The 'I Got A New Piece Of Art' Thread, (for everybody!)

[bronty]

I don't like the trend either for the reasons you state but believe it or not comic books are like the ONLY place illustration still happens by hand. The rest of the illustration industry switched over to digital around '95. That's twenty long years ago now. So as much as the trend sucks, comics have bucked the trend for twenty years now, so in some regards comic art fans should be happy there's any still being produced at all !

The next time you are looking at your turtles collection (minus the comics) look closely at all your, say, 1990 items. Every cover is a drawing or a painting. Now pull all your stuff from 2000 and you'll notice the difference. Or heck, just look around with a critical eye the next time you are at a Toys R Us or Chapters. Look at book covers, game covers, toy boxes, whatever you care to name. None of the product covers are drawings or paintings anymore, and at one time, they were. We can't live in the past, but its a real shame.

[Plasticplayhouse]

Wow, has it been that long already?! I've never seen any production art up close. I've tried to get some, but I've never had any luck tracking it down and the few things I did see were out of my budget at the time.

I guess traditional production art has become a lost art. Forgive the pun.

[ComicAddict]

I picked up a couple of Ross' pages as well. I had been wanting a page by him for a while so I am very pleased to add these to the collection.
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Issue 29 Page 3

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Issue 31 Page 6

[Jester]

Gotta love Ross' stuff.

*looks at avi/siggy combo.*

Irony....

[bronty]

Originally Posted by Plasticplayhouse

Wow, has it been that long already?! I've never seen any production art up close. I've tried to get some, but I've never had any luck tracking it down and the few things I did see were out of my budget at the time.

I guess traditional production art has become a lost art. Forgive the pun.

Yeah, it's been that long. (Actually children's books are the one other place where it's mostly all by hand still). Otherwise product illos for everything under the sun are just in photoshop now and have been for a long time. Most covers to cool things kids buy these days just exist as a picture file on some computer, and that's it, and this transition was already happening when the Tmnt cartoon was wrapping up.

FWIW I think what you are referring to is illustration. 'Production art' can mean different things to different collector groups but it usually means 'not actually art.' For example, a photocopy used in the production process. Or, a color guide (which is also a photocopy, just with color notes.). That sort of thing. Items used in the process of creating the artwork that aren't the hand rendered artwork itself.

[tOkKa]

Originally Posted by bronty

Yeah, it's been that long. (Actually children's books are the one other place where it's mostly all by hand still). Otherwise product illos for everything under the sun are just in photoshop now and have been for a long time. Most covers to cool things kids buy these days just exist as a picture file on some computer, and that's it, and this transition was already happening when the Tmnt cartoon was wrapping up.

FWIW I think what you are referring to is illustration. 'Production art' can mean different things to different collector groups but it usually means 'not actually art.' For example, a photocopy used in the production process. Or, a color guide (which is also a photocopy, just with color notes.). That sort of thing. Items used in the process of creating the artwork that aren't the hand rendered artwork itself.

-->> There's much hybrid work out there bridging the digital / "analog" art gap bringing many grey areas to the market. Still mainstream "traditional" artistics applied to covers and interiors are out there and categorically go into the realm of fine art in some cases bridging another gap. BIZ or Dave Mack for example go into that realm - - collecting that work demands TOP DOLLAR. OI !!

Very interesting last several posts in this thread.

~ t

[bronty]

In the pure illustration market there's very little hybrid work that Im aware of. With comics and so on yeah some guys are doing things like making a 1/1 print and then (supposedly ) destroying their digital file thus creating a "one of a kind original." In other words they are trying to make a physical manifestation of the digital file "rare" and hoping that will bridge the problem collectors have with digital material. However in my view and in the view of many others Ive spoken with about it, it's frankly just a glorified print, and Id never pay "original" prices for something whose physical creation was simply as a result of pressing "print" on someone's computer. At low price levels, sure, whatever, no harm no foul.

