• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Varanis

Recent Profile Visitors

228 profile views
  1. I think Kirby still has enormous future growth potential from a market perspective. I'm probably one of the youngest collectors on this board and when it comes to pre-modern art, Kirby is one of the only artists I care about. His art is a massive influence on not only modern comics, but the MCU. Thor: Ragnarok was oozing with Kirby inspiration. I expect the movies to continue to latch onto this style as well as they continue with their cosmic storytelling. I've also seen Disney start to promote Kirby as one of the key artistic masterminds behind Marvel and the MCU. If a company like Disney continues to promote something like that, Jack Kirby will easily be a household name before long. All in all, this is probably a pretty terrible take, but I thought I'd share my perspective.
  2. My dad bought a couple issue #20 Silvestri / Judith Marcos pages from Pablo Marcos for $150 / each relatively recently. Comps online seemed to be $300 - $500. So value is probably $200 - $400. Maybe some future upside since this is early Silvestri Marvel work.
  3. Not that there’s no risk, but I believe the specialty auction houses do some level of diligence to ensure they don’t list fakes. eBay in the other hand is rife with fakes.
  4. I think you're sort of paying a lottery ticket premium on all modern art. Some of the art being produced today will be the Kirbys, Millers, Buscemas, and Byrnes of tomorrow. It's just nobody knows who and what that art will be and you're paying for the upside on that uncertainty. Will Skottie Young's unique art style still hold mass appeal decades from now? I have no idea. I think Tradd Moore is as good or better than any of the premiere artists of the past. That doesn't mean his art will be worth anything in the future. I think it was said in the other SY thread - just buy what you like and you can't go wrong.
  5. Two main thoughts: 1. I feel the categories can get pretty confusing due to how varied original art can be. I saw several pieces where I wasn’t sure why it was in a particular category. 2. Voting was really tedious - both in terms of viewing the pieces and actually voting for them. Some thoughts on solutions: Allow everyone to submit any 5 pieces they want which were added to CAF that year. Once the entry window is closed, create an embedded slideshow of all the entered pieces. Let voters scroll through the slideshow and upvote any number of pieces they want. Allow voters to change their upvotes at any time until voting closes. Once voting closes, use the art type field on submissions to sort by category. If the field is empty, sort to other. Doing it this way makes both the voting and submission a lot more streamlined. It should also make the voting a lot more exciting as pieces will receive many more votes this way. Voters won’t feel like they have to choose between a Frazetta and a neat piece of modern art they like since they can now vote for both. The Frazetta’s probably still going to win but now the voter feels good because they gave more positive feedback and the submitter feels good because they received more positive feedback. You also retain categories with theoretically less overall work (to be fair, probably more work for Bill and less for users). It also lets you compare pieces across categories. So you can still have best voted interior, strip art, etc. But now you also have a top 5 overall, which could be anything.
  6. If you mean "fresh to market" as in do collectors value a piece more highly if they are the first aside from the artist to own it, I would say no. I've heard there are a few that feel this way, but that seems patently silly to me. If there's a piece I love, I want it regardless of who owned it previously. In fact, previous owners may make it more desirable if it came from a particularly noteworthy collection or individual. Now, I do think there is a slight premium for pieces being "fresh to market" if the piece has been held privately for many years and suddenly appears on the open market. Since art is one-of-a-kind, many will view this as their once in a lifetime opportunity to own the piece before it disappears once more unto the nether. There's a certain hype and excitement to such a reveal that heightens buyers' sense of irrationality. That said, I believe this effect is mostly only relevant for top shelf pieces. No one is going to get irrational over a random panel page with numerous available comps. I also think good art is good art and something spectacular is going to demand a premium regardless of whether it was kept private or not I think a piece being on CAF and NFS won't breed irrationality in the same way. I feel like most hold an odd sort of implicit notion that those pieces are somehow obtainable. Maybe the owner won't sell, but that's today - there's always tomorrow. At the end of the day, it's all about the buyers and the level of irrationality they're willing to court to obtain the art they want. "Fresh to market" can heighten that irrationality, but ultimately there must be an innate desire for a piece across buyers for that effect to translate to any sort of impact.
  7. I use CAF for all of this. Perhaps it's odd, but I do keep a spreadsheet of pieces I don't own that I may have future interest in or just want to know where they're located. That lets me add links to the dealer or CAF page and take notes. I find markets and provenance fascinating, so I find it fun. I've felt like CAF has been a good way to track what I do own. I'll likely start a spreadsheet if I ever sell anything as that will help calculate tax.
  8. Another enormous grail for me. A significant and absolutely stunning piece. On CAF - LINK Cosmic Ghost Rider #1 Cover by Geoff Shaw
  9. I like this style of voting much better. I'm not sure how much extra work it is on Bill / CAF's end, but I think it would definitely improve the user experience.
  10. That’s what I was told. I was considering springing for the really expensive matting to mount on due to the value and significance of that page, but my framer said while foamcore is technically less archival, it makes essentially no difference.
  11. Not to belabor the discussion, but there are some rare instances on eBay where the price of the product is baked into an inflated shipping cost. It used to be a lot more common before eBay started taking fees out of shipping as well. Just an example of a scenario where extra costs could be considered part of the price of the piece. I'm sure there are more scenarios. That said, that's all way too granular to worry about for this sort of thing. Post on the honor system and don't worry.
  12. I wanted the floating look for my pieces too, but my framer basically gave me the same rundown as @ESeffinga as to why that was a horrible idea. Attached are examples of what he came up with for me. Pretty similar to what @vodou's got going on. The pieces are attached to foamcore board using archival hinges. I really like how it turned out. It cost me about $300 to frame the DPS with 99% UV resistant glass and about the same for the single page with museum glass (same UV resistance, but no glare). This is likely only tolerated since original art is a one-of-a-kind market. Every piece is take it or leave it as is since there is no other.
  13. If Deadpool pages sell for $40k, I’d guess $20k - $30k for this with a possibility of less. Definitely not my forte, but seems like it loses a lot of appeal without Deadpool.
  14. Is there somewhere to see how many votes a piece has as it receives votes or is that only tallied in private to determine winners?
  15. I think a conversation on what is “key” art would be interesting. I have a hard time believing that Superman piece will be considered key in 5-10 years, but how then does a modern collector go about collecting key art for a character so old? Batman is an interesting case where popular stories make the art “key.” I haven’t seen a similar effect for Superman, but I’m admittedly very unfamiliar with the character’s market.