Anyone else over the Promise Collection? 6 6

[adamstrange]

On 1/26/2022 at 6:58 PM, William-James88 said:

Ooouuu, that is interesting.

It was quite the kerfuffle in the art world, with a number of articles and documentaries  recording the debate that spread out over several years.

[lou_fine]

On 1/26/2022 at 10:57 AM, Flex Mentallo said:

Have always absolutely loved this cover here because of the stunning green colors that often show up on the higher condition copies, like this raw condition copy right here before it got graded and slabbed:     

Although the colors on this copy here definitely looks stronger than on the above CGC 8.0 graded copy, it also looks pretty close to the deeper colors on the CGC 9.8 graded Promise Collection copy.  

[MrBedrock]

These walked in the door today. Found in a box in a house here in Houston and the older couple who brought them in said they will let us know if any more books show up. Other than a couple in the vgf range they are pretty low grade with tape and such. But apparently low grade is the new sign of a true collector, and I am nothing if not a follower, so I think I will keep them. Got to rebuild my street cred around here.

 

[sfcityduck]

On 1/26/2022 at 4:13 PM, adamstrange said:

It was quite the kerfuffle in the art world, with a number of articles and documentaries  recording the debate that spread out over several years.

Super complex debate.  The restorers decided that Michelangelo used a particular technique in painting the ceiling, that he painted on wet plaster so the paint infused in, and that embellishments added on the dry plaster (additional detail and black highlights) weren't him.  So they went beyond just cleaning off the dirt and grime, which is the usual conservative practice, and took an approach that might have been overly aggressive in also removing paint (which may or may not have been original).  It's a cautionary tale with the moral that a conservative approach is probably best as you can always clean more, but you can't really add back what you took off. The moral is not "don't clean" as part of conservation, it is clean appropriately.

Edited January 27, 2022 by sfcityduck

[adamstrange]

On 1/26/2022 at 5:51 PM, october said:

There is little/no correlation between the impact defects have on grade and the impact those defects have on eye appeal. I don't personally agree with that, which has been great for me as a collector.

Back cover water stains all day for Andy. 

I've always made sure to add a little stain to any book I sold you. 

Edited January 27, 2022 by adamstrange

[sfcityduck]

Back to the colors on the Promise books.  Worth noting that Heritage's pics might not be doing the view of the colors on the Promise books a favor.  A friend recently got a notable Promise copy in the mail from Heritage (not my book to identify).  He sent me a pic.  While it looked really nice on Heritage, the pic of the book taken with a good camera phone showed that the colors were as deep and fresh as could be dreamed of!  No modification to the pic.  Just a book with an image and colors and contrasts that made it look incredible!  A real museum quality piece of art with vibrancy that would make Van Gogh proud.

Anyone concluding that the Promise books look better in hand than on Heritage?

Edited January 27, 2022 by sfcityduck

[adamstrange]

On 1/26/2022 at 7:20 PM, sfcityduck said:

Super complex debate.  The restorers decided that Michelangelo used a particular technique in paingting the ceiling, that he painted on wet plaster so it infused in, and that embellishments added on the dry plaster (additional detail and black highlights) weren't him.  So they went beyond just cleaning off the dirt and grime, which is the usual conservative practice, and took an approach that might have been overly aggressive in also removing paint (which may or may not have been original).  It's a cautionary tale with the moral that a conservative approach is probably best as you can always clean more, but you can't really add back what you took off. The moral is not "don't clean" as part of conservation, it is clean appropriately.

That was part of the debate, but the biggest complaint was the removal of the varnish as that completely changed the look of the ceiling, which many believed was aesethitically bad and out of character with what they thought Michaelangelo intended.

[october]

On 1/26/2022 at 6:22 PM, adamstrange said:

I've always made sure to add a little stain to any book I sold you. 

I am good with that, as long as the price comes after the stain.

[MrBedrock]

On 1/26/2022 at 6:22 PM, adamstrange said:

I've always made sure to add a little stain to any book I sold you. 

I've almost stained many of your books when I was looking at them.

[Robot Man]

On 1/26/2022 at 4:19 PM, MrBedrock said:

These walked in the door today. Found in a box in a house here in Houston and the older couple who brought them in said they will let us know if any more books show up. Other than a couple in the vgf range they are pretty low grade with tape and such. But apparently low grade is the new sign of a true collector, and I am nothing if not a follower, so I think I will keep them. Got to rebuild my street cred around here.

 

I’ve got plenty of street cred but none of those, so you still got me beat.

Walked in huh? What a great day to go to work! 

[MrBedrock]

On 1/26/2022 at 7:19 PM, Robot Man said:

I’ve got plenty of street cred but none of those, so you still got me beat.

Walked in huh? What a great day to go to work! 

It was pretty cool. It has been a while since any GA has wandered into the shop. I got back from lunch and Hyde, my back issue buyer, said "Check out these".