As for bridging the gap to fine art frankly I don't think biz or mack would ever be taken seriously by the fine art establishment. That whole area of the art world is more interested in what the artist has to say than what the pictures look like. So the guys currently making inroads are more the types like Robert Crumb, Dan Clowes, Chris Ware, etc. The guys who are both artist and writer and are (or more accurately were once) at the artsy fringe of comics. Guys who were trying to express meaningful thoughts not guys that were good at pushing product. Guys that had complete control over their work without an editors interference. A guy subject to editorial approval like biz or Mack they would view as either having nothing to say, selling out their voice, or having their voice vetoed by the editor. Times and attitudes may change over decades but today's fine art collector would have no basis of appreciation for 99%+ of comic artists. Crumb in particular has made some inroads as he is represented by Zwirner which is quite a prestigious gallery.

[bronty]

Originally Posted by Redrumh2o

For all of you OA collectors with big wallets....Steve Lavigne just posted a grail on eBay!!...I have seen it in person and it is beautiful!!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/161248791217...84.m1423.l2649

Well I guess I can post this now.

[RatKingLeo]

Originally Posted by bronty

Well I guess I can post this now.

Did you win that? It's awesome I wish I had the cash to pony up for it

[tOkKa]

..the pure illustration market there's very little hybrid work that Im aware of.

-->>We'll have to part ways on this, respectively so please.. I mean no disrespect.

With comics and so on yeah some guys are doing things like making a 1/1 print and then (supposedly ) destroying their digital file thus creating a "one of a kind original." In other words they are trying to make a physical manifestation of the digital file "rare" and hoping that will bridge the problem collectors have with digital material. However in my view and in the view of many others Ive spoken with about it, it's frankly just a glorified print, and Id never pay "original" prices for something whose physical creation was simply as a result of pressing "print" on someone's computer. At low price levels, sure, whatever, no harm no foul.

As for bridging the gap to fine art frankly I don't think biz or mack would ever be taken seriously by the fine art establishment. .[/QUOTE]


-->> Politely disagree.. BODE, Ron English, Biz and Dave, Eastman and Talbot ( all TMNT and/or Mirage alumni ) are quintessentially are taken quite seriously by major galleries and fine art collectors.

That whole area of the art world is more interested in what the artist has to say than what the pictures look like.

-->> Alright..

So the guys currently making inroads are more the types like Robert Crumb, Dan Clowes, Chris Ware, etc.

-->> And then some..

The guys who are both artist and writer and are (or more accurately were once) at the artsy fringe of comics.


-->> OK..

Guys who were trying to express meaningful thoughts not guys that were good at pushing product.

-->> I hear that sometimes..

Guys that had complete control over their work without an editors interference. A guy subject to editorial approval like biz or Mack they would view as either having nothing to say, selling out their voice, or having their voice vetoed by the editor.


-->> Even in HEAVY METAL Magazine or their own published work ?? Really ??

Times and attitudes may change over decades but today's fine art collector would have no basis of appreciation for 99%+ of comic artists.


-->> Maybe variations and definitions of a "fine art collector" are in order so I can see your point more clearly.

Crumb in particular has made some inroads as he is represented by Zwirner which is quite a prestigious gallery.

-->> ah .. --
very interesting points, even if I don't totally agree with some of them.

As a hybrid creator and artist in industry; it's nice to discuss this with you.

~ t

[tOkKa]

Originally Posted by bronty

Well I guess I can post this now.

-->> We saw these at Steve's shop/gallery in Wells the other year, gorgeous.

~ t

[bronty]

Good to hear, thx.

As for the hybrid work, I'm not saying you're wrong, I just think we might be discussing different things? When you say hybrid, exactly what do you mean? i went down the digital 'original print' path but maybe you were talking about the sort of work where say... the pencils are traditional and then its digitally inked and colored, leaving an original but one that doesnt look so much like the end product?

