Original Comic Book Art: Chopped, Stolen, Reclaimed, and More 0

[comicwiz]

12 hours ago, vodou said:

That word usually precedes somebody losing a lot of money.

The market is the market, and more than anything else demand is greater for any single page out of 22 than 22 as a whole. Why? Because money doesn't grow on trees and fewer can afford big $ than smaller $. That right there guarantees break value almost always exceeds sum total. Keeping books and stories complete in spite of all this is strictly for the I light my cigars with benjamins instead of matches oligarchs

The market has spoken. I get it Captain!

The point I was trying to make is when these were turning up as entire stories 20-40 years ago, some seized the opportunity, Depending on who was in possession of the art, they saw a value in the stories remaining intact, and had the presence of mind to keep them together. Yes, they're are extant examples out there, and mad props to those who did it for the reasons that aren't accurately represented by typifying them as oligarchs. Even if you break it down by the type of page, the number of times the character appears in panels, splash page, etc., ultimately what these represent is a singular and incomplete part of the visual storytelling. The latter is an important facet of why you buy into the artist, and you must recognize the way breaking up pages for maximum money still feels like marketing on the merits of a participation trophy for collectors.

[vodou]

4 minutes ago, comicwiz said:

Yes, they're are extant examples out there, and mad props to those who did it for the reasons that aren't accurately represented by typifying them as oligarchs.

Many of us own complete stories and books even. But it's stuff where the whole isn't worth six figures or more. (Unless you want to provide actual examples: real people by name, real stories/books identified.) I mean, who doesn't have an Archie five or ten pager tucked away somewhere? But also...who cares? (We owners of said material do, but the market sure doesn't.) It's easy to keep those stories/books together because there's no pain in doing so, and the break-up might yield 50% more but you're still talking hundreds, even if it's Dan DeCarlo or Harry Lucey Archie material. Big deal. Not so everything though.The stuff that matters, that's six/seven figures as a whole, well it's essentially unsellable in that form except to a handful of people, and their cash has the negotiating power/advantage if one insists on not breaking the whole.

Instead of slinging the usual arrows, just tell us how many complete stories/books you already own -to ensure nobody ever breaks them up, and how active/much you're spending every year to bring more and more in, to "save the art from the hobby market itself" cuz..."should".

[comicwiz]

3 minutes ago, vodou said:

Many of us own complete stories and books even. But it's stuff where the whole isn't worth six figures or more. (Unless you want to provide actual examples: real people by name, real stories/books identified.) I mean, who doesn't have an Archie five or ten pager tucked away somewhere? But also...who cares? (We owners of said material do, but the market sure doesn't.) It's easy to keep those stories/books together because there's no pain in doing so, and the break-up might yield 50% more but you're still talking hundreds, even if it's Dan DeCarlo or Harry Lucey Archie material. Big deal. Not so everything though.The stuff that matters, that's six/seven figures as a whole, well it's essentially unsellable in that form except to a handful of people, and their cash has the negotiating power/advantage if one insists on not breaking the whole.

Instead of slinging the usual arrows, just tell us how many complete stories/books you already own -to ensure nobody ever breaks them up, and how active/much you're spending every year to bring more and more in, to "save the art from the hobby market itself" cuz..."should".

I want to quote this for the sole purpose of being able to demonstrate you're inability to comprehend a topic without turning it into a contest. Dude, get over yourself. Seriously.

[vodou]

3 minutes ago, comicwiz said:

I want to quote this for the sole purpose of being able to demonstrate you're inability to comprehend a topic without turning it into a contest. Dude, get over yourself. Seriously.

Try again. Seriously.

[comicwiz]

Just now, vodou said:

Try again. Seriously.

