1st McFarlane Hulk Cover on Ebay --- Pretty cool to see
0

36 posts in this topic

111 posts

It's a bit high in my opinion, but I'm no huge McFarlane fan either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,998 posts

To me, it looks like the bridge between his DC Comics "Infinity Inc." work and his Marvel Comics "Amazing Spider-Man" work, in the quality and development of his artistic style.

 

So, with that I'd challenge to say, there are probably many McFarlane fans who would rather have an Amazing Spider-Man or Spawn interrior page than this cover.

 

Items like this always raises a question to me about art collecting...

 

With sports cards, value and demand were once dictated by "rookie" cards, the 1st year. Then later by the scarcity of "crash numbered" cards whether autographed or with authentic memorabilia embedded. The relevance of that statement is less about the scarcity, since original comic book art is "one-of-a-kind" - but the question I wonder is...

 

Aside from the notoriety of a trademark artist to character and story arc such as Steve Ditko "Amazing Spider-Man"; Neal Adams "Green Lantern/Green Arrow"; John Byrne "Uncanny X-Men"; Frank Miller "Daredevil"; Jim Lee "Batman"; etc - - are "early works" by artists before they developed their trademark artistic style seen is inferrior or maybe desirable from an evolutionary standpoint? Or "later works" by artists who might be outside of the pinnacle of their game such as the recent Neal Adams "Batman Odessey" (the art is still one-of-a-kind like his 1970's work but I'd challenge to say his new stuff would not command the values and demand of his older Batman material whether The Brave & The Bold, Batman, or Detective Comics); Marshall Rodgers "Batman Dark Detective" (still with Austin inks, but a shadow of what his Detective Comics run commands); John Byrne "X-Men: The Hiden years" (where an Uncanny page is at least $5,000, a Hidden Years page is more like $200); Carmine Infanino "Flash" the 1960's material VS the 1980's material; etc.

 

I see a lot of art where the rendering isn't necessarily as refined or detailed, or has lackluster characters of course get offered for substantially less than an artists key work or even average. Case in point, several Adam Hughes pieces only featuring male characters.

 

Is it enough to have a piece by an artist, and there's no matter what a bare minimum collectibility to that artists work because of their name, or even with the name behind a mediocre piece, does the artist name carry less weight, especially when you compare that work to their very best, it becomes that much more less desirable for that comparison?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43,086 posts
I think the problem is that there is no HULK on the cover

 

45k for Doc Samson is rich

 

But I do love the cover

 

This was a VERY hot book in the late 80's

 

 

 

A bigger problem might be that it's not a 100% McFarlane piece. It's Tom Morgan inks over McFarlane pencils.

 

All of the signature McFarlane pieces that have moved to dizzying numbers were all McFarlane.

 

There's not a ton on this cover that sceams "McFarlane", the exaggerated poses, the wild perspectives, the intricate backgrounds...they are all missing here.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,998 posts

I'd probably put the valuation on this piece at about 10% of the eBay "Buy it Now" asking price, so $4,500 to the $45,000, based on the aesthetics, significance (honestly lack-there-of in this case), characters and artist. Even at $4,500, I personally would pass on it, so I'm not stating a price I'd be willing to pay, more so a value that I think reasonably the market would bear and if held at auction what the piece would command. My speculation, guess and opinion only of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26,707 posts

one of the worse covers out there, just terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,057 posts

Ebay is full of crazy buy it now prices. I doubt it gets anywhere even remotely close to the price in an auction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,815 posts
one of the worse covers out there, just terrible.

 

+1 :sick:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
865 posts

Nothing about this cover says McFarlane to me. This price is just a *little* bit unrealistic IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
639 posts

I am a fan of McFarlane's ASM and Spiderman titles, and even some of his later Hulk issues. But earlier in this run, McFarlane's Hulk was really awful. Good luck to the ebay seller; it will be interesting to see whether there is demand for McFarlane's earlier work.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56,011 posts
I am a fan of McFarlane's ASM and Spiderman titles, and even some of his later Hulk issues. But earlier in this run, McFarlane's Hulk was really awful. Good luck to the ebay seller; it will be interesting to see whether there is demand for McFarlane's earlier work.

 

 

 

 

It's not a horrible cover, and McFarlane's style is clear to see, if unrefined.

 

McFarlane art suffered terribly by a plethora of bad inkers, many of whom consistently obliterated McFarlane's linework. No other artist that I know of demonstrates such a study in the value of the inker than McFarlane, especially on his Hulks #330-339, and early Spideys.

 

When McFarlane actually got a chance to ink himself after he'd practiced for a few years, the results are quite astonishing, "classic McFarlane"...and this is found in Detective Comics #578, published a mere 6 months after this book, and another 6 months before he'd begin Spidey.

 

The underlying pencil work is there in the Hulk run, it just got buried by an army of poor to average inkers. Note especially the difference between #339, inked by Sanders, and #340, inked by McFarlane. The difference is unbelievable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts

yeah, its not bad and its the first book of the first run todd was really known for. It will have some decent value just for that reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,347 posts
yeah, its not bad and its the first book of the first run todd was really known for. It will have some decent value just for that reason.

 

Maybe not $45K though... :boo:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts

oh for sure. not even close to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
169 posts

I'm certainly a Todd McFarlane fan, but I whole-heartedly agree that nothing about this cover says "McFarlane" at all. It's a $5k-$10k cover on it's best day. $45k is an absolute hail mary by someone who's has no knowledge of the market and why people buy Todd's stuff.

 

Ken

 

http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryDetail.asp?GCat=19201

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts

the thing about hail marys is they don't cost nothin' :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56,011 posts
yeah, its not bad and its the first book of the first run todd was really known for. It will have some decent value just for that reason.

 

Maybe not $45K though... :boo:

 

It is, however, worth a bit more than $5K or even $10K. It is his first Hulk, it's the run he first got noticed for, and it's a key book, even if it's fallen on hard times. It certainly as "McFarlane" as most of his Infinity Inc covers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
169 posts

 

It is, however, worth a bit more than $5K or even $10K. It is his first Hulk, it's the run he first got noticed for, and it's a key book, even if it's fallen on hard times. It certainly as "McFarlane" as most of his Infinity Inc covers.

 

Obviously I could be wrong, but it sounds like you are mostly a "Slab" collector, who is misjudging the value that most OA collectors place on things such as "first of run" etc. that are ever so important to comic collectors. In most OA circles I'm privy to, collectors place far greater premiums on things such as "Key Storyline", "Favorite Storyline", and of course what one considers the artistic/stylistic "Peak Period" for a particular artist. For example i'm sure the ASM #298 (First McFarlane Spidey) Comic is worth considerably more than say ASM #316, however literally every art collector I know would prefer to own pieces from ASM #316 because it is representative of what many consider to be Todd at his peak on the title. And I also think it is worth mentioning that the ASM #316 Cover (actually most of the later ASM Covers) would sell for multiples of it's #298 counterpart.

 

And I agree that this piece is as "McFarlane" as any of the Infinity Inc covers, however, has any Infinity Inc cover sold for more than 5k??

 

If this particular cover was auctioned with no reserve i'd be shocked if it realized a 5-figure number.

 

Am I crazy??

 

Ken

 

 

Edited by gambron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0