Your Predictions Please 0

[Rick2you2]

4 hours ago, zhamlau said:

Britain’s population at the time was living under expected conditions, it was traction around the world to live under a monarchy at that time. China is living under a “fear of death” single party dictatorship where the general population knows there are much better options and have been for centuries, but they are denied it. 

If anything, don’t think England early 19th century, think France late 18th.

I don’t think that’s true. The majority are still thankful for the benefits they have received. Look at what happened in the USSR. Minor military activity, but mostly, a systemic collapse.

Now the minority groups, like the Uyghers, may act and feel differently. But the Han Chinese? 

[zhamlau]

54 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

I don’t think that’s true. The majority are still thankful for the benefits they have received. Look at what happened in the USSR. Minor military activity, but mostly, a systemic collapse.

Now the minority groups, like the Uyghers, may act and feel differently. But the Han Chinese? 

I saw an interesting special from the BBC of all places about Chinese re-education camps for Uygher Muslims living in the west. Lots of little games and redirects but with a little investigation the Truth oh how these thought correction facilities are run came out.

I just see bad things coming for a government who literally creates and maintains literally re-education facilities to correct wrongthink.

But, that’s does seem to lend support to the idea they will be Buscema Conan fans.

[tth2]

8 hours ago, delekkerste said:

So, what you're telling me is that they'll be more interested in John Buscema Conan over BWS Conan? 

Must... resist... making... remark... about... JB Conan... and... toilet paper!  

Edited July 15, 2019 by tth2

[Rick2you2]

8 hours ago, tth2 said:

Must... resist... making... remark... about... JB Conan... and... toilet paper!  

I will wager that more people buy the toilet paper. 

[Will_K]

Having grown up reading almost 95% DC (reading other kids' comics accounts for the other 5%), I am not that much of a John Buscema fan.  I simply don't associate him with my favorite comics.  But I thought he was among the top 5 favorite Marvel artists.  Am I wrong ??  It seems like there's a pent up dislike of Buscema.  Or is it just Buscema's Conan ??

[PhilipB2k17]

First point: Prediction is impossible. This is all just pure wild add guessing. 

Second point: There are literally - LITERALLY - millions of original comic book art pages out there. The vast, vast, majority of the stuff will be mostly worthless 25 years from now. It will be of obscure characters, obscure storylines, and mostly obscure artists. Who and what those will be, I have no idea. (Scotts point being well taken). The things you THINK will be worth it, probably won't. And some of the stuff you least expect, probably will be. 

Third: I'd start branching out into historical, or high brow graphic novel art. i.e. things with literary merit, or historical (not just pop culture) significance. Example: The art from March, which is the graphic autobiography of Congressman John Lewis. That graphic novel is becoming a staple in school curriculums, so the art from it will have a chance to go way outside the confines of our hobby. That's just one example. Another might be art from Fun Home, by Alison Bechdel, and so on. 

Fourth: I think Comic Art with word balloons is going to have a premium (in general) over comparable art without it. That is because it will be a cool, thing to put up on a wall, and if the art has a self-contained joke, or story, that is interesting, then it will becomes decorative pop art, and have value outside its original context. This may be especially so if it is regarded as a relic of a bygone era (mid to late 20th century). One glaring example of this in our own niche hobby is Y the Last Man art. Early, word-ballooned, Y art is much more desirable and valuable than any comparable later wordless art. (Certain key page exceptions, of course). Its one of those instances where it spans both eras of comic production and you can develop a natural experiment.

Fifth: Art from comics that becomes pop cultural phenomenon will have more value than stuff that just gets a couple of TV show, or Netflix show seasons. The latter is fool's gold. So, look for more Walking Dead than Deadly Class. (Although I love Deadly Class, and the art, its not a pop phenomenon which will leave an indelible psychic mark on a future generation of collectors).

Sixth: The vast majority of the classic superhero stuff that is valuable today - particularly Marvel superhero stuff - will retain its value, and may go up. And I mean "Classic" not random ROM or Conan pages from the 70's-80's. I'm talking about early to mid 60's Kirby, Ditko Spidey and Dr. Strange, etc. I think the run of the mill, mid run Keith Pollard Fantastic Four, or Sal Buscema Spectacular Spider -Man kind of stuff will go up for another 5-10 years, and then start to crash when the generation that loves it starts divesting, or gets their collection example itch scratched. A lot of the rising market prices are dictated by the generation that is doing the most buying. That's why you are seeing 90's Image guys art starting to go into a bubble. (McFarlane Spidey being the lone exception, as it had already exploded in value). 

Just my thoughts. 

[PhilipB2k17]

On 7/9/2019 at 6:31 PM, Rick2you2 said:

As I mentioned earlier, I suspect that some types of currently unfashionable art will one day be more collectible and desirable because they require no particular knowledge of the hobby to enjoy it. By way of example, this is a page which I spotted on Comic Art Tracker, and in my opinion, it is hoot. You can show the average person a Kirby fight scene, and they will probably consider it as no different than any other fight scene. This one, however, my gf really liked. Let me add that art with word balloons are likely to have more value than ones without them, all things being equal, because you can enjoy the content.