There is no need to try anything again. I keep reading your trolling on these boards and it's both nauseating and sad. If the comic art hobby turned you into this kind of person who has to turn every topic on it's head to prove a point, then go at it. But you're clearly in it for the wrong reasons. I've had people warn me privately, and I tried to remain indifferent, but when you start pulling this nonsense in a discussion, there's very clearly something that has happened to you that has turned you into the jerk you are, and for that I feel sorry. There's a lot more to enjoy about being involved in hobbies than trying to one-up anyone that you find disagreeable, even if it's just a simple difference of opinion.

[vodou]

1 minute ago, comicwiz said:

I've had people warn me privately, and I tried to remain indifferent,

Exactly the same via PM re: you

But back to the point - I am directly invested in and impacted by this discussion.

I have nearly, dunno 60-70, complete stories and books (some Archie, but much more other stuff too) and somewhere down the line some selling will occur. I don't want to break them, I bought them complete and would love for them to stay that way, as I agree with you in principal regarding the artform, etc. Only a contract entangling not only my buyer but every single one after me could ensure that. (That's not a legally enforceable contract, so it's DOA.) So...? I really don't know.

[comicwiz]

We have very different views and reasons for collecting. Mine are based primarily on nostalgia and an appreciation into the process. This isn't strictly with original comic art, as I love understanding the process involved in making 3D objects for mass consumer markets. Owning a piece instead of the entire workflow or archive for that series or run sometimes just isn't possible, and in those instances, I find a tremendous thrill in studying whatever extant work exists as a way to peer through the window of time and see how publishers and makers pursued the craft, sometimes obsessing over their mastery. Some of this is due in part to the fact that I had a raw ability and due to stern parental guidance I was never really able to actualize it the way I might have wanted, so I can do it now vicariously through the work, and hands of people that sacrificed it all to make it happen in their lifetime. This doesn't mean I do this out of regret for not being like them, or that I am not happy with my place in this world.

With this out of the way, if you're really invested in something, then you have an appreciation level that might never be understood or seen on the same level by others. There is no hard or fast rule, and frankly if your appreciation for something meant trying to keep something intact that isn't appreciably regarded by others in the same way, then they aren't the right people to become eventual custodians. This isn't even sentimentality - it's about having such a high regard for an artform and process that it trumps everything else, and the thought of anyone trying to arrive at a precise science or calculation in an attempt to subvert your view and opinion becomes an obstacle to your hobby pursuit.

Edited February 7, 2020 by comicwiz

[vodou]

12 minutes ago, comicwiz said:

We have very different views and reasons for collecting.

Not being argumentative, but you just don't know this about me and haven't asked. Readers of CFA-APA might understand better, but nothing trumps having an actual conversation with somebody, listening more than talking.

16 minutes ago, comicwiz said:

Mine are based primarily on nostalgia and an appreciation into the process.

Good of you to put yours out there, mine is, in part, light on nostalgia and heavy on artform/process. This is where I've learned that "should" typically precedes heavy loss (in price realized), unless married to strongly shared nostalgia.

17 minutes ago, comicwiz said:

...if you're really invested in something, then you have an appreciation level that might never be understood or seen on the same level by others. There is no hard or fast rule, and frankly if your appreciation for something meant trying to keep something intact that isn't appreciably regarded by others in the same way, then they aren't the right people to become eventual custodians. This isn't even sentimentality - it's about having such a high regard for an artform and process that it trumps everything else, and the thought of anyone trying to arrive at a precise science or calculation in an attempt to subvert your view and opinion becomes an obstacle to your hobby pursuit.

Yeah. And that's why I've sold less than 3% of my holdings since I began collecting, and less than 1/10th of that (3%) even in the last fifteen years. My sense of value (not price) regarding these objects is uncommon and I'm not in this for the cashout or even the trade laddering many engage in. (Life's inevitabilities loom larger now than a decade ago though; I am not made of stone.)

[bluechip]

16 hours ago, comicwiz said:

I personally have always felt the market should have disincentivized this practice. I see it as the total being greater, not the parts. Any complete story that's been curated and kept intact should always be worth more than a single page some dealer or auction house decided to break up for the sake of making more money.

