What does mega exposure do to the value of a piece of art !!!

[Guardian Comics]

This cover/image to the Pulse #4 by Mike Mayhew seems to be popping up all over the place, and seems to have taken life as the "definitive" Green Goblin image for modern collectors, and in use for marketing purposes. Here is the original of the piece in question.

 

 

and here are two examples of the image being used for promotion and/or marketing of the product in the last 6 months. A Spider-Man train set by Hawthorne

 

 

a Marvel Icons mini bust

 

 

Not that I would even entertain offers on the piece, my question is this, what do uses of the original image do....does it have a positive effect as the image becomes almost iconic in nature or does it have a negative impact as people are sick and tired of the image and it's over-exposure. Any thoughts?

 

Jim

[Solar]

Good question. I know someone was trying to move a Keown Hulk promo piece on ebay for an ungodly amount of money because it was used on virtually every piece of Hulk movie-related merchandise packaging. I'm pretty sure it didn't sell.

 

I don't think it could possibly hurt the value though.

[lmiller]

ditto on what solar said. i don,t think it matters.the publisher retain all right.s for printing purpose so they can do what ever they want with the image. does that effect the resale value of the art naww.

 

larry ;]

[Mighty Hal]

For me, exposure increases the value of a piece of OA.

 

Part of this is simple: If I don't know that a piece exists, how can I seek it out or try to find it? One of my grails is the very first STRANGERS IN PARADISE cover. The image has been reprinted frequently and it only makes me want it more. Somebody out there has it and when it goes up for sale, I'll be there.

 

KK would argue against the exposure = more value philosophy. And it's true that if a piece goes on eBay and fails to sell...again and again...its value falls. But I'm not talking eBay or auction sites. If used in ads, used on book covers, used on toys, an image can become iconic. On that basis, to my mind, value soars.

[Thomas]

I would want and covet a piece of art more if it's been published many times. I'd also want that train and that bust and whatever else I could get that had my art on it. If anything I'd say that type of exposure would increase the value. I would pay more.

[cbac]

I was thrilled when I found a piece of Sandman art I had was reprinted in the Sandman King of Dreams book, turned the page and unexpectedly, boom, there it was with the -script and a commentary.

 

It really made me appreciate and enjoy the piece more. Things like that couldn't detract from the value.

 

Cheers,

[Mister Trent]

Over-exposure will cement that image in the public's eye. That can only be a good thing, making your art more famous.

 

I imagine it's doubtful that you'd ever want to sell, so value (whilst of interest) is not a major consideration right now. Owning the art, enjoying it to look at, is your main focus.

 

Very interesting piece of framing and a stunning cover image. I bought Mike Mayhew's unpublished cover art to PULSE # 2 on eBay last year (at a real bargain price of a few hundred dollars), directly from the artist. As with your cover, Mike included the thumbnail sketches that led to the final art. It all adds to the fascination of the artist's working processes.