 10/9/2021 at 5:03 AM, Mr bla bla said:

Rob I respect you and your contribution to our hobby 110% This modern art just doesnt do anything for me. Thus, everyones mileage may vary. I am sorry if I came across too rude👍

No worries, it's all good. 

[lou_fine]

On 10/9/2021 at 9:07 AM, szav said:

If that OA doesn't exist they'll just have to settle for the next best thing and buy this from me for $100,000.00.  I'm sure once they hold it up half an inch from their eyeball to get that immersive experience it'll all be worth it.

Now, a big thumbs up to you as this was the exact comic book panel that I was trying to find and I knew someone here would be able to do it.  

Makes me wonder if Lichtenstein had to pay anything to the original artist for "lifting" this artwork to create his own $165M Masterpiece.  If I was the original artist for this comic strip panel, I would definitely be looking for some kind of adequate compensation here because like musicians and their music, this one would look pretty much undisputable in a court of law even to a person with absolutely no appreciation of art at all.       

[Aman619]

the art was work for hire.  DC would have had to sue.  And in the early 6os publicity for comics was unheard of, and welcome attention!  Marvel changed their masthead soon after to POP ART PRODUCTIONS to capitalize on the publicity.  

so the artists had no legal recourse.  The ones that did had no reason to.  end of story.  And it wasn't a 165M masterpiece when first sold.  Others can fill in the exact price. After that, all profits go to the art collectors, just like a 10 cent Action 1.  Neither Siegel nor Shuster, nor even DC has any claim against anything paid above the first 10 cents at the newsstand.

 

Edited October 9, 2021 by Aman619

[Aman619]

and for those who cry what a bad artist he was... gee, is the original comic panel a work of genius?  Looks like just 2 different inkers on the same pencils.  And if Lichtenstiens line work pales in comparison to Geilla or Colletta (not sure who here) that really wasn't what he was after.   But you'd have to pull back and take it in its entirety as a work of mainstream art which made a statement about popular culture and imagery at the time, and hit home very successfully. Everybody in America was familiar with comics, but focussing on the "drama" in one panel repainted on a huge canvas -- in a gallery! -- opened peoples eyes.  And that has been a hard sell here in the comics community.

[Aman619]

yeah.  why couldn't they be covers!?

 

[tth2]

On 10/10/2021 at 6:07 AM, Aman619 said:

yeah.  why couldn't they be covers!?

 

The whole point of pop art was to elevate the most banal, disposable aspects of everyday life.  So the label from a soup can found in the millions on store shelves every day.  A completely generic panel from a comic book indistinguishable from millions of other comic panels found on newsstand and drug store shelves every day.  

These recurring discussions crack me up.  The only people who ever place so much importance on "skill" and "effort" in determining whether art is "good" are those who have no artistic skill themselves.  Those who do have skill know very well that skilled artists are a dime a thousand (I can find you very skilled artists in the backstreets in China, Vietnam, Myanmar who can crank out really good work for peanuts).  Which isn't to say that being technically skilled and having a good eye isn't a good thing, but since the advent of photography the need for technical skill has been greatly diminished. 

Put another way, how many of the people in these threads who constantly bash abstract art have put their money where their mouth is by supporting a "realistic" artist by commissioning a portrait of themselves or their family?  

[buttock]

On 10/10/2021 at 1:41 AM, tth2 said:

The whole point of pop art was to elevate the most banal, disposable aspects of everyday life.  So the label from a soup can found in the millions on store shelves every day.  A completely generic panel from a comic book indistinguishable from millions of other comic panels found on newsstand and drug store shelves every day.  

These recurring discussions crack me up.  The only people who ever place so much importance on "skill" and "effort" in determining whether art is "good" are those who have no artistic skill themselves.  Those who do have skill know very well that skilled artists are a dime a thousand (I can find you very skilled artists in the backstreets in China, Vietnam, Myanmar who can crank out really good work for peanuts).  Which isn't to say that being technically skilled and having a good eye isn't a good thing, but since the advent of photography the need for technical skill has been greatly diminished. 

Put another way, how many of the people in these threads who constantly bash abstract art have put their money where their mouth is by supporting a "realistic" artist by commissioning a portrait of themselves or their family?  

I tried to, but working with the artist was like working with a toddler.  
 

I understand your point on art, at some point hyperrealism is no longer pushing boundaries.  But that doesn't mean that every abstraction by an artist is worth fawning over either.  

[tth2]

On 10/10/2021 at 11:55 PM, buttock said:

I understand your point on art, at some point hyperrealism is no longer pushing boundaries.  But that doesn't mean that every abstraction by an artist is worth fawning over either.

Yes, but from reading the posts by some folks in this thread (and in others, particularly in the OA forum), it's clear that some people here think all abstract art is garbage, with their litmus test basically being whether any unskilled person could draw/paint the same thing.

[Mr bla bla]

On 10/10/2021 at 6:11 PM, szav said:

 

Id rather be elevated by a kirby   Splash thank you.

[Aman619]

On 10/10/2021 at 12:11 PM, szav said:

 

we're talking POP art, not PO OP art!  : )

[batman_fan]

On 10/10/2021 at 1:41 AM, tth2 said:

The whole point of pop art was to elevate the most banal, disposable aspects of everyday life.  So the label from a soup can found in the millions on store shelves every day.  A completely generic panel from a comic book indistinguishable from millions of other comic panels found on newsstand and drug store shelves every day.  

These recurring discussions crack me up.  The only people who ever place so much importance on "skill" and "effort" in determining whether art is "good" are those who have no artistic skill themselves.  Those who do have skill know very well that skilled artists are a dime a thousand (I can find you very skilled artists in the backstreets in China, Vietnam, Myanmar who can crank out really good work for peanuts).  Which isn't to say that being technically skilled and having a good eye isn't a good thing, but since the advent of photography the need for technical skill has been greatly diminished. 

Put another way, how many of the people in these threads who constantly bash abstract art have put their money where their mouth is by supporting a "realistic" artist by commissioning a portrait of themselves or their family?  

I had a portrait commissioned of my wife.  It cost me $5k but definitely worth it.  The likeness is amazing.

[BabyAteMyDingo]

On 10/10/2021 at 6:48 PM, batman_fan said:

I had a portrait commissioned of my wife.  It cost me $5k but definitely worth it.  The likeness is amazing.

Yeah! She's a real beaut! Kinda has a reverse Shannon Doherty eye thing/Pete Townsend going for her but yeah! A new "Lady Bic" and some sunglasses she will be the belle of the ball!

[Chicago Boy]

On 10/10/2021 at 5:58 PM, BabyAteMyDingo said:

Yeah! She's a real beaut! Kinda has a reverse Shannon Doherty eye thing/Pete Townsend going for her but yeah! A new "Lady Bic" and some sunglasses she will be the belle of the ball!

I didn't think anyone else noticed Brenda Walsh's eye differential.  

[buttock]

On 10/10/2021 at 10:06 AM, tth2 said:

Yes, but from reading the posts by some folks in this thread (and in others, particularly in the OA forum), it's clear that some people here think all abstract art is garbage, with their litmus test basically being whether any unskilled person could draw/paint the same thing.

Can we agree that Rothko sucks?

[woowoo]

On 10/10/2021 at 3:48 PM, batman_fan said:

I had a portrait commissioned of my wife.  It cost me $5k but definitely worth it.  The likeness is amazing.

After few drinks it looks just like you WOW.