• 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.

July Heritage Auction Sorta Shaping Up!
3 3

519 posts in this topic

On 7/11/2020 at 1:25 PM, cstojano said:

I got my first and likely only piece of video game art - the Warren Chang Raiders of the Lost Ark interior (pharaoh not sphynx). I was right in the middle of a conference call when those lots hit, may have gone in more on the sphynx to keep them together but I was speaking when the "you've been outbid" alert rung, not sure if the rest of the call heard or not, a bit mortified. No clue if it was good value. I think it was the stronger of the two and the price difference in the end felt like a better deal to me. The size is decent as well. I think these were being offered initially at a gallery for 4500 if I am not mistaken.

well look at you Mr Stojano.   You've owned it for five minutes (have you even paid yet?) and already I see you have a post auction offer.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Bronty said:

well look at you Mr Stojano.   You've owned it for five minutes (have you even paid yet?) and already I see you have a post auction offer.    

I was going to post that here when it came in. My first HA offer after all the stuff I've bought there. Of course it was a min raise, or close. The other piece did not get the offer last I checked so I assume it may have been the other winner.

This may be my first HA win post salex tax in my state as well. It definitely hurts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, cstojano said:

I was going to post that here when it came in. My first HA offer after all the stuff I've bought there. Of course it was a min raise, or close. The other piece did not get the offer last I checked so I assume it may have been the other winner.

This may be my first HA win post salex tax in my state as well. It definitely hurts.

Could've been anybody, the other bidder is definitely a possibility but maybe yours was just the one they wanted.    I thought about bidding on your lot, I didn't consider bidding on the other one for example.    Who knows.      Maybe you'll get another offer after you reject this one.   Good luck.      

I seem to not have much luck when I get into counter offering back and forth on HA so if I get a counter offer I can even halfway live with, if I want the item badly enough I accept the counter.   As the communication can end at any moment it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2020 at 4:09 PM, RBerman said:

For the ignorant among us... how can one tell what is underneath a stat which is affixed to the page?

you cant until you physically hold it in your hand and put the back side of the art up to a very bright light.

Edited by romitaman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2020 at 10:28 PM, romitaman said:

you cant until you physically hold it in your hand and put the back side of the art up to a very bright light.

In other words, it isn't really difficult to do.  Which makes me all the more surprised whenever a potentially major piece with a big stat piece of the main character got photographed and meticulously authenticated and described and its image printed in a major auction house catalogue, the whole proverbial nine yards, without anyone ever holding it up to a lamp to see what's under the stat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, bluechip said:

In other words, it isn't really difficult to do.  Which makes me all the more surprised whenever a potentially major piece with a big stat piece of the main character got photographed and meticulously authenticated and described and its image printed in a major auction house catalogue, the whole proverbial nine yards, without anyone ever holding it up to a lamp to see what's under the stat.

Heritage has a policy on stats. I had a piece I sent them with one panel stat with art underneath. They said regardless if there is art under - they still have to say it’s a stat. 
Not sure where the logic comes from but they said they can’t mention it even if there is art under. 🤷🏽‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, RICKYBOBBY said:

Heritage has a policy on stats. I had a piece I sent them with one panel stat with art underneath. They said regardless if there is art under - they still have to say it’s a stat. 
Not sure where the logic comes from but they said they can’t mention it even if there is art under. 🤷🏽‍♂️

My guess would be that if the original published art has the stat, the art underneath doesn’t count. That’s my feeling, by the way. It is nice to have, but of no real worth.

Edited by Rick2you2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/13/2020 at 12:46 PM, delekkerste said:

More ink spilled on the page = More $$$

People laughed when I first said that, but, it's true (up to a point...it's like a Laffer Curve.  100% black ink on a comic art page isn't going to be worth anything on a comic art page).  

 

All black is only worth anything when it's "fine art"

 

Rothko black.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

My guess would be that if the original published art has the stat, the art underneath doesn’t count. That’s my feeling, by the way. It is nice to have, but of no real worth.

