Original pencils/inks vs. pencils and seperate blueline inks 0

[Dick O.]

10 hours ago, Stefanomjr said:

Pondering the pros and cons of inks over pencils vs inks over blue line is making my head hurt. Is there any historical data (sales) that show that one is preferred over the other?

Here's a couple recent Walking Dead comps showing pencils are more highly valued:

https://www.comicconnect.com/bookDetail.php?id=750831

https://www.comicconnect.com/bookDetail.php?id=750834

 

Then there's data showing the inverse here:

https://comicbookinvest.com/2017/12/15/market-report-december-2017-comicconnect-auction/

To quote:

"Commonly held belief is that when the pencils and inks for a particular page exist on separate art boards, the pencils-only artwork is worth roughly 50% more than the inks-only one. We had an opportunity to test that theory here, and the results were surprising indeed! Do these two sales turn our understanding of pencil/ink OA values on its head?"

 

[Rick2you2]

4 hours ago, O. said:

Then there's data showing the inverse here:

https://comicbookinvest.com/2017/12/15/market-report-december-2017-comicconnect-auction/

To quote:

"Commonly held belief is that when the pencils and inks for a particular page exist on separate art boards, the pencils-only artwork is worth roughly 50% more than the inks-only one. We had an opportunity to test that theory here, and the results were surprising indeed! Do these two sales turn our understanding of pencil/ink OA values on its head?"

 

I would be cautious about drawing that conclusion here, at least if the pencils were sold first. 

Someone buying the pencil work would probably want the inks, too. So, an unscrupulous seller could put in dummy bids, knowing that the buyer of the pencil work would also be trying to get the inks. Then, either bail out on the bidding, or, if stuck with the winning bid, try to sell it later privately to the winner (and eating the commission). 

Here though, the gap between pencils and inks is pretty large. This could also be a case where the underbidder on the pencils got angry and decided to "shoot the moon" on the inks.

In either case, I don't think this is a representative sampling.

[Stefanomjr]

5 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

I would be cautious about drawing that conclusion here, at least if the pencils were sold first. 

Someone buying the pencil work would probably want the inks, too. So, an unscrupulous seller could put in dummy bids, knowing that the buyer of the pencil work would also be trying to get the inks. Then, either bail out on the bidding, or, if stuck with the winning bid, try to sell it later privately to the winner (and eating the commission). 

Here though, the gap between pencils and inks is pretty large. This could also be a case where the underbidder on the pencils got angry and decided to "shoot the moon" on the inks.

In either case, I don't think this is a representative sampling.

In terms of inks over blue line vs inks over original pencil....I think it's trickier than that. Assuming there isn't any fraud involved and you've got a willing buyer and seller on each end of each sale.....other variables factor into desirability/price. Who worked on the page, was the OA part of an epic run or moment or intro of a character....seems hard to quantify. Which is preferable? Suffice to say it boils down to personal preference? 

 

Example: If you're a big Batman fan, all else being equal, do you prefer Greg Capullo pencil page AND Glapion inks over blue line? Or Glapion (or Miki) inks over Greg's pencil? 

 

[stinkininkin]

Another signal that there may be a sea change coming is that I have a video up on YouTube demonstrating how I ink (compressed from about 45 minutes to 4 minutes) with well over a million views and it's not unusual to get comments from people questioning my methodology of inking directly over the original pencils.  The belief that there should be two originals (one pencils, one inks) is becoming more common I think.  Of course, a lot of younger fans and artist's don't understand why we don't just work digitally in the first place, but that's a different conversation.

 

[Rick2you2]

18 hours ago, stinkininkin said:

Of course, a lot of younger fans and artist's don't understand why we don't just work digitally in the first place, but that's a different conversation.

Thank God you don't. 

[comicinkking.com]

On 3/31/2018 at 11:40 AM, stinkininkin said:

Another signal that there may be a sea change coming is that I have a video up on YouTube demonstrating how I ink (compressed from about 45 minutes to 4 minutes) with well over a million views and it's not unusual to get comments from people questioning my methodology of inking directly over the original pencils.  The belief that there should be two originals (one pencils, one inks) is becoming more common I think.  Of course, a lot of younger fans and artist's don't understand why we don't just work digitally in the first place, but that's a different conversation.

 

Confession: I am one of the million+ who watched this!

