• 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.

Old Batman "Rogue's Gallery" art?
2 2

77 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, Macedoniagreece said:

Pecimistic conclusion. 

I really doubt that just a fan could conjure up all these villains from all the Bat titles and newspaper strips and know who they all were and draw these cards. Just too hard to believe.

I also emailed the seller (who has a great Ebay track record from what I saw) and he actually said he was going to try and find out additional information. So it remains to be seen. 

 

 

And your qualifications as an expert are............?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, artdealer said:

And your qualifications as an expert are............?

Never said I was an expert but you drew a conclusion is if your 100% sure. I am only saying that people should get a hold of the seller then try to to see if the owner can give some more info about them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Macedoniagreece said:

Never said I was an expert but you drew a conclusion is if your 100% sure. I am only saying that people should get a hold of the seller then try to to see if the owner can give some more info about them. 

Yes, I’m very sure. The art is too amateurish to be any established DC artist. And why would DC do a “prototype” trading card set that consisted of mostly unknown villains, and only several Batman cards. 
 Besides, I emailed the seller twice with no response.
Anything the seller would say at this time would be very questionable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, artdealer said:

The art is too amateurish to be any established DC artist.

I'm not even sure if all 91 cards were done by the same person.  Some of the villains looked like they were done by a pro, and some looked to be very amateurish.

I will agree that the cards are not "prototypes".  Maybe "reference" though?  Although most of these villains were "one and done" villains only used for one story, so why make a reference if they're only going to be used once.

Edited by gadzukes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, artdealer said:

Yes, I’m very sure. The art is too amateurish to be any established DC artist. And why would DC do a “prototype” trading card set that consisted of mostly unknown villains, and only several Batman cards. 
 Besides, I emailed the seller twice with no response.
Anything the seller would say at this time would be very questionable.

What if there are more cards out there? And this is not a complete set? 

There are people who disagree with you regardless of how sure you think you are. For all we know they could be sketches made by anyone at the DC offices back then , just to archive them. And there were quite alot of artists at DC in the 40s. No one can just give a professional conclusion by just looking at Ebay photos online.

 

What is more impossible is to say is an amateur compiled all those cards by knowing every single Bat villain from every title and Sunday Newspaper strip Batman was in is just too hard to believe.

I  emailed the seller and he said he was going to contact the owner to try and get more info.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, gadzukes said:

I'm not even sure if all 91 cards were done by the same person.  Some of the villains looked like they were done by a pro, and some looked to be very amateurish.

I will agree that the cards are not "prototypes".  Maybe "reference" though?  Although most of these villains were "one and done" villains only used for one story, so why make a reference if they're only going to be used once.

Possibly being a reference makes more sense. 

More so how is it even possible for one amateur or kid to know all these Villains from all those DC titles and newspaper Strips? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Macedoniagreece said:

Possibly being a reference makes more sense. 

More so how is it even possible for one amateur or kid to know all these Villains from all those DC titles and newspaper Strips? 

 

26 minutes ago, gadzukes said:

I'm not even sure if all 91 cards were done by the same person.  Some of the villains looked like they were done by a pro, and some looked to be very amateurish.

I will agree that the cards are not "prototypes".  Maybe "reference" though?  Although most of these villains were "one and done" villains only used for one story, so why make a reference if they're only going to be used once.

It could be possible multiple artists were asked to do this. Who knows maybe Kane himself told a few people to compile this set to archive all these villains. We definitely need more info and I'd like to know as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Macedoniagreece said:

We definitely need more info and I'd like to know as well.

"We"? No. I think just "you".

So, seriously, how much money do you have invested in this new religion of yours?

I ask because the commitment level you're presenting is just off the charts man.

Off the charts and racing toward fanaticism.

Now about that bridge, limited rights to perform services and minor miracles are available too...just ask ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2020 at 9:00 AM, gadzukes said:

What's the story there.  I'm not up on my Bob Kane lore.  Was he having other artists do the art in his style?  And then taking credit?

Maybe that's why a set of "reference cards" were needed.

Yeah watch 2017 video Batman and Bill.

Bob Kane had taken all the credit for Batman but after watching the documentary you’ll come away stunned.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2020 at 12:17 PM, gadzukes said:

:whatthe: That's horrible :facepalm:

Did the other artists ever sign their names too?  Did Bob Kane even design any of these Rogues Gallery figures?

Happened all the time.   Including much more recently.   Jim Davis didn’t do all the stuff signed Jim Davis.   Matt Groening doesn’t touch the stuff signed Matt Groening.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Macedoniagreece said:

What if there are more cards out there? And this is not a complete set? 

There are people who disagree with you regardless of how sure you think you are. For all we know they could be sketches made by anyone at the DC offices back then , just to archive them. And there were quite alot of artists at DC in the 40s. No one can just give a professional conclusion by just looking at Ebay photos online.

 

What is more impossible is to say is an amateur compiled all those cards by knowing every single Bat villain from every title and Sunday Newspaper strip Batman was in is just too hard to believe.

I  emailed the seller and he said he was going to contact the owner to try and get more info.  

 

It’s amateur work.   You may not like that answer but it’s the truth.  When you’ve looked at enough art you can tell the difference between line work that is free and original and line work that starts and stops and isn’t internally consistent because the amateur is copying someone else.   

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, grapeape said:

Yeah watch 2017 video Batman and Bill.

Bob Kane had taken all the credit for Batman but after watching the documentary you’ll come away stunned.

 

Thanks for the info. Do you know if that's on Netflix?  Or maybe I can watch it on youtube.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if there was a commercial purpose to those drawings, the lettering would be much more professional looking. 

Definitely not the work of Ira Schnapp or any of his contemporaries. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, vodou said:

"We"? No. I think just "you".

So, seriously, how much money do you have invested in this new religion of yours?

I ask because the commitment level you're presenting is just off the charts man.

Off the charts and racing toward fanaticism.

Now about that bridge, limited rights to perform services and minor miracles are available too...just ask ;)

"Just you"? Only I want to know more info? 

Fanaticism?  :insane:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bronty said:

It’s amateur work.   You may not like that answer but it’s the truth.  When you’ve looked at enough art you can tell the difference between line work that is free and original and line work that starts and stops and isn’t internally consistent because the amateur is copying someone else.   

Ok your an expert. One look at a few Ebay photos and you nailed it. 

It's fine man. No research is needed. ¬¬

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Macedoniagreece said:

Ok your an expert. One look at a few Ebay photos and you nailed it. 

It's fine man. No research is needed. ¬¬

Pretty much.   I get why you would doubt that, when I started collecting art I would have doubted someone just concluding like that too.   Let’s have this convo again in 10 or 20 years and you will see what I mean. 

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
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
2 2