Morbid topic...what happenes when an artist passes?

[Guardian Comics]

I've only been at this O/A thing for about 9 months, and I was just wondering what happens to values of O/A when an artist passes. Ross Andru is a top 3 artist for me of all time, I know he hasn't been with us for a long time and all I know is that I spend $2,000 each for a good ASM panel page featuring the Goblin but has it always been like that? I mean upon passing, do people start grabbing everything they can and values go through the roof? Is it sustained or does it eventually return to their previous levels when they were alive. Just wondering. Sorry for the morbidity of the post.

 

Jim

[aardvark88]

When an artist like Carl Barks passed away at close to 100 yrs of age, there was a flood of signed & numbered lithos released onto the market trying to capitalize. Don't think his original pencil sketches or oils doubled in value or anything as they were already highly valued.

 

Even after John Buscema passed away, his SA Marvel cover recreations did not double in value on eBay.

 

Sometimes, the estate whether it is the surviving spouse or son/daughter hordes all the remaining (e.g. Charles Schultz Peanuts) original art & we, the fans, have to struggle to get even 1 piece of published original artwork by that artist/inker.

[Thomas]

When an artist like Carl Barks passed away at close to 100 yrs of age, there was a flood of signed & numbered lithos released onto the market trying to capitalize. Don't think his original pencil sketches or oils doubled in value or anything as they were already highly valued.

 

Even after John Buscema passed away, his SA Marvel cover recreations did not double in value on eBay.

 

Sometimes, the estate whether it is the surviving spouse or son/daughter hordes all the remaining (e.g. Charles Schultz Peanuts) original art & we, the fans, have to struggle to get even 1 piece of published original artwork by that artist/inker.

 

John Buscema passed away? Jeez.

[Darrell F]

Sometimes, the estate whether it is the surviving spouse or son/daughter hordes all the remaining (e.g. Charles Schultz Peanuts) original art & we, the fans, have to struggle to get even 1 piece of published original artwork by that artist/inker.

 

That is their right. They don't owe the fans anything.

[adamstrange]

Sometimes, the estate whether it is the surviving spouse or son/daughter hordes all the remaining (e.g. Charles Schultz Peanuts) original art & we, the fans, have to struggle to get even 1 piece of published original artwork by that artist/inker.

 

That is their right. They don't owe the fans anything.

 

They don't owe the fans anything, nor would they own their fortune without the fans.

[Darrell F]

Sometimes, the estate whether it is the surviving spouse or son/daughter hordes all the remaining (e.g. Charles Schultz Peanuts) original art & we, the fans, have to struggle to get even 1 piece of published original artwork by that artist/inker.

 

That is their right. They don't owe the fans anything.

 

They don't owe the fans anything, nor would they own their fortune without the fans.

That is true that they wouldn't have their money without the fans but the artist was just doing his job and getting paid for it.

[matewan1990]

When an artist like Carl Barks passed away at close to 100 yrs of age, there was a flood of signed & numbered lithos released onto the market trying to capitalize. Don't think his original pencil sketches or oils doubled in value or anything as they were already highly valued.

 

Even after John Buscema passed away, his SA Marvel cover recreations did not double in value on eBay.

 

Sometimes, the estate whether it is the surviving spouse or son/daughter hordes all the remaining (e.g. Charles Schultz Peanuts) original art & we, the fans, have to struggle to get even 1 piece of published original artwork by that artist/inker.

 

But, shortly before John Buscema died, you could get his Conan covers for $500-$1000. Now, try getting one for under $2000. Those shot up in value. I remember one dealer urging me not to invest too much in a Buscema Conan cover because he said sword and sorcery covers were hard to move no matter who drew them, just like western covers.

So, I passed up a really sweet Buscema Conan cover for what is now a very cheap price.

When Jack Kirby was alive, you could get his original Black Panther pages and Losers pages for around $150 each. After he died, pages, even the worst Kirby art, sold for upwards of $350-$500 per page.

I know, because I was going to buy a couple of Black Panther pages, really nice ones, for $150 each. But, Kirby died and then the price went way up.

Jim Aparo died last year and the prices on his art went up.

If an artist is alive, there's always the chance that you'll get a new piece. But, when one dies, no matter how many pages and covers are out there, collectors know that there's still a limited amount now that they're gone.

It's not morbid, it's just the law of supply and demand in action. After an artist dies, the supply becomes limited and, as demand increases for that artist's work, the prices go up, up, up.

Mike B.

[Guardian Comics]

See and this is the part I was trying to understand. Okay in other artwork such as oil paintings, Picasso, Monet, whomever dies then yes that artist cannot produce any more artwork, so the supply is capped. I would assume comic artwork is different and here is why. Okay god forbid Neal Adams passes, sooner than expected, Neal Adams vintage prices have already escalated. He can't produce another panel page from GL/GA #76 (well he can but it would be a recreation). It seems that we collect artwork by their respective artists primes. Even a Todd McFalane can't go out and draw the splash from ASM #301 again, supply is already limited. Steve Dirko can't go back and draw ASM #31 again but what you are saying is that if Mr. Ditko wasn't with us anymore, those pages would have gone for even more? Just trying to understand is all.

 

Jim

[adamstrange]

Sometimes, the estate whether it is the surviving spouse or son/daughter hordes all the remaining (e.g. Charles Schultz Peanuts) original art & we, the fans, have to struggle to get even 1 piece of published original artwork by that artist/inker.

 

That is their right. They don't owe the fans anything.

 

They don't owe the fans anything, nor would they own their fortune without the fans.

That is true that they wouldn't have their money without the fans but the artist was just doing his job and getting paid for it.

 

Not in the case of Schulz. While he drew the strip himself, he/the syndicate licensed the characters out to a multitude of entities involving many different artists. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but none of those licenses would have been worth what it was without the fan's showing their appreciation of the characters and the work of Schulz..

[Robert Plunkett-migration]

It's totally unpredictable. Sometimes, as with Dave Berg and Kelly Freas, they flood the market with stuff and it's a good time to load up. Conventional wisdom is that it increases the value. That's probably more true of a conventional artist than a popular or commercial artist. I think it also makes a difference when an artist dies. If he dies unexpectedly like Vaughn Bode, that's one thing, but if he lives to be 100, the market probably already reflects the expectation of death.

 

I once said that if I was going to spend (a certain high amount) on a piece, I want the artist to be dead. Then, when this same friend and I were talking about spending twice that much, I said, I wanted him to be long dead. By the time an artist is long dead, all the part of the price that reflected current fad has probably been shaken out and what's left is lasting value.

 

Robert