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

[Macedoniagreece]

1 hour ago, vodou said:

You're right. I'm jealous. No idea how I didn't realize it before.

not the point man. But anway.

[pemart1966]

On 5/4/2020 at 4:48 PM, Catwoman_Fan said:

 

Check out the seller's closed auctions.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/313061757214

 

Firstly, can it be proven  that they are vintage?  That is my main concern.  

I'm not jealous, but am more concerned that a dealer will pass them off as Bob Kane sketches - without any proof.  Its a shame that Shelly Moldoff or Lew Schwartz aren't around to chime in.

Assuming they are old, the set is such an oddity, to me it makes the most sense that someone at DC created them (as, who else would have had access to all the comics?) as a reference for Finger or other writers/artists.  So they could reuse characters, or not unintentionally repeat names. 

 

my .  take it for what it's worth.

 

Let's examine your question - "...can it be proven that they are vintage?"  There are forgery methods that can make modern paper look old; feel old; smell old but in this case, most of the characters on these cards are so obscure I can't imagine someone going to all of this trouble to deceive.

Let's assume that the seller's description is correct and that they are original art.  The patina looks good.  They look old; the wear on them is consistent with something that's old.  I can't feel them or smell them though.  But based on what I'm seeing (both images and the paper) and the seller's description I would have no qualms about saying that "yes" they are vintage to the era of the images i.e. mid 1940s - they are not recently done IMO

I suspect that if all 91 images are checked, you would find that all of the characters portrayed are from a small block of time 3-4 years perhaps.  

The next question has to be:  could these have been done as a set of cards for in-house artist/writer reference?  In the mid 1940s there were a handful of Batman ghosts - Robinson, Sprang, Schwartz, Burnley and maybe another couple that I can't think of right now.  All of these artists were working regularly on Batman, Detective and World's Finest - they were all familiar with the characters and how to draw them.  Each artist had their distinctive style and if they needed a reminder or refresher on a certain character, they probably would have a) consulted the back issues DC library (if there was one); b) asked a fellow artist; or c) consulted their own reference files.  

The small sampling of cards shown here have images that are done in the Bob Kane style; a few in the Sprang style; and others.  It wouldn't have done Sprang much good if he had to consult a card done in the Bob Kane style or the Jerry Robinson style.  Besides, I think that Sprang might have been working at home at this time so these "reference cards" wouldn't have done him any good.

Additionally, most of these, we've been told, are obscure characters - I suspect that most of them were one issue wonders. If these cards were DC reference material, it would make sense that there'd have to be a write up accompanying the drawing giving the characteristics of the character portrayed on these cards.   Without the write up, you could have a situation where a character portrayed on one of these cards first appears as a kindly orphanage director and appears the next time as a cold blooded killer.

The cards shown are drawn "in the style of" but are certainly not drawn by a professional artist.  It was probably some 14-15 year old kid that had a bottle of ink and a pen and decided to have some fun and see how close he could get to the published likeness of these characters.  They may have even been done for a school art project - who knows.  I know that when I was a kid in the mid 60s, I'd trace and colour comic book covers being VERY careful not to indent the cover with my pencil so it doesn't surprise me that some kid 20 years earlier was doing something similar (although he wasn't tracing LOL)

 

 

Edited January 18, 2021 by pemart1966

[gadzukes]

1 hour ago, pemart1966 said:

Let's examine your question - "...can it be proven that they are vintage?"  There are forgery methods that can make modern paper look old; feel old; smell old but in this case, most of the characters on these cards are so obscure I can't imagine someone going to all of this trouble to deceive.

Let's assume that the seller's description is correct and that they are original art.  The patina looks good.  They look old; the wear on them is consistent with something that's old.  I can't feel them or smell them though.  But based on what I'm seeing (both images and the paper) and the seller's description I would have no qualms about saying that "yes" they are vintage to the era of the images i.e. mid 1940s - they are not recently done IMO

I suspect that if all 91 images are checked, you would find that all of the characters portrayed are from a small block of time 3-4 years perhaps.  

The next question has to be:  could these have been done as a set of cards for in-house artist/writer reference?  In the mid 1940s there were a handful of Batman ghosts - Robinson, Sprang, Schwartz, Burnley and maybe another couple that I can't think of right now.  All of these artists were working regularly on Batman, Detective and World's Finest - they were all familiar with the characters and how to draw them.  Each artist had their distinctive style and if they needed a reminder or refresher on a certain character, they probably would have a) consulted the back issues DC library (if there was one); b) asked a fellow artist; or c) consulted their own reference files.  