Agree. This goes to my point about some of this stuff becoming decorative art (or Pop Art). 

[PhilipB2k17]

On 7/9/2019 at 8:53 PM, delekkerste said:

I could see this piece having crossover appeal...up to about $150. 

It's kind of like old advertising poster prints, etc. It will be a decorative art, and $150 may or may not be what this stuff commands in the future. It depends. 

[PhilipB2k17]

On 7/10/2019 at 8:11 AM, delekkerste said:

I think it's a cool piece too, but, why would anyone think to pay up for it, either now or in the future?  Anyone into comic art will see this for what it is - generic genre art from the period. Superheroes will never become so stale that nondescript character art is going to be more popular than the IP which the medium is best known for. 

And as for crossover appeal, how would anyone even think to seek something like this out in the future? And to the extent that anyone does come across it, it's not going to have any of the appeal of a Lichtenstein to someone who collects fine art - or, do you think that these people will come for comic art the future (and, if so, why would they come for romance art, which is like the red-headed stepchild of our hobby?) I don't see its universal genericism being a big draw; it's not like being broadly relatable is helping it at all now. At best, it has less air to come out of it than hero art, but, I don't see where a resurgence of demand for this material is ever going to come from. A '70s comeback? Sure. A '70s romance art comeback? Doubtful. 

You have to divorce yourself from today's mindset. What will an urbane 30-something with disposable income think - in 2045 or 2050 - about a word-ballooned original comic art page that has a self-contained little vignette? Something that is fresh to them, and has no baggage other than its own intrinsic merits as decorative art? If they think about it at all, they are not going to care about who the artists was, what comic it was from, what the overall storyline was, or whether the page is a "key." They will only look at it and judge it on its own terms. And whether or not it would look cool hanging on their wall.

Edited July 15, 2019 by PhilipB2k17

[PhilipB2k17]

On 7/10/2019 at 12:56 PM, delekkerste said:

But, again...how many home decorators are ever even going to come across a piece like this?  Are we going to start seeing interior designers pouring over Anthony Snyder's booth at shows looking for cheap romance OA?     It's just never going to happen other than an exercise in mental onanism. 

You never know. The point is, though, its virtually impossible to predict what might become decorative art. I think the old romance stuff possibly could, because its less niche. It's more kitschy or Pop Arty.

[delekkerste]

2 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

You never know. The point is, though, its virtually impossible to predict what might become decorative art. I think the old romance stuff possibly could, because its less niche. It's more kitschy or Pop Arty.

See, I disagree with this notion that "you never know", and that "it's virtually impossible to tell" these things. I mean, OK, sure, if your standard is absolute, metaphysical certainty, I guess you never know.  But, using Bayesian (probabilistic) analysis, the series of low-probability steps it would require for this to reach the mainstream and actually become enough of a thing/trend worth talking about is pretty remote, IMO. 

I do think that old romance OA could look good as kitschy decor.  But, I'm confident that it will never be a thing worth talking about as a driver for the overall OA market or even that small segment of it.  

[delekkerste]

35 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

You have to divorce yourself from today's mindset. What will an urbane 30-something with disposable income think - in 2045 or 2050 - about a word-ballooned original comic art page that has a self-contained little vignette? Something that is fresh to them, and has no baggage other than its own intrinsic merits as decorative art? If they think about it at all, they are not going to care about who the artists was, what comic it was from, what the overall storyline was, or whether the page is a "key." They will only look at it and judge it on its own terms. And whether or not it would look cool hanging on their wall.

This kind of logic doesn't make any sense to me at all.  Why would 30-somethings in 2050 even be looking at vintage comic art from the 1960s and 1970s?  How many of them even do so today?  If it's already cool and affordable to hang up kitschy romance art as edgy decor today...why isn't anybody doing it (I'm not talking about people who have other comic art on their walls and happen to own some romance art that is up there as well, I'm talking about someone purposefully targeting this in the manner described in this thread)?  

I think you have to divorce yourself from the mindset in the hobby - people outside it wouldn't even think to use this as proper interior decor, and at this price point, you're competing with posters and prints and other cheap art and decor.  

[Rick2you2]

4 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

See, I disagree with this notion that "you never know", and that "it's virtually impossible to tell" these things. I mean, OK, sure, if your standard is absolute, metaphysical certainty, I guess you never know.  But, using Bayesian (probabilistic) analysis, the series of low-probability steps it would require for this to reach the mainstream and actually become enough of a thing/trend worth talking about is pretty remote, IMO. 

I do think that old romance OA could look good as kitschy decor.  But, I'm confident that it will never be a thing worth talking about as a driver for the overall OA market or even that small segment of it.  

While you are correct that no one can know with certainty, I think the future is a bit less predictable than the present viewers. I am surprised that most political cartoons (besides Thomas Nast) aren’t held in higher regard as to price. They can have well known content and speak to how people feel about common issues regardless as to age. But, a lot of them are relatively cheap.

