Batman 251 Cover 0

[vodou]

4 hours ago, Will_K said:

I'll admit that I looked up the word.

 

2 hours ago, grapeape said:

+ 1

No Hemlock Grove fans here?

[Will_K]

20 minutes ago, vodou said:

Hemlock Grove

OK... I looked that up as well.. What ??

[vodou]

37 minutes ago, Will_K said:

OK... I looked that up as well.. What ??

Netflix?!

 

[Randall Ries]

On 9/10/2019 at 12:45 AM, Superhero said:

 

I stared at the 251 recreation on Neal's site for several years knowing the original cover was well beyond me so I eventually picked it up.  link below.  It is a great piece.  I confirmed with him that it was all him.  The title/logo/trade dress are stats on a separate overlay.  I talked to Neal about it for a while.  At that time, he didn't know if the original cover still existed or who might have it.   Interesting thing is I know he did it in the late 90's early 2000s but he dated the certificate of authenticity when I purchased it instead of when he actually drew it. 

 

https://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=807921

What is now grating me is that in the recreation, Jokers left leg (your right) is still horribly at a wrong angle. Talk about line for line.

[wurstisart]

You mean Batman’s ?

[NelsonAI]

Slightly Off Topic

If  I Recall Correctly, Neal did 2 cover recreations in the early 2000's.

1) the aforementioned Batman 251 cover that he had priced at $40,000.

2) Detective 412 where a medieval Knight on a horse is charging at Batman priced at $20,000.

Both were posted on the Neal Adams website for several years before selling.  

There is a reason why most publishers look the other way when artists do commissions for profit on their copyrighted characters such as Batman.

1) The publishers can continue to pay the artists minimally as work for hire but allow them to make a living on the side to support themselves.  Even Disney, which was known to sue anyone and everyone for violating Disney copyrighted characters seem to look the other way for their Marvel roster.

2) maintain a good working relationship with artists.  Deadlines are tight and you never know when you need someone to fill in immediately.

3) it's good public relations to the general public who are ultimately, the consumers of the publisher's products.

 

[ESeffinga]

$40k for a line for line... go Neal, go.

[NelsonAI]

Keep in mind, Neal sold those recreations about 8 or 9 years ago.  Healthy prices back then.  

You can still arrange for Neal to do a line for line cover recreation through his website but his price is not publicly disclosed.

[Will_K]

On 9/16/2019 at 3:05 PM, NelsonAI said:

There is a reason why most publishers look the other way when artists do commissions for profit on their copyrighted characters such as Batman.

1) The publishers can continue to pay the artists minimally as work for hire but allow them to make a living on the side to support themselves.  Even Disney, which was known to sue anyone and everyone for violating Disney copyrighted characters seem to look the other way for their Marvel roster.

2) maintain a good working relationship with artists.  Deadlines are tight and you never know when you need someone to fill in immediately.

3) it's good public relations to the general public who are ultimately, the consumers of the publisher's products.

As I mentioned in another thread, some artists may also have expressed permission from publishers to draw their characters.  The example I gave was Joe Staton.  I would assume Neal Adams has (or can certainly get) similar permissions.

[aokartman]

On 9/16/2019 at 3:05 PM, NelsonAI said:

Slightly Off Topic

If  I Recall Correctly, Neal did 2 cover recreations in the early 2000's.

1) the aforementioned Batman 251 cover that he had priced at $40,000.

2) Detective 412 where a medieval Knight on a horse is charging at Batman priced at $20,000.

Both were posted on the Neal Adams website for several years before selling.  

There is a reason why most publishers look the other way when artists do commissions for profit on their copyrighted characters such as Batman.

1) The publishers can continue to pay the artists minimally as work for hire but allow them to make a living on the side to support themselves.  Even Disney, which was known to sue anyone and everyone for violating Disney copyrighted characters seem to look the other way for their Marvel roster.

2) maintain a good working relationship with artists.  Deadlines are tight and you never know when you need someone to fill in immediately.

3) it's good public relations to the general public who are ultimately, the consumers of the publisher's products.

 

I might have missed it on this piece,

but, wouldn't it  have helped the consignor to re-create the missing text on the cover?

Curious, David

[Blastaar]

On a line for line recreation does the artist light box or trace the exiting art? Or is it freehand?

[Will_K]

It might depend on if the "original" is available for tracing.  Also it might depend on the size of the recreation.  If you're "serious" about it, lightboxing a scan could work.  Or if you're want to go really large, use a projector (a common brand is Artograph).

There's also the issue with reproducing brush strokes.  I'd say it's impossible.  You'd have to build up the line using a fine point like those 005 Microns.