[Robot Man]

On 1/26/2022 at 5:28 PM, MrBedrock said:

It was pretty cool. It has been a while since any GA has wandered into the shop. I got back from lunch and Hyde, my back issue buyer, said "Check out these".

Odd that it would have only been that consecutive run of Rangers. Wouldn’t surprise me if they come in with more…

[MrBedrock]

[HemiGTX]

On 1/26/2022 at 6:47 PM, szav said:

I'm thrilled with how this one looks in hand, but the HA scan does appear to make the color appear a bit deeper.  That said, in hand it's radiant, bright, glossy, and fresh in a way that the HA scan doesn't capture.  When I hold it up against other comics, even high grade ones you can tell the difference.  I don't think my phone pic captures all the qualities either.  How my eye sees them is a bit in between the two.

I tried some back door love with my wife, but she said NO THANKS!!! 

[tth2]

On 1/27/2022 at 3:32 AM, Robot Man said:

Exactly. It’s amazing how many ignorant people are simply seduced by the number in the top left and not the book it’s self. A fool and his money…

I think it's a bit over the top to call someone who might not realize that the color strike is not as good as it could be "ignorant" and a "fool".

Edited January 27, 2022 by tth2

[tth2]

On 1/27/2022 at 8:53 AM, MrBedrock said:

On 1/27/2022 at 8:22 AM, adamstrange said:

I've always made sure to add a little stain to any book I sold you. 

I've almost stained many of your books when I was looking at them.

[Flex Mentallo]

On 1/26/2022 at 11:55 PM, adamstrange said:

Removal of the varnish resulted in the original vibrant colors showing up for the first time in centuries.  The question was whether those varnish layers were intended by Michangelo to mute the colors or were a later add by other less talented minds.

Yes, the argument is that Michelangelo first laid down bright colours in wet fresco, and after this layer dried, added another layer to create shadows , atmosphere, sculptural form, etc etc. It would seem that he also worked on the eyes. As a result, many details have gone missing, including some of the eyes, and this is irreversible.

[Flex Mentallo]

On 1/27/2022 at 12:20 AM, sfcityduck said:

Super complex debate.  The restorers decided that Michelangelo used a particular technique in painting the ceiling, that he painted on wet plaster so the paint infused in, and that embellishments added on the dry plaster (additional detail and black highlights) weren't him.  So they went beyond just cleaning off the dirt and grime, which is the usual conservative practice, and took an approach that might have been overly aggressive in also removing paint (which may or may not have been original).  It's a cautionary tale with the moral that a conservative approach is probably best as you can always clean more, but you can't really add back what you took off. The moral is not "don't clean" as part of conservation, it is clean appropriately.

I posted my response before reading yours.

Being in the UK is a curse on these boards, while I'm sleeping you are having all the fun! When I post, often you are sleeping. Thanks to those who commented on the Sistine restoration. At the risk of overlap and duplication, I hope no-one minds if I add some further comments, and illustrations. It's my personal view.

 

Fresco, meaning 'fresh' is a technique of mural painting executed upon freshly laid ("wet") lime plaster. Water is used as the vehicle for the dry-powder pigment to merge with the plaster, and with the setting of the plaster, the painting becomes an integral part of the wall. Then, because the artist has little time before the plaster sets, and there are limits to the effects that can be achieved, fresco-secco or secco mural painting techniques are applied to dried plaster, to supplement painting in fresco.

 

The critic John Berger once memorably said that everyone admires Michelangelo, but few love him. I certainly don't love him – I find him cold. However, the botched resto ironically reveals Michelangelo's thinking, and this is fascinating.

 

By uncovering what lies beneath in the wet layer, it is obvious that the artist deliberately applied overly heightened colors that would create depth and vibrancy when darker layers were subsequently applied utilizing secco techniques. Otherwise these darker layers would have 'killed' the intended effect.

 

And he would not have done this uniformly, only where necessary. Citation needed, but my guess is that some colors would have needed to be more saturated than others to have the desired effect – yellow for instance. [I am a professional artist so I have some experience of this.]

 

Hence the secco layer would also have been used to unify and harmonize – impossible even for Michelangelo to otherwise do across an entire ceiling painted section by section.

 

The capper for me is that Michelangelo was predominantly a sculptor, and I think his interest in solid forms existing in/emerging from the surrounding space would have been critical to his approach. He wanted to conjoin Heaven and Earth, so as to transport the worshiper.

 

The restorers decided to uniformly remove everything except the wet layer, and yes, this reveals hidden details – but at the same time, it removes others, and crucially, all of the over layers.

 

They've created something entirely unintended – a sort of uniformity that is unbalanced. Colors – like yellow, leap out more than they should. Eyes and other details are missing. But don't take my/our word for it. See for yourself.

 

Edited January 27, 2022 by Flex Mentallo

[Flex Mentallo]

In the left spandrel, black detailing of robes, eyes and architecture is intact. In the right spandrel, these details have been lost in the cleaning.

 

 

Edited January 27, 2022 by Flex Mentallo

[Flex Mentallo]

The Prophet Daniel, before and after restoration.