The small sampling of cards shown here have images that are done in the Bob Kane style; a few in the Sprang style; and others.  It wouldn't have done Sprang much good if he had to consult a card done in the Bob Kane style or the Jerry Robinson style.  Besides, I think that Sprang might have been working at home at this time so these "reference cards" wouldn't have done him any good.

Additionally, most of these, we've been told, are obscure characters - I suspect that most of them were one issue wonders. If these cards were DC reference material, it would make sense that there'd have to be a write up accompanying the drawing giving the characteristics of the character portrayed on these cards.   Without the write up, you could have a situation where a character portrayed on one of these cards first appears as a kindly orphanage director and appears the next time as a cold blooded killer.

The cards shown are drawn "in the style of" but are certainly not drawn by a professional artist.  It was probably some 14-15 year old kid that had a bottle of ink and a pen and decided to have some fun and see how close he could get to the published likeness of these characters.  They may have even been done for a school art project - who knows.  I know that when I was a kid in the mid 60s, I'd trace and colour comic book cover being VERY careful not to indent the cover with my pencil so it doesn't surprise me that some kid 20 years earlier was doing something similar (although he wasn't tracing LOL)

 

 

I like your analysis.  One thing you're forgetting is that the cards were not found alone by themselves.  They were found with a sizable stack of what appears to be "file/reference" comics.  To me that's what makes this find a lot more interesting.  (I picked up many of these comics because I thought they were interesting)

The "file/reference" copies were sewn together in groups of 3 stories, with all ads removed.  The most common grouping was a Batman story from Detective, a Batman Comics story, and a World's Finest "batman" story.  

Many of the splash pages have typed numbers (or the issues) in the upper margins (see pics).  I'm assuming the numbers were typed in because there was no cover to identify the issue.  Also, each grouping has another written identifier at the top (see first pic).  The top number identifier was probably something like a dewey decimal identifier to locate certain issues.  I'm sure there was a file system involved.  

I also feel that the art may be a couple of different people.  Some of the art is decent, and some of the art is embarrassingly bad.  Look at the last two pics.  The top card has what I consider to be competent artwork, while the bottom card is a disgrace (even Liefeld does better hands).  Did the same artist draw those?

Listen.... I don't know exactly what we're looking at here, but it's gotta be more than just a 14 to 15 year old kid drawing 91 cards and creating filing systems for comics.  The ebay seller says the original sellers told him their grandfather worked for DC for 5 years in the mid 1940s.  Unfortunately that's the ONLY info that's been offered up.  I asked him for something more, anything more, a house location, something.... and I'm getting nothing.  

Is there a good DC connection out there to ask questions to?  I'm curious to find out more, but it may all be a dead end. 

Edited May 5, 2020 by gadzukes

[pemart1966]

Doubtful that DC would go to that length of work to create reference copies in that particular format.  What would be the point?  It would have been much easier to just leave the books as printed or group them together and have them bound in a leather cover as we've seen done before.

Also, no way DC would have allowed him to leave with part of the "library".

I suspect that this was the grandfather's personal collection.

Edited January 2, 2021 by pemart1966

[gadzukes]

21 minutes ago, pemart1966 said:

Also, no way DC would have allowed him to leave with part of the "library".

Well.... there is the Bodnar's auction fiasco.  I wonder if this could be the same seller.

[pemart1966]

8 hours ago, gadzukes said:

Well.... there is the Bodnar's auction fiasco.  I wonder if this could be the same seller.

If I was going to walk out with part of the library, these would be the last things that I'd walk out with - even in 1944/45.

Further to my post above, all of this could also have been done during his time at DC - assuming the "working at DC story" is true.  Either way, I don't think that either the books or the cards were done in any official capacity or for any official purpose.

If all of these books have their spines cut, that could explain how just the splash page got inserted into a typewriter allowing the issue number to be typed at the top.

 

[vodou]

The most basic question to ask here, as to "value", is: In the absence of really solid* provenance and authorship of the art...what would thye be worth (without the story)?

That's what you've got without that really solid provenance and authorship...nothing. Just "a story", no different than anybody could tell you. Except for me.

I don't lie. Even when my wife asks how her backside looks in those jeans

Getting back to "value", no story and you're left with "maybe vintage" and "maybe professional" which equals (to me): $10 each tops, as a curiosity of GA fan materials.

