Will_K Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 I would not say all pencils are prelims. I would not say only inked pieces are not prelims. The separation of pencils and inks and digital media are blurring all the lines. There are new rules being written. It's a very strong statement for Malvin to say "the comic was published direct from tight pencils " But to say "the comic was published direct from tight pencils "... wait for it... "that were digitally inked " in parentheses weakens the point. Would I have bought the original piece ? Probably not. But if I did, would I have gotten it inked ?? Highly unlikely. This has been called a crime against original art collecting. Jae Lee is not the collector that owns the piece so he may not care about the value to collectors but I wonder how he would describe what he did. Would he describe the pencils as a prelim? I'll continue to read but I don't think I can "contribute" anything more to this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Peck Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 (edited) I don't think it is sacrilegious. I think it's a crime against original art collecting! I'm not saying this because I am one of the 2 friends you consulted who thought it is a bad idea. Nor am I saying this because we have a friendly bet as to how many haters you will have. But I think it is a crime and you will go to original art hell! May your grail be purchased by the Donnelly's so that it is forever out of your reach now I need other haters to speak their mind. At least six! Please speak up now Malvin We need to do everything we can to make sure "Backstabbin Malvin" looses this bet. No more haters! Only positive feedback. And also I hear Malvin hates Kirby and says Frazetta is overrated! Hater +1 Edited February 2, 2017 by Brian Peck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Peck Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 In my opinion no matter how great the job, it is altered original art. It ruins the value in my opinion even if it looks great. It is not akin to restoration or cleaning which is generally preserving the art. It is literally an unoriginal alteration. The value to me is now a little more than an equivalent commission piece would be. More because the piece was published but less than the unaltered original. As was previously stated, if you like it and never intend to sell it then bravo. If you do sell at some point, you will be stuck explaining and expect a significant monetary loss. I wonder if the younger generation of buyers feel that way about what I did. There are artist who are not using paper at all to create their art. They are selling one of a kind prints of their pages with signature. Millennials are buying them. What I have is far more than that. I now have the only truly inked Batman/Superman page there is and can sell it as such. Do you really think I won't find a buyer in the future? The medium is changing dramatically. If I ever decide to sell I don't think I'll have any problems. There is no one way of making comics any more. The purists are being replaced with a generation far more flexible. I don't consider buy one off prints of digital inks to have anything to do with the original comic art community. Its like buying colour keys or production plates not original art at all. Noob19 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malvin Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 This has been called a crime against original art collecting. Just in case it somehow gets lost in translation/context. That was a joke. Although I do think it is a terrible idea and a terrible thing to do. I did think there would be more haters though..., the OP might win the bet! Malvlin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronty Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 OP: Bad idea. Sorry. If you had no intention of ever selling then whatever but I don't get that sense here, and as someone said you will be stuck explaining and any time you are in that position, you will lose money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCarter27 Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 This isn't the first time I have seen this type of commission being done. I've seen examples of a different inker (not the production inker) being brought in to ink on the pencils. Or another inker's take over a blueline pencil copy. So, the hobby is definitely branching out. I think it is a trade-off. On one hand, the historical artifact is diminished. On the other, the piece presents better aesthetically. So I guess if the page isn't historically relevant, the work is quality, and it is documented if sold, then I don't have an issue with it. And I have far less issue with it in this case since it was the production inker recreating the work. But it's true, the only hand-touched art has been permanently altered. And I have pencil pages (that were later digitally-inked) that I would prefer to have preserved as is. If I wanted to ink them, I would ask them to be light-boxed. That all being said, the page looks great! (I am one of those oddball people who prefers inks over bluelines vs pencils. They present better and are closer to the final, published page.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John E. Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 Great discussion. I choose not to be a hater and agree with Gene below. [so, if someone wants Jae Lee to ink one of his countless penciled pages, the bottom line is who is really going to give a...hoot. All these guys create hundreds/thousands of pages of art. They may be nice, but, unlike in the vintage era, none of the pages are likely to be particularly memorable to the extent that anyone is going to be upset because it no longer exists in its original form. I say, no sacrilege here, knock yourself out - the inked page looks great/better and nobody's going to miss not having the original penciled version around. For the record, I, for one, care about resell value, so I would rather err on the side of not touching the "original." I think 99% of collectors--the "Purists"-- fall in this camp. In his recent Felix Comic Art podcast, David Mandel stated that he hates it when original art is messed with. On the other hand, Andy Robbins, another respected collector in the hobby, retouched this page from Five Ghosts and I think it's an improvement. FIVE GHOSTS has its followers, but I hardly doubt this title, much less this page, is worth the tizzy over altering the original. I'm a fan of Jae Lee and I'm waiting for the right Jae Lee piece to come along. I read his run on Batman/Superman. I saw when Albert Moy debuted those pages. When he did, the asking price of the choice pieces were $700-$800 (excluding splashes). That's a lot of money for a pencil-only piece. I can imagine what the price would be if they were published as inked pieces. $1200-$1500? If you read that run then you know that book was done in mostly silhouette or shadow and pure pencils just doesn't do justice for the collector. So I don't blame the OP for wanting it inked, especially if it only cost him $200 on top of the original price (would be curious to know what Jae charged to ink it). Again, if you're a Jae Lee fan, you know how masterful his brush strokes are...I really don't see how this page would lose value; and if it did, it wouldn't lose anymore value than any modern art sold at auction. If I were bidding on this piece, I'd be thanking the seller for doing something I couldn't bear to do myself. Most of us here are familiar with the "penciled page/inks only" debate. The more liberal collectors argue that the "inks-only page" has value because that's the published image. The Purists will retort that it's not that valuable because the penciler never touched the page. Then the liberal collector will counter that you can't see the pencils on a vintage page anyway. For which the Purist will rebut, "But the original pencils are underneath the inks!" In the case of this Jae Lee piece, are the original pencils not underneath the inks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Seffinga Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 To paraphrase a quote from the late great Jeff Jones... "6 Inches!!!" His response to a collector on the Comicart-L who had talked about trimming some "excess" border off of an original once. He indicated that said collector needed to keep his hands (and scissors) six inches away from artwork at all times. It was a bit of a goof, but the underlying intent was that if you really want to be a lover of art originals, you take the path of do no harm. Not unlike the medical profession. There are instances of preservation that are not only welcome but warranted. But in the world of restoration and renovation for personal preference, Jones' inferrence was that one better keep their hands 6 inches away, lest they do something they later regret. The kicker here is that it was the original creator that did the modifications. At the owners behest, of course, but still it was his hand. If he had a problem with it, he wouldn't have done it. Seems like he was into it. If it were something I'd bought, I'd have kept it as-is. Simply because I am a lover of the process of original art as much as I am of the content of the pages. So to me, I'd never even think of changing the thing to suit my personal tastes. Same as I'd never give a page to Steve Oliffe to color, or cut out panels of my favorite pages and hot glue them to my favorite coffee table. And I totally could, if I wanted to. But that's not for me. I'm not in love with having a big representation of the published art on the wall. I could go to Kinkos with a clean copy of the book and make myself one of those for next to nothing. I'm into the OA. I see it as that simple. I'm with Gene in that I just don't see this having any knock on effect to the Lee market, beyond this one page. It's become it's own outlier. Could go cheap at auction. Could be unsellable. Could sell just fine. But it's not like it's a piece of one of the greatest comic stories of all time, that's been rendered ash. It's one of hundreds just like it. Or near enough. But the creator drew over it. It's not like he had some uninvolved party to the book bust out the inks on it. I'd never tell anyone else what to do with their possessions. But then I didn't shed any tears over those burned Ottley Invisibles pages. Or the time the post office totally crushed (I think it was) an Archie page. Mostly cause I'd no interest in that stuff anyhow. Now if a well know collector of a certain title like Saunter Lee was having Jill Thompson watercolor all of his Sandman pages, or using them to decoupage his bathroom, I'd have out the pitchfork and torch faster than you can say Morpheus. -e. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JadeGiant Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 It is your art, so you are free to with as you please. That said, I would not have done it .... never would have even considered it. I have added inks to penciled commissions but wouldn't do it for published works. I would consider getting the pencils inked on a different board if I really wanted to see that done. I also don't understand the premise/rationale for not doing inks on a different board. How would it have cost twice as much? Either way you are asking the artist to lay down inks over the same image - wouldn't the only additional cost been the extra piece of paper to reprint out the pencils? And, by adding inks over the original pencils you have created something that had nothing to do with the initial creation of the comic - the piece that was used to create the comic is now essentially gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc McCoy Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 For the record, I, for one, care about resell value, so I would rather err on the side of not touching the "original." I think 99% of collectors--the "Purists"-- fall in this camp. In his recent Felix Comic Art podcast, David Mandel stated that he hates it when original art is messed with. This is the original art (not a prelim ) to the cover of All-New X-Men #3, penciled by Ed McGuinness. It was digitally inked and colored for publication. While I love the pencils, getting a piece by Ed without inks by Dexter Vines these days just seemed wrong, so I inquired about inks with Mike at MGA when I was making the purchase since he reps both. That was one of his first questions to me: Did I want the inks over the original? As Jay mentioned above and David Mandel stated on the podcast, as a purist, I couldn't say "NO" fast enough. My thought process was 1) For whatever reason this piece went to press without inks, later added digitally 2) To have it inked over directly, even by one of the inkers most associated with working would Ed, would negate the piece as being the original art for that cover and though I'd be hesitant to sell, hurt it's value 3) Having the inks separate would make for a better side by side presentation. So, I was able to get it inked by Dex over blue lines, preserving the original piece of art. To answer your original question: At the end of the day, as long as you're happy with the piece, then what we think doesn't matter. Is it sacrilegious? I guess that falls along with your perception of what is and isn't published original art these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Doyle Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 I agree with the poster who suggested that a light-boxed (inked) copy would have been the better option. That would have provided two pieces of OA that would have looked neat displayed side-by-side. As a matter of interest, has anyone ever come across the later BWS Conan art that was published from original pencils only? Would love to see how the OA looks (and, no, if anyone here owns any of those pages, PLEASE do not get them inked!). Noob19 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delekkerste Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 This debate reminds me of an instance that happened probably 10-12+ years ago at this point. I don't remember the exact circumstances, but, the gist of it is that there were two Steve Oliffe-colored Savage Sword of Conan pages available for sale publicly (think they were on eBay). The content of the pages was very generic. But, regardless, cue the usual hand-wringing about crimes against humanity and original art, how could someone have that done to an original piece of OA, now the pages are all but worthless, etc. Well, hold up there, buddy. Veteran collector Ruben Espinosa (I don't remember at this point if he was the seller or not) said, waitaminute, get a grip, folks. Not only are these pages not going to sell at a discount, but they will probably sell for MORE than if they had been left alone. And you know what - HE WAS RIGHT! Not only did they sell for more, they sold for a lot more on a % basis. His rationale was that generic SSOC pages were a dime a dozen, the unloved red-headed stepchild of vintage Conan artwork. Uncolored, these pages wouldn't have caught anyone's attention and nobody would have wanted them except at a completely bottom of the barrel price. But, colored, they actually looked FANTASTIC, and drew attention away from the fact that the content was pretty mediocre. They had gone from pages you wouldn't have even bothered to look at, to something pretty cool (mind you, I am not advocating that anyone color in their OA, but, if it was already done...) This Jae Lee piece is nice, but, let's face it, it's just one of many thousands of nondescript OA pages that get cranked out every year. Most of these pages will end up in stacks of art and never get sold, never even see the light of day. You could probably incincerate all but the top 1% of Modern OA that gets created in a year and few would notice and even fewer would care - that's how much of it is out there. So, no, I absolutely don't believe that the OP did anything wrong, I don't believe that the same rules that apply to vintage also apply to Modern, I don't believe that this page has been ruined for future generations and I don't believe it's even been devalued