• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

This is why no one likes the Donnellys
2 2

38 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, hmendryk said:

Please do not interpret my following comment here as support of the Donnellys. I won that Dark Victory Riddler cover from Heritage and managed to remove the recreated stats without damage to the art. Of course it would have been much better if they were never attached in the first place.

 

 

Wow, congrats! Looks GREAT! Good on for you bringing back the piece to it's original, Donnelly-less state lol! Gem!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take so far is that not EVERYONE dislikes these DBs.  
 

Several board members (and those not on the boards) are more than happy to buy, sell and trade with them, thus helping to propagate what anyone with common sense, decency, and integrity would denounce. Good job, guys and gals! Stick to your guns. Get that art you want and let the art you traded and your dignity be damned. :golfclap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overlays, and removable stats are one thing. Here's an example that veers into the Ink "restoration" topic.

I've posted about this on the board before. I don't think I included pictures.
I've been around. I've been aware of the brothers for a long time. I've heard the stories. I've seen the fabled booth and negotiating tactics. I'd long written off ever dealing with them.

And then one day I missed an auction on Heritage for a Paul Pope Escapo piece I really wanted. I totally spaced on the auction, and even managed to mindlessly delete the reminder when I got it. And the piece sold for far less than I wold have paid for it. ! Then about a month later, it pops up on the CL site for sale with the usual "Inqure". Double-!

Did I mention I really wanted the piece badly? Escapo pieces in the wild are RARE. As in, I can only think of 4 or 5 published Escapo pieces in the wild, including one I own and this one that the Brothers now have up for sale. Because of this, and my very serious desire for the piece, I held my nose and hit that inquire button. The response was typical for the brothers. Steve wrote me back with a list of Paul Pope pieces they had for sale. 2 or 3 unrelated pieces of art, lower in price, and then the piece I was asking about, at right around 3xs what it had sold for at Heritage now a couple months prior.

When Heritage posted the scans of the piece, I thought that portions looked really faded. More so than the usual marker fade that some Pope pieces have. Paul had a penchant for using these brush pens, and one brand of them tends to fade to a dark to medium sepia color. I've seen a number of his originals from this time period, and own another Escapo piece that has this. https://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=1353202

I'm fine with it, but the scan posted on the site makes the piece look like all black ink. I figure they just have manipuated the scan in photoshop to present the piece better than it actually is, and I just want to make sure the art hasn't been tampered with. So I ask if it's been in any way touched or tampered with. Any re-inking? Are the faded marker areas there, etc? I ask for a photo of the art, rather than a scan. I figure if it's been toyed with, I'll be able to see it. I also wanted to see where and how the art is drawn on the art board. I figure if it has any wonky edges or whatever, they've probably cropped them, etc. Sure enough, I get the photo back, and they'd definitely messed with the for sale scan on their site. In the photo, i looks like the fading marker is there, but it's definitely darker looking than the Heritage scan. But the Heritage scan faded markers looked REALLY faded. Almost like the scan was done overly bright or contrasty. I assumed the truth was probably somewhere between the shadowy photo Steve sent, and the Heritage scan. Seemed reasonable.

After reiterating I wouldn't be accepting the piece if it was in any way altered, and being assured it was all original, I bought it. Against my better judgement, and for so far above market, it was silly. BUT I didn't have any plans to sell it. I did figure if the fading as really extreme and in danger of losing that machine portion of the art, I'd contect Paul and Felix and see about having Paul possibly re-ink it while he's still in his prime. I even went so far as to reach out to Paul via social media, and after a couple private chats, he said he'd be happy to set that up. I was jazzed to have it coming to me, but still feeling nagging unease.

So I very anxiously (not excited, but nervously) awaited it's arrival. And I knew within 2 minutes of cutting the package open, that it was going back. I was so mad in fact, I never took it out of the plastic bag it was inside of, mounted to the back of a packing board. So I never even bothered to totally unwrap it. And to my regret, didn't take better pictures of either. I wish I'd documented the extent of the damage. Because that's what it was. Not restoration, but damage.

To Steve D's credit, as soon as I explained how it had clearly been gone over with a marker and pens to darken down the faded lines, and showed him the Heritage scan and then his photo, and my shot of the date circle. And explained all the places I could see where someone had done a less than stellar job of trying to darken everything down, Steve said he'd be happy to take it back for a full refund. And he did. He paid for the art, and the original shipping to get it to me.

When confronted about the "retouching" he said that it wasn't his piece, it belonged to his brother, but as far as he knew it wasn't bought from Heritage, it was bought at NYCC, right before they listed it for sale. So basically, claiming ignorance about any retouching, just saying he thought it looked great as-is. Whatever. So I sent it back. I got my money back.

