Heritage May 16 - 18 Comic Art Signature Auction - Chicago 3 3

[PhilipB2k17]

26 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

It's more nuanced than that. Obviously, Frazetta is known primarily for his paperback, magazine, movie poster, etc. images painted in (full color) oils, so, that is what people covet the most. There are probably second-tier oils worth as much as his best B&W Famous Funnies/WSF (B&W) covers.  All of Alex Ross' finished artwork is color - if he started doing B&W pen & ink work, it wouldn't be worth as much.  James Jean is known for his (full color) paintings, and so they go for more than his pencil-only, pen & ink or mixed media work, generally speaking.

You have to find a true apples-to-apples comparison. I can think of one data point - the Jim Lee/Scott Williams/Joe Chiodo X-Men Marvel Press Poster (#108, "Grounded") which was also used as the cover of the "X-Men: Mutant Genesis" TPB. This was done originally in pen & ink, and Chiodo applied colors directly onto the board.  It looks fantastic in person (I used to own it) - it really captures that era of the X-Men better in color than it does in B&W, as all of those characters' costumes were very much associated with certain color schemes.  

Anyway, it is a fantastic, full-team image, published at least twice.  I'm not going to put a number on its value, but, I think most in-the-know people would probably say that it would be worth even more in B&W than color, because no serious OA collector will have a problem with B&W, but color may limit the pool of potential buyers at any given price point.  

One well-known collector and active Boardie explained it to me once this way:  "Ours is a black & white hobby".  Obviously there are exceptions, but they are exceptions that prove the rule. 

I guess that's kind of an experimental test case where the exact same piece of art was published first based off of a black and white version, and second a colored version? (If I read your correctly). So, you are saying there'd be a certain market preference for the black & white version (pencil and ink) vs the colored version.

I would also expect this to be true for someone who asks, say, Laura Martin to color an original pencil and ink page. Even though she may be one of the best colorists in the business, and may do a superb job, it still lowers the value of the art in the hobby.

What I was referring to, however, was when the original art is in color. I should think that the Punisher cover paintings by Phil Zimelman over Mike Zeck pencils, to use an example, are no less desirable or valuable to the hobby collectors, just because they were painted in color. 

Edited April 8, 2019 by PhilipB2k17

[Bronty]

Contrast:   Neal Adam, can't paint for mess.   Colored in outlines.. coloring book.

 

Versus:  Frazetta.   Actual painting.   Not a coloring book.  No ink outlines.   Just layers of color

 

 

 

[Bronty]

2 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

I guess that's kind of an experimental test case where the exact same piece of art was published first based off of a black and white version, and second a colored version? (If I read your correctly). So, you are saying there'd be a certain market preference for the black & white version (pencil and ink) vs the colored version.

I would also expect this to be true for someone who asks, say, Laura Martin to color an original pencil and ink page. Even though she may be one of the best colorists in the business, and may do a superb job, it still lowers the value of the art in the hobby.

What I was referring to, however, was when the original art is in color. I should think that the Punisher cover paintings by Mike Zeck, to use an example, are no less desirable or valuable to the hobby collectors, just because they were painted in color.

You mean the Punisher cover paintings by Phil Zimmelman?   

 

[PhilipB2k17]

Just now, Bronty said:

You mean the Punisher cover paintings by Phil Zimmelman?   

 

I corrected it before you responded.

[Bronty]

1 hour ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

I corrected it before you responded.

Those pieces are good examples of the point you're trying to make as yes, people love them.    Same with the dark knight 1 cover.     However, I'm not sure that's always the case.    And, as Gene says, there's nuances based on what the artist is known for.    But, in general, I'd argue the comic collector bias is towards b&w as being "safe" and "easy to understand" because its the norm and doesn't require stepping outside the comfort zone.

Its just a matter of what you're used to.   I primarily collect paintings and so I have a bias the other way, against b&w.  Its rare that I find a piece that's b&w from something I like at a price I want to pay as a result.

Edited April 8, 2019 by Bronty

[J.Sid]

19 hours ago, J.Sid said:

 coffee stains have no impact on value... 

Hey now – I never claimed they increase value!

[PhilipB2k17]

1 hour ago, Bronty said:

That's very nicely done, its lovely.    But comic artists generally suck at painting.    Drawing in b&w or in pencil is their forte.     Even on this lovely piece, its on display.   Its not hard to see the artist drew directly onto the board (see edges) and then applied a thin layer of watercolor or goauche perhaps.    Lovely work, and so on, but its a twist on what I was referring to earlier.   In spirit, more of a colored drawing than a painting.   Outlines filled in with paint, coloring book style.   Particularly obvious on the buildings at the top.   Now, she's skillful enough that I don't mean that in any negative way.   But the point is... drawing not painting is really what they do best.     Look at a boris, or a frazetta.    Those are fully realized in paint.   Not outlines that they've colored in.

