With technology scattering pop culture like never before... 1 1

[SquareChaos]

Can some of you people that have thought deeply about this explain the reasoning into why high end, big money fine art dealers would enter into the hobby in sufficient numbers to make a large impact?

 

From what I know of such circles, it is largely appreciation that makes them do it, but it's also about status. Is someone accustomed to acquiring fine art from acknowledged masters going to feel a status bump for acquiring a Wrightson, Kirby, Davis, or Raymond?

 

 

its just never going to happen. They collect their own stuff and comic oa and fine art are as different as comic collecting and book collecting.

 

Very few from here are going to go out and purchase a really expensive first edition novel (sure there might be a couple) and very few hardcore novel collectors are going to start collecting comics.

 

The similarities are fairly surface level... the differences quite deep.

 

That is near enough to my take on it. I'm confused every time I read the suggestion, thus my question.

[Mighty Hal]

It's a mug's game, trying to peek into the future. So let me have a turn.

 

There are some really smart people on these boards and I usually agree with most of what they say, but not in this regard. I tend to be cautious regarding the opinions of those collectors who are heavily into GA/SA/BA artwork. They barely acknowledge modern OA, they rarely buy it, so they assume there can't be much interest in the stuff. Moreover, the interest there is must be about to fade because comic sales aren't what they used to be. Right?

 

Sure, but there didn't use to be graphic novels, either. My small town library adds new graphic novels to the shelf every week. Almost all of them are from new series. Brian Hibbs says it's graphic novels that keep his comic stores afloat. Jim Zub writes a terrific comic called Wayward, per issue sales are fairly garbage, but he says the graphic novel numbers allow his artist (Steven Cummings, great work) to focus on the comic for his livelihood. Mr. Cummings hasn't been able to do that in the past.

 

Unlike floppies, graphic novels don't get slabbed, bagged, or boarded. They're read and re-read, and a new collector is born every day. I know there's an audience for modern comics and its artwork; it's just not in plain sight. And, yeah, all of the old stories have been published as graphic novels, too, but it's the new collections that are ending up on my library's shelves.

 

Not that modern comics are as necessarily dead as advertised, either. Go to the Modern Comic Section on the Message Boards, you'll usually find an audience of viewers that's bigger in number than the comic boards for GA/SA/BA. Almost always.

 

I appreciate modern OA, and it's at the heart of my collection, even if it doesn't get much respect here. I think the artwork of the past decade is often better drawn than the standard-issue art of years ago and the story lines are frequently more intriguing. The more popular artists keep bumping their prices up and up...hardly a sign of a diminishing interest.

 

However, if you're only talking investment, buy the single best original Kirby page you can find. Chances are, the family won't sue you.

[SquareChaos]

I've said it before, I'll say it again... new collectors had better like modern OA, because it's just about all that they can afford.

[Bronty]

HELOC.

 

[vodou]

HELOC.

 

Rising rates. Less attractive by the day.

[Dick O.]

Agree with the views expressed in this thread

 

These are some of the reasons why I started writing the Original Art Aficionado column - attract new OA collectors, stir enthusiasm among existing collectors, promote appreciation of post-'80s art (along with earlier art)!

[Bronty]

It was a joke

[vodou]

It was a joke

Yes but I'm sure you know a collector or two that has done just that, I know I do. Actually I know a guy that blew up his retirement account and went deep on Kirby and Ditko silver art. But that was nearly twenty years ago...and a very good move in hindsight (along with more fun too!)

[delekkerste]

Unlike floppies, graphic novels don't get slabbed, bagged, or boarded. They're read and re-read, and a new collector is born every day. I know there's an audience for modern comics and its artwork; it's just not in plain sight. And, yeah, all of the old stories have been published as graphic novels, too, but it's the new collections that are ending up on my library's shelves.

