Near six figure MTG art sales
0

586 posts in this topic

3,915 posts

 

The source and it's dissemination as pop culture, fine art or otherwise doesn't matter to me one way or the other. I don't like art for the name of the artist attached, or the brand, or how popular it is, or even in most cases for any nostalgic ties to it. I like a piece of art or an artist because I like the art and it elicits a response from me. Pretty simple.

 

 

(thumbs u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts

@Eric

 

Then you are one of the few guys that prefers sketchbook pages and after the fact commissions over vintage published. If that's you, fine, but IMO the art itself and the subject matter are inextricably linked. Terry's giving you the big high five :) because he likes to give the same speech but that magic card art which he likes "solely for the art" is created a certain way, for a certain purpose. You can't strip it entirely of its subject matter and place of publication because the subject matter is it's entire reason for being in the first place, and for looking a certain way.

 

To put it another way, I pretty well abhor Trimpe but I'll take the hulk 181 cover 1000x over the romita wolverine concept. If you prefer the romita, well that's certainly a valid choice, and you can point to reasons (better artist, first rendering of character, looser, more organic), but it's still spooning crazy. IMHO of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,915 posts

 

Terry's giving you the big high five :)

 

 

Thumbs up.

 

Just being pedantic, here, y'know? (shrug)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts

Hehehehe you're right, it was a thumbs up ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,915 posts
Hehehehe you're right, it was a thumbs up ;)

 

(thumbs u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,254 posts
Terry's giving you the big high five :) because he likes to give the same speech but that magic card art which he likes "solely for the art" is created a certain way, for a certain purpose. You can't strip it entirely of its subject matter and place of publication because the subject matter is it's entire reason for being in the first place, and for looking a certain way.

I'll let you guys fight (well only Bronty it seems?) amongst yourselves, just wanted to peel this out. It's my big problem with this current MTG movement (vs. the older amateur hour stuff that's big bucks now). Anyway you cut it...it's D&D, no matter how well painted, how majestic in scope and drama. It's magic, dwarves, ogres, all that. And primarily posed like those gazillion OHOTMU illos from the eighties. Little to no narrative, all D&D all day long. I can't get past that (as a D&D is for dorks sort) and so the art, nice as it is, does not land in my collection. But Frazetta, Boris and Ken Kelly do. Less D&D, maybe?? So who knows, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,281 posts
@Eric

 

Then you are one of the few guys that prefers sketchbook pages and after the fact commissions over vintage published.

 

Again, you're trying to pigeonhole me in a way that doesn't really fit. If it makes you feel better, I'm fine with that though.

 

Sometimes I do like prelims more than published pages, and sometimes I like the published pages more. It depends on the artist, the work in question, etc. But I buy and like work based on whichever appeals to me. I don't tend to like commissions. I used to do a lot of that sort of thing, but it wasn't where my heart really lies. It might be helpful to see my CAF, if you've never looked. It's not even close to everything, but it's an example. Compared to what folks on CAF are into, I like the dark, offbeat and weird stuff. I've always said, I am an anomaly on this board compared to most. I've had a lot of hero stuff over the years. Some really neat stuff. A couple Kirby covers & some interiors, Neal Adams Brave & Bold Bats and Deadman pages, Alex Ross Marvels and Kingdom Come pages, etc. And I went through a period a decade and a half ago when I had a metric ton of themed commissions like Chris has. But I felt that urge and interest pass, and I eventually moved on. Over time I kepts the stuff that continued to fascinate me years later, and sold off a lot of stuff worth a WHOLE LOT more now than I ever sold it for. I'm good with that. I also still really really enjoy seeing those things and more. I ahve a pretty huge appreciation for most art. Even for things that don't personally appeal to me. Just don't feel the motivation to own them. A lot of stuff I'm perfectly happy looking at the printed books for instead. :)

 

I'd bet most folks here couldn't be bothered to even look at my collection for more than a few minutes. I'm good with that too. I discover new amazing things in pieces I've owned for more than 2 decades all the time.

http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryDetail.asp?GCat=7723

 

I'd say half my collection now is printed work, but printed in art monographs rather than comics and graphic novels. I grew up as an artist, and I've always approached work with an eye in that field. I never fit in as a straight ahead comic collector either, for what it's worth. I bought and read all my comics. Never cared for bags and boards, and wouldn't know what the hell a key is if it slapped me in the face. I'm in it for the stories, and to feel something or be inspired. not so much for the "collector" side of things.

 

I would rather have a nifty Alex Toth, Jeff Jones or Frazetta pencil prelim drawing than an finished McFarlane "key" cover. Simply because the McFarlane doesn't do it for me aesthetically and the Toth piece likely would. If it had to be Spiderman, give me Moebius' poster art.

 

And from the flipside, I'd rather have a great finished and published Walt Kelly Pogo strip over a highly detailed Jim Lee Batman prelim, or something of that sort. Though the street values on those are probably a lot closer together. For me it's all by gut reaction, instinct and interest.

 

And for the sake of argument, I might very well actually prefer a commission of EWJ over one of those published box art pieces. I bet Felix Fine Art could arrange for a pretty incredible James Harren piece if I was so inclined. I know he could totally bring it. But would I like that more than what I have from Doug TenNapel? Hard to say.

 

In my house the walls are to the point that I won't buy a piece unless I love it enough to knock something else off the wall. I know, it's crazy to folks with portfolios full of work (and I used to do that too), but it's my way now.

 

Anyway, I'm done talking about what motivates me. I've done my best to explain it. People that know me generally get it. I'm sure most collectors think of me as a wingnut. It's all good. I know who I am and how I fit into things, and how I don't.

 

My apologies to anyone that read all that. And for dragging the thread down in whatever this is.

Back to Magic cards...