What I was trying to say is that I'm not aware of guys who illustrate... oh, say, hot wheels car packages that are doing prints of their digital files and then destroying the files. You might be in a better position than me to comment but Ive not seen that and those kinds of artists are what Im talking about when I say the illustration industry at large.

As for the fine art discussion, I think we aren't quite discussing the same thing here either. I sometimes hear comic fans talking about how comic art will be accepted by the fine art elite one day. Ie representation at the top galleries. Having one billionaire comment to another billionaire over champagne at a showing how much they like the work. A one man retrospective at MOMA. That sort of thing. And as much as I like Eastman, talbot, etc, pigs will fly before that sort of thing happens with respect to their work. Crumb is far far closer to that than they are, but I wouldn't call him close either.

Anyways, none of this is to say or imply that fine art is "better." I much prefer our hobby. Just don't think that you are ever going to see a Talbot between a Francis Bacon and a Lucien Freud on a museum wall any time soon And Im sure you would agree with that - so I think in making our points we just had different things in mind. I may have been answering not quite the question you were asking.

[tOkKa]

Good to hear, thx.

As for the hybrid work, I'm not saying you're wrong, I just think we might be discussing different things?

-->> I think so.


When you say hybrid, exactly what do you mean? i went down the digital 'original print' path but maybe you were talking about the sort of work where say...

-->> That or say like a "Bill Sienkiewicz" - - comics for so long now are so quazi and diverse. To me even definitions and labels aren't always clear. It all gets so blurred.


the pencils are traditional and then its digitally inked and colored, leaving an original but one that doesnt look so much like the end product?

-->> Ah, yeh -- "traditionally" yes. I see, Ok !!

Every published piece i've had( not a hell of allot mind you ) has had to go generally in a digital direction; tho' most of the illustration itself has been created by hand and not say like on a tablet.

What I was trying to say is that I'm not aware of guys who illustrate... oh, say, hot wheels car packages that are doing prints of their digital files and then destroying the files. You might be in a better position than me to comment but Ive not seen that and those kinds of artists are what Im talking about when I say the illustration industry at large.


-->> Alright i see : : yes -- .. or the very rare PLAYMATES, MEGO, Mattel,Video Game, KENNER, et. al. packaging art be it more modern or vintage -- digital or hard copy so much of that does get destroyed or lost in some designer or Toy Company's storage unit.

Hmm - The lucky pieces of package art and their artists get to a renaissance point. Like the famous 2 gentleman whose names elude me known for their painted work on MOTU and Star Trek toys back in the day - -their work is at least now considered "fine". Not only is that work uber collectable but museum quality in some cases. Those artists have gone back to work for the toy companies in some regards. Mostly thinking of the famous MOTU guy. Gaw- what the hell is his name. Um he recently did a MOTU classics box art for the Castle Greyskull. Tho' this is very special case, clientele, and artwork job for the gentleman. Sorry i am bouncing around here and not thinking straight.


As for the fine art discussion, I think we aren't quite discussing the same thing here either.

-->> Maybe, but judging what's in your collection and to my understanding of the "art world" and due to experience of some standard galleries, museums and some very eclectic galleries ( mind you ) .. commercial art; pop culture images produced for product that it may be of a certain age due lapse into a "fine" - art category. Steve runs a small gallery/museum .. your Tournament Fighters Piece was hanging in a gallery with other legendary artists' works and iconic packaging and comic pieces people reading this thread would recognize.

Your work in collection has iconic status and is gallery worth; in some cases some would argue museum worthy.


I sometimes hear comic fans talking about how comic art will be accepted by the fine art elite one day. Ie representation at the top galleries.

-->> O O - -again i see your point partially.

Having one billionaire comment to another billionaire over champagne at a showing how much they like the work. A one man retrospective at MOMA. That sort of thing. And as much as I like Eastman, talbot, etc, pigs will fly before that sort of thing happens with respect to their work. Crumb is far far closer to that than they are, but I wouldn't call him close either.


