When pencils and lightboxing make it two originals... 0

[bluechip]

A while back I bid on a cover I'd always liked, which was in penciled form (without logo, etc) and had been lightbox inked by another artist to create the published cover.  Thought it was cool but it was in light pencils and not the final, so ultimately I bid too low, which got me thinking...   

--- what are the general feelings regarding desirability when there's a pencil only incomplete version (which obviously came first) but the second version is the final, and it's inked and published?

If pencils only go for one amount, say 100, how much should you expect the published cover (created via lightbox inks) set you back?   I would assume that both covers are worth more separately than they would be as if the pencils and inks were on one page.  But how much (if any) does the market take off from a published cover if the original pencils are on a separate page?  And if so does the market give or take away any value if the pencils were simply (and fully) erased?   (in each case, you've got an inked piece that has no original pencils, and in one case you've got a separate piece with only pencils

I imagine other bidders and interested parties might have also been unsure how to value a piece like a cover that exists in more than one form, which got me to thinking about how many forms they take, including-- 

pencils which were lightboxed;

Inked (published) covers that were lightboxed (and therefore have no original pencils);

pencils that were nearly or entirely finished when the artist decided to "start over" and created a new cover that is still substantially like the first one;

completed covers that were inked and ready to be published but then were slightly revised with corrections on a stat, which becomes the published cover;

completed covers that were ready to be published but then redone with entirely new concepts for one reason or another...

...I'm sure there are still more variations to consider, which I just haven't thought of on the spot here.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 30, 2019 by bluechip

[Twanj]

I've always seen 60% pencils, 40% inks.

 

So if the lightboxed inked page was $400, the original pencils only page would be $600.

 

There are some pages I've been interested that were digital pencils only and inks, but I've never been able to pull the trigger.

[aokartman]

I doubt you will find a consensus on values of relative forms of the comic book art, though there will be likely no lack of opinions!

My preference is lettering directly on the page, inks over original pencils (look for traces), factory stats (not later replacements), any restoration should be fully disclosed,

even if amateur.

If the seller is aware, they should disclose whatever they know about a piece.

That is just me, there are some other iterations of production "art" which also appeal to me, but on a different level.

Best, David

[Varanis]

It varies a lot based on exact circumstances and the artists involved.

Based on my very limited experience, in the case you mention where the cover was penciled on one board and light boxed and inked on another, the penciled board will usually be worth substantially more. Again, that depends a lot on the artists involved too. If the inker is more renowned than the penciler, it may be the other way around.

In cases where the pencils and inks are by the same artist, the pencils are generally worth more. If the pencils were digital and don't exist, the inked piece will usually be worth what you'd expect a pencil + ink piece to be worth (again, assuming the same artists did both).

Best to approach on a case by case basis.

 

[grapeape]

You’re not going to get a consensus opinion. I struggled with this with John Byrnes Silver Surfer 1 annual cover 1982. When I realized Palmer inked Byrne by light box it left me stumped on how to value it.

I passed.

artistically COOL

$ value.....uggghhh

 

Edited December 30, 2019 by grapeape

[bluechip]

1 hour ago, Twanj said:

I've always seen 60% pencils, 40% inks.

 

So if the lightboxed inked page was $400, the original pencils only page would be $600.

 

There are some pages I've been interested that were digital pencils only and inks, but I've never been able to pull the trigger.

Interesting.   If I had been operating on that percentage, I'd have bid much higher.   On a number of things. 

Also, I would expect two pieces (one pencil, one inks) to add up to more than 100% (one piece).   So I would've expected -- presuming inks over pencils being 100% -- something more like 25-60% pencils and 80-90% inks in published form.  Figures pulled partially from my posterior and when you factor in the potentially wide disparity between artists (e.g. if Kirby was the penciler and Vince Colletta the inker, those percentages might flip)

course I don't collect the more modern pieces, where lightboxing has become more prevalent and you don't really have many choices that include everything, word balloons and all.  With them, such a breakdown makes a lot of sense.  But in my experience, which is admittedly limited, I have seen a strong preference for things that are either in final published form or at least appear to be (like a cover that is fully inked and was then revised on stats for the final).   

Once had a Romita cover that was lightboxed for the published version which I got for about 500 when similar covers in final published form were, if I recall correctly, about 20X that.   It was on letter size paper, which might have affected it.  But I saw another (ASM) cover full size penciled which was, I had been told, lightbox inked and it went for only 1500 when a finished cover was about 10X that, because the pencil only piece was valued as if it were a "prelim".   I may be answering my own question to suggest that there are so many variables that it's hard to put fixed percentages on them.   