I can't say whether they had any inkling it was reworked, or if they'd been duped by someone at NYCC that year, but within days of my putting it back in the mail, the piece was relisted on the Coollines site for sale. Still with the original all black ink scan they created. No mention of everything I pointed out to them about the piece and someone having done work to it.

As far as what was done to the art... MOST of the faded sepia marker was gone over with something darker. The Heritage scan was in fact pretty faithful to the fading. It definitely was more faded than most of these pieces I've seen from Paul. Must have seen a lot of sun. You can see at the base of the Heritage scan where it looks like it was in a frame and the orignal faded marker is not faded in a straight line across the base. Probably hidden in a mat in a frame.

In these reduced scans, the re-inking might look pretty faithful. The original is another story altogether. Keep in mind Pope's originals are VERY big. You can see where the re-inker missed lines. Unsteadily re-inked lines. Inked lines next to the original faded marker lines rather than over them, so the peek in and out. Filled in areas that were originally circles or double lines, etc. Most look like what happens when someone traces a gestural mark, vs it being an actual gestural hand stroke. Or mis-interprets the fading details. And some things were left alone, like Pope's signature. Which just rubs your nose in the fact that it was reinked, partially. For someone like me, this piece is effectively ruined. And it's a damn shame, because all the figures are all Paul. He only used the later fading markers on background elements.

Paul told me he only used these markers because Toth once told him to not be afraid to experiment and use any tools he could get his hands on. Ironically, Toths work is often a faded marker mess. And Paul told me he regrets having used these markers then.

So that's what I have to offer.

The Heritage Scan:
imageproxy.php?img=&key=31b352271b3a5a4b414028810.jpg

 

The Photo from Coollines:
414028808.jpg

 

A closeup of reinked lines over the original faded sepia ones:
414028809.jpg

Edited by ESeffinga
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

Overlays, and removable stats are one thing. Here's an example that veers into the Ink "restoration" topic.

I've posted about this on the board before. I don't think I included pictures.
I've been around. I've been aware of the brothers for a long time. I've heard the stories. I've seen the fabled booth and negotiating tactics. I'd long written off ever dealing with them.

And then one day I missed an auction on Heritage for a Paul Pope Escapo piece I really wanted. I totally spaced on the auction, and even managed to mindlessly delete the reminder when I got it. And the piece sold for far less than I wold have paid for it. ! Then about a month later, it pops up on the CL site for sale with the usual "Inqure". Double-!

Did I mention I really wanted the piece badly? Escapo pieces in the wild are RARE. As in, I can only think of 4 or 5 published Escapo pieces in the wild, including one I own and this one that the Brothers now have up for sale. Because of this, and my very serious desire for the piece, I held my nose and hit that inquire button. The response was typical for the brothers. Steve wrote me back with a list of Paul Pope pieces they had for sale. 2 or 3 unrelated pieces of art, lower in price, and then the piece I was asking about, at right around 3xs what it had sold for at Heritage now a couple months prior.

When Heritage posted the scans of the piece, I thought that portions looked really faded. More so than the usual marker fade that some Pope pieces have. Paul had a penchant for using these brush pens, and one brand of them tends to fade to a dark to medium sepia color. I've seen a number of his originals from this time period, and own another Escapo piece that has this. https://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=1353202

I'm fine with it, but the scan posted on the site makes the piece look like all black ink. I figure they just have manipuated the scan in photoshop to present the piece better than it actually is, and I just want to make sure the art hasn't been tampered with. So I ask if it's been in any way touched or tampered with. Any re-inking? Are the faded marker areas there, etc? I ask for a photo of the art, rather than a scan. I figure if it's been toyed with, I'll be able to see it. I also wanted to see where and how the art is drawn on the art board. I figure if it has any wonky edges or whatever, they've probably cropped them, etc. Sure enough, I get the photo back, and they'd definitely messed with the for sale scan on their site. In the photo, i looks like the fading marker is there, but it's definitely darker looking than the Heritage scan. But the Heritage scan faded markers looked REALLY faded. Almost like the scan was done overly bright or contrasty. I assumed the truth was probably somewhere between the shadowy photo Steve sent, and the Heritage scan. Seemed reasonable.

After reiterating I wouldn't be accepting the piece if it was in any way altered, and being assured it was all original, I bought it. Against my better judgement, and for so far above market, it was silly. BUT I didn't have any plans to sell it. I did figure if the fading as really extreme and in danger of losing that machine portion of the art, I'd contect Paul and Felix and see about having Paul possibly re-ink it while he's still in his prime. I even went so far as to reach out to Paul via social media, and after a couple private chats, he said he'd be happy to set that up. I was jazzed to have it coming to me, but still feeling nagging unease.