Rather than disincentivizing by punishing folk who break them up I would prefer to see people incentivized to keep stories whole (or making them whole by assembling all pages) because the biggest players put more value on them.  But so far they haven't.   

We see the same thing happening with the biggest key comics.  If it's at all incomplete or tainted by resto, the market hammers the value so much that if you're motivated by what you can get from it you may as well tear apart what you have, be it incomplete or restored, because the parts will be worth more.    

If that happens in the comics market, then it's all the more likely to happen with art, because a complete comic you can hold and appreciate in one hand.   People appreciate art mostly by displaying it, and few people have the room as well as the desire to put an entire story on the wall.  

I would be inclined a bit toward the whole story thing because I like to see a completed thought in a display.  So pages that are, for lack of a better word, self-contained, appeal to me more.  Not necessarily an entire story but a whole "beat" of the story.   Artists often do break up their story beats, sometimes all on one page and more often on several pages.  (Though I've noticed Kirby, more often than others, would sometimes carry the final panel of a particular "beat" or sequence into the next page). 

It seems to be something Kirby did instinctively, if not deliberately, to set up the next beat.   He would do this not just with a sequence within a comic but sometimes with the whole story. 

Many artists and writers would "tease" the next week's story, like having a villain appear in the final panel or page.   But Kirby would sometimes wrap up the main story well before the book was over and present several pages of the next story (or even half the story) in the final part of the book.    

I got off on a tangent there, but I guess my rambling sort of makes the point that even if you have all the pages to an entire book, when you're talking about Marvel pages and KIrby in particular it doesn't necessarily mean you have an entire story, or even a self-contained chapter of a story.

 

[vodou]

20 minutes ago, bluechip said:

People appreciate art mostly by displaying it, and few people have the room as well as the desire to put an entire story on the wall.  

Great point. Complete stories/books in an Itoya is a bit too much like an oversized comic (or AE!), just not the same when on wall and arranged in an intentional manner (not always a very long row, side-by-side!)

Now, all the stuff that has been or will be sent to an institution...a lot of that is "complete" but rarely or never is displayed, only seen upon request and then you're back to that viewing a portfolio dynamic.

Is it "better" all together but hiding in some dark closet? (whether my house or an institution!)

Interesting subject but no easy answers for those that support keeping set together.

[comicwiz]

5 hours ago, vodou said:

Not being argumentative, but you just don't know this about me and haven't asked. Readers of CFA-APA might understand better, but nothing trumps having an actual conversation with somebody, listening more than talking.

Contextually, I was referring to this need to turn it into a commodity, being caught up in values, etc.

5 hours ago, vodou said:

Yeah. And that's why I've sold less than 3% of my holdings since I began collecting, and less than 1/10th of that (3%) even in the last fifteen years. My sense of value (not price) regarding these objects is uncommon and I'm not in this for the cashout or even the trade laddering many engage in. (Life's inevitabilities loom larger now than a decade ago though; I am not made of stone.)

I'm a reluctant seller by nature, particularly when it comes to art. Your experience and sentiment is both relatable and pragmatic.

[vodou]

11 minutes ago, comicwiz said:

I was referring to this need to turn it into a commodity,

Just because I can talk the talk, as a savvy and educated person, doesn't mean I walk it with my actions.

I didn't turn anything into a commodity; I assure you I don't have nearly that much mesmeric power over the world. It just is

12 minutes ago, comicwiz said:

being caught up in values, etc.

I guess.

It's hard not to when one of otherwise modest means and circumstances, through collecting for other reasons ends up at mid-life positioned with a collection whose conservative valuation is some several multiples more than their cumulative earnings of a lifetime 'working'. I'd imagine that would be something very few could ignore thinking about, that those thoughts might just come out in conversation too.

This criticism, coming from a self-confessed appraiser, one who would have exactly this conversation with people in similar circumstances? That's puzzling.

