BEST OF 2019: BUDGET EDITION - Results Posted!
4 4

197 posts in this topic

1,640 posts
39 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

Just. Makes. No. Sense.

I'll explain it in Gene Wilder terms...

It's kind of like you're the accountant Leo Bloom from the Producers-

94144862e15c94b93163c0a7afa5b2b6.png

and you're trying to walk into the Chocolate Factory and argue pricing models with this guy-

willywonka.png?w=1020&h=574&fit=crop&cro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,823 posts
1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

or East Djibouti

How'd you know that's where I found my Romita ASM cover for three figures (but sadly a few bucks over $500 :( ).

1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

while another has offered numerous times to provide re-mailing services

I prefer to think of my offer as a receiver service ;) because not everybody is home to sign all the time. Whatever happens after that is a private discussion/negotiation.

Or maybe you meant someone other than me :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,745 posts
22 hours ago, aokartman said:

I understand, but what's next, someone gets outed for a misdemeanor?  It's just for fun! 

When I buy the occasional piece, I'm not thinking about the "budget edition" threshold, please tell

me you are just buying what you like at the price point you are comfortable with rather than can i win next year's budget edition with this one?

My standing in the "budget edition" archive is not a 

marker in my career as a collector or buyer, seller, I mark it down as extracurricular.

David

 

Of course it isn’t a career maker. The point of this exercise is show off great art you bought at a low price. And to pretend there isn’t an element of competition here, as someone else mentioned, is to ignore the obvious. Some of us live by strict rules, like lawyers, so what is really just for fun, can make us feel like we are cheating. What fun is that? 

Let me suggest a workaround. Instead of a hard cap of $500, allow entries for no more than around $500. And, if someone feels that is too loose a standard, it’s better than this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,745 posts
On 1/15/2020 at 2:15 PM, PhilipB2k17 said:

For those for whom it matters, why don't we have a separate contest where we post art that we bought with added on expenses, including taxes, shipping, etc as less than $15? 

You can call it "Budget/Extras"

I had suggested $5,000 because it has been mentioned on these boards that the vast majority of art sells for less. The $500 price also makes sense because a lot of art sells for less. How is someone to realistically compare a Frazetta cover to a lot of other work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,077 posts
15 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

How is someone to realistically compare a Frazetta cover to a lot of other work?

we do it every year in the caf lowry / best of the best competition. just because someone spent the most amount of $ doesn't mean that it will appeal to everyone.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,745 posts
5 hours ago, eewwnuk said:

we do it every year in the caf lowry / best of the best competition. just because someone spent the most amount of $ doesn't mean that it will appeal to everyone.  

True, but I can virtually guarantee that as you move up the ladder in price, you are going to find the higher cost items tend to include more favorites than the lower priced items. - as a tendency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,214 posts
9 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

Of course it isn’t a career maker. The point of this exercise is show off great art you bought at a low price. And to pretend there isn’t an element of competition here, as someone else mentioned, is to ignore the obvious. Some of us live by strict rules, like lawyers, so what is really just for fun, can make us feel like we are cheating. What fun is that? 

Let me suggest a workaround. Instead of a hard cap of $500, allow entries for no more than around $500. And, if someone feels that is too loose a standard, it’s better than this.

a) well some will stretch that 500 to 997, etc.     

b) there's really no problem with the current set up.   Just some arguing over minutae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,745 posts
7 hours ago, Bronty said:

a) well some will stretch that 500 to 997, etc.     

b) there's really no problem with the current set up.   Just some arguing over minutae

And saying it’s okay to cheat for a few dollars is better? I agree with Gene on this one that anything which all submitters don’t have to pay equally, like taxes and shipping, should be excluded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,214 posts
1 hour ago, Rick2you2 said:

And saying it’s okay to cheat for a few dollars is better? I agree with Gene on this one that anything which all submitters don’t have to pay equally, like taxes and shipping, should be excluded.

I’m saying that I agree with you and Gene, however, see Iverson clause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,745 posts
4 hours ago, Bronty said:

I’m saying that I agree with you and Gene, however, see Iverson clause.

? Allen Iverson?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
914 posts

I was too busy the last couple months to invest the time to read the rules,look through all the work and participate. I need to be in the right headspace for viewing art, and I’ve been doing so many work hours for a project since Nov., I couldn’t force myself to concentrate. So I kept my thoughts to myself while this was live. 
 