So I very anxiously (not excited, but nervously) awaited it's arrival. And I knew within 2 minutes of cutting the package open, that it was going back. I was so mad in fact, I never took it out of the plastic bag it was inside of, mounted to the back of a packing board. So I never even bothered to totally unwrap it. And to my regret, didn't take better pictures of either. I wish I'd documented the extent of the damage. Because that's what it was. Not restoration, but damage.

To Steve D's credit, as soon as I explained how it had clearly been gone over with a marker and pens to darken down the faded lines, and showed him the Heritage scan and then his photo, and my shot of the date circle. And explained all the places I could see where someone had done a less than stellar job of trying to darken everything down, Steve said he'd be happy to take it back for a full refund. And he did. He paid for the art, and the original shipping to get it to me.

When confronted about the "retouching" he said that it wasn't his piece, it belonged to his brother, but as far as he knew it wasn't bought from Heritage, it was bought at NYCC, right before they listed it for sale. So basically, claiming ignorance about any retouching, just saying he thought it looked great as-is. Whatever. So I sent it back. I got my money back.

I can't say whether they had any inkling it was reworked, or if they'd been duped by someone at NYCC that year, but within days of my putting it back in the mail, the piece was relisted on the Coollines site for sale. Still with the original all black ink scan they created. No mention of everything I pointed out to them about the piece and someone having done work to it.

As far as what was done to the art... MOST of the faded sepia marker was gone over with something darker. The Heritage scan was in fact pretty faithful to the fading. It definitely was more faded than most of these pieces I've seen from Paul. Must have seen a lot of sun. You can see at the base of the Heritage scan where it looks like it was in a frame and the orignal faded marker is not faded in a straight line across the base. Probably hidden in a mat in a frame.

In these reduced scans, the re-inking might look pretty faithful. The original is another story altogether. Keep in mind Pope's originals are VERY big. You can see where the re-inker missed lines. Unsteadily re-inked lines. Inked lines next to the original faded marker lines rather than over them, so the peek in and out. Filled in areas that were originally circles or double lines, etc. Most look like what happens when someone traces a gestural mark, vs it being an actual gestural hand stroke. Or mis-interprets the fading details. And some things were left alone, like Pope's signature. Which just rubs your nose in the fact that it was reinked, partially. For someone like me, this piece is effectively ruined. And it's a damn shame, because all the figures are all Paul. He only used the later fading markers on background elements.

Paul told me he only used these markers because Toth once told him to not be afraid to experiment and use any tools he could get his hands on. Ironically, Toths work is often a faded marker mess. And Paul told me he regrets having used these markers then.

So that's what I have to offer.

The Heritage Scan:
imageproxy.php?img=&key=31b352271b3a5a4b414028810.jpg

 

The Photo from Coollines:
414028808.jpg

 

A closeup of reinked lines over the original faded sepia ones:
414028809.jpg

 

Amazing how firm he was in his assurances that it was all original , but then mentions it's his brother's piece when confronted with the obvious restoration and re-inking to deflect from his personal responsibility for not giving you the right information about the piece when asked directly.  

However, when someone is caught telling you one thing and delivering another and then they undo the deal they deserve very very little "credit" for accepting the return when the alternative is probably something that's far less easy than refunding you and relisting it (still without disclosure) on their site. 

Because there it sits, to this day on their site, like a cow pie waiting for something else to step in it. 

Makes you wonder how much of a "shock" it was to him that it had been re-inked being that he agreed to take it back instantly....even though it's his "brother's" piece. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cover for ROM #19 popped up on their site over the weekend:

https://www.comicartfans.com/ForSaleDetails.asp?ArtId=1425099

Wondering about the cover dress.  ROM covers often have the little crosshair targets which betray the presence of an overlay, but it might only mean that stat work of some sort was required for the color version of the ROM logo.  (Every cover I have has black lines between the little color gradations in the logo, but the published covers have no black lines.)

Do the logos look like they are attached directly to the art?  Do they look like recent stat replacements, or are they likely vintage?  If they're vintage, and attached to the art, were they once on a clear overlay, and have been removed from the overlay to be attached to the art?  (The cover dress has some shadows to my eye.)

I've compared this to the published cover, and the lines all line up well.  If there was work done on this recently, it was skillfully completed.

Edited by thethedew
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone ever tried contacting them about art, such as the MK/Brother Voodoo piece, and say they are interested but they saw it on Heritage without the stats, and what happened to it?  I'm curious as to what their response would be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, thethedew said:

The cover for ROM #19 popped up on their site over the weekend:

https://www.comicartfans.com/ForSaleDetails.asp?ArtId=1425099

Wondering about the cover dress.  ROM covers often have the little crosshair targets which betray the presence of an overlay, but it might only mean that stat work of some sort was required for the color version of the ROM logo.  (Every cover I have has black lines between the little color gradations in the logo, but the published covers have no black lines.)

