• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

New podcast/video from Felix Comic Art (UPDATED 1/3/17!)
6 6

1,647 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, vodou said:

Who but those age 40+ would care? That's where the money is, but that window is closing fast. If these things only come out of estates (like the stuff of Ethan's has) too much later, another ten or fifteen years...will even today's age 40+ care? They'll be 50+ and thinking a lot about how much Medicare doesn't cover. I don't think anybody born after 1978 will at all. And certainly not for more than $1k. Interesting will be those of us still alive watching them go for hundreds and even we can't muster the energy to hit the red button ;)

Many of the early-to-mid '80s indie titles are squarely in my nostalgic sweet spot and there are still a number of titles that I'd love to get a killer example from and would pay up for.  That said, fast forward 10 years and I'm guessing I'm not buying them unless the price is super attractive.  15-20 years, forget about it - at that point, I'm probably enjoying what I have, but, there's almost no chance that I'm still actively buying.  In a nutshell, you're right - the window for people to cash in on '80s nostalgia at/near its peak will be closing rapidly IMO with the '80s kids still mostly in their 40s.  Once that group ages into the mid-50s and 60s, it's game over - a lot of guys will no longer be buying, others will be less willing to pay up, and few will embark on collecting more than 1 example whereas they might have gone all out in their prime collecting days.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it fair to say that  - for those stories that remain in print or take on new life in movies or gaming - a new generation can take over  from nostalgia buyers who grew up with the work when it was new? 

I am thinking of comic collecting. Current (young-ish) collectors still buy comics that came out years before they were born.  Could that work with art?

What about inheritance - will some kids of current collectors take up the mantle? Will they take over the collections and grow them? Or even if they just keep them - will that keep prices up as supply is low? Or will all this art be dumped on the market at some point?

Anyone here ever get artwork handed down to you that hung in your home as a child?

Even though you wouldnt pick the item if it was up to you - you still love it and cherish it because of the memories attached to it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Skizz said:

But the appreciation for a classic is a logical response to the having an understanding of history/tradition, which is less powerful than the emotional response that is created by nostalia.

 

Price wise this is exactly the opposite in the long term. Nostalgia/hype fade with time, but historical importance is forever. If DK prices drop, it won't be from a lack of fans of the story, but a lack of buyers of comic art altogether. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Mr. Machismo said:

Thanks for listening, everyone. Good conversation. 

I’ve had a number of emails come through on CAF regarding the podcast. Interesting trend: they also were not impacted by DKR, and in some cases downright hated it. I’m surprised to hear this from some collectors, and it’s my belief there’s a reservation among younger collectors to express this as it will somehow discredit them in a hobby which is dominated by mature individuals.

When I first read DKR in my teens, I really did not like it. I felt it was far too copy-heavy and the news segments were incredibly boring and broke up the action. I view it very differently now having gone back to it, but it’s still not in my personal top 5. I have no nostalgia towards it, despite reading it early on.

Regarding nostalgia strength VS time, my view differs from Felix’s a bit. Although Dark Victory, HUSH, and Long Halloween were among the first comics I read, it’s Court of Owls which I hold the fondest memories of. This is true for some other listeners who have contacted me as well, as a number of them jumped into comics with the New 52 reboot, or really amped it up when things seemingly became more accessible. Yes, it feels like comics nowadays are reset to #1 almost yearly, but this was the FIRST time Batman went back to #1, and psychologically that brought a lot of new readers in.

Anyhow, it will be interesting to watch prices over the next couple decades. Because the vast majority of art collectors skew older — and sometimes don’t even read new comics from the big two — there’s an inherent lack of appreciation of new work VS the older stuff. Where comments like “Snyder and Capullo’s run was average” and “White Knight is horrible” is echoed among the veteran collectors, an intense and opposing reaction is heard from the younger, heavily active readership. Do you have any idea the hype that is heard throughout local comic stores for White Knight? 

As I mentioned, I do best on the pieces which are absurdly priced and mocked, by far. In part, I attribute this to not possessing a heavy bias towards older work, for whatever significance or reason, which can sometimes lead to a disconnect to what’s happening today. An observation!

Interesting comment all around, and I appreciate your comments in the podcast. 

As for the highlighted parts... I just don't hear people saying Snyder & Capullo's run was average. I've heard people say it is overhyped but that is a nearly reflex reaction from comic fans these days when a book starts to get critical attention and people start to list it among the great runs in the cannon. I think time will eventually put their run, if not as top tier Batman cannon, then definitely just in the rung below.


I do hear plenty of people beating on White Knight, and yeah, I do read modern comics regularly. I've yet to hear anyone (outside of the internet) glow over it, but that doesn't mean it can't its own success and readership. Having said that... I'll eat my hat if people are talking about this series in 5 years, let alone 20. I'm sure I'll still be around on the boards in 2023, so look me up to collect if I'm wrong.

 

Anyway, as others have said, it does seem like the talk is often about the next DKR - the interesting thing to me has been the propensity for speculators to seek this in a Batman book. I'm pretty strongly of the opinion that you can't do a 'next DKR' with Batman; my opinion has always been that they need to look for it elsewhere, look for a character that hasn't reached it's full potential. Too many Batman books, especially limited series, are visibly trying too hard to reach those heights and - at least in my experience - it is very noticeable and pretty off-putting 2c

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone that read TDKR and Watchmen when they were first released, I was not impressed.  

I was a huge FM fan and appreciated his futuristic view of Batman but it took me awhile to warm up to his new artistic style.  

Alan Moore has always had a fan following because he treated comics seriously and assumed his audience was mature, intelligent and literate.  However, IMHO, Moore tends to be a bit verbose.  There might very well be more words per square inch on the page than art.  The overall plot was neither unique or groundbreaking.

** SPOILER ALERT **

Sacrifice a million lives to save billions of lives is hardly unique.

** End of Spoiler **

IMHO, I thought Dave Gibbons' art was serviceable but not great.  Do you see anyone clamoring for Gibbons' non-Watchmen art?

So when it comes down to TDKR and Watchmen, I believe those collectors are buying more for the nostalgia of the story than the actual art itself. 

Same with The Sandman.  IMHO, the title sold on the strength of Neil Gaiman's writing than the crop of rotating artists.  Some of the artists were fantastic, some average.  However, if you ask collectors of Sandman OA, it doesn't matter who the artist is.  It's all about Gaiman's writing.

So any future contenders for the next "classic" better have strong writing.  I am with Gene on Brubaker / Epting's run on Captain America.  For full disclosure, I do own some Epting art.  Conversely, on the subject of collecting art for art's sake, people buy art all the time without reading the comic at all.  Want proof?  Look no further than cover artists that have sold their art before the comics have been released.  Adam Hughes, Art Adams, JSC, Finch, etc.  From Felix's own roster, how about Tradd Moore or Skottie Young?  Their art will sell regardless of the writing.

Thankfully, not everyone collects the same type of art. 

Cheers!

N.

 

 

    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NelsonAI said:

So when it comes down to TDKR and Watchmen, I believe those collectors are buying more for the nostalgia of the story than the actual art itself. 

Same with The Sandman.  IMHO, the title sold on the strength of Neil Gaiman's writing than the crop of rotating artists.  Some of the artists were fantastic, some average.  However, if you ask collectors of Sandman OA, it doesn't matter who the artist is.  It's all about Gaiman's writing.

That's not something I've ever read before, but it mirrors my own feeling towards all three books. Sandman in particular...wow, I just never got it. Thus I have no interest in the OA. There have been other times when I've been out of step with consensus and, being that most of us like similar things overall -that's what makes a hobby, I've usually been able to come back later with more maturity or additional context and found myself also wowed by the (finally!) obvious genius of the subject. Still hasn't happened with these three though. DKR, I'll give another run at soon enough. The other two, especially Sandman, probably never, trying to to digest the entirety of Sandman might be a financial commitment (even in trades or omnibus or whatever) that I just don't care enough to make. Three Absolute Preacher volumes (two out now, the third later this year), even that I'm having trouble forking out for -basically to find out "what the big deal is?" It just adds up. When it works though, it sure is fun, binging on quality bites that add up to a larger vision (having just finished Criminal Deluxe 1 a few minutes ago, can't wait to hit Deluxe 2!)

