Cool Lines Art Work Inquiry 1 1

[eewwnuk]

Dumb question, but if they are actually committing fraud and doing something illegal, which is what people are saying and have been saying for years....then why haven't there been any repercussions to them or their business?

 

I still see them actively on CAF and apparently they remain on ebay.

 

Also for these big dollar transactions, are people really paying cash so that they have no recourse with a credit card company or paypal?

 

 

[SquareChaos]

Dumb question, but if they are actually committing fraud and doing something illegal, which is what people are saying and have been saying for years....then why haven't there been any repercussions to them or their business?

 

I still see them actively on CAF and apparently they remain on ebay.

 

Also for these big dollar transactions, are people really paying cash so that they have no recourse with a credit card company or paypal?

 

 

People don't pursue it. The easiest and cheapest tactic is to ignore spurned customer complaints until a lawyer is involved, then capitulate.

 

Typically, my guess is most that take it that far are just looking for a refund without having to spend a lot of legal fees to litigate on principled grounds... Especially when you consider a lot of these claims may be difficult to prove in a court setting.

[jqa3]

The easiest and cheapest tactic is to ignore spurned customer complaints until a lawyer is involved, then capitulate.

 

Maybe for the seller but in this day & age the customer has options.

Assuming you have been legitimately wronged, create a website such

as "dealerxrippedmeoff.com" and use keywords to your advantage.

Stay on the safe side of libel laws - be able to back up whatever

you post - and you'd be surprised at the results.

 

I finally got fed up with an overdue commission from an artist and can

tell you from experience that it is an option. Costs a few buck for a

godaddy domain but the payoff could be either the art or a refund.

(Or a letter/e-mail form a lawyer. But if you're in the right - and you

know it/have proof - DO NOT back down.) In my case I got a much

nicer piece than had been originally agreed upon although it did

have touch of "Virue" to it.

[chrisco37]

The easiest and cheapest tactic is to ignore spurned customer complaints until a lawyer is involved, then capitulate.

 

Maybe for the seller but in this day & age the customer has options.

Assuming you have been legitimately wronged, create a website such

as "dealerxrippedmeoff.com" and use keywords to your advantage.

Stay on the safe side of libel laws - be able to back up whatever

you post - and you'd be surprised at the results.

 

I finally got fed up with an overdue commission from an artist and can

tell you from experience that it is an option. Costs a few buck for a

godaddy domain but the payoff could be either the art or a refund.

(Or a letter/e-mail form a lawyer. But if you're in the right - and you

know it/have proof - DO NOT back down.) In my case I got a much

nicer piece than had been originally agreed upon although it did

have touch of "Virue" to it.

 

Do tell!

[NinjaSealed]

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/sam-kieth-marvel-collector-s-edition-1-wolverine-cover-charleston-chew-giveaway-original-art-marvel-1992-/a/7141-93139.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

 

 

http://www.comicartfans.com/ForSaleDetails.asp?ArtId=547593

 

 

 

[jaybuck43]

So my guess is that they took the original work, pasted it onto an unused Bristol board and added the paste ups. Then I guess they used a black and white scanner (hence why the blue lines look like graphite pencils). So since it sold for $4200 in November, it's now worth $15,000.

[comicwiz]

You just reopened that old wound when I made the mistake in asking about Sam Keith art. I've since handled the fainting at the sight of pricing his work better since I told myself its been lost in a fire.

[comix4fun]

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/sam-kieth-marvel-collector-s-edition-1-wolverine-cover-charleston-chew-giveaway-original-art-marvel-1992-/a/7141-93139.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

 

 

http://www.comicartfans.com/ForSaleDetails.asp?ArtId=547593

 

 

 

Adding titles, logos, and trade dress to an actual published cover doesn't bother me since they are stats anyway, as long as it's disclosed.

 

At least it's an actual cover and not some convention commission, or sketch, or some random piece that's being passed off as the original published piece, or mis-attributed to a much more appreciated (read: $$$) artist, or a piece that's just plain fake.

[NinjaSealed]

So my guess is that they took the original work, pasted it onto an unused Bristol board and added the paste ups. Then I guess they used a black and white scanner (hence why the blue lines look like graphite pencils). So since it sold for $4200 in November, it's now worth $15,000.

 

Something of that nature. They also actually decided to add art and extend the legs and claw at the bottom.

[comix4fun]

So my guess is that they took the original work, pasted it onto an unused Bristol board and added the paste ups. Then I guess they used a black and white scanner (hence why the blue lines look like graphite pencils). So since it sold for $4200 in November, it's now worth $15,000.

 

Something of that nature. They also actually decided to add art and extend the legs and claw at the bottom.

 

 

Oh, now that's messed up right there.

[comicwiz]

So my guess is that they took the original work, pasted it onto an unused Bristol board and added the paste ups. Then I guess they used a black and white scanner (hence why the blue lines look like graphite pencils). So since it sold for $4200 in November, it's now worth $15,000.

 

Is it possible the CAF link is just a cover proof of the production art?

[NinjaSealed]

You just reopened that old wound when I made the mistake in asking about Sam Keith art. I've since handled the fainting at the sight of pricing his work better since I told myself its been lost in a fire.

 

I bid on this piece, thought it went for a fair/very fair price and was kind of regretting not going higher. Now I REALLY regret it.

[NinjaSealed]

So my guess is that they took the original work, pasted it onto an unused Bristol board and added the paste ups. Then I guess they used a black and white scanner (hence why the blue lines look like graphite pencils). So since it sold for $4200 in November, it's now worth $15,000.

 

Is it possible the CAF link is just a cover proof of the production art?

 

Considering all the facts I highly doubt it.

[comicwiz]

The revised art is suspect, and the colour proof that was included in the Heritage auction is why I asked. But it still looks like a cover proof to me, that maybe they digitally altered later?

 

Either way, an explanation is in order here, and "no description" in their CAF FS listing isn't going to cut it.

 

Good catch.

[jaybuck43]

So my guess is that they took the original work, pasted it onto an unused Bristol board and added the paste ups. Then I guess they used a black and white scanner (hence why the blue lines look like graphite pencils). So since it sold for $4200 in November, it's now worth $15,000.

 

Is it possible the CAF link is just a cover proof of the production art?

 

A cover proof wouldn't have paste ups. They (usually) will xerox with overlays.

 

Also Holy Hell Ninja, I missed the extended leg, shading, and claw. That is HORRENDOUS. I mean theoretically you could have someone remove the real page from the Bristol and the art (probably) wasn't harmed) but what the ever loving hell???

I think it's time to get the NY AG's office on this. SMDH

[NinjaSealed]

Yeah, the additional art is what prompted the post, the other stuff is whatever floats your boat, but messing with the art.....

 

I wonder why they didn't add a SNIKT!, should be worth another $5k

[comicwiz]

So my guess is that they took the original work, pasted it onto an unused Bristol board and added the paste ups. Then I guess they used a black and white scanner (hence why the blue lines look like graphite pencils). So since it sold for $4200 in November, it's now worth $15,000.

 

Is it possible the CAF link is just a cover proof of the production art?

 

A cover proof wouldn't have paste ups. They (usually) will xerox with overlays.

 

Are you saying this because you see shadow lines from the title/logo/masthead?

 

I'm not asking to be thick, as I understand there's a layer of revision here (the claws) that didn't make it to the final production cover, but because I've seen "cover proofs" floating around that have seemed suspect to me.

 

Proofs are not an area of interest of mine, so I tend to be more of a sideline observer to what gets listed at any given time when I'm searching for OA.

 

Generally though, the line weight of shadow drops on titling are usually inconsistent on cover proofs (sometimes appearing like dotted lines).

 

It's either a generational loss that comes from reproducing line art, or dialing-up the contrast through saturation so the black ink pops for digital rendering.

 

This is why I wondered if this was mocked-up or digitally created post-production.

[comicwiz]

BTW: this is what I mean by the dotted line appearance on the shadow drop effect on the title

[vodou]

Adding titles, logos, and trade dress to an actual published cover doesn't bother me since they are stats anyway, as long as it's disclosed.

 

At least it's an actual cover and not some convention commission, or sketch, or some random piece that's being passed off as the original published piece, or mis-attributed to a much more appreciated (read: $$$) artist, or a piece that's just plain fake.

Agree. Except that overlays aren't always used, nothing worse (imo) than cheezy b/w photocopier trade dress glued down directly onto previously bland/pristine board space. The "work" coming out of CL seems to be a bit higher quality now, still not on overlays that I've seen though, but ten years ago...ugly b/w photocopies of the comic blown up and all around shtty, even out to arm's length + distance. And glued/pasted down (using non-archival no doubt!)

[comicwiz]

I much prefer acetate overlays with stats, than gluing the stats on the board. The only thing I have to ask though is this - certainly archival glue makes sense, but unless you are professionally removing that destructive adhesive used by publishers, there's nothing slowing down the inevitable yellowing that will happen unless that glue is completely removed. The fact it's hiding behind stats doesn't mean it isn't there.