July Heritage Auction Sorta Shaping Up! 3 3

[jjonahjameson11]

Can't we all get back to talking about this auction?

[comix4fun]

42 minutes ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

Can't we all get back to talking about this auction?

There's an auction?  

[Rick2you2]

2 hours ago, glendgold said:

Summarized to the point of inaccuracy: JB: "If it's legal to murder you and the company murders you, it's your fault for working there" vs. FM: "even without specific regulations, corporations have moral responsibilities to their contractors/employees,"  each of which can be argued for...well, at least 33 years  now, I guess.

One doesn’t have to view this purely as a “moral” issue, it is also an economic issue. Higher pay generally begets higher quality. How many really good artists left the field, or wouldn’t get into it, when pay was lower? 

[Rick2you2]

1 hour ago, Michael Browning said:

Again, you’re taking up a cause where there might not be one. You don’t know what Kirby’s heirs have gotten paid - or are getting paid - but you want to take the up the fight to get them what you believe is rightfully theirs (I disagree) and that’s fine, but don’t try to throw copyright laws into your argument that it’s bad that Marvel is still using Kirby images after all these years - and all these lawsuits lawsuits - when you don’t have any idea if they’re getting paid or not.
You also swerve away from the Kirby argument to take up the fight for other artists and use Neal Adams as the patron saint of the poor, mistreated comic book artists and the moral standard in the comic book industry. Ha. That’s kind of funny and made me laugh.

You ain’t changing my mind, and I ain’t changing yours. That’s the one fact on which we both agree.

If you knew your history on the subject, you would discover Adams was a prime mover, if not the prime mover, to protect comic artists. 

Marvel would have the right to re-use those images post 1975 because I am sure the artists’ contract of employment would give them that right. The artist can sell the original, now, which the companies used to throw out or give away, and if the artist wants, probably have it copied for T-shirts (although that might violate the company’s own copyright or trademark in the character).

 I don’t know why you keep bringing up Kirby. I just followed your illustration.

Finally, companies could always essentially reduplicate the old work for hire doctrine by requiring any artist to assign his/her right title and interest in copyright to the company. The fact that they don’t is indicative they now agree the old way was unfair.

  Now, I am done. Had to get that off my chest.

 

[marktom]

Funny to hear Byrne take this stand when it's directly in conflict with his belief that a seller of his art has a moral obligation to send him a percentage of the profits from the sale. 

[cheekyj2112]

31 minutes ago, marktom said:

Funny to hear Byrne take this stand when it's directly in conflict with his belief that a seller of his art has a moral obligation to send him a percentage of the profits from the sale. 

Does he? I wasn’t aware. Wonder if he expects Claremont to send him a cheque for the X-men artwork he just sold.

 

[Bird]

1 hour ago, Rick2you2 said:

Adams was a prime mover, if not the prime mover, to protect comic artists

I must have thanked Neal Adams 10 times at least for taking a stand regarding the return of art to artists. I have NEVER bought anything from his table but talk to him occasionally and always make sure to let him know I appreciate his role in getting things done.

[Bird]

as far as HA goes, I won some comics 2 weeks ago, they sent it no signature and FedEx misdelivered. Then 2 weeks of unanswered email (until today when i got a response of, will look into it). Only a few hundred $ but still.

 

[glendgold]

I know zero about Dave Stevens - was this based on a life drawing? It looks that way: https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/dave-stevens-chelsea-girl-illustration-original-art-1998-/a/7231-94108.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515&viewAdult=1

[Michael Browning]

1 hour ago, marktom said:

Funny to hear Byrne take this stand when it's directly in conflict with his belief that a seller of his art has a moral obligation to send him a percentage of the profits from the sale. 

I’ve never seen where Byrne has EVER said anything of this sort. Are you sure you’re not thinking of Barry Windsor Smith?

[jjonahjameson11]

1 hour ago, glendgold said:

I know zero about Dave Stevens - was this based on a life drawing? It looks that way: https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/dave-stevens-chelsea-girl-illustration-original-art-1998-/a/7231-94108.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515&viewAdult=1

I believe a friend modelled for him, but I forgot her name.

[marktom]

3 hours ago, Michael Browning said:

I’ve never seen where Byrne has EVER said anything of this sort. Are you sure you’re not thinking of Barry Windsor Smith?

