• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

DAREDEVIL 27 COVER

19 posts in this topic

817107002o.jpg

 

Now why would the owner of this page have Gene Colan sign the actual art within the border image ? ? ? That is plain silly and ruins the piece for me. I would have bid on it if not for this fact. Some people are sooooo ridiculous and lack judgement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

krazykat. it still a nice cover. and dont really bother me but. i guess you still can cover that area . by cutting the mat area a little smaller. to below the mike murdock must die. part. and you won,t have to look at the auto. problem solved.

 

larry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take on signed artwork is that I don't mind at all as long as it doesn't detract from the piece.

In this case the artist has signed near the bottom of the page in a blank area, which I think is fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take on signed artwork is that I don't mind at all as long as it doesn't detract from the piece.

In this case the artist has signed near the bottom of the page in a blank area, which I think is fine.

 

I guess. I find it distracting. I would prefer the artist sign along the border or on the back of the piece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, do you mind when an artist or writer signs the front of a comic book that you're collecting?

 

Didn't think so.

 

We art collectors tend not to like it either. Signing on the border, however, is a great thing. And, it's a wonderful experience to bring your art to the original artist to have it signed. Sharing the excitement and admiration with the creator is one of the best aspects of collecting original art (or comics).

 

Personally, the DD 27 example doesn't bother me. It's a small signature, on the bottom, and doesn't call attention to itself. But, I can see why it'd bother some/many.

 

Best,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, do you mind when an artist or writer signs the front of a comic book that you're collecting?

 

Didn't think so.

 

We art collectors tend not to like it either.

 

I certainly agree that the signature would be preferable in the border, but in this case it is tucked away under the headline blurb so is pretty unobtrusive.

 

Also it is kinda different from having a comic signed across the front cover, as if I don't like it I can always find another copy. But as you guys are so fond of pointing out Original Art is one of a kind, so if you want the piece what else can you do but learn to live with the signature? 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed! Like I said, the signature doesn't bother me on this example. But, some artists (McFarlane is an obvious example) have such egos that they will sign their name boldly and in large letters on the art. And, in the case of McFarlane, usually in silver marker! I wouldn't let the man anywhere near his own art smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess. I find it distracting. I would prefer the artist sign along the border or on the back of the piece.

 

Just to play devils advocate a little here KK, would you still be interested in buying the Romita cover to ASM #39 if he had signed it right across the front cover? Or would you go for another ASM cover instead?

 

These questions are really posed to gauge how strong the 'it's one of a kind' argument really is with OA collectors. 893scratchchin-thumb.gifconfused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is plain silly and ruins the piece for me

 

The previous owner probably had it signed for his enjoyment...perhaps so that he could see the signature while it was framed....

 

The previous owner never even took into consideration (or even gave a krap) how you would feel about the sig... screwy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see where it would be annoying in certain cases, but it's not like you can go pick up an another Daredevil 27 cover without the sig. Plus, that's just about the most unobtrusive autograph I've ever seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most original comic art is signed by the artist when they physically create the piece, and you can see the signature on most comic book covers when they're printed. Going back and signing it somewhere on the cover at a later time is what we're talking about. If that's going to happen, and I think there's no problem with that (in fact, it is preferable to me), I prefer it to be on the border. Most artists themselves agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like getting my art signed and prefer in the margins as well. But, as long as it doesn't detract from the piece, I couldn't care less.

 

But, here's an example from my collection where the artist signed in the middle of the page. It doesn't bother me at all:

 

bullets8.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess. I find it distracting. I would prefer the artist sign along the border or on the back of the piece.

 

Just to play devils advocate a little here KK, would you still be interested in buying the Romita cover to ASM #39 if he had signed it right across the front cover? Or would you go for another ASM cover instead?

 

These questions are really posed to gauge how strong the 'it's one of a kind' argument really is with OA collectors. 893scratchchin-thumb.gifconfused-smiley-013.gif

 

If the ASM #39 was signed right across the front I wouldnt alter my bid one iota (although I would use the 'defacement' as a negotiating tactic). It IS one of a kind and I would never get the chance to find another ASM#39. However, I still recognize that the piece is 'marred' from its publication image by the writing which was not on during the publication.

 

I used to own the DD #27 for about 15 years(83' - 98') so the fact that some numb-nut gets it in his hands for a brief time and doesnt have the discipline to 'leave well enough alone' is somewhat annoying. That said,...I never was a REAL TRUE FAN of the DD#27 piece and I probably, in this case. would subtract from my bid in the event I decided to 'take a crack' at owning it again because of the autograph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites