oakman29 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 3 minutes ago, kav said: Frazetta sigs are beautiful and rare. Stan's are neither. That's like comparing a diamond to sand. They are both the same, but ones ground down to obscurity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 1 minute ago, oakman29 said: That's like comparing a diamond to sand. They are both the same, but ones ground down to obscurity. EXACKLY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 2 minutes ago, oakman29 said: That's like comparing a diamond to sand. They are both the same, but ones ground down to obscurity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miraclemet Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 8 hours ago, oakman29 said: Personally I think the signature ruins the book. One day, there will more Stan Lee signed books than not signed. Probably already there. 7 hours ago, kav said: This is my thinking too. Some day there will be a premium on books that dont have names written on cover. This is always the go to line.... But can you find a KEY book in the census that has more Ss copies than universal (which still wouldn't take into account all the raw copies out there, most of which would also be unsigned). I'm thinking there's not one non-modern example out there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miraclemet Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 10% of AF15 11% of ASM1 11% of ASM129 Heck even NM98 is only 18% SS and that's the book I see signed more than anything (and that's usually Liefeld not Stan, though sometimes it is) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oakman29 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 1 hour ago, miraclemet said: This is always the go to line.... But can you find a KEY book in the census that has more Ss copies than universal (which still wouldn't take into account all the raw copies out there, most of which would also be unsigned). I'm thinking there's not one non-modern example out there... Hi Mr. Literal Nelly, Point taken, but the truth is there are 10% of AF 15's etc. etc. that will never be the same due to a bunch of scribbling on the book. Doesn't that make you a little sad in a way? Dave2739 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wall-Crawler Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 11 minutes ago, oakman29 said: Hi Mr. Literal Nelly, Point taken, but the truth is there are 10% of AF 15's etc. etc. that will never be the same due to a bunch of scribbling on the book. Doesn't that make you a little sad in a way? The only sigs that make me "sad" are ones that are just flat out BAD (like the ASM #129 spider thing) or one where it ruins the cover art, like the sig goes across an important part of the art, like a character's face. I'm also not interested in books signed by anyone else other than the creators directly involved in the book. I have no desire to have a IH #181 signed by Stan. A sig in general or a not so crisp sig? Not so much. One day, there will be no more "new" Stan Lee sigs. If 10-15% of those are AF #15's are signed, well there will still be plenty of unsigned books out there for the purists. They may never be "the same" but they will be special to lots of other collectors/fans. Sidebar: with respect to Stan Lee sigs on AF #15's and early ASM's...I think that very high grade or better copies should be left alone. Silver_Couch_Surfer 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wall-Crawler Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 17 hours ago, Aliens said: I got this signed back in megaton Orlando last year and had a great time experience and though I am glad with how the comic came out But I would of preferred a thinner signature would you say that the signature defects the book or makes it a better worth thanks Here's the thing...Stan is getting old. His eye sight is not what it use to be. Rightly or wrongly, he has hundreds of books heaped upon him to sign. I would argue that it is not that he doesn't "care" about placement or how his sig looks, just people need to be "realistic" at this stage of his life. The sharpie does not help either. The other variable I just thought of is that it might also depend on the size of the window box and space he had to work with. Lots of factors to consider. Overall, the placement is pretty good. It does not interfere with any of the art and the trade off might have been a "bunched up" sig. The "St" is still very predominant as is the"l" so I don't think that sig will 'turn off' too many collectors who would want an early ASM signed by Stan. I have seen better and I have seen far worse. I think you made out alright. Nice book too btw. I still need one of those... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badback83 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 I don't think the signature on the OP's book is too bad considering some of the others I have seen. Personally, I don't care for signed books. If I want a signature from a creator, I'll get a hardback or a print signed. It all boils down to what you like to collect. If you like SS books, cool. If not, that's cool too. Ryanfromottawa 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1950's war comics Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Everything about the signature , comic and holder on your ASM #3 CGC 2.0 presents real nice ! the comic looks especially nice for the grade FoggyNelson 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miraclemet Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 1 hour ago, oakman29 said: Hi Mr. Literal Nelly, Point taken, but the truth is