6 hours ago, NelsonAI said:

Conversely, on the subject of collecting art for art's sake, people buy art all the time without reading the comic at all.  Want proof?  Look no further than cover artists that have sold their art before the comics have been released.  Adam Hughes, Art Adams, JSC, Finch, etc.  From Felix's own roster, how about Tradd Moore or Skottie Young?  Their art will sell regardless of the writing. 

What I was getting at in posing the question again, here, was more nuanced: collecting art that doesn't tie up nicely with what you already know/expect (basically a very un-safe 'bet'). So scratch...AH!, Art Adams, JSC, Finch, etc. Those are the safest 'bets' of all, zero surprises, unless you simply overpay by a wide margin (a fool and his money... lol) And so what, that can happen anytime, anywhere, the overpaying. Maybe Tradd Moore and Skottie Young? (but only if something indie and not tied to Big Two 'product' type output!) Even so, those guys have enough under their belt now that their sensibility to art, interpreting a -script sequentially, their style is pretty much a known quantity. Sight unseen. (Except to those that haven't been previously exposed: me, for example. So there may be some personal un-safe at play for pockets of individuals, allowing that I'm not the only one.)

Instead...example: how many are buying Chiang Paper Girls, DWJ Extremity quickly (before the ers sell out!) having not read a single issue, no idea what the story is about even, and neither being obvious as to what they are (visually speaking) except that (broadly) reviews seem favorable, both released by proper publishers (versus self-p, thus some editorial gatekeeping at play) and...the sht sells out fast (did I mention that already?) I did that recently, bought blind, several times. The art caught my eye, was attractive at a quick glance but also drew me in to wanting to figure it out 'more'. Because I don't buy single floppies anymore, only collecteds, I'm always 'behind' on what Felix is offering. That means: I don't know the storyline, the characters, what I'm even looking at on a given original (buncha faces, buncha action, whatever, without dialogue even!) A real blind purchase in the sense I'm bringing it up. (Except that it is sequential, so we're not talking about abstract collage art or something!) And in case it hasn't sunk in yet...you have to get there early to get something good and, more and more, anything at all. That means buying before the trade comes out, or buying art from issues you haven't personally read yet, based only on reading whatever the most recent collected of previous issues was. (That, however is a safer 'bet', as one has at least read something on the subject!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, NelsonAI said:

IMHO, I thought Dave Gibbons' art was serviceable but not great.  Do you see anyone clamoring for Gibbons' non-Watchmen art?

So when it comes down to TDKR and Watchmen, I believe those collectors are buying more for the nostalgia of the story than the actual art itself. 

Same with The Sandman.  IMHO, the title sold on the strength of Neil Gaiman's writing than the crop of rotating artists.  Some of the artists were fantastic, some average.  However, if you ask collectors of Sandman OA, it doesn't matter who the artist is.  It's all about Gaiman's writing.

I remember in the early days of my OA collecting that Watchmen art was still (relatively) inexpensive, as the prevailing view was that it was Moore's writing, not Gibbons' art, that made it special.*  But, over time, I think people grew to recognize that a piece of WM art is not only what Gibbons put on the board, but also incorporates Moore's genius/input.  I also think that people grew to appreciate Gibbons' contribution to the series; his style was really bang-on perfect for it IMO.  I suspect if he had subsequently had a long stint on a major superhero title post-WM (instead of a Supes issue here, some British comics there, etc.) that his non-WM art probably would be more in demand these days.   

Of course there is a nostalgia component to buying WM and DKR art...but, I think there's also the historical significance of the two series and the prestige that comes with owning pieces from them.  One can buy Rob Liefeld art out of nostalgia (not saying there's anything wrong with that at all) and one can buy DKR art out of nostalgia, but, only one of those purchases is going to add gravitas to your collection. 