[comicwiz]

4 hours ago, bluechip said:

Rather than disincentivizing by punishing folk who break them up I would prefer to see people incentivized to keep stories whole (or making them whole by assembling all pages) because the biggest players put more value on them.  But so far they haven't.   

We see the same thing happening with the biggest key comics.  If it's at all incomplete or tainted by resto, the market hammers the value so much that if you're motivated by what you can get from it you may as well tear apart what you have, be it incomplete or restored, because the parts will be worth more.    

If that happens in the comics market, then it's all the more likely to happen with art, because a complete comic you can hold and appreciate in one hand.   People appreciate art mostly by displaying it, and few people have the room as well as the desire to put an entire story on the wall.  

I would be inclined a bit toward the whole story thing because I like to see a completed thought in a display.  So pages that are, for lack of a better word, self-contained, appeal to me more.  Not necessarily an entire story but a whole "beat" of the story.   Artists often do break up their story beats, sometimes all on one page and more often on several pages.  (Though I've noticed Kirby, more often than others, would sometimes carry the final panel of a particular "beat" or sequence into the next page). 

It seems to be something Kirby did instinctively, if not deliberately, to set up the next beat.   He would do this not just with a sequence within a comic but sometimes with the whole story. 

Many artists and writers would "tease" the next week's story, like having a villain appear in the final panel or page.   But Kirby would sometimes wrap up the main story well before the book was over and present several pages of the next story (or even half the story) in the final part of the book.    

I got off on a tangent there, but I guess my rambling sort of makes the point that even if you have all the pages to an entire book, when you're talking about Marvel pages and KIrby in particular it doesn't necessarily mean you have an entire story, or even a self-contained chapter of a story.

 

Some good points. I struggle with displaying my collection. The struggle is not just with art, it's with everything I collect. It's a work in progress.

One of my "irrational goals" when I first started out was to complete an entire issue. I have 52 pages, just waiting for the cover to show up, and I won't beat myself up if I don't achieve it. That was more of a goal born out of this idea that it's something worth trying to accomplish when you're already out there looking to add more art to your collection. It will likely end up in an Itoya portfolio and I'm good with enjoying it that way. The other option is to display it all in a 60 panel poster display I bought some years ago.

I think what this article did really well is to retell the early efforts to save art.  The burgeoning market that came from it all aside, those efforts still allowed future generations to enjoy it. If we believe there is much more to original art than being a part of the process to make comics, then their enjoyment isn't really restricted to being hung on a wall. I have about 10% of my art on CAF now, I try to make it a project of mine to scan a few pages every few months. Even though the two-up and Sunday strips take me more time to scan, I pore over those pages and if I had to describe the feeling, it's a lot like the feeling I had reading those large treasury editions as a young boy.

I agree with you on the idea of incentivizing keeping stories together, and to this end, if I was offered a complete story for something I really wanted, I would at the very least offer what the person would be able to get for it pieced out.

Edited February 7, 2020 by comicwiz

[comicwiz]

4 minutes ago, vodou said:

This criticism, coming from a self-confessed appraiser, one who would have exactly this conversation with people in similar circumstances? That's puzzling.

I'm an accredited appraiser, it requires more than being self-confessed.

Admittedly, I realized only after you provided more context to your comment that I was rash in my judgment. My apologies. I better understand the context of your comment, and in my more recent replies I was simply trying to clarify my views and opinions.

 

[RBerman]

"Too much like an oversized comic" sounds pretty good to me.

There are cultural values at work here as well. In the USA, everthing is essentially new and transient. In most European countries, if you start excavating to build a new building, and you discover ruins, your future mall has just become a historical site instead of a commercial development.  You may not make changes in your home without approval of the local historic homes board, because your ownership of the home is treated as custody of heritage.

But in the USA, capitalism is the only rule. If a company is worth more in pieces, buy it, fire the employees, and sell the pieces. Likewise a piece of sequential art. If it can be divided, then divide it and sell the pieces. Gordon Gecko approves!