Nostalgia vs. Craft in Original Art 0

[Bronty]

18 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

Both have their demographic limits, but I don't know anything about mtg. If it doesn't have some sort of cross-cultural or cross-collectible link to a general market, it can't have a really long "hot" lifespan. 

I do know I'm not impressed with that artwork.  

I don't get where you are going with this, but its clear to me you underestimate or don't understand its appeal.    Nerdy teenagers don't read comics anymore, they play mtg and video games and do pretty much anything but read.      The "you" of 30 years ago is the mtg player of today.   And has been for many years now.     

More than that, I see you have your 'comics' blinders on, like all comic art is good, and all mtg art bad based on you having seen one card art.    What would something think of comic art that had seen one Liefeld panel?   There is plenty of atrocious comic art just like there is excellent and atrocious mtg art.    Comics artists aren't special in the good, or bad sense, and the atrocious mtg art out there is generally the very early stuff, which is prized for other reasons.    Much like some golden age comic stories are tough to read, but they are early and therefore prized comics.

 

Edited August 14, 2018 by Bronty

[The Voord]

4 hours ago, Bronty said:

I don't get where you are going with this, but its clear to me you underestimate or don't understand its appeal.    Nerdy teenagers don't read comics anymore, they play mtg and video games and do pretty much anything but read.      The "you" of 30 years ago is the mtg player of today.   And has been for many years now.     

More than that, I see you have your 'comics' blinders on, like all comic art is good, and all mtg art bad based on you having seen one card art.    What would something think of comic art that had seen one Liefeld panel?   There is plenty of atrocious comic art just like there is excellent and atrocious mtg art.    Comics artists aren't special in the good, or bad sense, and the atrocious mtg art out there is generally the very early stuff, which is prized for other reasons.    Much like some golden age comic stories are tough to read, but they are early and therefore prized comics.

 

As I've said numerous times, I know zilch about MTG.  What I do know is that there are some gorgeous traditionally-painted artworks fronting those cards.  You don't have to play the game to recognize the talent (and imagination) behind the art.

[Pete Marino]

18 minutes ago, The Voord said:

As I've said numerous times, I know zilch about MTG.  What I do know is that there are some gorgeous traditionally-painted artworks fronting those cards.  You don't have to play the game to recognize the talent (and imagination) behind the art.

Because of the quality of the art, the illuxicon crowd that may not play the game at all still is collecting the art because some of it is beautiful as well.  And I believe mtg has one of the highest pay rates in the industry, so they keep getting top talent.

[The Voord]

Three examples of MTG paintings that I own, just to showcase the work of three different artists (that I hope serve as better examples of the kind of work being produced for the game).

In order . . . Volkan Baga, Kev Walker and Steve Belledin.

 

[Rick2you2]

1 hour ago, The Voord said:

Three examples of MTG paintings that I own, just to showcase the work of three different artists (that I hope serve as better examples of the kind of work being produced for the game).

In order . . . Volkan Baga, Kev Walker and Steve Belledin.

 

I like those, incidentally.

[Rick2you2]

20 hours ago, fmaz said:

While I appreciate your open minded response to my opinion I think you’ve missed my point. Perhaps because I didn’t state it clearly enough so I’ll try again - what I was trying to say was that when time strips away all value based on nostalgia what will remain is just the piece of art.  Pen and ink.  And it will be judged solely on that. THAT is the craft. 

I wasn’t speaking, nor do I particularly care, about investment. 

That raises still another question from the OP: how does one judge "craft"? Will the loss of knowledge from the current generation result in a lesser appreciation of craft in future generations? And, let me add a further step: can you fairly base an understanding of craft in the present of what will be prized in the future? Van Gogh wasn't.

I was trying to focus on what I thought was the primary question raised by the OP: "I've had a LOT of discussions with friends and fellow collectors recently about the whole "nostalgia vs. craft" debate in the original art hobby, as it seems that, at least as far as market values go, ...". 

I think I will leave some of these questions to Dr. Fate.