Byrne's made that stand numerous times on his Forum over the years - though admittedly I don't read his forum anymore based on what it turned into and the role the moderators play in it. But I doubt he's changed his mind. He didn't go as far as BWS by requiring a signed contract dealing with resale of his art. But he was a proponent of all future sellers of his (and others) art giving a percentage back to the original artist - which I have a real problem with if implemented after the artist has already sold the piece.

Edited June 27, 2020 by marktom

[comix4fun]

12 hours ago, glendgold said:

I know zero about Dave Stevens - was this based on a life drawing? It looks that way: https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/dave-stevens-chelsea-girl-illustration-original-art-1998-/a/7231-94108.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515&viewAdult=1

This was a later piece so I'd wager there was probably a model involved. Dave spoke in several interviews of using all sorts of materials when he needed to work out a pose for pinups. He had an extensive collection of photography books, men's magazines from the 40's through the 60's, many featuring bettie page and other pinup girls from the day. I am not sure about this particular piece but he had mentioned more than once that when he had to do a cover for a publisher with certain specific elements he had to use models to get it just right, but for pinups he wouldn't necessarily need to and could use whatever posing he was comfortable with. 

When he passed away his estate sold off a large amount of the contents of his collection and source material. I purchased several of his art and photography books, many still had his notes and placeholders for images he wanted to use elements of or poses from. 

[Michael Browning]

10 hours ago, marktom said:

Byrne's made that stand numerous times on his Forum over the years - though admittedly I don't read his forum anymore based on what it turned into and the role the moderators play in it. But I doubt he's changed his mind. He didn't go as far as BWS by requiring a signed contract dealing with resale of his art. But he was a proponent of all future sellers of his (and others) art giving a percentage back to the original artist - which I have a real problem with if implemented after the artist has already sold the piece.

Sorry, but I have NEVER read that on his forums nor have I seen that in his interviews. Can you show some screenshots of said comments or provide a link?

[jjonahjameson11]

1 hour ago, comix4fun said:

This was a later piece so I'd wager there was probably a model involved. Dave spoke in several interviews of using all sorts of materials when he needed to work out a pose for pinups. He had an extensive collection of photography books, men's magazines from the 40's through the 60's, many featuring bettie page and other pinup girls from the day. I am not sure about this particular piece but he had mentioned more than once that when he had to do a cover for a publisher with certain specific elements he had to use models to get it just right, but for pinups he wouldn't necessarily need to and could use whatever posing he was comfortable with. 

When he passed away his estate sold off a large amount of the contents of his collection and source material. I purchased several of his art and photography books, many still had his notes and placeholders for images he wanted to use elements of or poses from. 

He definitely used a model for this particular piece, I just forget her name.

[comix4fun]

18 minutes ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

He definitely used a model for this particular piece, I just forget her name.

Makes sense. It's from that later era where all the pinups were recognizable. 

[marktom]

7 hours ago, Michael Browning said:

Sorry, but I have NEVER read that on his forums nor have I seen that in his interviews. Can you show some screenshots of said comments or provide a link?

I'd love to, and would. But when you don't follow the prevailing consensus of thought on that forum board, the moderators choose to no longer allow the ability to post or search past topics. I'll leave it at that. But if you're that interested it's there. Look back a few years. The subject dealt with the proposal of laws requiring payment to artists for future sales of art sold and a moral obligation for sellers of art bought prior to the law. 

Edited June 27, 2020 by marktom
edit....this has become way OT from where it should be in this thread. Feel free to PM me if interested in discussing any further.

[BCarter27]

3 hours ago, marktom said:

this has become way OT from where it should be in this thread.

This thread is waaay past caring about such proprieties!

@Peter G You should just change this thread title to something random and start a new Heritage July thread.

[tth2]

Good grief, the Frazetta "Gods of Mars" B&W illustration is already at $21,600, with 12 days to go.  I know it's Frazetta, and it's from his highly coveted early 1970s work on the ERB Mars/John Carter books, but damn!  The image area is only 7.25" x 6"!

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/illustrations/frank-frazetta-the-gods-of-mars-frontispiece-illustration-original-art-nelson-doubleday-1971-/a/7231-94045.s?ic2=mybidspage-lotlinks-12202013&tab=MyBids-101116

[exitmusicblue]

That's crazay.  Albert did well to auction.