Exactly.  We are talking about illustrated/commercial art here.  The primary reason that it has value is that it got published and therefore needs to be in the form that was published. 

Suppose Marvel commissioned Frank Frazetta and Herb Trimpe to draw up alternative versions for the cover of Incredible Hulk 181, and then for whatever reason decided to go with the Trimpe version that we all know today.  Despite Frazetta being a bigger name, and despite his version no doubt being clearly artistically superior to the published version by Herb Trimpe, the Frazetta version will never be as valuable as the Trimpe version

In no other world other than illustrated/commercial art (which includes comic art), will art by Frazetta be valued less than art by Trimpe simply because one was published and the other was not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, tth2 said:

Exactly.  We are talking about illustrated/commercial art here.  The primary reason that it has value is that it got published and therefore needs to be in the form that was published. 

Suppose Marvel commissioned Frank Frazetta and Herb Trimpe to draw up alternative versions for the cover of Incredible Hulk 181, and then for whatever reason decided to go with the Trimpe version that we all know today.  Despite Frazetta being a bigger name, and despite his version no doubt being clearly artistically superior to the published version by Herb Trimpe, the Frazetta version will never be as valuable as the Trimpe version

In no other world other than illustrated/commercial art (which includes comic art), will art by Frazetta be valued less than art by Trimpe simply because one was published and the other was not.

Fire that editor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, tth2 said:

Exactly.  We are talking about illustrated/commercial art here.  The primary reason that it has value is that it got published and therefore needs to be in the form that was published. 

Suppose Marvel commissioned Frank Frazetta and Herb Trimpe to draw up alternative versions for the cover of Incredible Hulk 181, and then for whatever reason decided to go with the Trimpe version that we all know today.  Despite Frazetta being a bigger name, and despite his version no doubt being clearly artistically superior to the published version by Herb Trimpe, the Frazetta version will never be as valuable as the Trimpe version

In no other world other than illustrated/commercial art (which includes comic art), will art by Frazetta be valued less than art by Trimpe simply because one was published and the other was not.

You can say that and make it sound logical or like that's-how-it-is but in fact there are many examples of sales that contradict your assertion.  Many covers that sold in a form that was later altered before publication, and which did not sell for drastically lower prices.  I recall a Cap cover (103?) that recently sold and it's NOT the final, yet iirc it went well into six figures.   

We also know that published covers with major areas being stats sell for less than those with all original art, and we also know that such covers DO sell for more when there is actual art underneath and the stat which made up the published version was simply shifted a bit or enlarged a bit, or whatever.     

I think another Cap cover 117, iirc featured a stat in the published version that was pasted over the original art, and I do not recall it selling for the huge discount your assertion it must have sold for.  If it had I would probably have bought it, because I do not agree that such things are so much less desirable and would have been quite happy to discover that everybody else shared your view.  But they just don't.

 

Edited by bluechip
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very nice result on the McKean Sandman #6 cover....and it's going to look like a bargain in a couple years. There's an extremely limited quantity of McKean mixed media Sandman covers and a hardcore fanbase as it is, and with Netflix making a huge investment in the series ("the most expensive DC show ever"), I don't see a lot of downside risk there even though it sold for nearly twice the Preludes & Nocturnes cover did three years ago

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bluechip said:

You can say that and make it sound logical or like that's-how-it-is but in fact there are many examples of sales that contradict your assertion.  Many covers that sold in a form that was later altered before publication, and which did not sell for drastically lower prices.  I recall a Cap cover (103?) that recently sold and it's NOT the final, yet iirc it went well into six figures.   

We also know that published covers with major areas being stats sell for less than those with all original art, and we also know that such covers DO sell for more when there is actual art underneath and the stat which made up the published version was simply shifted a bit or enlarged a bit, or whatever.     

I think another Cap cover 117, iirc featured a stat in the published version that was pasted over the original art, and I do not recall it selling for the huge discount your assertion it must have sold for.  If it had I would probably have bought it, because I do not agree that such things are so much less desirable and would have been quite happy to discover that everybody else shared your view.  But they just don't.