For example, I've seen pieces that were penciled and then lightbox inked with noticeable changes made by a second artist.   And I've also seen pieces that were penciled and then redone and revised by the original penciler, who also inked it.  In the first example, the pencil only piece is considered an original published piece, despite the revisions in the final.   But in the second example, it's considered a "prelim" (and valued less?) even though neither it or the other pencil piece are published and the extent of the revisions may be similar.  So one could easily conclude the second example is valued less specifically because it was inked by the penciler and not someone else.  Which seems counter-intuitive (though I can certainly understand the thought process which got us there)

And of course there's many examples of covers (like the recent Cap 103) which sold for stratospheric prices even though they differ from the final published version.  One reason I can assume, without much fear of contradiction, being that the "finished cover" -- if revised on a stat -- contains far less original art.

 

 

 

Edited December 30, 2019 by bluechip

[Brian Peck]

It comes down to who penciled and who inked the cover. If its a big name like Byrne, Adams or Romita and inked by a little known inker the values are very different. Lightbox art the penciler (if artists are different for penciler and inker) never toughed the finished inked piece then the value would be low. But also need to figure in the series and the issue, if its some fill in issue by a big name artist and the story is forgetable value for pencils would be alot lower. But if its for a very popular series or story that a big name penciler draws can be alot.

With modern art its hard to track if some cover only exist in inks (pencils digital) but if there are separate pencils and inks values can drop significantly. All depends on what information you are given. I tend to stay away from modern art. As for pre-digital era, its rare to have lightboxed covers but they are out there. Many times the inks will go for less but there are exceptions. A few years back X-Factor #1 inked by Joe Rubinstein was on Heritage, their description was not all there clear. It mentions Walt Simonson penciling the cover, BUT the art up for auction was lightboxed by Rubinstein. Story is Walt penciled and inked the cover but Shooter asked Rubinstein to lightbox the inks (no idea of the reason). Rubinstein's version was published. To 95% of the people who looked at both it looked the same. Anyways the lightboxed Rubinstein cover went for $33K (oops was wrong on the hammer). That was an insane hammer price because Walt never toughed the original and his pencils are not on it. Its a nice cover but nothing historic, people bid alot because its a Walt Simonson cover and Walt doesn't sell his originals. Even though it really isn't a Walt original. Basically I am saying its hard to judge prices between pencils only and a published lightboxed cover. Too many variables.

And to your original comment, a cover drawn by a different penciled and inker does contain the original pencils even if they are erased. The original pencils are under the inks. Like a bug trapped in amber.

 

 

Edited December 30, 2019 by Brian Peck

[Twanj]

1 hour ago, Brian Peck said:

It comes down to who penciled and who inked the cover. If its a big name like Byrne, Adams or Romita and inked by a little known inker the values are very different. Lightbox art the penciler (if artists are different for penciler and inker) never toughed the finished inked piece then the value would be low. But also need to figure in the series and the issue, if its some fill in issue by a big name artist and the story is forgetable value for pencils would be alot lower. But if its for a very popular series or story that a big name penciler draws can be alot.

With modern art its hard to track if some cover only exist in inks (pencils digital) but if there are separate pencils and inks values can drop significantly. All depends on what information you are given. I tend to stay away from modern art. As for pre-digital era, its rare to have lightboxed covers but they are out there. Many times the inks will go for less but there are exceptions. A few years back X-Factor #1 inked by Joe Rubinstein was on Heritage, their description was not all there clear. It mentions Walt Simonson penciling the cover, BUT the art up for auction was lightboxed by Rubinstein. Story is Walt penciled and inked the cover but Shooter asked Rubinstein to lightbox the inks (no idea of the reason). Rubinstein's version was published. To 95% of the people who looked at both it looked the same. Anyways the lightboxed Rubinstein cover went for $25K. That was an insane hammer price because Walt never toughed the original and his pencils are not on it. Its a nice cover but nothing historic, people bid alot because its a Walt Simonson cover and Walt doesn't sell his originals. Even though it really isn't a Walt original. Basically I am saying its hard to judge prices between pencils only and a published lightboxed cover. Too many variables.

And to your original comment, a cover drawn by a different penciled and inker does contain the original pencils even if they are erased. The original pencils are under the inks. Like a bug trapped in amber.

 

 

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/walt-simonson-and-joe-rubinstein-x-factor-1-the-return-of-jean-grey-cover-original-art-marvel-1986-/a/7076-92320.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515

$33,460

[Dick O.]

4 hours ago, Twanj said:

I've always seen 60% pencils, 40% inks.

 

So if the lightboxed inked page was $400, the original pencils only page would be $600.

That's my view too, with some examples here:

https://comicbookinvest.com/2017/12/15/market-report-december-2017-comicconnect-auction/

https://comicbookinvest.com/2018/04/06/market-report-march-2018-hakes-comicconnect-auctions/

 

[Stefanomjr]

Before getting into this hobby,  I always assumed all inks were over original pencils.  Then I saw mentions of ink over "blue line"  - folks like Capullo selling original pencil and original ink pages. Add some aspect of digital or lightbox into the process... it's no wonder I gravitate towards artists that ink over their own pencils/layout. Eliminates this whole dilemma... bifurcation of values.

Enjoying this thread. 