 

I disagree strongly. A new collector isn't born from graphic novels being available in libraries and bookstores - new readers are born. To the extent that it gets people involved in collecting, great, but the conversion rate I would wager is minuscule. I bought & read floppies for 25 years before switching over to TPBs, and now I read a mix of TPBs and digital (no floppies). For people who start with TPBs or digital, it's hard to imagine the migration the other way in any meaningful numbers.

 

It's not dissimilar to the TV shows & movies. People don't go see the latest Marvel movie and decide that they want to collect OA. At best, it's an intermediate step - they discover the comics (either through back issues or through TPBs) and then maybe they get into art if they get into the hobby subculture deeply enough that they scour the online sites, attend conventions, etc. But, like I said, the conversion rate is minuscule - these things mostly energize the existing collector base and bring lapsed collectors back into the fold.

 

The bottom line is that it takes a lot to convert a library patron or film goer into an OA collector. Most people read a TPB and/or see a superhero film and then go back to whatever else they were interested in beforehand. The amount of time and energy and networking and learning and exposure that must happen to actually create a new OA collector is immense. More than a billion people have probably been exposed to superhero movies/media (TPBs less of course) over the past 15 years. How many new OA collectors were created during that time (who weren't already comic readers/collectors?) Heck, how many collectors are there now?

[vodou]

The bottom line is that it takes a lot to convert a library patron or film goer into an OA collector.

I think it takes a lot to convert somebody into a ART collector, forget about the insular "hobby" of comics/properties originals! Look at museum attendance, look at how cutthroat the competition is among museum's to score and show "hot" properties (themes, major traveling pieces) to pull the numbers they need (and thus more/future donor funding behind the scenes).

 

IMO it's never been harder to be a museum, fiscally, assuming the institution doesn't want to drain the endowment for operating expenses(!) Similar for galleries that aren't Gagonsian, Zwirner, Boone, and the rest of a very small group at the top of the pyramid. The local gallery/frame shop model is suffering if not bankrupt except for ZIRP prop up.

 

With that in mind, and I'm sure some disagree, how much harder to convert the average Joe (or Singh or Chan) to comics...at an older age, inorganically (meaning a "decision to seek", not something all kids are gifted for their fifth birthday to encourage reading!) And then from there...to buying the art? Not the new stuff either, but the vintage for (often) the cost of a nice used car, nice new car, nice durned HOUSE in many parts of the non-coastal cities/burbs?

 

Well.

 

Is there another way it could happen? Sure, but then we're sort of talking about people (en masse) taking up ART (and/or COMIC art) by skipping the usual steps we all see and/or running to it as an asset class (localized hyper-inflation? dunno?!!) Highly speculative conversation if this is what we're doing here.

 

Working as I do with fine art...try turning any of your family, friends, extended folk onto a nice landscape...very nice, right over the couch piece, for...(just) $250. Blanch. "But, but I can get the same at Target for like $19.99!!", followed by 'me': "No. That's a inkjet print on canvas...straight outta Sweatshop Bangladesh". Response? "Whatever. Who care, I just wanted to fill the white space with some color, maybe I'll just re-paint the wall in a floral or something"

 

The above occurring where -even- contextual information is not required to "convert".

 

That's the challenge I face daily, nothing to do with comic art but everything to do with peoples general fear of the unknown...especially as the price tag rises past $19.99.

[delekkerste]

Not that modern comics are as necessarily dead as advertised, either. Go to the Modern Comic Section on the Message Boards, you'll usually find an audience of viewers that's bigger in number than the comic boards for GA/SA/BA. Almost always.

 

I appreciate modern OA, and it's at the heart of my collection, even if it doesn't get much respect here. I think the artwork of the past decade is often better drawn than the standard-issue art of years ago and the story lines are frequently more intriguing. The more popular artists keep bumping their prices up and up...hardly a sign of a diminishing interest.

 

Unlike many here, I actually read a lot of Modern comics. But, I disagree with your conclusions and feel that Modern OA is largely a mug's game.