other than to the extent that virtually all Modern OA resells at a loss anyway. Heck, it might even do better considering that it now looks better/different/distinct from many of the other hundreds/thousands of other pages out there by the artist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F For Fake Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 It's no longer "original art", but it's yours, so do with it as you please. I think it's possible that you've shot yourself in the foot for future resale, but if you are buying it to keep, you should have the piece that you want. Looks great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Surfer Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 Should have left it alone, photocopied it and then sent the copy for inking so now you have the best of both worlds. I am a big fan of original pencils in their raw form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquareChaos Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 And Jae's very recent pencils in particular are really interesting to look at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCarter27 Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 As a matter of interest, has anyone ever come across the later BWS Conan art that was published from original pencils only? Would love to see how the OA looks (and, no, if anyone here owns any of those pages, PLEASE do not get them inked!). Cary Nord's were final pencils and then digitally colored (more like painted). The originals are terrific. I think Tomas Giorello's were the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eewwnuk Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 I agree with the poster who suggested that a light-boxed (inked) copy would have been the better option. That would have provided two pieces of OA that would have looked neat displayed side-by-side. agreed, this would have been the route I would go for. also agree with the other posters that have said that jae's pencil work have been really interesting. disagree that this page is just one of thousand value less pages that are out there. Jae Lee is always in demand and a page showing Jae Lee illustrated Batman vs Catwoman will always have a market regardless if its original pencils or this now more commission like piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodou Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 I think Gene makes a very valid point, but only if putting the cost of the inking (or coloring) aside. Run them side by side (unmolested vs. molested actual cost basis) for ROI...who knows. I'm not sure the OP will recover that premium (at the same ROI rate) on the pieces as it's now "enhanced", same as I'm not so sure the Conan situation would either. Maybe it just makes it more liquid? However I'm also not reading that the OP cares at all for that end of it...we are all projecting that resale/ROI is important. Wouldn't do it myself. But then I wouldn't pay for it to be inked separately either, to be fair. I'm really too busy buying more new (to me) art to worry about touching up old (to me) art! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delekkerste Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 Malvin must be working overtime to bring the haters out. There are more than 60 unsold pieces of Jae Lee Bats/Supes art on AlbertMoy.com alone, and that only encompasses selected pages from a small handful of issues from the series. There must be thousands of unsold Jae Lee pages out there in total (not all on the website obviously) from all the series that he's worked on. Yes, the art is cool, but there's more supply than demand can ever meet. Like I said, you could incinerate most of it and few would even realize the art was missing. No one is going to miss one or even a hundred random pages that are inked over and no longer exist in their original form. If anyone wants a good pencil-only Jae Lee example, there's more than enough to go around for everyone for now...and all of eternity. :whatthe: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquareChaos Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 Malvin must be working overtime to bring the haters out. There are more than 60 unsold pieces of Jae Lee Bats/Supes art on AlbertMoy.com alone, and that only encompasses selected pages from a small handful of issues from the series. There must be thousands of unsold Jae Lee pages out there in total (not all on the website obviously) from all the series that he's worked on. Yes, the art is cool, but there's more supply than demand can ever meet. Like I said, you could incinerate most of it and few would even realize the art was missing. No one is going to miss one or even a hundred random pages that are inked over and no longer exist in their original form. If anyone wants a good pencil-only Jae Lee example, there's more than enough to go around for everyone for now...and all of eternity. :whatthe: You're speaking of Jae's work as a group and not really focusing on this one, unique, impossible to replace page such as most of the rest of the people here are. Sure, there are a lot of pages out there unclaimed (their list price may have something to do with that, just saying, but that's another conversation), but it doesn't change the fact that this page, that someone did buy, has been modified beyond repair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