That's very interesting that people think the pencils and inks should be separate.  Maybe it's a generational thing, or maybe they don't realize that original comic art is just a by-product of a production process.  We have all heard the stories of art being given away, thrown away, chopped up and discarded.  It was not considered valuable and was just a means to an end.  I suppose there is something unfortunate about the pencils being obliterated, but I've always viewed a pencil and ink team like two singers who harmonize.  You can't have one without the other - and only those two guys working together could make that finished piece.  Even though you can no longer see the pencils, technically, you have them on an inked page.  That's why, even if something is inked via blueline - I'd want the inks.  I can't imagine the finished piece would look any different if it's inked using bluelines or straight from pencils, so you're still getting that team effort or "harmony".

[F For Fake]

On 3/31/2018 at 2:40 PM, stinkininkin said:

Another signal that there may be a sea change coming is that I have a video up on YouTube demonstrating how I ink (compressed from about 45 minutes to 4 minutes) with well over a million views and it's not unusual to get comments from people questioning my methodology of inking directly over the original pencils.  The belief that there should be two originals (one pencils, one inks) is becoming more common I think.  Of course, a lot of younger fans and artist's don't understand why we don't just work digitally in the first place, but that's a different conversation.

 

Love stuff like this, but I have to ask: when you receive a page like this, do you ever just sigh and say "JEE-zus Jim, why so many freakin' tiny little lines everywhere???" I'm exhausted just watching the video.

[stinkininkin]

9 hours ago, F For Fake said:

Love stuff like this, but I have to ask: when you receive a page like this, do you ever just sigh and say "JEE-zus Jim, why so many freakin' tiny little lines everywhere???" I'm exhausted just watching the video.

Well, we're taking this off topic (which is fine), but no, I've been doing this for so long that the level of detail doesn't even register.  And as for the video itself, it IS exhausting to watch.  It was produced on a lark for a San Diego panel I did with Jim and Scott Snyder, and is so kinetic and frantic as to induce nausea.  Overuse of the zoom function, film speed, and the fact that I spin the page as I work makes for something of a mess.  But I thought it was only going to be seen once (at the panel), and it wasn't until later that I casually posted it on YouTube, and 1.3 million views later, I don't have the heart to take it down, amateurish and EXHAUSTING though it might be!

Scott

Edited April 3, 2018 by stinkininkin

[comicinkking.com]

On 4/2/2018 at 12:12 PM, stinkininkin said:

Well, we're taking this off topic (which is fine), but no, I've been doing this for so long that the level of detail doesn't even register.  And as for the video itself, it IS exhausting to watch.  It was produced on a lark for a San Diego panel I did with Jim and Scott Snyder, and is so kinetic and frantic as to induce nausea.  Overuse of the zoom function, film speed, and the fact that I spin the page as I work makes for something of a mess.  But I thought it was only going to be seen once (at the panel), and it wasn't until later that I casually posted it on YouTube, and 1.3 million views later, I don't have the heart to take it down, amateurish and EXHAUSTING though it might be!

Scott

So... 45 min for one panel?  Is that normal?  How long would a page like this take?

[stinkininkin]

1 hour ago, comicinkking.com said:

So... 45 min for one panel?  Is that normal?  How long would a page like this take?

What do you mean "normal"?  It takes as long as it takes, depending on complexity.  A page like the one in the video would probably be around 8-10 hours.  A page a day is a rough benchmark most artist's (not named Kirby) shoot for.

[BeholdersEye]

I enjoy seeing the pencils separate from the inks and having two different pieces to observe, showing the art process and the contributions of the inker embellishing the pencils as well as the raw pencils isolated. 

[comicinkking.com]

21 hours ago, stinkininkin said:

What do you mean "normal"?  It takes as long as it takes, depending on complexity.  A page like the one in the video would probably be around 8-10 hours.  A page a day is a rough benchmark most artist's (not named Kirby) shoot for.

Wow!  Makes you really appreciate the amount of work it takes to put out a monthly book. 

[stinkininkin]

2 hours ago, comicinkking.com said:

Wow!  Makes you really appreciate the amount of work it takes to put out a monthly book. 

20-22 pages a month, and it's a massive struggle every single time!

[Solar]

On 3/26/2018 at 6:47 PM, comicinkking.com said:

If I were an inker, I'd be very insulted by this comment.  It's the old "inkers are tracers" line.  I suspect you may not realize what good inking is really about.

Woah...do you realize that the post you replied to is going on 12 years old? Impressive.

[comicinkking.com]

On 4/19/2018 at 5:01 AM, Solar said:

Woah...do you realize that the post you replied to is going on 12 years old? Impressive.

Some topics are timeless. ;)