I was too late to contribute to the Lowery best of as well, so I’ll sit that out.
 

But the one thing I have always wondered with that, and now with equal curiosity for the “Budget Edition”, is how very different would the results be with the names of the artists hidden, and the names of the owners hidden?

Im not saying people would judge strictly on the quality of the art, as it’d be impossible to not notice a Killing Joke page is what it is, or a Dark Knight page or whatever. But I have long wondered how many people are voting for favorite characters, artist teams, their friends, etc without ever opening up and genuinely looking at all the entries posted. It takes a loooong time. Especially if you are looking at an artists work for the first time. I’m not familiar with a fair bit of what gets posted each year, and I genuinely find looking at the work interesting. 
 

Just a curiosity that I have. I know the biases are there. Just curious how much they are there, and how results could shift if folks truly looked.

 Not saying it’s a problem, as you can’t make folks look objectively. They have to want to. But it sure is a great way to discover stuff you either don’t normally get into, or have been totally unaware of.

And since I’m being so helpful, I think it’d be fun to have a category split between new work, and preexisting work. Maybe even put the decades against each other, or something. Encourage folks that are buying current work, so they aren’t lost in the lower end of voting against the same big trophy pieces of decades past.

The list of work to look through wouldn’t get any longer, just more subdivided, like the comic OA market and modern culture are today.

 

 

Edited by ESeffinga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,640 posts
4 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

Encourage folks that are buying current work, so they aren’t lost in the lower end of voting against the same big trophy pieces of decades past.

To some extent, the price point does this on its own. Such that you are going to see more modern stuff and more unpub pieces. And then if someone was able to hustle or dig hard enough, or got lucky with a nice vintage piece under $500, then they get a little bump for that effort too.

I think overall what you are getting at is a blind "art contest" and where we are at currently is an "art collecting review". The current emphasis is on the collectors. Because it's not like we were the ones drawing this stuff. We just bought it.

4 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

how very different would the results be with the names of the artists hidden, and the names of the owners hidden?

But I like that you are thinking outside the box! The current format was made possible because of the new board format with the easy Like system for voting. Hmmm... maybe I can think of a simple way to do a "black box" category next year. Until then, take a look through this recent (great) thread--

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,214 posts
On 1/18/2020 at 12:16 PM, Rick2you2 said:

? Allen Iverson?

We talkin' bout shipping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,745 posts
6 minutes ago, Bronty said:

We talkin' bout shipping.

Still don’t get it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,214 posts
22 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

Still don’t get it. 

To sum it up, who gives a shyt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,745 posts
1 hour ago, Bronty said:

To sum it up, who gives a shyt.

That I understand. 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,770 posts
On 1/19/2020 at 5:31 AM, ESeffinga said:

I was too busy the last couple months to invest the time to read the rules,look through all the work and participate. I need to be in the right headspace for viewing art, and I’ve been doing so many work hours for a project since Nov., I couldn’t force myself to concentrate. So I kept my thoughts to myself while this was live. 
 

I was too late to contribute to the Lowery best of as well, so I’ll sit that out.
 

But the one thing I have always wondered with that, and now with equal curiosity for the “Budget Edition”, is how very different would the results be with the names of the artists hidden, and the names of the owners hidden?

Im not saying people would judge strictly on the quality of the art, as it’d be impossible to not notice a Killing Joke page is what it is, or a Dark Knight page or whatever. But I have long wondered how many people are voting for favorite characters, artist teams, their friends, etc without ever opening up and genuinely looking at all the entries posted. It takes a loooong time. Especially if you are looking at an artists work for the first time. I’m not familiar with a fair bit of what gets posted each year, and I genuinely find looking at the work interesting. 
 

Just a curiosity that I have. I know the biases are there. Just curious how much they are there, and how results could shift if folks truly looked.

 Not saying it’s a problem, as you can’t make folks look objectively. They have to want to. But it sure is a great way to discover stuff you either don’t normally get into, or have been totally unaware of.

And since I’m being so helpful, I think it’d be fun to have a category split between new work, and preexisting work. Maybe even put the decades against each other, or something. Encourage folks that are buying current work, so they aren’t lost in the lower end of voting against the same big trophy pieces of decades past.

The list of work to look through wouldn’t get any longer, just more subdivided, like the comic OA market and modern culture are today.

 

 

I vote for images that I like. Cost and artist really don't factor in - whether or not I want it for my collection does matter.

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