hmendryk

Member
  • Content Count

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About hmendryk

  • Boards Title
    Collector is an understatement.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I have never been bothered about the art I could never afford to own, or jealous of those who could afford it. I am only sad about the art that I once was able to collect but am now priced out of. But of course that is what often happens when one has collected OA for a long enough time.
  2. I am a big fan of Dave Hoover's Captain America, so I was initially considering bidding when it came up on eBay. That is until the bidding started to get pretty high. There was another one that recently sold for about 10K (ComicLink?). So hence the 15K price (hey a dealer has to make a profit). Sad for me because it means that I am now out of the market for an artist that I used to collect (for much, much less).
  3. Well trying to corner the market is one way to push up prices.
  4. I am not going to make a prediction about how much SS6 goes for, most of those posting here are much more knowledgeable than me on pricing. But I will point out that those nay sayers who cite lack of nostalgic value miss the point. Yes nostalgia is currently the driver for most of today's market and yes SS6 is old enough that few buyers will remember buying the comic off the newsstand. But when OA gets old enough historical and aesthetic values come into effect. SS6 cover is very powerful on both fronts. While technically the hooded figures are not KKK, that is certainly how people today respo
  5. I am not sure if this qualifies as a one page story, but it is one page. By Creig Flessel in 1977 for DC but never published. Too sexy?
  6. I don't do much in the way of editing descriptions in CAF but I do like to re-arrange things. I do not like a folder to have too many pieces of art. When that happens I create a new folder and split up the contents. Probably a waste of time because most visits to my galleries are from newly posted art. Not blaming anyone because in fact I often only have enough time to visit and comment on the new art from others.
  7. While I wouldn't describe it as steaming, the first certainly is a masterpiece by Jack Kirby who with Joe Simon created the romance comic genre. From Young Romance #20 (April 1950). The second piece is the unused cover to the never published title Artist and Models by Bill Draut from about 1954. The cover for Young Brides #14 (April 1954) by John Prentice (who would later take over the syndication strip Rip Kirby). And finally (at least for this post) the cover for Young Love #68 (December 1955) by Mort Meskin (who was a big influence for Steve Ditko).
  8. I disagree. The letter warns against selling digital art, not printed copies of digital art. The whole reason for DC's letter was the large sum of money for NFTs. DC is certainly aware that various artist sell prints, both monoprints and in greater quantities. There just isn't enough money to justify their concern.
  9. True, that includes non-NFT digital art, but says nothing about 1/1 monoprints.
  10. Is there another letter out there? Because the one I read only talks about NFTs. https://boingboing.net/2021/03/13/dc-warning-letter-about-using-comic-characters-in-nfts-is-being-sold-as-an-nft.html
  11. Even if the films exists that does not men there are "almost 'no' control" for the collector. Sure the collector cannot stop the publisher from reprinting the comic, but surely you realize there is a difference between the film and the OA? They are not identical. If you printed it out the same size as the OA no one would have a problem in distinguishing the two. The film was made for comic publication and the nuances present on OA are undesirable for publication. Now it is possible that the publisher also kept scans and this may have been done by the original artist as well. But if someone in
  12. Well I am certainly not a SME, so I guess by your standards I am talking out of my bung hole. But I am interested in the subject enough to pursue some reading on it. My understanding is that the NFT is held in a wallet. Not a physical wallet but rather software that allows you to store your assets and make transfers. There is a cost to making the NFT token too large, so the digital image is not actually part of the NFT but rather there is some sort of link to it.
  13. But you ignore your original statement "Nah. Physical world the creator can always dilute through publishing and recreation." That is what I was responding to. And I repeat no dilution of control there because what they are distributing is not the actual OA. Check out the current thread of DC not compensating for scans of the OA for publication. There obviously is some level of control of OA otherwise DC, Marvel, IDW etc wouldn't have to ask owners for high resolution scans. Sure you can share low res scans (such as appearing in CAF) or poor grade physical copies (photocopies) but that