 

First, I think the product is inherently inferior. No word balloons, often less detailed due to digital finishing techniques (inking, coloring, etc.) and, most crucially, decompressed storytelling. Less simply happens on a modern art page, and the lack of words makes it even harder to judge the context.

 

Second, there's just so much of it. Think about how many thousands of new pages are created each and every month. I haven't done the math, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few years of Modern books across all the dozens of publishers equals more OA than all the pre-1990 art still in existence. The % which is truly collectible is absolutely tiny. It also makes it easy to not chase pieces because there will be many comparable pages to choose from as well, unlike back in the old days.

 

Third, Modern OA is very faddish. Yes, despite points #1 and #2, plenty of modern readers/collectors still want OA from their favorite books. That said, with vintage art, many of the characters/titles have been published more or less continuously for decades. With Modern OA, indie titles tend to have a very finite lifespan, and are only hot during a certain part of their run. One day, it's all about Peter Panzerfaust and The Sixth Gun; the next it's all about something else.

 

And as for mainstream art from the Big Two, as good as the stories and art may be in some cases, it's hard to match the importance of the vintage art when the stories are reaching a tiny audience (by historical standards) and are merely adding on to 40, 50, 70 years of history. I think in many respects that the Bendis/Maleev and Brubaker/Lark Daredevil runs are every bit as good (in some cases, better) than the Miller DD run, but there are also so many more pages with so much less happening on them than the typical Miller DD page as to render them uninteresting from a collecting standpoint (and I think that Maleev's working methods mean that there aren't really many/any pages available from his run anyway - another casualty of modern comics).

 

Just as 80% of fine art never resells for a premium once it leaves the dealer, so it is with modern OA (probably even much higher than 80%). There's just so much of it out there, and certain titles and storylines only stay hot for so long. I enjoy reading modern titles, and read quite a number of them - I've long been reading various indie titles and I've been consuming vast amounts of Modern Marvel titles since signing up for Marvel Unlimited. But, I have very little interest in collecting art from these titles - maybe a standalone piece (cover) here or there, but it's just not the same. Maybe the younger generation won't have the same hang-ups, but, given all the other interests that they've grown up with, it's hard to credibly believe that they'll be flocking to modern OA in greater numbers than Gen X and the Baby Boomers flocked to vintage OA.

[delekkerste]

That's the challenge I face daily, nothing to do with comic art but everything to do with peoples general fear of the unknown...especially as the price tag rises past $19.99.

 

That's another thing - no matter how popular the movies or how available the TPBs, the fact is that high OA prices are much more of a barrier nowadays than when comic characters were less popular! Even outside of vintage, for newbies looking into modern OA, the prices are still going to look pretty high without having deep knowledge of the hobby/market to contextualize it.

[vodou]

I ...feel that Modern OA is largely a mug's game.

A big part of the problem with modern OA that of entry point. Newer current artists are standing on the shoulders of vintage 'collectible' reputations and pricing, using that as a benchmark to position themselves, their 'market'.

 

So we know all about Capullo. There's threads, no need to re-hash. You can add Jim Lee and a host of other still living/active comic artists to this list too. They started producing and built their reputations during the heyday of comic art rising at a 45 degree angle over the last 25 years. Not who I'm talking about, there's a track record and a built in collector base that keeps this train rolling at sufficient speed (for now).

 

I'm thinking more of Ian Bertram. As an example. (So NO I am not picking on Ian, Felix or their pricing model, figure the relatives skins are thick enough here to not cause a problem, just sayin'!) I like this guy's work. A lot. Saw some House of Penance posted on CAF this morning, reminded me of his work (again), and that I wanted to "do" something at some point there (= BUY!!) And then I got to the prices. And understand, I haven't read any of these books, don't know what's going on (no text on these), and in the case of HoP, it's a limited and done thing, right? (Meaning not Dr. Strange or whatever!) So the stuff that's a lot of fun to look at and excites my appreciate of Ian's skill...$250+. Forget about speculating, flipping down the road, all that...$250 as an entry point, well that buys a lot of things in the real world that "do" real things. Cheap lawn mower, hella nice coffee maker, service call to the electrician, plumber, a/c/heat guy, etc. That's what people outside comics think of first when it comes to $250. I'm inside and I still sorta back off. Not because $250 is the end of the world but it is competing with all the other vintage third-tier or not in costume art out there that does have some track record, some built-in following, can be let back out down the road for circa same money. Not sure about Bertram BoP though, I don't know what the aftermarket is and what the appreciation others have is (echo chamber = bad way to spend money on art!)