there are 10% of AF 15's etc. etc. that will never be the same due to a bunch of scribbling on the book. Doesn't that make you a little sad in a way? Sorry for missing your hyperbole. To me the only SS books that I've ever winced at were pedigrees that got signed since it changed the conditions of a one of a kind book. Also rare GA books that are impossible to find, werethey to be SSed I might feel the pang of loss overtime I their original condition. I see us as temporary custodians of books, so in those cases you are personally changing a book that is only yours for a while, and then no one ever again could have the book you did (at least as it was initially). I remember thinking this when someone had a GA ped book signed by Joe Simon. But an AF15? When there are plenty of available copies in grade that are not signed? Doesn't bother me. Maybe if it was a lone 9.8 that was getting signed... deadleg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valiantman Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 (edited) 11 hours ago, oakman29 said: That's like comparing a diamond to sand. They are both the same, but ones ground down to obscurity. Actually diamonds are extremely common and have almost no resale value. Frazetta sigs just get better each year. It's more like comparing a $100 bill to a $1 bill. They really are both the same, but one is 100 times better when you buy it and stays 100 times better when you sell it. Edited September 14, 2017 by valiantman oakman29 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aliens Posted September 14, 2017 Author Share Posted September 14, 2017 2 hours ago, Wall-Crawler said: Here's the thing...Stan is getting old. His eye sight is not what it use to be. Rightly or wrongly, he has hundreds of books heaped upon him to sign. I would argue that it is not that he doesn't "care" about placement or how his sig looks, just people need to be "realistic" at this stage of his life. The sharpie does not help either. The other variable I just thought of is that it might also depend on the size of the window box and space he had to work with. Lots of factors to consider. Overall, the placement is pretty good. It does not interfere with any of the art and the trade off might have been a "bunched up" sig. The "St" is still very predominant as is the"l" so I don't think that sig will 'turn off' too many collectors who would want an early ASM signed by Stan. I have seen better and I have seen far worse. I think you made out alright. Nice book too btw. I still need one of those... completely agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s14roller Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 I'm a fan of the sigs, but only if it's certain to be placed well and written well. With that said, I would never get a unsigned book, signed. No way to guarantee how the sig will look. The handful of SS books I have were purchased after the fact. kav 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason4 Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 Why is that book only a 2? it looks nice. I have stan Sig on an amazing fantasy 15 but only because it was low grade and on that book people pay more with the signature in the low grades. Same with xmen 1...my brother has a 1.8 signed and people pay more for it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artboy99 Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 I think it looks ok. I don't typically like to have signatures on my comics. If I do get them signed I prefer it on the inside splash page rather than the cover. The Stan Lee signatures I have: 1. Page of Spider-Man art I did 2. Interior page from the very first comic I ever bought, FF 112: 3. my mint un-used Marvel Value Stamp Booklet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercury Man Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 I have gotten his signature three times. Not one of them was on a comic, but rather on small prints and a poster. That is enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aliens Posted September 21, 2017 Author Share Posted September 21, 2017 4 hours ago, jason4 said: Why is that book only a 2? it looks nice. I have stan Sig on an amazing fantasy 15 but only because it was low grade and on that book people pay more with the signature in the low grades. Same with xmen 1...my brother has a 1.8 signed and people pay more for it that way. thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aliens Posted September 21, 2017 Author Share Posted September 21, 2017 1 hour ago, Artboy99 said: I think it looks ok. I don't typically like to have signatures on my comics. If I do get them signed I prefer it on the inside splash page rather than the cover. The Stan Lee signatures I have: 1. Page of Spider-Man art I did 2. Interior page from the very first comic I ever bought, FF 112: 3. my mint un-used Marvel Value Stamp Booklet: i agree on the splash page is a much better place to get signed and i would but he was signing so fast there were not any time to get him to switch to a pen and signed inside and the risk of him opening the book and creasing the spine with a lower grade copy while he signs... and it looks horrible when he signed the splash page in sharpie, yuk! cool sigs though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADAMANTIUM Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Serious question... If some people's argument about signatures is that it detracts from the cover... Has anyone just got signatures on the back cover? How come most sigbaturrs usually happen on the front cover where it is so busy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