In 30 years, I think this hobby will be seriously hollowed out. The top tier stuff will command high prices, the bottom tier will sell as affordable art for people who value style as well as collectors, but the material these days which might sell between $10,000 and $100,000 or even higher will be very slow if not dead. There may be interest in things like GL/GA 76, but not much.

[PhilipB2k17]

17 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

See, I disagree with this notion that "you never know", and that "it's virtually impossible to tell" these things. I mean, OK, sure, if your standard is absolute, metaphysical certainty, I guess you never know.  But, using Bayesian (probabilistic) analysis, the series of low-probability steps it would require for this to reach the mainstream and actually become enough of a thing/trend worth talking about is pretty remote, IMO. 

I do think that old romance OA could look good as kitschy decor.  But, I'm confident that it will never be a thing worth talking about as a driver for the overall OA market or even that small segment of it.  

I don’t disagree. I was commenting on other people’s comments a d laid out my thoughts in an earlier post. This was but one 6th of my prediction. 

[PhilipB2k17]

4 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

While you are correct that no one can know with certainty, I think the future is a bit less predictable than the present viewers. I am surprised that most political cartoons (besides Thomas Nast) aren’t held in higher regard as to price. They can have well known content and speak to how people feel about common issues regardless as to age. But, a lot of them are relatively cheap.

In 30 years, I think this hobby will be seriously hollowed out. The top tier stuff will command high prices, the bottom tier will sell as affordable art for people who value style as well as collectors, but the material these days which might sell between $10,000 and $100,000 or even higher will be very slow if not dead. There may be interest in things like GL/GA 76, but not much.

I don’t even think the GL/GA 76 cover will retain its value in 25 years. Nobody 25 years from now is going to put much of a premium on Neal Adams vs Don Newton vs Jim Aparo. Kirby & Ditko have very distinct styles that might translate. But Adams looks like any other competent commercial artist, when you divorce him from the Comics medium. And will anyone really care that much - then - about the supposed start of the Bronze Age of comics? 

 

[PhilipB2k17]

12 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

This kind of logic doesn't make any sense to me at all.  Why would 30-somethings in 2050 even be looking at vintage comic art from the 1960s and 1970s?  How many of them even do so today?  If it's already cool and affordable to hang up kitschy romance art as edgy decor today...why isn't anybody doing it (I'm not talking about people who have other comic art on their walls and happen to own some romance art that is up there as well, I'm talking about someone purposefully targeting this in the manner described in this thread)?  

I think you have to divorce yourself from the mindset in the hobby - people outside it wouldn't even think to use this as proper interior decor, and at this price point, you're competing with posters and prints and other cheap art and decor.  

People NOW don’t view it as decorative art. But maybe they do in 2050, when the printed comic book is a dead letter and the art style may be nostalgia or kitsch.  I agree, it won’t have a ton of value. But it might not be valueless. 

[delekkerste]

25 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

I don’t even think the GL/GA 76 cover will retain its value in 25 years. Nobody 25 years from now is going to put much of a premium on Neal Adams vs Don Newton vs Jim Aparo. Kirby & Ditko have very distinct styles that might translate. But Adams looks like any other competent commercial artist, when you divorce him from the Comics medium. And will anyone really care that much - then - about the supposed start of the Bronze Age of comics? 

 

I guess I see less of it all amalgamating together (e.g., Adams vs. Aparo vs. Newton) than some people; I think there will still be a healthy respect for Adams' art and accomplishments (as well as those of most of the big names) that will translate into price differentiation.

That said, I don't know that GL 76 is as highly valued in 25 years as it is now if you compare the inflation-adjusted price then vs. now; unlike some/most, I definitely don't see any overriding imperative that says this stuff has to keep rising in value over time.  We'll see.   

Edited July 15, 2019 by delekkerste

[vodou]

2 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

But Adams looks like any other competent commercial artist

Except that by all examples I've seen - he can't paint.

[Bronty]

6 minutes ago, vodou said:

Except that by all examples I've seen - he can't paint.

Can't paint worth a dam.   But neither can 95% of comic artists.   Great draftsmen because that's what they do, but they can't generally paint because its not what they do

[Rick2you2]

6 hours ago, delekkerste said:

This kind of logic doesn't make any sense to me at all.  Why would 30-somethings in 2050 even be looking at vintage comic art from the 1960s and 1970s?  How many of them even do so today?  If it's already cool and affordable to hang up kitschy romance art as edgy decor today...why isn't anybody doing it (I'm not talking about people who have other comic art on their walls and happen to own some romance art that is up there as well, I'm talking about someone purposefully targeting this in the manner described in this thread)?  

I think you have to divorce yourself from the mindset in the hobby - people outside it wouldn't even think to use this as proper interior decor, and at this price point, you're competing with posters and prints and other cheap art and decor.  

For the same reason that Bakelite jewelry enjoyed a renaissance, and heirloom jewelry does, too (up to a point). In those cases its about the craftsmanship and the style.

I gave my daughter some cells from a commercial for Chiquita Banana and had them framed in a colorful frame. She loves them, and they look great (particularly with the matting).