• 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.

Same artist, same run, pencil vs inked
0

25 posts in this topic

I know the topic has some previous thread.  In this case I have a specific question.  I have a penciled and inked cover from a certain run.  There is a nice cover from the same run (same artist, more or less equivalent content) coming up on CLink Focused auction, but it is just pencils.  This is not the case of an inked version existing elsewhere.  A few issues of that run were printed straight from pencils. 

Assuming the two pieces were of similar aesthetic content, what do people feel the premium of the inked cover versus the pencil-only one should be?  It has been a while since a comparable has come up and I would like to obtain a valuation datapoint from this auction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which do you like more? If you had both and had to get rid of one, which would it be? If the penciled piece speaks to you more, I would bid accordingly and not compare to something else. I don't think there is a formula for this stuff IMO, especially on art that inspires you to bid. Good luck, I hope you score it below what you'd like to pay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Carlo M said:

I know the topic has some previous thread.  In this case I have a specific question.  I have a penciled and inked cover from a certain run.  There is a nice cover from the same run (same artist, more or less equivalent content) coming up on CLink Focused auction, but it is just pencils.  This is not the case of an inked version existing elsewhere.  A few issues of that run were printed straight from pencils. 

Assuming the two pieces were of similar aesthetic content, what do people feel the premium of the inked cover versus the pencil-only one should be?  It has been a while since a comparable has come up and I would like to obtain a valuation datapoint from this auction.

In the situation you describe, all things being equal, I would consider the pencil & inked cover as the published cover and would pay at least 2.5x more for it than the pencil only version

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Price is always a function of demand, not content. 

In my view, a pencil-only published cover is the equal of a pencilled and inked published cover.

If one is more aesthetically pleasing than the other, that's the one which is worth more for the simple reason that more people will want it. Whether 2 pieces are both equally aesthetically pleasing is a matter of opinion, with the price of each one a function of the largest number of potentially interested buyers.

Bottom line: if you like it, bid on it; ignore ratio's as meaningless.

Edited by Rick2you2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

In the situation you describe, all things being equal, I would consider the pencil & inked cover as the published cover and would pay at least 2.5x more for it than the pencil only version

If I'm understanding the OP correctly, the "pencil only" cover is the published cover (at least for the piece in question).

It sounds as if there are a few issues of the run which were solely based on pencils - that's to say these pages were never inked at all.

If this is correct, I'd personally judge the piece on its own merits, sort of like Rick2you2 suggested.  That's to say that for me, the quality of the image would solely determine what I'd be willing to bid/value each piece at.

I've seen some really tight/polished pencils in situations where they were intended to be the final product, and wouldn't value them any less than something slightly looser that was then inked.

Edited by ShallowDan
correcting typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if this is better suited for the other topic, but it happened recently.

Albert Moy had the Ultimate Spiderman 54 cover for sale by Bagley. It was inked, which AFAIK they were all published from pencils. No explanation. Comparing the cover to the published version, you could tell it's not the published version. I remember another USM Bagley Venom cover being in a similar situation.

A few days ago the new owner posted it & someone was accused of "ting on it" because they asked about it.

The inker (John Dell?) was nice enough to chime in that he had inked it over the published pencils a long time ago, so it's partially the original and partially a recreation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are getting away form the initial question.

Unless I misunderstood, the artists had both pencil only and pencils and inks covers from the same run.  This isn't the case of pencils only cover being inked after it was published.

As well, of course the content of the cover matters, but it was a generic question (without getting into evaluating the content of the cover) as to how we desire a pencil only cover vs pencil and inked cover.  Both by the same artists. Both by the same run.  Both published with no alterations.

Regards,

Malvin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, malvin said:

but it was a generic question (without getting into evaluating the content of the cover) as to how we desire a pencil only cover vs pencil and inked cover.  Both by the same artists. Both by the same run.  Both published with no alterations.

Correct (or at least that's my read of the OP's question).  And all things being equal, I wouldn't personally value a "pencil only" cover any less than another cover of similar quality that was penciled/inked.

If I understand your post, you would value a penciled/inked cover at 50-100% more than a penciled-only cover (once again, all things being equal)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, malvin said:

I think we are getting away form the initial question.

Unless I misunderstood, the artists had both pencil only and pencils and inks covers from the same run.  This isn't the case of pencils only cover being inked after it was published.

As well, of course the content of the cover matters, but it was a generic question (without getting into evaluating the content of the cover) as to how we desire a pencil only cover vs pencil and inked cover.  Both by the same artists. Both by the same run.  Both published with no alterations.

Regards,

Malvin

Correct, IMO, but we aren’t comparing a dozen large white eggs to each other. This is art, unique art, so asking a question as though all things are equal doesn’t really work. It’s all about the image and desireability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing I would consider is the pencier/inker combination. If I preferred the look of a penciled only piece to the look of a pencil and ink piece, I might put a premium on the pencil piece, especially if it is more rare. I tend to put a priority on how the piece looks to my eye and how it appeals to me whereas I know a lot of people place the highest priority on how a piece was published. But then again I tend to buy more for personal appreciation than resale/ROI, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are going to frame the art and put it on the wall, pencils and inks can make a *huge* difference. Pencil pieces can become invisible in brightly lit rooms, and end up looking like a blank page in a frame.

In a folio, it's different of course, so you need to factor that into the equation.

In the end it comes back to the simple mantra "buy what you like" and if you want it, bid to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Carlo M

As others have said, you cannot quite compare one cover to another, irrespective of whether one is inked and the other isn’t.

That said, here’s my two pence for what it matters.

Firstly, you would have to determine what the FMV of the pencilled art would have been IF it had been inked. Sounds like you’ve determined it to be the same as the inked cover you have. 

My general understanding is that 60% of the value of comic art would reside in the pencils and 40% in the inks. To that end, I’d say the FMV on the pencilled version should be 40% less than the pencilled and inked cover you already have. 

Having said the above, of course, other factors like which cover has better eye appeal, is one from a more key issue, the degree of finishing on the pencilled piece may have a impact on the final price at auction. Overall I’d say you should expect to pay at least 60% and up to 100% of the FMV on your pencilled/inked version.

Now if you threw up the link of the art you’re looking at, I’m sure we can all be more precise. Surely no one would try to take this from under you at the auction. (:

Edited by Skizz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to everybody who has contributed.  Just to clarify, I am talking comparing like for like, where the difference is "just" pencil vs inked.  The inverted quotes are required, because I agree 100% that you can never compare 100% one piece of art to another.  There will always be a gradation of quality.  And I am doing this because I like to keep an updated mark-to-market of my own collection.

Having said that, I am realising that the "pencil only" piece I am looking at may actually be more than pencils only.  Here it is:

RAD4E8B6202064_203054.thumb.jpg.ced0ef5fde4039f6e308b61f936810ef.jpg

 

Looking more closely at it, I am realising there might be some wash inks involved, so proably I am looking at it the wrong way.  CLink description is vague on this point. BTW, just to to be clear, I don't want in any way to affect the outcome of the auction.  It is a great piece, IMHO, from a great run, and I love love love ChrisCross, such an underrated artist, IMHO.

And here is my piece:

1709525661_200120CCross20Captain20Marvel2022.jpg.1e2ef754ce0ec9d000eb7ffce68c4693.jpg

 

So I wonder, will the outcome of the auction be a good valuation reference point for my cover?

Carlo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually know that cover.  I really enjoyed that issue, it was one of the funniest single issues I had read in the Peter David run, so I grabbed a few pages from Michael Ryan when it came out.

That cover was auctioned a few times already and I never bid that strongly to win.  Mostly because to me the cover is a "pinup" cover that has nothing to do with the story.

As for valuation, aside from pencils vs inks, the other issue is the costume.  I personally prefer the traditional costume more than the "Spartan" look later, so that would skew.  You can always make some vague % adjustment to account for various things, but I think the different costume just adds another factor that makes the comparison more of a guess.

Malvin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carlo M said:

 

So I wonder, will the outcome of the auction be a good valuation reference point for my cover?

Carlo

 

 

Look at it this way. If the auctioned cover goes for a lot of money, your cover will likely be seen as more valuable. If the auctioned cover sells for a low price, hey, you can tell people it would have gone for more if it had been pencils-and-inks. And you might be right.

There was a time when I turned away from pencil pieces, but I've adjusted my thinking. I've come across a few artists who only work in pencils and, if I wanted an original from them, that's what I was going to have to buy. When I took a deep breath and bought my first one, the artwork was beautiful; tight and finished. I now own four pencil-only covers by three different artists and I love looking at them. I don't value them any less than the inked covers I own. They certainly weren't as cheap as some of the inked covers I own.

Just as an aside, I've seen some xeroxed Kirby pencils where I much prefer the pencil work to the inked work that was published. If the pencils were still around, that's where I'd spend my money.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic, but related to the same artist.  Anybody knows the price of the cover to Cap Marvel 2 by Chris Cross that was just sold at Romitaman? I can't get the data from Comicarttracker....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Carlo M said:

Slightly off topic, but related to the same artist.  Anybody knows the price of the cover to Cap Marvel 2 by Chris Cross that was just sold at Romitaman? I can't get the data from Comicarttracker....

$1K IIRC

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
0