2 ?'s for KK
0

19 posts in this topic

69 posts

Since this is an open forum and I do not have an e-mail, I will ask here.

I am a novice at art collecting, my main thing is comics.

Through the years I have grabed art here and there.

Since you post a lot I will ask your help with these questions.

1) I have noticed that you have voiced an objection to cover art that has been inked.

Is this opinion a standard or just a personal choice?

I have had art framed with the comic, I thought it was neat to have the art

colored the same as the cover.

2) There are artist in today's market doing recreations of covers, I feel this is a

determent to the market for the original cover. As an investment will

these recreations hold future value?

 

I do realize that K.K. is not the only one on this board with an opinion on these

questions. There are a lot of OA smarts on this board.

I would like to know others thoughts, but do not want to start a bashing

marathon.

Thanks livinglucky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13,056 posts
1) I have noticed that you have voiced an objection to cover art that has been inked.

 

Just so you're speaking the same language as the rest of us... you're confusing terms here. Any black and white line art cover, splash or panel page has been "inked." Inking, in the area of comics refers to the application of black india ink to penciled pages. With the exception of painted art and art shot directly from pencils, all comic art is inked.

 

You're referring to black and white artwork being colored outside of the normal production process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,053 posts

Living,

 

'Inking'/ should be clarified from 'coloring'.

 

Yes,..the opinion is standard. And changing standards I do not think will ever account for colored art. The market will always discount such pieces heavily.

 

Recreations are not a 'burden' on the original piece when they are labled as 'recreations' [contrasted with second copies with the intent to defraud]. Recreations probably promote the original. I do not believe they will hold their value.

 

KK

Edited by krazykat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81 posts

The vast majority of art collectors (I am in that majority) favor "un-colored" pieces over colored pieces. In general, I do not like pieces that have been colored outside the production process. Not sure why that is the case since comic books are generally a colored medium and my fondest childhood memories of comic books are in color bu it just is. Maybe the hobby's taste will change in time but I would not hold my breath while waiting. I happen to own a nice Wrightson piece that was colored and while it was done by a professional colorist I still feel like it is "not right".

 

The problem comes with the fact that we are dealing with one-of-a-kind pieces. Everyone art collector has a grail; that one piece they would give their left nut to own. I sometimes wonder if my grail would change if I were to find out it was colored. I happen to know my personal grail is not colored, which is good, but that the owner has no intention of selling (sigh).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,796 posts
I happen to own a nice Wrightson piece that was colored and while it was done by a professional colorist I still feel like it is "not right".

 

Do you have a scan of the page? I'd love to see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,578 posts

Weng! Welcome to the boards! 893applaud-thumb.gif

 

Weng was one of my first "OA buddies" when I started collecting this stuff. He is a perfect gentleman when it comes to doing deals, never a problem, his knowledge of OA is great and has even offered to pass on a piece he would pay more than I would in auction if I really wanted it. hail.gif

 

So.....everyone, please sell him all the Defenders art you can find at a reasonable price........ tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
581 posts

With the exception of painted art and art shot directly from pencils, all comic art is inked.

 

Not so. A lot of art is now being scanned as blue line scans and sent digitally to the inker who then inks a seperate piece. More and more pencil only art is out there.

 

That brings up another question about desirability. Personally I dislike pencil only art and like inked pieces. I also question the durability of the pencilled pages if they haven't been sprayed with a fixative to avoid smudging, blending, etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33,167 posts

With the exception of painted art and art shot directly from pencils, all comic art is inked.

 

Not so. A lot of art is now being scanned as blue line scans and sent digitally to the inker who then inks a seperate piece. More and more pencil only art is out there.

 

That brings up another question about desirability. Personally I dislike pencil only art and like inked pieces. I also question the durability of the pencilled pages if they haven't been sprayed with a fixative to avoid smudging, blending, etc...

 

Yep. Any Turner page I've ever seen has been pencil only. This past weekend in B'more Michael Lark had a few that he sent out for inking as well that were all pencil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13,056 posts

With the exception of painted art and art shot directly from pencils, all comic art is inked.

 

Not so. A lot of art is now being scanned as blue line scans and sent digitally to the inker who then inks a seperate piece. More and more pencil only art is out there.

 

I wasn't clear. I wasn't referring to originals, where there can be all sorts of combinations, I was referring to the finished product- as in most comic books that people buy contain art that at one time during th eproduction process was black and white inked artwork. [edited to make this make more sense. Hopefully it worked]

 

I work as an inker, I'm well aware of the realities of modern production. thumbsup2.gif

Edited by rob_react

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
324 posts

humm. while were on the subject of production. i have questions. if there is more pencil art out there now. and the inker light boxes the blue-lines. on paper.