 

So is it a mug's game? Maybe not, but buy it to love it (but why a particular interior page out of many available of an indie title??) and consider the money lost. Sure. Assuming one even has $250 to burn on 'pure fun', xwhich is not a given in today's economy for those under 30 (35?!) Does anybody (a small handful aside) even "love" BoP at $250 to begin with? Is $250 the market price, or is the market being forced to pay that number or walk away? Just a gut but I'm feeling the eBay $0.99 start auction would end closer to $85-$100. Nice art, but not too much risk being taken on "fun" not paying out later.

 

All of this, not the math we had twenty, thirty years ago when "stuff" art was $20/page. And yes gas was $1.50/gal and we all made hella less (but we were teens/college, no resume, experience and not on salary either!) But median household wasn't too much lower than now (inflation adjusted) and household debt..was. There was likely more play money laying about. Ultimately it wasn't as hard to drop Friday night money on a page or two at a show, when it was $40-$60 total for two or three "stuffs" (of no particular anything, not covers et al). Don't know where you guys live, but in my area...Friday night money is not $250, it's about 25% of that. As much as I do like Bertram's BoP, it's not $50. I don't, at least today, love it for $250. At $50 I'd probably grab two or three...for fun and never look back. All fwiw...

[BCarter27]

Some great points. However, I'm not sure you can decry the volume of modern OA pages on one hand while lamenting the lack of supply (due to digital penciling/inking) on the other.

 

Also, indie art will always be more transitory than the 80-year superheroes. Someone getting priced out of Neal Adams Batman can look at an Eddy Barrows Batman and still feel some continuity there even if they aren't reading the current run. Indie art collecting is much more story-driven, than character- or aesthetics-driven.

 

I feel like indie explosion of recent years will lead to the indie OA market following the trend of other media... It will find its small niches of fans and collectors. Maybe that will keep pricing down for those fans and maybe that will be a good thing. The cost for entry into the hobby will be lower, stimulating participation for a web comic reader to pickup a page here or a cover there. Will there be another Jimmy Olsen-level circulation book? No, but as an article in the NY Times pointed out recently, nor will there be another ubiquitous All in the Family. (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/technology/how-netflix-is-deepening-our-cultural-echo-chambers.html) And maybe that is a good thing. No more homogenized society. OA (and comics) will live on because it will break into a multitude of smaller pieces.

 

(Unrelated, but I think you could then make the counter-argument that the quality of art will suffer because the big paychecks will no longer be there as an incentive for a working artist to soak their time into greater works. Maybe indie art collecting will devolve into only con sketches or commissions.)

 

Moving forward, I think indie OA will have even MORE collectors than the current Gen X and Baby Boomer crowd. However, the prices may be lower and the collections may be smaller. Volume up, price down.

 

I think the proliferation of reading digitally will mean that the fetishization of the object itself, which is the true heart of collecting, will be diminished. I think this is a good thing as well. People may finally learn to pursue the experience rather than the material goods. Maybe this will spill into OA. Maybe it should spill into OA.

 

But back to vintage super-heroes... In 30 years, what happens to all of the pages from today and back? If everyone is producing digitally with greater frequency, does it all become irrelevant garbage or does it then become truly collectible -- because now it is its own category in the history of popular art and it has a finite supply?

 

I keep looking for models of comparison in other collecting areas. Certainly, pottery and ceramics went through a similar change of production methods. Or Old Master fine art has similar name recognition of a dead group of originating pioneers. But neither collecting field has the mass appeal of comics.