 

I am taking what tth2 wrote as an attempt to illustrate a point using exaggeration. I suspect that in this market the Frazetta piece would sell for more. Likewise, some people do value art buried under stats. The focused question, however, involves the way Heritage lists a piece at auction and the reasons for it.
Furthermore, as a general principle, I would agree with him. Don’t forget that this is a thin market with a limited number of potentially interested buyers, so it is much easier to find examples which are not on a smooth statistical curve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, tth2 said:

Exactly.  We are talking about illustrated/commercial art here.  The primary reason that it has value is that it got published and therefore needs to be in the form that was published. 

Suppose Marvel commissioned Frank Frazetta and Herb Trimpe to draw up alternative versions for the cover of Incredible Hulk 181, and then for whatever reason decided to go with the Trimpe version that we all know today.  Despite Frazetta being a bigger name, and despite his version no doubt being clearly artistically superior to the published version by Herb Trimpe, the Frazetta version will never be as valuable as the Trimpe version

In no other world other than illustrated/commercial art (which includes comic art), will art by Frazetta be valued less than art by Trimpe simply because one was published and the other was not.

While I can see how some (many?) collectors might feel this way, I hold a different position. While being published certainly adds value to a piece of comic book art, in the end for me it is about the art. That is what an artist puts down on the paper. Stats are no more original art than the published comic book. In my collection I have a unused cover art for Captain America #125 by Marie Severin and Frank Giacoia that I personally value much more than the published version because IMO it is a much better piece of art. I am not sure I would ever purchase a piece with a stat covering some original art, but if I did I would probably have the stats removed and put a mylar overlay so that I could see and admire the artist's original intention.

CaptainAmerica125.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, tth2 said:

Exactly.  We are talking about illustrated/commercial art here.  The primary reason that it has value is that it got published and therefore needs to be in the form that was published. 

Suppose Marvel commissioned Frank Frazetta and Herb Trimpe to draw up alternative versions for the cover of Incredible Hulk 181, and then for whatever reason decided to go with the Trimpe version that we all know today.  Despite Frazetta being a bigger name, and despite his version no doubt being clearly artistically superior to the published version by Herb Trimpe, the Frazetta version will never be as valuable as the Trimpe version

In no other world other than illustrated/commercial art (which includes comic art), will art by Frazetta be valued less than art by Trimpe simply because one was published and the other was not.

Another example from my collection. I have an unused cover for Alarming Tales #3 by Jack Kirby. Joe Simon redid the whole thing to produced the published version. And by the way the original art for Joe's version has survived and is in some black hole collection. I can understand why Joe made the changes, the published version stood out better on the racks than Jack's would have. But am I the only collector that would prefer to have the Kirby version over the Simon one?

AlarmingTales3alt.jpg

Alarming Tales 3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are of course always individual collectors who prefer the art for art's sake, but there's no question that all things being equal, the market will value the published version higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hmendryk said:

Another example from my collection. I have an unused cover for Alarming Tales #3 by Jack Kirby. Joe Simon redid the whole thing to produced the published version. And by the way the original art for Joe's version has survived and is in some black hole collection. I can understand why Joe made the changes, the published version stood out better on the racks than Jack's would have. But am I the only collector that would prefer to have the Kirby version over the Simon one?

AlarmingTales3alt.jpg

Alarming Tales 3.jpg

While I know you didn't intend this reaction, it makes a strong case for how good Simon was on his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stinkininkin said:

I've posted this before, but here is a best of both worlds example I have in my collection. A Frank Miller Ronin page with the printed art being actual original art and not a stat, and then a glorious unused original pencilled and inked version underneath. I actually took it to a restorer (Gordan Christman) and had him affix the top original with a safe and neutral and removable hinge so that I could easily look at both versions (I do not have this one framed). I did not know the original was underneath the paste over when I bought it, but i might venture that I might have marginally paid UP had I known. It is indeed all about the art and in this particular scenario, having two examples is better than having one IMHO. (thumbsu

1.JPG

2.JPG

3.JPG

That's awesome

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
3 3