tth2

Indeed!

There is an insane run of ultra-HG Ducks that'll be in the upcoming Heritage auction. The nicest set on Heritage I can remember since 2006.

The Great Crash... It's (finally) here!

Your wife clearly has good taste. Kind of makes us wonder why she ...

I vote for more Rowena. I vote for more spikes through my eyes.

Of course. These aren't comics where there are multiple copies and the only way to value one copy over another other is grade/condition. Whether "Le Rêve" has a hole in it from Steve Wynn's elbow or not, it's the only "Le Rêve" in the world. Similarly, the X-Men 137 DPS is the only one, whether there are some unobtrusive signatures on it or not.

Sure, because he would have done it neatly and unobtrusively, in an area where you would expect him to sign a piece. If these sigs on the DPS were done in the margins, it would be a plus. But, it's 4 sigs in the art area, and 3 of the signers never touched the art except to autograph it. It's not a condition issue, it's about detracting from the image and cheapening the art by treating it like you would a mass produced collectible. There is no "margin" in fine art paintings. Margins are something that only exist in the world of commercial art. So technically, Picasso, Monet, etc. all signed their paintings in "the art area", but out of the main image area, just like the signatures in this piece..

Very well said.

Only if the signature took the form of a big red X all across the painting.

Only comic OA collectors, who still carry over a comic collector's focus on condition, think this way. If someone had a painting by Picasso from early in his career that was unsigned for some reason and got him to sign it decades later near his death, and assuming it was witnessed by credible witnesses so that there was no question why the paint for the signature was not the same age as the paint of the painting, and assuming that he didn't sign right in the middle of the relevant image being depicted, there is no world in which that painting would not be considered to be more valuable as a result of Picasso's signing or in which it would be considered to be somehow marred by Picasso (the artist) signing his own work.

Dear Lord!! What was EVERYONE involved with making that sig happen in that place thinking? This is an abomination, but it's also totally different from the X-Men page, unless there are signatures from Hugh Jackman and other members of the cast of the X-Men movies that I didn't notice.

Cool, maybe I'll end up inadvertently winning it if collectors continue to obsess over completely immaterial things.

It's a $100k book.

Are you trying to talk down the price of the piece or something? The sigs are a complete non-factor in my opinion. They're not detrimental at all to the image, and why wouldn't you want the signatures of the creators on the piece, even if they were signed after the fact?