I totally agree that writing is what determines classics over the long-term (not that artists, in transforming that to visuals, can't play a significant role in the visual language and storytelling, of course).  Todd McFarlane ASM art might always be in-demand on the strength of the art, but, no one in their right mind would call ASM #298-328 a must-read classic run on the strength of the largely forgettable writing (and that goes double for the McSpidey series).  When it comes to Batman, it's the strength of the writing that will keep DKR and Year One so revered IMO. 2c 

 

* Definitely should have seen it coming that people would eventually just clamor to own a piece of Watchmen! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, NelsonAI said:

 

IMHO, I thought Dave Gibbons' art was serviceable but not great.  Do you see anyone clamoring for Gibbons' non-Watchmen art?

 

Cheers!

N.

 

 

    

You mean like pages from Superman Annual 11?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, NelsonAI said:

As someone that read TDKR and Watchmen when they were first released, I was not impressed.  

I was a huge FM fan and appreciated his futuristic view of Batman but it took me awhile to warm up to his new artistic style.  

Alan Moore has always had a fan following because he treated comics seriously and assumed his audience was mature, intelligent and literate.  However, IMHO, Moore tends to be a bit verbose.  There might very well be more words per square inch on the page than art.  The overall plot was neither unique or groundbreaking.

** SPOILER ALERT **

Sacrifice a million lives to save billions of lives is hardly unique.

** End of Spoiler **

IMHO, I thought Dave Gibbons' art was serviceable but not great.  Do you see anyone clamoring for Gibbons' non-Watchmen art?

So when it comes down to TDKR and Watchmen, I believe those collectors are buying more for the nostalgia of the story than the actual art itself. 

Same with The Sandman.  IMHO, the title sold on the strength of Neil Gaiman's writing than the crop of rotating artists.  Some of the artists were fantastic, some average.  However, if you ask collectors of Sandman OA, it doesn't matter who the artist is.  It's all about Gaiman's writing.

So any future contenders for the next "classic" better have strong writing.  I am with Gene on Brubaker / Epting's run on Captain America.  For full disclosure, I do own some Epting art.  Conversely, on the subject of collecting art for art's sake, people buy art all the time without reading the comic at all.  Want proof?  Look no further than cover artists that have sold their art before the comics have been released.  Adam Hughes, Art Adams, JSC, Finch, etc.  From Felix's own roster, how about Tradd Moore or Skottie Young?  Their art will sell regardless of the writing.

Thankfully, not everyone collects the same type of art. 

Cheers!

N.

 

 

    

I think people buy Preacher art because of the importance of the comic, not because Steve Dillon's art was particularly special (although I personally really like it). He clearly was perfectly suited to the material, but its not special. Like Gibbons, nobody is clamoring for Dillon art outside of Preacher (except maybe some Judge Dredd stuff).

I think the next "TDKR" may never come, as far as comic books go. There is nothing today that gets the same kind of mass audience that book got. The only thing close would be The Waking Dead, but that's a long-running saga, with a ton of art available. TDKR art is valuable in large part because there is not very much art available. Supply and Demand. If you want TWD art, it's easy to come by. Now, "key" pages are more expensive, obviously. But, you will never get the average per page price for TDKR. If Saga art were available, it would also probably be in this category.

I think what would have to happen is that a fairly popular (by today's standards) LIMITED RUN independent comic book becomes a pop culture phenomenon (a la the TMNJ), and gets turned into a big movie franchise, with TV spin offs, etc. I say "limited run" as opposed to ongoing (like TWD) because that original limited run's art would become the most valuable art of the property. It would, inevitably, be sequelized as a comic book, and create a larger universe. But, that initial run would be special. Hell Boy had a shot at that too.

And, had the initial TMNT run been a 6 issue limited series, that may qualify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the very fact that there is a debate about the long term value of TDKR art means that it is probably going to come down from it's lofty heights at some point. It will never be cheap. I think, long term, stuff like the Ditko Spidey pages, or Kirby/Sinnott FF pages (especially from issues 48-50) are the ones that will win out as the most desirable in the hobby. Even among younger collectors. Because, as important as TDKR was, what Kirby and Ditko did in the early Marvel days was far more important for the hobby, and even popular culture.

