Heritage May 16 - 18 Comic Art Signature Auction - Chicago
4 4

783 posts in this topic

24,771 posts
9 minutes ago, vodou said:

:screwy:

not for me either, but nothing wrong with and a cheaper alternative to art.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,077 posts
On 5/11/2019 at 6:54 AM, delekkerste said:

If he was a prominent player in the OA market, he wouldn't have defaced the art area with unnecessary signatures. 

He may be a prominent something, but, prominent player in the OA market ain't it. :whistle:

Maybe he's worried that the piece has been tainted by his ownership and poor stewardship of it. 

Wow, I wanted to defend this, somehow.  But when I went on HA to look at it, jesus this is just awful.  Just have them sign the back if you real want their sigs on it, or sign UNDER the lettering box in the lower left corner.  

20809255%5D,sizedata%5B850x600%5D&call=u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,407 posts
1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

To be clear, it's still a great piece. It's just really, really unfortunate that some Philistine decided to treat this like a mere collectible by plastering unnecessary signatures on it instead of treating it like a proper piece of artwork. 2c 

IF someone were to be a buyer for this, and IF the signatures could be safely removed by a competent professional, would you do it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
871 posts
8 minutes ago, stinkininkin said:

IF someone were to be a buyer for this, and IF the signatures could be safely removed by a competent professional, would you do it?

I think they can be safely removed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,407 posts
3 minutes ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

I think they can be safely removed

Yes, often this is true depending on the ink used.  Question still stands.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,203 posts
13 minutes ago, stinkininkin said:

IF someone were to be a buyer for this, and IF the signatures could be safely removed by a competent professional, would you do it?

If Wanda Maximoff could whisper "No more sigs" and remove them instantly, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

But, if the reality is that the whole piece would need to be submersed in a chemical bath for days/weeks as part of the process...I'd want to discuss with the restorer whether he felt the condition of the rest of the piece merited a full conservation treatment at this time or not. And, if not, I'd be inclined to just leave it be. I think the sigs are unsightly, but, their presence is not a dealbreaker. 2c 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,991 posts
2 hours ago, delekkerste said:

...like a proper piece of artwork. 2c 

C O L L E C T I B L E.

That's what we're doing here all day long, talking about collectibles. Quibbling over which Spidey artist is the bestest is not an "art" discussion.

In that light, totally appropriate. Especially since we even got Stan's on there...before he died. Thank God for that foresight!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,353 posts
4 hours ago, jaybuck43 said:

Wow, I wanted to defend this, somehow.  But when I went on HA to look at it, jesus this is just awful.  Just have them sign the back if you real want their sigs on it, or sign UNDER the lettering box in the lower left corner.  

20809255%5D,sizedata%5B850x600%5D&call=u

Could be worse...like the guys who take a 9.4 - 9.8 book and have the artist sign all over the main characters...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,077 posts
3 minutes ago, pemart1966 said:

Could be worse...like the guys who take a 9.4 - 9.8 book and have the artist sign all over the main characters...

No.  Disagree.  There are other copies of the book out there.  I don't care if they deface one copy when others exist.  This is the art.  That's it.  This is where it came from.  You defaced it.  It's like someone scribbling on the sistine chapel .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,203 posts
9 minutes ago, jaybuck43 said:

No.  Disagree.  There are other copies of the book out there.  I don't care if they deface one copy when others exist.  This is the art.  That's it.  This is where it came from.  You defaced it.  It's like someone scribbling on the sistine chapel .

PREACH IT, BROTHER! :preach: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,353 posts
22 minutes ago, jaybuck43 said:

No.  Disagree.  There are other copies of the book out there.  I don't care if they deface one copy when others exist.  This is the art.  That's it.  This is where it came from.  You defaced it.  It's like someone scribbling on the sistine chapel .

My point was that the piece has already been defaced.  It would have been worse if the signees had signed over characters as opposed to where they did sign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,077 posts
5 minutes ago, pemart1966 said:

My point was that the piece has already been defaced.  It would have been worse if the signees had signed over characters as opposed to where they did sign.

Again no.  One defacement is not worse than another.  If you write over Mona Lisa's face, it's not worse or better than if you write over her chest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,134 posts
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, jaybuck43 said:

Again no.  One defacement is not worse than another.  If you write over Mona Lisa's face, it's not worse or better than if you write over her chest.

Yes it is! 10 out of 10 would choose Stan Lee's sig on the bottom right corner of the Mona Lisa vs. directly on her face, so YES!!! Placement DOES matter!!! (thumbsu

Edited by Timely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
545 posts

Well sure it could be worse -- they could have signed on top of the characters.  But I agree with what appears to be the majority sentiment -- the art was better left alone.

And sorry Mike H., it's not just a " C O L L E C T I B L E"   even if the consignor may or may not have treated it as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,353 posts
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Timely said:

Yes it is! 10 out of 10 would choose Stan Lee's sig on the bottom right corner of the Mona Lisa vs. directly on her face, so YES!!! Placement DOES matter!!! (thumbsu

Of course it does!!  How many artists sign in the middle of their work or over the face of the main character?  Answer - 0

Edited by pemart1966

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,353 posts
4 hours ago, jaybuck43 said:

Again no.  One defacement is not worse than another.  If you write over Mona Lisa's face, it's not worse or better than if you write over her chest.

WTF????  (shrug)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,134 posts
2 minutes ago, pemart1966 said:

Of course it does!!  How many artists sign on the middle of their work or over the face of the main character?  Answer - 0

I think you would be surprised to see exactly what Stan Lee would  sign over.... including other people's signatures!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,077 posts
7 minutes ago, pemart1966 said:

Of course it does!!  How many artists sign in the middle of their work or over the face of the main character?  Answer - 0

ironfist.thumb.jpg.0b42dcefd753bffe9c29f

 

Share this post


Link to post
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
4 4