 

Maybe someone more knowledgeable about vinyl collecting could weigh in... Are the overall number of collectors up or down? Are prices up or down? How many super-collectors are out there buying up the collapsing market for pennies? (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/10/magazine/the-brazilian-bus-magnate-whos-buying-up-all-the-worlds-vinyl-records.html)

[BCarter27]

A bit more on the indie stuff... One of the reasons for the indie comics explosion is because everyone is looking for that Hollywood money. That isn't going away any time soon.

 

So, what happens many years down the road when a webcomic with, say, 10 years of serial storytelling gets turned into a massive TV hit? A new Walking Dead. It will have all been done digitally by a more mainstream-friendly artist. (I love Adlard, but how would TWD art look to the casual masses if it were more rendered by a Mico Suayan or an Eddy Barrows or maybe even if it were more cartoony like Tony Moore or a Terry Moore.)

 

So there is no OA for this future webcomic/TV hit except for cover-quality commissions bought through a rep and those prices go through the roof? And they hold their resale because of lack of supply? Do digital con prints become even MORE popular as the con souvenir of choice in place of cheap interior pages?

 

Thoughts?

[vodou]

Fascinating articles BCarter27. Thank you very much for posting them.

 

A basic part of them problem, as I've already sort of posted is today's "market" wants yesterday's financial model...as if the two are compatible. I think they are not.

 

Which 'too high' breaks down first: cost of living or incomes to support?

 

Something has to. Greater supply and lesser demand for any product, including yourself, is deflationary. Expecting or demanding same or higher income as yesteryear (all other things being equal) is delusional. In the aggregate, not that certain outliers (superstars) won't experience outlier income, standard of living, etc.

[Bronty]

Difficulty of conversion - and it's very real - is a two edged sword. It's not just what prevents new entrants but also what has kept and will keep incumbents around so long. That's why new comics can be in the dumps while old comics do well, but it has to catch up, eventually, when the incumbents die off. For that reason I'm of the mind that it's 25 years plus before it collapses but when it does, it will do so HARD

[delekkerste]

Some great points. However, I'm not sure you can decry the volume of modern OA pages on one hand while lamenting the lack of supply (due to digital penciling/inking) on the other.

 

I never said the two were equivalent in magnitude. Clearly, the volume & (over)supply of Modern OA is what predominates by an overwhelming margin. It's just a bit unfortunate/ironic that a few of the more prominent Modern bits of OA (e.g., Maleev DD, Staples Saga,etc.) that might have otherwise been among the rare widely desirable/collected Modern runs (along with Lee/Williams Hush, Moore & Adlard TWD, etc.) have art that isn't created in a readily collectible fashion.

[SquareChaos]

Threads like this one is why I keep coming back.

 

I can speak from my perspective, as a new collector, who still reads a great deal of modern comics... I keep a subscription to Marvel Unlimited, and I check in from time to time, but I don't truly follow a single book from the Big Two - some of the art is strong, but the storytelling is bankrupt, treading water, and two or three issues away from a reboot at any given time. This isn't a knock on the people creating these stories, this is a knock on the industry, and if I'm being honest, the consumers who enable such behavior... myself included considering my Marvel Unlimited subscription.

 

Love for iconic characters aside, my personal opinion is that the current state of the Big Two is that of a storytelling wastelands. I don't believe a healthy new generation of readership is being cultivated. I strongly doubt that, come two or three decades hence, there will be a population capable of appreciating the current source material to such an extent that they'll eagerly slap down a significant amount of money to experience pride of ownership or stewardship.

 

I primarily buy modern indie (I'm always uncertain using that term these days) art. I am in complete agreement with vodou - the price of entry is generally artificial, and too high. I agree with delekkerste, this genre of OA is "the walking dead" - outside of a great few tiny exceptions, it has no real chance of longevity or continuity. It is here and then gone, a flash in the pan. I agree with literally everyone, modern production methods leaves something to be desired for the collector, the feeling of singular uniqueness to a pencil and ink piece can't be beat, it is the superior format for collecting purposes.