 

[alxjhnsn]

5 hours ago, Twanj said:

I've always seen 60% pencils, 40% inks.

That’s the ratio that seems to work. 

[bluechip]

2 hours ago, Brian Peck said:

It comes down to who penciled and who inked the cover. If its a big name like Byrne, Adams or Romita and inked by a little known inker the values are very different. Lightbox art the penciler (if artists are different for penciler and inker) never toughed the finished inked piece then the value would be low. But also need to figure in the series and the issue, if its some fill in issue by a big name artist and the story is forgetable value for pencils would be alot lower. But if its for a very popular series or story that a big name penciler draws can be alot.

With modern art its hard to track if some cover only exist in inks (pencils digital) but if there are separate pencils and inks values can drop significantly. All depends on what information you are given. I tend to stay away from modern art. As for pre-digital era, its rare to have lightboxed covers but they are out there. Many times the inks will go for less but there are exceptions. A few years back X-Factor #1 inked by Joe Rubinstein was on Heritage, their description was not all there clear. It mentions Walt Simonson penciling the cover, BUT the art up for auction was lightboxed by Rubinstein. Story is Walt penciled and inked the cover but Shooter asked Rubinstein to lightbox the inks (no idea of the reason). Rubinstein's version was published. To 95% of the people who looked at both it looked the same. Anyways the lightboxed Rubinstein cover went for $33K (oops was wrong on the hammer). That was an insane hammer price because Walt never toughed the original and his pencils are not on it. Its a nice cover but nothing historic, people bid alot because its a Walt Simonson cover and Walt doesn't sell his originals. Even though it really isn't a Walt original. Basically I am saying its hard to judge prices between pencils only and a published lightboxed cover. Too many variables.

And to your original comment, a cover drawn by a different penciled and inker does contain the original pencils even if they are erased. The original pencils are under the inks. Like a bug trapped in amber.

 

 

Interesting way of putting it

 

[bluechip]

19 hours ago, grapeape said:

You’re not going to get a consensus opinion. I struggled with this with John Byrnes Silver Surfer 1 annual cover 1982. When I realized Palmer inked Byrne by light box it left me stumped on how to value it.

I passed.

artistically COOL

$ value.....uggghhh

 

Interesting, because Palmer was the one who had inked via lightbox the cover I was looking at.   So, perhaps it is something he did on a regular/semi-regular  basis?    wonder whether his intent was to keep the originals as they were, or whether he did it for some other reason (maybe as insurance in case he messed up or wanted to change his mind about a revision?)

 

[NelsonAI]

Palmer usually inked directly on pencils.  

With the SS, Byrne drew on regular board but I believe Palmer wanted to do some tint craft effect on certain pages so he light boxed onto tint craft Bristol.

Some people like the final publshed image which is why the inks only can still command some big $.

Usually, the penciller is the star artist.  As such, the pencils only command more than the inks only.

As stated by others, if the inker is the bigger star, ( i.e. Sienkiewicz inks over Sal Buscema pencils), the inks only might be worth more.

 

[grapeape]

3 hours ago, bluechip said:

Interesting, because Palmer was the one who had inked via lightbox the cover I was looking at.   So, perhaps it is something he did on a regular/semi-regular  basis?    wonder whether his intent was to keep the originals as they were, or whether he did it for some other reason (maybe as insurance in case he messed up or wanted to change his mind about a revision?)

 

NelsonAl made a comment about the process that I feel is correct. It was something about the effects he wanted to create in the SS cover.

Byrne the GOAT of course.

Tom Palmer certainly is no slouch either.

[Rick2you2]

I just look at the piece and see if I like it or not. Sometimes, pencils not yet inked are too incomplete. Sometimes, the shading on the pencil work is too good to treat lightly. Figure, each one is less than 100% and just buy it if you like it. The only ones who should care about pricing are buyers who plan to flip or sell soon, and that isn’t me.

[Brian Peck]

For some issues of Namor Byrne would pencil and ink a page then photocopy the inks onto dou-shdes and then spot blacks and add shading using the dou-shade chemicals. Both are originals. Most times they would be kept together when sold but have seen some have been broken up.

 

 

[delekkerste]

13 hours ago, bluechip said:

Interesting, because Palmer was the one who had inked via lightbox the cover I was looking at.   So, perhaps it is something he did on a regular/semi-regular basis? 

Yes, he lightboxed a number of his '70s covers. I'd be curious to learn when he started doing so - I'm guessing around 1975, plus or minus a year, but I've never seen or heard a definitive answer. 

Edited December 31, 2019 by delekkerste

[gumbydarnit]

One would think the answer is that instead of getting 1 out of 3 covers to sell at conventions, he got all of the covers he inked to resell at conventions ...mo money mo money!!! 
 

Of course, the Cabal would NEVER want it to get out which ones don’t have the original pencils underneath ; )

[NelsonAI]

Tom Palmer still does shows so it is easy enough to ask him in person.