-->> I can see what your saying half-way. As far as my experience with Bode in particular; it goes along the lines of what your are saying as far as Crumb goes and beyond that. He's currently working for exhibitions overseas and as you may know is already highly embedded in the urban art scene.

I think lots of us learned from Kevin himself the state of comics is commercial sure - but it really is a viable and legit art-form gallery worthy of some kind or another. Maybe it's not all in the Smithsonian just yet or what have you.. but i think the perspective on some of this deffly' has changed over the past 30 + years on the art and taking beyond the original product.

The " fine art elite " don't always get last dibs on what's described as "fine". Such an awful vague term nowadays anyway.

Anyways, none of this is to say or imply that fine art is "better." I much prefer our hobby. Just don't think that you are ever going to see a Talbot between a Francis Bacon and a Lucien Freud on a museum wall any time soon


-->> Maybe not.. yeh, but Eric has had his own solo Gallery shows here and there for years now.

And Im sure you would agree with that - so I think in making our points we just had different things in mind.


-->> Yes..

I may have been answering not quite the question you were asking.

-->> Well somewhat .. i'm not of the caliber of a SHERLOCK HOLMES detective ..more like Scooby Doo. From what i gather and deduce of your collection and you .. you may see this as a "hobby"; but i think you are collecting very special, rare,dated, and highly prized ;AT THIS POINT "FINE ART PIECES". Preserving them in a way and to sink so much of an investment in them must mean that they MEAN something very special to you.

It's a "hobby" .. - - ok fine; but i see you more as a fine art collector of a very specific sort.

There's nothing wrong with that. I don't know everything about all of this but i know a bit as i've had to run the gamut as a very struggling designer ( and if i like it or not "fine" artist ); and to a smaller degree a collector too. i have a small collection of gems. But nothing as spectacular as your scale of a collection. i also know all the preceding are more compliments to you and your collection.

~ t

[Plasticplayhouse]

Originally Posted by bronty

FWIW I think what you are referring to is illustration. 'Production art' can mean different things to different collector groups but it usually means 'not actually art.' For example, a photocopy used in the production process. Or, a color guide (which is also a photocopy, just with color notes.). That sort of thing. Items used in the process of creating the artwork that aren't the hand rendered artwork itself.

noted

Originally Posted by bronty

In the pure illustration market there's very little hybrid work that Im aware of. With comics and so on yeah some guys are doing things like making a 1/1 print and then (supposedly ) destroying their digital file thus creating a "one of a kind original." In other words they are trying to make a physical manifestation of the digital file "rare" and hoping that will bridge the problem collectors have with digital material. However in my view and in the view of many others Ive spoken with about it, it's frankly just a glorified print, and Id never pay "original" prices for something whose physical creation was simply as a result of pressing "print" on someone's computer. At low price levels, sure, whatever, no harm no foul.

I totally agree. While I appreciate the art form of digital era and all the time and effort the artists put into their work, as a collector, I don’t care much for prints. It does not matter to me if the prints are signed/numbered or even if the original file was destroyed and there is only one print in existence. It is still not the same. With today's technology, a print can be copied and reprinted to make additional high quality prints, maybe not quite the quality of the original, but close enough. So what in fact are print collectors collecting? Rarity, numbers, a signature? The tangible remnants of the artist's strokes were left on the artist's wacom tablet (or whatever illustration tool they use). To me, the best part of art, other than the message, is the tangible labor that can be seen. You can see the pencilings and erasures which give you a glimps of the artists thought process. The lines and pattern of inking which allows you to see their methodical process; do they ink in straight lines, in curved lines, in large blotchy swipes of a brush, or in total randomness? The same goes for paint strokes. While my eye isn’t quite this keen yet, I'm fairly certain that a keener eye can even tell if the artist was left handed or right handed. All of that is lost with digital art.