I think even Da Vinci roughed out his paintings in charcoal before painting them.

[Bronty]

1 hour ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

I think even Da Vinci roughed out his paintings in charcoal before painting them.

missing the point.   On purpose?

Look at this sky

A comic book artist would draw cloud lines then color the sky blue.   The white clouds he'd leave empty. 

A painter might paint the entire sky blue, then paint white clouds right over the blue he'd already painted.   Layers.   The little wisps of blue in the horizon at the bottom of the clouds would just be the bottom layer peeking through where the white layer was thinly applied or not applied at all.

It may be hard to grasp but you end up with two very different looking results.

 

Edited April 8, 2019 by Bronty

[BCarter27]

I'm going to help this discussion out so much...

 

[Bronty]

YES!!

[Bronty]

YES!!

Maybe this will help, or maybe I'm beating a dead horse that no one but me cares about.

A comic book artist creates colored pieces in b&w and colors them in just like a comic book page.. not surprising right?

 

 

 

a painter uses zero black lines and creates shapes in layers of color.    A more realistic but a much more time consuming process.   Here we have white on top of yellow on top of red on top of blue.    Just needs a happy little tree.

 

[PhilipB2k17]

47 minutes ago, Bronty said:

missing the point.   On purpose?

Look at this sky

A comic book artist would draw cloud lines then color the sky blue.   The white clouds he'd leave empty. 

A painter might paint the entire sky blue, then paint white clouds right over the blue he'd already painted.   Layers.   The little wisps of blue in the horizon at the bottom of the clouds would just be the bottom layer peeking through where the white layer was thinly applied or not applied at all.

It may be hard to grasp but you end up with two very different looking results.

 

 

[PhilipB2k17]

Why did the Dalrymple painted cover make you sad, batman_fan? 

[Bronty]

This thread needs more Boris.

[PhilipB2k17]

32 minutes ago, Bronty said:

This thread needs more Boris.

I vote for more Rowena. 

[batman_fan]

1 hour ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

Why did the Dalrymple painted cover make you sad, batman_fan? 

Just not my taste in art.

[buttock]

On 4/7/2019 at 1:35 PM, Bronty said:

When I reverse google it, it appears to be based on Maori mythology

 

In Māori mythology, Tinirau is a guardian of fish. He is a son of Tangaroa, the god of the sea. His home at Motutapu (sacred island) is surrounded with pools for breeding fish. He also has several pet whales.

Hinauri, sister to the Māui brothers, had married Irawaru, who was transformed into a dog by Māui-tikitiki. In her grief Hinauri throws herself into the sea. She does not drown but is cast ashore at the home of Tinirau, where she attracts his attention by muddying the pools he uses as mirrors. She marries Tinirau and uses incantations to kill his other two wives, who had attacked her out of jealousy (Biggs 1966:450).

When her child Tūhuruhuru is born, the ritual birth ceremony is performed by Kae, a priest.^[1] After this is done, Tinirau lends Kae his pet whale to take him home. In spite of strict instructions to the contrary, Kae forces the whale, Tutu-nui, into shallow water, where it dies, and is roasted and eaten by Kae and his people. When he learns of this Tinirau is furious and sends Hinauri with a party of women (often they are Tinirau's sisters) to capture Kae, who is to be identified by his overlapping front teeth. The sisters perform indecent dances to make him laugh.^[2] When he laughs, they see his crooked teeth. Then the women sing a magic song which puts Kae into a deep sleep, and carry him back to Motutapu. When Kae wakes from his sleep he is in Tinirau's house. Tinirau taunts him for his treachery, and kills him (Grey 1970:69, Tregear 1891:110, Biggs 1966:450).

Later Tūhuruhuru is killed by the tribe of Popohorokewa for the death of Kae. In turn, Tinirau calls on Whakatau to destroy the Popohorokewa, which he did by burning them all in the house called Tihi-o-manono (Biggs 1966:450).

In a South Island account, Tinirau, mounted on Tutunui, meets Kae, who is in a canoe. Kae borrows Tutunui, and Tinirau goes on his way to find Hine-te-iwaiwa, travelling on a large nautilus that he borrows from his friend Tautini. When Tinirau smells the south wind he knows that his whale is being roasted (Tregear 1891:110).

But what about the perm?

[Bronty]

18 minutes ago, buttock said:

But what about the perm?

I'm using it to scour my pots 

[buttock]

1 minute ago, Bronty said:

I'm using it to scour my pots 

Is Aqua Net water resistant? 

[Bronty]

1 minute ago, buttock said:

Is Aqua Net water resistant? 

Well, if there is one thing that painting taught us, its that her perm cannot get wet.   Therefore, yes, yes it is.