 

And yet... I still seek out art. I still read these stories that are guaranteed to die young and be forgotten in just a few short years time, and I still desire to connect with them in a personal way by owning a piece of the story.

 

I'm not an insufficiently_thoughtful_person (er, I don't think), and I'm not fabulously wealthy, so these beliefs absolutely form the economic bedrock and rules governing how I collect. I don't spend a lot of money. I am not an investor. I do not expect art to significantly appreciate. I do believe, on most brand new pieces that I buy, that the price is inflated, but I accept it to a certain extent if I love the work.

 

I guess this is a very long winded way for me to say, from an almost purely confirmation biased position, that I believe that the number of people with hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars sunk into this hobby must shrink, and practically vanish, over the next two to three decades. I don't believe we'll ever see a rising wave of appreciation for the art of current day - namely for the reasons I previously mentioned / we've been talking about - and I see no reason to believe, nor have I read a well reasoned out logical explanation why, some form of deus ex machina will arrive to change that.

[delekkerste]

Difficulty of conversion - and it's very real - is a two edged sword. It's not just what prevents new entrants but also what has kept and will keep incumbents around so long. That's why new comics can be in the dumps while old comics do well, but it has to catch up, eventually, when the incumbents die off. For that reason I'm of the mind that it's 25 years plus before it collapses but when it does, it will do so HARD

 

I'm not saying it's not possible, but why do you think it will be 25 years-plus? IMO, the mean expectation (think of it as the Vegas over/under line) is probably more like 15 years, with a 98% confidence interval spanning 0 to 30 years. The reality is, 25+ years from now, most of today's prominent collectors will be AARP members by then, and that's even long enough for a good number of collectors to have passed away. While a number of people will hang on to their art until the bitter end, I'm pretty sure most people will slow down their buying in their 50s and 60s (if not earlier). And, empirically, we've seen a number of prominent collectors in their mid-50s to early 60s liquidate recently (e.g., Doc Dave, Frank Darabont, etc.), which is about the right time to do it if you're planning to use the proceeds to enjoy retirement/your later years while you still have both the time and ability to enjoy them.

 

Some very prominent collectors have indicated to me that their current intention is to liquidate around when they're in their early 60s (call it within 15 years). Undoubtedly their (substantial) buying will have peaked and tapered long before then. Another friend indicated to me recently that he's probably going to start selling within a few years. Yet another says he's probably no more than 5 years away. Again, look at it from the Peak Art point of view - at what point does one pass the point of spending more than half of all the money you will ever spend on art, and where are most collectors, even those still spending with reckless abandon, on that spectrum? I'd back up the truck and bet that most established collectors in the 45-up age group are already past their individual Peak Art points, and I wouldn't be surprised if most of them are past 90% within 15 years.

 

I just think this hobby is going to change a lot within 15 years. Most of the top collectors today will be in their 60s and 70s. Will 60 year-old collectors still be trying to haggle with 70-something Albert in the year 2032 over Jim Lee art? I tend to doubt it. I would wager by then that this group will have largely stopped buying on balance (their aggregate sales will exceed their aggregate new purchases), or be close to it. A good number will probably no longer be in the hobby, just as many of the top collectors from when I first got into the hobby have either cashed out or at least become largely inactive. I've noticed over the past year or two that convention attendance already seems to be down a bit among the established OA collector crowd - imagine what it will look like in 15 years. Will there be a bunch of salt-and-pepper and white haired guys lugging around portfolios then?

 

It seems we agree that the generational changeover will be bad news for vintage art. If that's the case, no need to wait 25 years when the movers and shakers of today are largely in their 70s and 80s - we'll start to see the effects by/around the 15-year point unless some miracle happens and we're all living longer and are a lot richer in 2032 than modern economics and science would project today.