sbomfim Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 This image was also used as the cover to the first Spider-Man comic in Brazil (08/1968). mtlevy1, Twanj, aardvark88 and 1 other 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecclectica Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) Ditko seemed to like this kind of leg positions for the character : (from the Mandel collection -> https://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=721757) Edited February 19 by Ecclectica Twanj and grapeape 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will_K Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 Ditko was just foreshadowing the bow legged style that is very common in Marvel Comics (particularly Gil Kane, John Buscema). The piece currently on ComicLink is far superior to any examples posted in this topic so far. grapeape 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhamlau Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 What I never got is that with all the variant covers that get published these days, why hasn’t someone thought to use one of these classic era unpublished pieces as a variant cover? You don’t think Marvel would love to have an original previously unpublished Ditko cover variant on some key book/product? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malvin Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 On 2/20/2024 at 9:52 AM, zhamlau said: What I never got is that with all the variant covers that get published these days, why hasn’t someone thought to use one of these classic era unpublished pieces as a variant cover? You don’t think Marvel would love to have an original previously unpublished Ditko cover variant on some key book/product? I'm guessing that it may be a mess or hassle to pay the artist to do that. Malvin zhamlau 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhamlau Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 On 2/20/2024 at 4:10 PM, malvin said: I'm guessing that it may be a mess or hassle to pay the artist to do that. Malvin See i would have thought that issue settled since they paid originally to have the artwork drawn using their IP, especially now that they settled with the Ditko estate as many have reported. Think about how many guys would have to buy this comic just to say their Ditko Spider-man cover collection was complete! LOL could probably sell 5k to them alone! alxjhnsn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecclectica Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 (edited) On 2/20/2024 at 6:52 PM, zhamlau said: What I never got is that with all the variant covers that get published these days, why hasn’t someone thought to use one of these classic era unpublished pieces as a variant cover? You don’t think Marvel would love to have an original previously unpublished Ditko cover variant on some key book/product? They already thought of that : (Amazing Spider-Man #700 - January 2013) Edited February 21 by Ecclectica Will_K and zhamlau 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecclectica Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 (edited) On 2/20/2024 at 10:15 PM, zhamlau said: Think about how many guys would have to buy this comic just to say their Ditko Spider-man cover collection was complete! LOL could probably sell 5k to them alone! Well, this variant is not cheap to acquire nowadays : https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313&_nkw=Amazing+Spider-Man+%23700+ditko+variant&_sacat=0&rt=nc&_odkw=Amazing+Spider-Man+%23700+ditko&_osacat=0&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1 Edited February 21 by Ecclectica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhamlau Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 On 2/21/2024 at 11:50 AM, Ecclectica said: They already thought of that : (Amazing Spider-Man #700 - January 2013) See this was already published before though. I’m talking about finished but never published material like the OP showed. I’d love to see them do that . grapeape 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjonahjameson11 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 On 2/21/2024 at 11:50 AM, Ecclectica said: They already thought of that : (Amazing Spider-Man #700 - January 2013) Yeah, and it was already published way before ASM #700, as the back cover to the Official Marvel Index to The Amazing Spiderman #1 (1985) zhamlau and Ecclectica 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecclectica Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) On 2/22/2024 at 12:36 AM, jjonahjameson11 said: Yeah, and it was already published way before ASM #700, as the back cover to the Official Marvel Index to The Amazing Spiderman #1 (1985) Great! I didn't know it. Guess I have to buy now another (affordable, this one!) old comic. Edited February 22 by Ecclectica zhamlau 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latverian Tourism Board Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) Also, they inked the image a little more, manipulated the left arm and tilted the image, and then used it for a marvel poster. I’m pretty sure I remember seeing it on a marvel toy from the 70s, too. Spider-Man shield or something like that? 😏EDIT to add that this was already mentioned upthread. I do think I saw it on another toy, though. Edited February 22 by Latverian Tourism Board Twanj 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecclectica Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 Coincidence. In https://nick-caputo.blogspot.com/ new entry : "[...] they had their own card set! The display box utilized art by Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko [...]" That's an occasion to read again Nick Caputo's excellent blog. grapeape and The Voord 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 On 2/17/2024 at 11:25 AM, Carlo M said: Surprised this has not been brought up yet . This one must be truly impressive in person. Too early to provide estimates? https://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2FAUCTIONS%2FPREVIEW.ASP%3Fcode%3D2024may%26itemtype%3D1%23Item_1752106&id=1752106&itemType=1#detail Talk about needing this so bad !!!! But what I'd have to sell to get it would be VERY painful.... The Voord and grapeape 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voord Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 (edited) For those struggling to compare . . . looks like they re-jigged Spidey's limbs, otherwise quite close. Personally, I'd class the Spidey pin-up as published (in altered format). Edited February 24 by The Voord zhamlau, Unca Ben, Will_K and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1classics Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 On 2/23/2024 at 3:08 PM, The Voord said: For those struggling to compare . . . looks like they re-jigged Spidey's limbs, otherwise quite close. Personally, I'd class the Spidey pin-up as published (in altered format). yeah but not of the "era", which unfortunately from a collector / investment standpoint could make a massive difference... The Voord and grapeape 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voord Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 (edited) On 2/24/2024 at 1:23 AM, 1classics said: yeah but not of the "era", which unfortunately from a collector / investment standpoint could make a massive difference... Yeah, and if I was deep-pocketed, I'd be all over this . . . and I'm definitely in a Ditko Spidey collecting area! Investor? No, I just love this . . . future financial return just wouldn't figure . . . so, go figure!. Edited February 24 by The Voord 1classics and grapeape 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
batman_fan Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 Question, if the brothers win this can they turn it into an "unpublished Spider-Man 1 Cover"? The Voord and grapeape 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmaz Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 Eh, I mean... it's fine... if you like that sort of thing. grapeape 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pemart1966 Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 Annoying that there's no photo of the back of the art. I wonder whether the CCA approved it? Judging by the image, I'd guess that it was done in 1964. Ecclectica, 1classics and grapeape 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