 

I think George Pratt's Fatal Blow is pretty great. I had to look that one up. I knew he had one I really liked back then. It's super dynamic, and effective. There are a lot of heavily rendered Magic cards I don't like nearly as much. So there! Heh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts

 

I would rather have a nifty Alex Toth pencil prelim drawing than an finished McFarlane "key" cover. Simply because the McFarlane doesn't do it for me aesthetically and the Toth piece likely would. .

 

Well that's precisely what I was getting at, and yes its not a choice many people would make. We do agree ;)

 

And yes, Felix art is a lovely institution

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,281 posts
And yes, Felix art is a lovely institution

There you go... some concensus!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts
Terry's giving you the big high five :) because he likes to give the same speech but that magic card art which he likes "solely for the art" is created a certain way, for a certain purpose. You can't strip it entirely of its subject matter and place of publication because the subject matter is it's entire reason for being in the first place, and for looking a certain way.

I'll let you guys fight (well only Bronty it seems?) amongst yourselves, just wanted to peel this out. It's my big problem with this current MTG movement (vs. the older amateur hour stuff that's big bucks now). Anyway you cut it...it's D&D, no matter how well painted, how majestic in scope and drama. It's magic, dwarves, ogres, all that. And primarily posed like those gazillion OHOTMU illos from the eighties. Little to no narrative, all D&D all day long. I can't get past that (as a D&D is for dorks sort) and so the art, nice as it is, does not land in my collection. But Frazetta, Boris and Ken Kelly do. Less D&D, maybe?? So who knows, right?

 

 

Its definitely D&D all day, hard to argue that part, whether one likes or hates that fact.

 

What's OHOTMU?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,254 posts
What's OHOTMU?

Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,281 posts

How to Paint the Gathering, the Magic Way!

Who uses the Magic Method?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,915 posts
Terry's giving you the big high five :) because he likes to give the same speech but that magic card art which he likes "solely for the art" is created a certain way, for a certain purpose. You can't strip it entirely of its subject matter and place of publication because the subject matter is it's entire reason for being in the first place, and for looking a certain way.

I'll let you guys fight (well only Bronty it seems?) amongst yourselves, just wanted to peel this out. It's my big problem with this current MTG movement (vs. the older amateur hour stuff that's big bucks now). Anyway you cut it...it's D&D, no matter how well painted, how majestic in scope and drama. It's magic, dwarves, ogres, all that. And primarily posed like those gazillion OHOTMU illos from the eighties. Little to no narrative, all D&D all day long. I can't get past that (as a D&D is for dorks sort) and so the art, nice as it is, does not land in my collection. But Frazetta, Boris and Ken Kelly do. Less D&D, maybe?? So who knows, right?

 

As far as I'm concerned, there's no fight here, just an exchange of opinions. It's all good and I find interest in most opinions being expressed.

 

Your take on the MTG movement could equally apply to other stuff within the OA realm enthused about here, on CGC Forums. (shrug)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,254 posts
Your take on the MTG movement could equally apply to other stuff within the OA realm enthused about here, on CGC Forums. (shrug)

Correct. I can't get past the context. Too heavy-handed (for me) to ignore. Which is why the argument of comic art ending up in permanent museum collections alongside other Post-WWII Art, when the majority of gatekeepers/tastemakers are not rabid comic book collectors...doesn't hold water :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts

For Dungeon:

 

here's that necro that went for 35k

 

necro1_zpsqcd6jogn.jpg

 

necro2_zpsmzgy3svs.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts

Looks like that librarities is no longer the place to go - there's a place called the mana drain with an art area that gets a good amount of traffic and facebook group called MTG art exchange that seems quite lively. manadrain mentioned a private auction for this, regenerate from alpha. It was at 13k when the notification was posted but not idea what it ended at

 

reg_zpsiudul1uo.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
377 posts

Donato Giancola apparently still has some originals left here. Prices seem sane on a standalone basis but I don't know how they fare once you factor in the popularity/importance/lack thereof of the cards which they illustrate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts

well, 95+% of the cards that come out are garbage from a play perspective.

 

If you look at Rack & Ruin for 6k, nobody would use that card now - garbage. When it came out it would have seen some light play though.

 

So not the worst but ten steps down from the best and not anything anyone would care about. "Almost mildly usable once upon a time" isn't going to set any hearts afire. In that context 6k seems pricey.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,281 posts

So this is probably a dumb question,

but is it truly a case of awesome card for game play but blah art can = $$$$$$

Lousy playing card with amazing art can = $$$

 

Probably obvious to others, but at the risk of picking up from yesterday, I find that a curiosity. It's probably already been addressed in the thread. I'll go back and re-read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,932 posts

Re:

 

"awesome card for game play but blah art can = $$$$$$

Lousy playing card with amazing art can = $$$"

 

--Sure.

 

and you can add

lousy card lousy art = $

 

 

Now replace 'key/popular comic' with 'card for game play' and you've pretty well priced comic covers too. A beautiful cover to a nothing comic series from a nothing publisher won't get squat. A so-so ASM cover? Ca-ching

 

The only real surprise is how much trouble people have applying what happens in their own hobby to another hobby. NOT a shot at you, I think 90% of people have this trouble(!) ( and as you've said your tastes are varied).

 

Here's a 1960s example. What's going to be worth more - a lovely williamson flash gordon cover from the 1960s series? Or a weak ditko (and I love ditko) ASM cover like #35?

 

Or, what's going to be worth more, a random but well rendered ditko charlton cover? Or that ASM cover? Its not even a contest. Make no mistake, this same formula that surprised you when applied to MTG is being applied around you, constantly. (In a way, even to the works that you collect 'only for the art'.. because if they lack a content association of significance they will be priced without that additional premium).

 

 

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