[Rick2you2]

18 hours ago, Bronty said:

I don't get where you are going with this, but its clear to me you underestimate or don't understand its appeal.    Nerdy teenagers don't read comics anymore, they play mtg and video games and do pretty much anything but read.      The "you" of 30 years ago is the mtg player of today.   And has been for many years now.     

More than that, I see you have your 'comics' blinders on, like all comic art is good, and all mtg art bad based on you having seen one card art.    What would something think of comic art that had seen one Liefeld panel?   There is plenty of atrocious comic art just like there is excellent and atrocious mtg art.    Comics artists aren't special in the good, or bad sense, and the atrocious mtg art out there is generally the very early stuff, which is prized for other reasons.    Much like some golden age comic stories are tough to read, but they are early and therefore prized comics.

 

I know nothing about mtg except for that one mediocre image which was posted. I also don't think all comic art is good. A fair amount of comic art is just run-of-the-mill (if it weren't at least okay, it wouldn't get published).

But about mtg art, if what you are saying is correct, and it is 30 years "ahead" of comic art, then take what I wrote and drop it in a time capsule to be opened in 30 years. Same principle. One major difference, however, is that "collectible" pricing is higher now, I think, than 30 years ago, across the board. So, the baseline is different. Hope that's clear. 

My focus has really just been on the idea that price is primarily a function of demand, and the overall market for a subject (OA, or anything else) will have a greater impact on price than the quality of a particular piece within the subject. A rising tide floats all boats, but also, in reverse. Each generation values what it grew up with. So, as generations move up to and out of their peak discretionary spending years, so will the price of a collectible. It goes up, hits a high, and eventually sinks. Tom Mix play outfits anyone?

[Bronty]

10 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

I know nothing about mtg except for that one mediocre image which was posted. I also don't think all comic art is good. A fair amount of comic art is just run-of-the-mill (if it weren't at least okay, it wouldn't get published).

But about mtg art, if what you are saying is correct, and it is 30 years "ahead" of comic art, then take what I wrote and drop it in a time capsule to be opened in 30 years. Same principle. One major difference, however, is that "collectible" pricing is higher now, I think, than 30 years ago, across the board. So, the baseline is different. Hope that's clear. 

My focus has really just been on the idea that price is primarily a function of demand, and the overall market for a subject (OA, or anything else) will have a greater impact on price than the quality of a particular piece within the subject. A rising tide floats all boats, but also, in reverse. Each generation values what it grew up with. So, as generations move up to and out of their peak discretionary spending years, so will the price of a collectible. It goes up, hits a high, and eventually sinks. Tom Mix play outfits anyone?

I agree with your basic premise, but why should I drop anything in a time capsule for 30 years from now?   The point is that mtg was popular 25 years ago and has remained popular.   The way things are going it will probably still be very popular 25 years from now, as new product.

So it might be more like 50-75 years before demographics turn it downward, or more.    Those cards really aren't a fad unless you consider a solid 25 years a fad.    They started in 1993.   If you consider comics starting in 1933 as most do, that's a 60 year difference.

Your 30 year timeline only works if the items die at a point in time (like tom mix outfits and comic book circulation numbers).

No disrespect.   Its just that the basic local hobby store?   The one that sold comics 30 years ago to you and your friends?    It sells mtg now and stopped selling comics a long time ago.    Im not sure you're grasping that.    The reality is that comics have far more of a demographics issue than mtg does.

Edited August 15, 2018 by Bronty

[The Voord]

1 hour ago, Bronty said:

I agree with your basic premise, but why should I drop anything in a time capsule for 30 years from now?   The point is that mtg was popular 25 years ago and has remained popular.   The way things are going it will probably still be very popular 25 years from now, as new product.

So it might be more like 50-75 years before demographics turn it downward, or more.    Those cards really aren't a fad unless you consider a solid 25 years a fad.    They started in 1993.   If you consider comics starting in 1933 as most do, that's a 60 year difference.

Your 30 year timeline only works if the items die at a point in time (like tom mix outfits and comic book circulation numbers).

No disrespect.   Its just that the basic local hobby store?   The one that sold comics 30 years ago to you and your friends?    It sells mtg now and stopped selling comics a long time ago.    Im not sure you're grasping that.    The reality is that comics have far more of a demographics issue than mtg does.

Hey, Dan, you're more savvy with the MTG stuff than I am (even if by your own admission you're not exactly addicted to the game).  Out of curiosity, do you know the worldwide audience involved (I'm guessing that it extends beyond the USA)?

[Pete Marino]

So, I found this 2 year old article today, thought it was relevant to this thread.

M:tg is the 2nd highest grossing thing Hasbro owns, after only star wars!

https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurenorsini/2016/03/18/for-magic-the-gathering-diversity-is-the-marketing-strategy/#1b9b96c42216

If we're taking life cycle of a property, magic is much different than comics.

Randomly, I was at a family party last weekend and 2 of my wife's cousins kids were playing magic against each other all day.  They are 9 and 14.

Those are the art collectors of 25 years from now

[Mr. Machismo]

FYI, it’s not uncommon for MTG to carry comic and board game shops. Without it, many would fold. The popularity of MTG far exceeds anything you’d expect. It is absolutely incomparable to baseball cards, beanie babies, etc., particularly as it leads in a resurgence of board and card gaming as a tech-driven world craves human interaction. 

[Bronty]

6 hours ago, The Voord said:

Hey, Dan, you're more savvy with the MTG stuff than I am (even if by your own admission you're not exactly addicted to the game).  Out of curiosity, do you know the worldwide audience involved (I'm guessing that it extends beyond the USA)?

It’s worldwide yes... I’ve heard 40 million players bandied about but I have no idea where /how they come up with that number exactly

[Rick2you2]

13 hours ago, Bronty said:

I agree with your basic premise, but why should I drop anything in a time capsule for 30 years from now?   The point is that mtg was popular 25 years ago and has remained popular.   The way things are going it will probably still be very popular 25 years from now, as new product.

So it might be more like 50-75 years before demographics turn it downward, or more.    Those cards really aren't a fad unless you consider a solid 25 years a fad.    They started in 1993.   If you consider comics starting in 1933 as most do, that's a 60 year difference.

Your 30 year timeline only works if the items die at a point in time (like tom mix outfits and comic book circulation numbers).

No disrespect.   Its just that the basic local hobby store?   The one that sold comics 30 years ago to you and your friends?    It sells mtg now and stopped selling comics a long time ago.    Im not sure you're grasping that.    The reality is that comics have far more of a demographics issue than mtg does.

If mtg has a long life-span, that great for the players and the buyers. I don't know the hobby and I was just making a general observation. 

No disrespect taken. But, I would still watch the market carefully on any popular collectible. 

[delekkerste]

8 hours ago, Bronty said:

It’s worldwide yes... I’ve heard 40 million players bandied about but I have no idea where /how they come up with that number exactly

Looks like there's a lot of articles which cite figures in the low 20 millions as of 2014-16; accounting for growth (if there has been any), maybe 25 million in 2018.  Though, I've seen someone break down the methodology used to get to that number - it just takes an arbitrary multiplier to the relatively small base of registered die-hards (~1 million), so, there's probably a pretty big potential standard deviation when you account for the one-offs and casual players...could be 15 million, could be 30 million in total; I doubt anyone can pinpoint it with much accuracy.  

I've never played the game, but, I know that it's had a lot of ups and downs in popularity over the past 25 years.  One of the biggest playas in the OA hobby made his fortune selling cases of MTG cards back in the day to speculators; we're certainly not seeing anywhere near that kind of frenzy these days.  I remember when MTG tournaments were shown on ESPN2 back in the day (no longer).  Looking at the stats, it looks like the popularity was stagnant for over a decade (late '90s-late Aughts) before being on a growth path this decade.  I don't know enough to determine what has accounted for the growth in the 2010s, though, would be wary of how much of this is from improved data collection or extrapolation based on sales (a stat which also makes the comic book industry look healthier than it actually is).