 

*Period documents and/or photographs relating to the pieces (not just "one") and specific named individuals and corroboration by multiple sources that are not vested in the financial outcome of the selling.

[pemart1966]

29 minutes ago, vodou said:

The most basic question to ask here, as to "value", is: In the absence of really solid* provenance and authorship of the art...what would thye be worth (without the story)?

That's what you've got without that really solid provenance and authorship...nothing. Just "a story", no different than anybody could tell you. Except for me.

I don't lie. Even when my wife asks how her backside looks in those jeans

Getting back to "value", no story and you're left with "maybe vintage" and "maybe professional" which equals (to me): $10 each tops, as a curiosity of GA fan materials.

 

*Period documents and/or photographs relating to the pieces (not just "one") and specific named individuals and corroboration by multiple sources that are not vested in the financial outcome of the selling.

I don't think that there's much debate about the vintage but with no provenance except a short unsubstantiated story even the vintage adds little to the value IMO - except to the guy that won the auction and perhaps the under bidder   

Edited May 5, 2020 by pemart1966

[vodou]

1 hour ago, pemart1966 said:

even the vintage adds little to the value IMO

Adds a lot, about 10x, taking them from $1 to $10 per each

[pemart1966]

36 minutes ago, vodou said:

Adds a lot, about 10x, taking them from $1 to $10 per each

...to you    and a little bit more to the high bidder.   To me - zero...  

[gadzukes]

These just popped up on Ebay and they look strikingly similar to the Batman Rogue's Gallery cards that were sold on ebay last Spring.

Looks like the same artist.

Some of these are stamped "DC" on the back.

Thoughts?  Just more fan art from back in the day?

Here's what it says in the description....

I won this card, along with several others, in an estate auction that was held in Northern New Jersey over 30 years ago. They were mixed in with some other original comic art pages created by DC Comics and Fiction House. I would date them to before 1944 just by doing a little research (IE: the look of Batman, Superman's logo, etc...) but I'm not exactly sure when they were created. These are in great shape, well drawn on thick illustration board cardstock, and very cool. 

Edited January 1, 2021 by gadzukes

[malvin]

I'm sure Golden age experts can chime in, but the first thing I wanted to check whether or not they were even called "DC" back then.

Wikipedia says:

Despite the official names "National Comics" and "National Periodical Publications", the company began branding itself as "Superman-DC" as early as 1940, and the company became known colloquially as DC Comics for years before the official adoption of that name in 1977

So I am skeptical.

Malvin

[batman_fan]

1 hour ago, gadzukes said:

These just popped up on Ebay and they look strikingly similar to the Batman Rogue's Gallery cards that were sold on ebay last Spring.

Looks like the same artist.

Some of these are stamped "DC" on the back.

Thoughts?  Just more fan art from back in the day?

Here's what it says in the description....

I won this card, along with several others, in an estate auction that was held in Northern New Jersey over 30 years ago. They were mixed in with some other original comic art pages created by DC Comics and Fiction House. I would date them to before 1944 just by doing a little research (IE: the look of Batman, Superman's logo, etc...) but I'm not exactly sure when they were created. These are in great shape, well drawn on thick illustration board cardstock, and very cool. 

Wow, those look very amateur !

[gadzukes]

49 minutes ago, batman_fan said:

Wow, those look very amateur !

Yes, the Batman Rogues cards were very amateur too.  Same artist?  These new ones are very obviously art swipes from covers and pin-ups.

Some kind of reference cards?  Many of these are stamped DC on the back.  That doesn't prove anything, but it's interesting.

Those Batman cards went for a lot of money, I wonder how these will do?

Edited January 1, 2021 by gadzukes

[batman_fan]

This is something I bought of Heritage many years ago.  How "real" is it?  Unsure but there were several pages sold off over the years.

[gadzukes]

5 minutes ago, batman_fan said:

This is something I bought of Heritage many years ago.  How "real" is it?  Unsure but there were several pages sold off over the years.

Cool piece.  

[gadzukes]

On 1/1/2021 at 10:02 AM, gadzukes said:

Superman card sold for ..........$566

Wonder Woman card sold for $502

Starman card sold for .............$435

Spectre card sold for ..............$480

Joker card sold for ................$1125

Green Lantern card sold for ...$566

Flash Card sold for ..................$220

Batman card sold for ...............$809