Do the logos look like they are attached directly to the art?  Do they look like recent stat replacements, or are they likely vintage?  If they're vintage, and attached to the art, were they once on a clear overlay, and have been removed from the overlay to be attached to the art?  (The cover dress has some shadows to my eye.)

I've compared this to the published cover, and the lines all line up well.  If there was work done on this recently, it was skillfully completed.

Do you really want to know the answer? Not everyone does; which is why they are still in business. They just might not be able to charge you the Andrew Rom Collector price when you “enquire” which is why they also stay in business. I would not buy it for any price unless I could inspect it in person, and now that I know it’s passed through their hands, it’s no longer worth as much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, JadeGiant said:

The problem now is that they are “laundering” their art through auction houses and into unsuspecting collector hands and then probably back into the hobby.

Has anyone heard about the official re-naming of the Comic Link Comic Art Exchange to the DONNELLY COMIC ART EXCHANGE...??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2018 at 5:53 AM, ESeffinga said:

 

 I held my nose and hit that inquire button. The response was typical for the brothers. Steve wrote me back with a list of Paul Pope pieces they had for sale. 2 or 3 unrelated pieces of art, lower in price, and then the piece I was asking about, at right around 3xs what it had sold for at Heritage now a couple months prior.

 

Jr Rookie mistake! Everyone knows whatever piece you want of theirs, you don't ask for the actual page. You pick a random page of the same character/artist. Steve will email you everything of that genre marked up 3x but at least the page you really want wont be marked up 5x.  #themoreyouknow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/19/2018 at 9:25 PM, dirtymartini1 said:

Jr Rookie mistake! Everyone knows whatever piece you want of theirs, you don't ask for the actual page. You pick a random page of the same character/artist. Steve will email you everything of that genre marked up 3x but at least the page you really want wont be marked up 5x.  #themoreyouknow

'the piece I was asking about, at right around 3xs what it had sold for"

Somebody can't read...  highlighted here for the literacy challenged among us. :slapfight:

H9jy835p_400x400.jpg



I get you are making a joke and I do get it. It's a very old joke, with that sad kernel of truth that makes jokes funny. ;)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MagnusX said:

Could anyone explain what are they trying to sell now..?
@ $REFerence..?
(shrug)

Link...

So is that the prop photo, or something made up? If it's the film used prop photo, wouldn't they say so? If it's a second copy unused in the film but from the same printer or whatever... that's easy enough to explain. But as is, who the hell knows... god help us all if they are moving into props.

I can see it now...

Original "Unused Alien Prop"

pez.jpg?resize=640%2C442&ssl=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

'the piece I was asking about, at right around 3xs what it had sold for"

Somebody can't read...  highlighted here for the literacy challenged among us. :slapfight:

H9jy835p_400x400.jpg



I get you are making a joke and I do get it. It's a very old joke, with that sad kernel of truth that makes jokes funny. ;)

 

 

I bet you are the life of the party at bbq's and family gatherings.    ::insert anal pri-ck emoji here:: 

Edited by dirtymartini1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎10‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 9:49 PM, lobrac said:

Buy an unpublished, undated Ricardo Villamonte Moon Knight/Brother Voodoo piece in auction:

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/ricardo-villamonte-moon-knight-and-brother-voodoo-illustration-original-art-undated-/a/7187-94783.s?ic4=OtherResults-SampleItem-071515&tab=ArchiveSearchResults-012417

Create stats and claim the piece was a published and/or alternate cover:

https://www.comicartfans.com/ForSaleDetails.asp?ArtId=1413032

Here is the actual published Moon Knight #21 cover by Sienkiewicz. The title stats were lifted off this one and used on the undated Villamonte piece. There is no record anywhere that the Villamonte piece was ever published.

https://www.comics.org/issue/36526/

‘nuff said

 

On ‎10‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 12:49 AM, RB3 said:

I would think this is boarder line fraud.  They claim its a "Fill In Issue" whatever that means.  I guess when it comes down to legal they could say he we disclosed that "WE" Filled in the issue with BS stuff!!!  I consider myself still a newbie in this area of comic collecting but from what I have read on here, I would not buy anything from them.  Plus, again as a newbie, I find it very frustrating that i have to contact them to get a price.  But then to hear that once you get a price, that the next time you inquire about it or want to make payment, the price has suddenly increased.  Well, I wont be doing any business with them, Sorry!!

This is what I'm curious about. How is this not fraud? They obviously have a history of doing this. Is it just not worth the effort to try and make a case out of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/22/2018 at 1:28 PM, Antpark said:

 

This is what I'm curious about. How is this not fraud? They obviously have a history of doing this. Is it just not worth the effort to try and make a case out of it?

Money is a serious impediment.

Legally, fraud is hard to prove. You have to show they did it intentionally, not done by someone else, with the intent to deceive, not a mistake. But yes, the basic claim is, if proven, fraudulent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
2 2