June 2023 Heritage Signature Auction #7340 4 4

[vodou]

On 4/24/2023 at 2:01 PM, Bronty said:

Vodou will say 40 I'm sure.

I don’t find notable presence on a wall under  48” tall.

[Bronty]

On 4/24/2023 at 2:31 PM, JC25427N said:

I miss when we talked about Garfield strips in these kind of threads

There is NO Garfield talk on Mondays!

Edited April 24, 2023 by Bronty

[vodou]

On 4/24/2023 at 2:08 PM, buttock said:

I've never noticed that before, but now it really stands out.  That's pretty awful.  

Sorry bro, I was massive sarc. Hoffman is the devil.

[buttock]

On 4/24/2023 at 12:19 PM, Bronty said:

Awful?

Its on purpose.

Many better illustrators, Frank included, had sparse detail at the edges of a work, and then went to town with detail at the focal point of the picture.

In this case, both the composition and the details put in and left out are built to take your eye to the tiny red slits of paint which represent the eyes.

(He could certainly paint the hell out of every rock in the foreground if he wanted to, but then you'd be looking at the rocks and not the figure, not the eyes.   )

 

And, by the way - why do you think you never noticed it before?    Because you were looking at the figure, at the small details on the armor and saddle, at the vultures which take the eye away from and then back to the figure.    

The fact you never noticed the sparse foreground is a complement to the picture.

I never noticed it before because I never looked at it before.  I've never bothered to look at it with anything more than a casual glance.  And yes.  It's awful.  There are ways to make that detail sparse without looking like your dog walked across it with paint on his tail.  

[Bronty]

On 4/24/2023 at 2:19 PM, Bronty said:

Awful?

Its on purpose.

Many better illustrators, Frank included, had sparse detail at the edges of a work, and then went to town with detail at the focal point of the picture.

 

Further to the point of this being a known technique, a 'foreground detail' vs 'focal point detail' vs 'as published' from my own collection.    These two OA images are from the same painting.    The boards will compress the images, so I can't make it as stark a difference as in person, but you get the point.    The artist wants you looking at the figures not the pavement.

 

[Bronty]

On 4/24/2023 at 2:38 PM, buttock said:

I never noticed it before because I never looked at it before.  I've never bothered to look at it with anything more than a casual glance.  And yes.  It's awful.  There are ways to make that detail sparse without looking like your dog walked across it with paint on his tail.  

With all due respect its a pretty successful painting.  I think it worked out OK for him.

As for you not looking that closely, I understand, but that's also the point.   Better artists understand that most people just scan the images and don't think too hard about what they are looking at.   They are often guiding your eye, at least to an extent, without you consciously knowing it.

Edited April 24, 2023 by Bronty

[MrBedrock]

Check out the inattention to background detail on this! What was da Vinci thinking?

[Bronty]

On 4/24/2023 at 2:52 PM, MrBedrock said:

Check out the inattention to background detail on this! What was da Vinci thinking?

I figured it was Liefeld as the figure is conveniently cut off at the feet.

Great hands though!

[buttock]

On 4/24/2023 at 12:44 PM, Bronty said:

With all due respect its a pretty successful painting.  I think it worked out OK for him.

As for you not looking that closely, I understand, but that's also the point.   Better artists understand that most people just scan the images and don't think too hard about what they are looking at.   They are often guiding your eye, at least to an extent, without you consciously knowing it.

I'm not arguing that it's successful.  And I'm not arguing that it's not a technique, and one that Frazetta uses often.  I'm just arguing that in this particular instance it's execution is awful.  But I think we're arguing opinion at this point, and I don't want to do that.  

[buttock]

On 4/24/2023 at 12:52 PM, MrBedrock said:

Check out the inattention to background detail on this! What was da Vinci thinking?

It would be better if he scrawled a bunch of curliques all over the background like the master Frazetta. 

[Bronty]

On 4/24/2023 at 3:00 PM, buttock said:

I'm not arguing that it's successful.  And I'm not arguing that it's not a technique, and one that Frazetta uses often.  I'm just arguing that in this particular instance it's execution is awful.  But I think we're arguing opinion at this point, and I don't want to do that.  

Fair enough, although I think that takes us back to the size of the piece.   Its a couple circular brushstrokes and only that because its a small painting.

 

Edited April 24, 2023 by Bronty

[MrBedrock]

On 4/24/2023 at 2:02 PM, buttock said:

On 4/24/2023 at 1:52 PM, MrBedrock said:

Check out the inattention to background detail on this! What was da Vinci thinking?

Expand  

It would be better if he scrawled a bunch of curliques all over the background like the master Frazetta. 

Hell, just put the curlicues in the foreground. The art-world will love it!

[GreatEscape]

On 4/24/2023 at 3:02 PM, buttock said:

It would be better if he scrawled a bunch of curliques all over the background like the master Frazetta. 

Meh...it's just an unpublished commission by Italian merchant Francesco del Giocondo. For all we know, Da Vinci painted over blue lines and kept his original pencils to himself 

[buttock]

On 4/24/2023 at 12:52 PM, MrBedrock said:

Check out the inattention to background detail on this! What was da Vinci thinking?

Fixed it. 

[KirbyCollector]

Steering this back to OA...

I'm looking at several pages in this auction for clues about the state of the market, with my primary target being John Byrne's Dragon Man fight page from Cap 248. I'm using it b/c there is a direct basis for comparison in the Cap 249 page which hammered at HA for 9500 (11400 w/BP) last September (same art team, also 5 panels, also all action). I suspect last fall's HA results may have represented a temporary top/been a little hot, so I think this page (among others) may be a great way to refute/confirm this.

[Michael Browning]

Huh. Again, and then there was Lichtenstein. (Look at all that background detail!)

[comix4fun]

On 4/24/2023 at 1:54 PM, Bronty said:

I figured it was Liefeld as the figure is conveniently cut off at the feet.

Great hands though!

Needs more pouches. 

[tth2]

On 4/24/2023 at 11:22 PM, MrBedrock said:

Mine as well. But the size of Death Dealer was a shocker to me. After seeing it large on the side of so many vans in the '70s it was weird to see it in person. It is really small.

So the parallels to the Mona Lisa continue! 

[tth2]

On 4/25/2023 at 12:56 AM, batman_fan said:

My 1st Frazetta exposure was old paperback book covers (and Boris as well).

My first exposure was his work on the ERB John Carter books back in the 1970s.

 

[jjonahjameson11]

On 4/24/2023 at 4:58 PM, KirbyCollector said:

Steering this back to OA...

I'm looking at several pages in this auction for clues about the state of the market, with my primary target being John Byrne's Dragon Man fight page from Cap 248. I'm using it b/c there is a direct basis for comparison in the Cap 249 page which hammered at HA for 9500 (11400 w/BP) last September (same art team, also 5 panels, also all action). I suspect last fall's HA results may have represented a temporary top/been a little hot, so I think this page (among others) may be a great way to refute/confirm this.

If Cap was battling Dragon Man on both pages, then yes, it would be a good basis for price comps.  However, the other page is vs Machinesmith so not really the best comp