MTG art is certainly white hot, though, as is comic art, D&D art, etc.  The price of the collectible doesn't have to match the strength of the current underlying fundamentals for anything, especially not in hobbies that are nostalgia-based and backward looking.  Back in college, I took a course on modeling genetic defects; turns out that it takes an extraordinarily long time to weed out a deleterious recessive gene from the population.  Similarly, these nostalgia-based hobbies will have a long tail...they're not going away, but, they will get successively less popular and less valuable after the demographic tipping point is reached (at least for the bulk of the material).  Though, that doesn't appear to be an imminent concern for either OA or MTG art it would seem.  

[Bronty]

2 hours ago, delekkerste said:

 

I've never played the game, but, I know that it's had a lot of ups and downs in popularity over the past 25 years.  One of the biggest playas in the OA hobby made his fortune selling cases of MTG cards back in the day to speculators

If you're talking about Paul (?) I'm not sure how much he still buys or doesn't but the good stuff was bought 25 years ago for 500 each.    I was not under the impression he was wealthy more so than just in the right place at the right time and with the cajones to spend that early money.    Now I could be very wrong so if you know more feel free to share.     I know he has bought more recent stuff and that its value has exploded too so I'm sure he does some buying and selling but I was under the impression that its not being bought with stacks of cash so much as stacks of equity.   Again, could be very wrong.

[delekkerste]

12 minutes ago, Bronty said:

If you're talking about Paul (?) I'm not sure how much he still buys or doesn't but the good stuff was bought 25 years ago for 500 each.    I was not under the impression he was wealthy more so than just in the right place at the right time and with the cajones to spend that early money.    Now I could be very wrong so if you know more feel free to share.     I know he has bought more recent stuff and that its value has exploded too so I'm sure he does some buying and selling but I was under the impression that its not being bought with stacks of cash so much as stacks of equity.   Again, could be very wrong.

No, not talking about that MTG art guy, talking about one of the biggest (comic) OA collectors who made his fortune in the '90s at the height of the MTG '90s bubble wholesaling cases of cards.  My point being that the heat on MTG is not greater now than it was back then, despite the fact that the OA is white-hot, just as the heat on baseball cards as a hobby is not what it was in the '80s and early '90s despite 1952 Topps Mickey Mantles and other top cards hitting records. 

[Bronty]

5 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

No, not talking about that MTG art guy, talking about one of the biggest (comic) OA collectors who made his fortune in the '90s at the height of the MTG '90s bubble wholesaling cases of cards.  My point being that the heat on MTG is not greater now than it was back then, despite the fact that the OA is white-hot, just as the heat on baseball cards as a hobby is not what it was in the '80s and early '90s despite 1952 Topps Mickey Mantles and other top cards hitting records. 

Oh you mean Fish?

[Bronty]

6 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

No, not talking about that MTG art guy, talking about one of the biggest (comic) OA collectors who made his fortune in the '90s at the height of the MTG '90s bubble wholesaling cases of cards.  My point being that the heat on MTG is not greater now than it was back then, despite the fact that the OA is white-hot, just as the heat on baseball cards as a hobby is not what it was in the '80s and early '90s despite 1952 Topps Mickey Mantles and other top cards hitting records. 

As new product I agree, but the older product is white hot right now on the collector market.

In the past year, all the old/powerful/collectible cards have doubled.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Bronty

[Pete Marino]

1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

No, not talking about that MTG art guy, talking about one of the biggest (comic) OA collectors who made his fortune in the '90s at the height of the MTG '90s bubble wholesaling cases of cards.  My point being that the heat on MTG is not greater now than it was back then, despite the fact that the OA is white-hot, just as the heat on baseball cards as a hobby is not what it was in the '80s and early '90s despite 1952 Topps Mickey Mantles and other top cards hitting records. 

I think they're just better at meeting market demand for new product than they used to be.  But try to buy an old box of sealed product from the 90's and be ready to plunk down serious cash.

[Bronty]

^ a box of arabians is like 50k is something dumb like that. a box of alpha would be ridiculous.   several times that I'm sure but they aren't to be found.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Bronty