I recall back in the 70's and early 80's when I would get my annual copy of the Overstreet price guide. I would be amazed that Marvel Comics #1 was more valuable than Action #1 or Detective 27. But, particularly Action #1. I thought "This is the most important comic book ever printed. And it's the second most valuable? This doesn't make any sense to me." I knew this was wrong even when I was a kid.

And, history has born this judgment out. Marvel #1 had a halo effect because it was the first "Marvel" comic. But, history, and logic, won out.

If I had to choose between a good TDKR page and a good Ditko Spidey page, I'd take the latter any day of the week.  

Edited by PhilipB2k17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

 

If I had to choose between a good TDKR page and a good Ditko Spidey page, I'd take the latter any day of the week.  

Yeah but, at this point, the latter is going to cost you double what the former does. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, comix4fun said:

Yeah but, at this point, the latter is going to cost you double what the former does. 

And it should. And, I think this illustrates the point. I think Mandel majorly overpaid for that TDKR splash.

I think people should be asking "what's the next Ditko Spider-Man" not the next "TDKR."

Edited by PhilipB2k17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

And it should.

I just mean it's not a one to one choice. 

Most people would probably choose the Ditko, as the cornerstone of the hobby/title/character/icon that it represents. That demand is where the price difference is created. 

So you're on the right track in thinking a good Ditko Spidey is more desirable than a good Miller DKR page. The market agrees. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

I just mean it's not a one to one choice. 

Most people would probably choose the Ditko, as the cornerstone of the hobby/title/character/icon that it represents. That demand is where the price difference is created. 

So you're on the right track in thinking a good Ditko Spidey is more desirable than a good Miller DKR page. The market agrees. 

I also think Romtia Spidey pages are significantly inflated. Yes, the KEY pages and covers should be worth a lot. But, the run of the mill Spidey fighting some nondescript random villain in an issue that has no story importance, is just too expensive for what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

I also think Romtia Spidey pages are significantly inflated. Yes, the KEY pages and covers should be worth a lot. But, the run of the mill Spidey fighting some nondescript random villain in an issue that has no story importance, is just too expensive for what it is.

If that's true I am sure it will eventually correct itself. 

Most of the results that seem inflated are auction results, so it's not a seller demanding too much and a Marvel Zombie opening his wallet. 

It's followed it's current arc for so long, however, it may simply "feel" inflated while the rest of the market is acclimated and accepting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

If that's true I am sure it will eventually correct itself. 

Most of the results that seem inflated are auction results, so it's not a seller demanding too much and a Marvel Zombie opening his wallet. 

It's followed it's current arc for so long, however, it may simply "feel" inflated while the rest of the market is acclimated and accepting. 

It takes a few years for this stuff to shake out. I think those prices will come down. Or, at least, the price inflation will slow to a relative crawl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

It takes a few years for this stuff to shake out. I think those prices will come down. Or, at least, the price inflation will slow to a relative crawl.

Hoping you're right. I've been waiting over 20 years for that to happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

I think the very fact that there is a debate about the long term value of TDKR art means that it is probably going to come down from it's lofty heights at some point. It will never be cheap. I think, long term, stuff like the Ditko Spidey pages, or Kirby/Sinnott FF pages (especially from issues 48-50) are the ones that will win out as the most desirable in the hobby. Even among younger collectors. Because, as important as TDKR was, what Kirby and Ditko did in the early Marvel days was far more important for the hobby, and even popular culture.

I may be in the minority in saying that I have no interest in ditko spidey or Kirby ff.  I would think that a younger generation would probably rather spend $50k on a splashy Jim Lee cover than some of this older art that they don't have any emotional connection with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, eewwnuk said:

I may be in the minority in saying that I have no interest in ditko spidey or Kirby ff.  I would think that a younger generation would probably rather spend $50k on a splashy Jim Lee cover than some of this older art that they don't have any emotional connection with. 

No interest as in "if someone offered it to me in a price range I could afford, I wouldn't buy it?" Or "that's so unobtainable, I don't pay that much attention to it?"

Link to comment
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
6 6