 

and you now have two peice,s of art for the same page. are they both original.s ?

do they hold the same retail value. ?

 

if the inker of such pages.in selling . have to inform the buyer the pages were light boxes only. ?

 

what do you guys think. chime in. confused-smiley-013.gif

 

larry

Edited by desertdogg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
581 posts

I've seen both pencils only and inks only as pages for sale. I've also seen them marked as such each time.

 

It's easy for the pencils as you can plainly see they haven't been inked. It's more of an issue with the inks.

 

From my point of view I don't really care who the inker is and thus, don't desire their artwork. I do like a lot of pencil art but I haven't bought any. I really like Mike Wieringo's artwork but wish it was inked and not pencils only. frown.gif

 

It'd be interesting to hear from some dealers how pencils only or ink only pages sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13,056 posts
From my point of view I don't really care who the inker is

 

Get a look at a couple of bad ones and you'll start to care real quick 27_laughing.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
581 posts
From my point of view I don't really care who the inker is

 

Get a look at a couple of bad ones and you'll start to care real quick 27_laughing.gif

Hehe, I know exactly what you mean when bad inks are done on a good penciller but in this case I meant that I wouldn't buy inks only no matter who's art they've been lightboxed or bluelined from. I'm personally interested in the penciller's art.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
324 posts

well. my question is still should they both be viewed as original comic art. and does the inker has the right to sell the light box pages as the same price as the pencil pages.

 

 

and how would you feel if you bought an inked page from ebay or a dealer. and you found later the original pencils to the page exist. as well. how would you feel about the page. would you still want to keep it.

 

and would you sell the page knowing the pencil page is out there. or would just try to find the pencil page.

 

i just have a problem with the fact you have two pages of art for one page. if all comic art was done like this for the future. would you collect the pencils or the inks or both.

 

this reminds me of animation cels. you have a pencil drawing and and color / inked cel. the color/ inked cels sell for a lot more than the pencil drawing.s

will this be the case in the near future for comic art. ?

 

larry ;]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
581 posts

All good questions DD. Personally I would sell the inked page if I found out there was a pencilled page floating around. I wouldn't think the inked page would go for more money than the original pencils but I could be wrong in my thinking on that.

 

Personally I don't like pencilled only or inked only pages so hopefully won't see a page that I 'must have' that fit into either category. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81 posts

From my point of view I don't really care who the inker is and thus, don't desire their artwork.

 

There are certain pencil/ink combos that are considered "classic" and more desireable. For example Starlin/Milgrom on Captain Marvel, Busecma/Palmer on Avengers, Colan/Palmer on Tomb of Dracula. The reason those are more desireable in my mind is because of the inker.

 

There are Kirby pages inked by Coletta are considered less desirable.

 

Drop by Bob McLeod's website when you get a chance and you can see how much an inker can do to enhance a page.

 

Not trying to slam you or anything so much as mention that I used to think that way and have learned that it is not always true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,384 posts

From my point of view I don't really care who the inker is and thus, don't desire their artwork.

 

There are certain pencil/ink combos that are considered "classic" and more desireable. For example Starlin/Milgrom on Captain Marvel, Busecma/Palmer on Avengers, Colan/Palmer on Tomb of Dracula. The reason those are more desireable in my mind is because of the inker.

 

There are Kirby pages inked by Coletta are considered less desirable.

 

Drop by Bob McLeod's website when you get a chance and you can see how much an inker can do to enhance a page.

 

Not trying to slam you or anything so much as mention that I used to think that way and have learned that it is not always true.

 

Hi Weng,

 

You are absolutely right! I used to feel the same way, too, but now I realize that the inker is as important, and at times more important, than the penciler. I think it takes some time in this hobby to really realize this, mainly because the contribution of the inker is sometimes lost in the published work whereas it is more obvious in black and white. After looking at tons of original art by the same penciler, you begin to realize that the inker can and does make a huge difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
581 posts

Heartened and wktam you're not reading the entire thread and then posting. I agree with you about how an inker influences work 100% and have seen it numerous time over the last 25 years on artist's work that I like. I've seen great art ruined by the inker and I've seen great art embellished by the inker.

 

My sole intent in this thread was to say that I wouldn't buy just an inker's work as a stand alone piece when I know the pencils are out there as a seperate piece no matter who the inker is.

Share this post


Link to post
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