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

783 posts in this topic

24,908 posts

I have to agree.   There’s not much to get hit about there.   Everyone’s backs are turned too.   It’s not subject matter he’s known for, it’s not real exciting to me.   If that hit 500k I’d be waaaay more impressed than if EQ hit 5m

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,234 posts
3 hours ago, GeneticNinja said:

 

35 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

You really like that? If it didn't have the name Frazetta attached to it, it would pass for some of the 18-19th century overblown historic junk that people used to paint and like.

I agree with Rick. While this is interesting to analyze inside the Frazetta oeuvre, it's also exactly the kind of generic genre painting the Frazettas weren't keeping in the 1970s. Just a guess on my part but canvas board support reads: quickie deadline job to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,044 posts

Since it was published only once, I feel that it doesn't have the emotional pull that other classic (i.e. widely published) images have (EQ, Death Dealer, Snow Giants, etc).

That might hurt the final sales price.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,234 posts
5 minutes ago, Bronty said:

I have to agree.   There’s not much to get hit about there.   Everyone’s backs are turned too.   It’s not subject matter he’s known for, it’s not real exciting to me.   If that hit 500k I’d be waaaay more impressed than if EQ hit 5m

Egyptian Queen...I am fascinated to see where that finally hammers when Sea Witch was only 15% of your $5m number. I'm not saying they are at the same ranking but they aren't that far apart either. Of course that was at PIH, 3 years ago (before most of the big numbers on Frazetta oils were achieved publicly -no accident how post-PIH action played out either), in an auction format and platform that wasn't as desirable to the broadest band of bidders. Though at $500k+, the pool is already rather thin so the last part probably doesn't matter as much.

https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/frank-frazetta-iconic-sea-witch-cover-oil-paint-15-c-fba4c26a13#

image.png.7769837653d3318e28ff3d8980a344d9.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,234 posts

I should add that Sea Witch, touted as a $1m Frazetta oil during the run-up to auction go-date may end up being viewed in hindsight as one of the great steals for major Frazetta oils. If it isn't already. (I see it exactly that way, if you have to pay retail for these things in a public auction environment, then SW or 2.5x for...that 1980s Death Dealer from HA?! Um...no contest ;) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,908 posts
13 minutes ago, spider9698 said:

Since it was published only once, I feel that it doesn't have the emotional pull that other classic (i.e. widely published) images have (EQ, Death Dealer, Snow Giants, etc).

That might hurt the final sales price.

 

The fact its not that good might hurt the price too. :insane:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,908 posts
14 minutes ago, vodou said:

Egyptian Queen...I am fascinated to see where that finally hammers when Sea Witch was only 15% of your $5m number.

 

 

I'm not really making a comment on EQ, certainly not making a comment on sea witch.    Just saying the roman chariot male buttocks painting isn't what you look for in a frazetta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,234 posts

Right, wasn't meaning to suggest that you thought EQ would achieve $5m but I can see how my comment could read that way. Roman chariot male buttocks is $150k "just cuz - Frazetta" but at auction it's either a fail (in final hammer or reserve not met) or 1-protection-bid win. Not sure if outside of family consignor will get the same support though as other recent oils have. Depends on who's bidding and whether it's to own (for love) or to flip (er...yikes?!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
535 posts

Given Creepy covers were being offered for 250 dollars back then, I suspect the consignor of the Roman piece will still come out way ahead here. But, all points agreed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,497 posts

I've never done it before, but I think I might have to thrill bid Egyptian Queen. Who's with me? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,586 posts

There seems to be an error in their description of the Avengers 3 page (which I owned back in the day) saying this is their first-ever battle. Hulk and Iron Man fought in Avengers 1, actually. A great page, still, but seems like someone didn't do their homework. 

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/jack-kirby-and-paul-reinman-avengers-3-page-9-original-art-marvel-1964-/p/7209-70001.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515

"Jack Kirby and Paul Reinman Avengers #3 Page 9 Original Art (Marvel, 1964). The first-ever battle between Iron Man and the Hulk! And Kirby makes you feel the power of every punch and repulsor blast. In the wonderful closeup in panel 3 you see Iron Man's peaked-mask look was still very new at this point -- Shellhead had just ditched his old bulky armor a month earlier in the pages of Tales of Suspense. Signed by Kirby in the bottom margin. Ink over graphite on Bristol board with an image area of 12.75" x 18.5". Pinholes. Minor corner creasing and very minor production staining. Very Good condition"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,285 posts

I think it is most unfortunate that Frank reworked Egyptian Queen. I find the final version sort of uncomplicatedly sexy, where the Warren version has a complex expression of alarm and is only accidentally sexy, which makes her MORE sexy. I fear I will have to spend my 4.2 million elsewhere. Perhaps on a Lichtenstein.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,420 posts
Posted (edited)
On 3/29/2019 at 8:54 AM, vodou said:

Egyptian Queen...I am fascinated to see where that finally hammers when Sea Witch was only 15% of your $5m number. I'm not saying they are at the same ranking but they aren't that far apart either. Of course that was at PIH, 3 years ago (before most of the big numbers on Frazetta oils were achieved publicly -no accident how post-PIH action played out either), in an auction format and platform that wasn't as desirable to the broadest band of bidders. Though at $500k+, the pool is already rather thin so the last part probably doesn't matter as much.

https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/frank-frazetta-iconic-sea-witch-cover-oil-paint-15-c-fba4c26a13#

image.png.7769837653d3318e28ff3d8980a344d9.png

 

I think they are a bit further apart than a little. EQ is sexy and has an air of danger to it with a number of “moving parts” scattered around and good  image balance. With Sea Witch, the actual operative part of the picture is relatively small—her and that creature with the serpents in the vicinity. The rest is drama created with what boils down to background art. In today’s market, I think it would go for over $1M, and the purchase price would be a steal. But EQ is significantly more interesting.

Edited by Rick2you2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43,078 posts
2 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

I think they are a bit further apart than a little. EQ is sexy and has an air of danger to it with a number of “moving parts” scattered around and good  image balance. With Sea Witch, the actual operative part of the picture is relatively small—her and that creature with the serpents in the vicinity. The rest is drama created with what boils down to background art. In today’s market, I think it would go for over $1M, and the purchase price would be a steal. But EQ is significantly more interesting.

Agreed, but perhaps even more so as it pertains to how the pieces are remembered, the way each piece was presented to the public originally (which went a long way towards how they were remembered, and thus how romanticized and nostalgically linked the memory of each piece is today) were dramatically different.

The choice to lay the piece out in a landscape perspective exacted a heavy toll on how the piece was published by warren. The way the pieces were published by Warren went a long way towards either making them unforgettable in the collective consciousness or a piece that's easily passed over. 

Eerie #7 Sea Witch

8241-2300-9099-1-eerie.jpg.9683eff49e7dc2319f6bfdd9d2f4855f.jpg

 

Eerie #23 Egyptian Queen

306348-2300-122841-1-eerie.gif.jpeg.387e8f28c0ea8519d2389f7106b81a8b.jpeg''

 

The central image in EQ is custom made for publication in this format. As a result the central figure is 4 to 5 times the size of the Sea Witch holding each cover next to the other in your hands. 

One jumped out at the reader and the other could more easily slip by if one wasn't looking closely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,420 posts
1 minute ago, comix4fun said:

Agreed, but perhaps even more so as it pertains to how the pieces are remembered, the way each piece was presented to the public originally (which went a long way towards how they were remembered, and thus how romanticized and nostalgically linked the memory of each piece is today) were dramatically different.

The choice to lay the piece out in a landscape perspective exacted a heavy toll on how the piece was published by warren. The way the pieces were published by Warren went a long way towards either making them unforgettable in the collective consciousness or a piece that's easily passed over. 

Eerie #7 Sea Witch

8241-2300-9099-1-eerie.jpg.9683eff49e7dc2319f6bfdd9d2f4855f.jpg

 

Eerie #23 Egyptian Queen

306348-2300-122841-1-eerie.gif.jpeg.387e8f28c0ea8519d2389f7106b81a8b.jpeg''

 

The central image in EQ is custom made for publication in this format. As a result the central figure is 4 to 5 times the size of the Sea Witch holding each cover next to the other in your hands. 

One jumped out at the reader and the other could more easily slip by if one wasn't looking closely. 

Good point. That Sea Witch cover is pretty bland looking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54,578 posts

Sea Witch (the painting itself, not the way it was published on the cover of Eerie) doesn't look like a Frazetta to me.  It's so bright and smooth that it looks more like something done by Roger Dean.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,908 posts
Posted (edited)

Well, I kinda see what you mean but I would argue it’s not the technique or the brightness (when I look at them I see oils vs airbrush and those two mediums never look the same in person).    What gives them a bit of a shared bond is that, boobies aside, the landscape is the star of the show in Sea Witch (land in Deans work too.   

Edited by Bronty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,506 posts
9 hours ago, tth2 said:

Sea Witch (the painting itself, not the way it was published on the cover of Eerie) doesn't look like a Frazetta to me.  It's so bright and smooth that it looks more like something done by Roger Dean.  

#whodiditbetter

2006293943_FrazDean.thumb.jpg.22833f549367025cc3088bc8bdab467f.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,103 posts

2.5 million on the Fritz plus BP..my guess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54,578 posts
9 hours ago, Bronty said:

Well, I kinda see what you mean but I would argue it’s not the technique or the brightness (when I look at them I see oils vs airbrush and those two mediums never look the same in person).    What gives them a bit of a shared bond is that, boobies aside, the landscape is the star of the show in Sea Witch (land in Deans work too.   

Yes, that's absolutely right, I guess I thought that was implicit.  But if Frazetta had his normal rougher, more impressionistic brushwork and typical darker colors, I wouldn't have drawn the comparison just on the basis of being a landscape/seascape.

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