In regards to the prices/value, I can't comprehend why people pay hundreds and even thousands of dollars for a print. To me an original, stand alone piece of art and a limited print aren’t in the same league.

With all that said, I am NOT discounting digital art or the artist who practice it. I feel that digital art is a respectable form of art and it has a definite place within the art industry/community. It's just not my personal cup of tea.

[bronty]

Tokka - Oh you're being far too kind but thanks.

You're probably thinking of Earl Norem btw.

Playhouse - well said and I should have said that also. I certainly respect all of the work tha went into a digital print and the artist's talent. But I just don't want to collect that particular sort of thing

[Sofistocat]

I like the "fine art" debate and will offer this up because I think this could be one of those "bridging the gap" pieces:

This is one of the pages I came across while going through Mark Martin's OA collection. It's from 1989 and measures 16" x 12". Mark pencilled it and Talbot inked it, then toned a xerox on thin DuoShade paper. It was published in a indy ashcan called "Chicken Slacks", the lettering is the lyrics to a "They Might Be Giants" song. I really dig it because it's different than what both were into at the time... Thay both have told me they had alot of fun working on this. Eric owns the toned page and Mark owns the penned and inked page.

Pen and Ink:


Tones:


I consider Pen and Ink original art comic pages to be 100% fine art, by definition. To see things like the ASM 328 cover OA go for 620K+ and similar pages/prices would tell me that there is a place for comic art and the like in "Fine Art" catagories and galleries. Granted it's a much smaller market with a much smaller market base, comic art still finds it's way to the premier auction houses. Though it may not reside in a museum b/w the artist's Bronty mentioned, sitting next to such artists in the auction house may be considered the same thing, no?

I find that the artist's style at the time the page was created depicts what they were trying to say. Talbot's style for example in the earlier years says, to me anyway, a much different story to me than his recent work. I think the progression of artistic style by the artist shows what they were trying to say.

Granted it's a ficticious piece of evidence, I think the scene from "Unbreakable" where SLJ is explaing/condeming the father for wanting to buy a page for his kid is a great example of the rationalization that comic OA is "Fine Art"

I'm probably jumping in the Kool-Aid not knowing the flavor, but I'm on break and there's my 2 cents...

[Plasticplayhouse]

^^sofistocat, that is a great looking piece. it's really cool to see eric's inks on mark's work. that's not a frequently seen combo.

i personally really dig the toner pages. they may not hold the original lines, but the tones are all original and to me, it's still in the realm of OA because of it.

Originally Posted by ComicAddict

I picked up a couple of Ross' pages as well. I had been wanting a page by him for a while so I am very pleased to add these to the collection.

Spoiler:

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Issue 29 Page 3
http://imageshack.com/a/img844/3557/1q9x.jpg
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Issue 31 Page 6
http://imageshack.com/a/img853/3306/lcnb.jpg

nice grab CA!

[Sofistocat]

Originally Posted by Plasticplayhouse

^^sofistocat, that is a great looking piece. it's really cool to see eric's inks on mark's work. that's not a frequently seen combo.

From what they both said: This was done because at the time, they were the only people who expressed an interest in TMBG and had just recently met. Comparitively, I think it could be said that this page is collaboratively comparable to the way E&L passed the first couple of TMNT books back and forth. I really find it to be one of those pieces that tells a great story...

[d_osborn]

Originally Posted by bronty

I sometimes hear comic fans talking about how comic art will be accepted by the fine art elite one day. Ie representation at the top galleries. Having one billionaire comment to another billionaire over champagne at a showing how much they like the work. A one man retrospective at MOMA. That sort of thing.

I know this is an extreme example, but it popped in my head...

http://www.moma.org/visit/calendar/exhibitions/313

[Sofistocat]

Originally Posted by d_osborn

I know this is an extreme example, but it popped in my head...

http://www.moma.org/visit/calendar/exhibitions/313

Gruff, so pissed I missed this...