Is it sacrilegious?

2 2

Three years ago I purchased a page from the Jae Lee run of Batman/Superman. Jae would do the pencils on board and then ink digitally so if you wanted an original art piece you were buying a pencil only. A couple of weeks ago I sent my page to Jae to have him ink it. You can see the beautiful results here: Inked page

When I told a couple of friends who are also OA collectors that I sent my page to Jae for this purpose they thought it was a bad idea. They felt that the piece should not be manipulated from what it was originally intended to be. They felt I should have him do the inking on a separate paper. I didn't like that idea for two reasons. First it would have cost me twice as much. Secondly it would have created a piece that had nothing to do with the initial creation of the comic.

My feeling is that the page was never meant to be published as a pencil so like a prelim it doesn't reflect the artists final vision. I got the original artist to do the inking and now the piece closely resembles what it was intended to be.

So my question is do you feel this piece is no longer a proper representation of the book? I would really like to hear opinions on this.

I think you should do what you want with your art.

As for your question, it is no longer an exact representation of the book...it is something other. Neither good nor bad in my opinion, but it is not the page from the book really anymore. It is something other. You will always have to explain what it is, that alone tells you it is not the printed page anymore. (Maybe type it out and put it with the piece, behind it if in a portfolio.

But as a pencil it wasn't a printed page anyway.

But the inks are not what was printed either. Its more like a page recreation. With the pencils no longer seen it has no connection to the published page. I am glad you like it but it might be hard to sell if you ever decide to part with it.

All of this simply plays to why I don't really go for any modern published art. The splitting of inks and pencils, or even just pencil and the rest done by computer, has really devalued, not just the monetary aspects for modern comic art, but even a lot of the aesthetic qualities it is supposed to have. What made published comic art so unique, was that it was a collaborative effort. That the whole was greater than the sum of the parts. The deconstruction of it over the last 20 years, has really lessened my enjoyment and interest in published modern comic art. It's why you'll rarely see anything published in my personal collection of it, post-1996.

All of this simply plays to why I don't really go for any modern published art. The splitting of inks and pencils, or even just pencil and the rest done by computer, has really devalued, not just the monetary aspects for modern comic art, but even a lot of the aesthetic qualities it is supposed to have. What made published comic art so unique, was that it was a collaborative effort. That the whole was greater than the sum of the parts. The deconstruction of it over the last 20 years, has really lessened my enjoyment and interest in published modern comic art. It's why you'll rarely see anything published in my personal collection of it, post-1996.

I argued similarly in another recent thread. The Modern OA product is inherently...less attractive by virtue of this deconstruction you describe (especially the lack of lettering on the board), and also the decompression in storytelling. Between the two, there is simply less going on and no context for you to put things in unless you are already intimately familiar with the storyline. Content is the great equalizer, though, and so of course a page from a memorable and well-drawn Modern storyline is going to be more valuable and appealing than some schlocky filler page from the mid-1990s with lettering on the board.

Anyway, as it regards the OP's question, let's be frank: there are thousands of new OA pages created every month, spread across far more titles than there were during most of the pre-1996 "vintage" era, reaching a smaller readership than in earlier times (at least smaller per issue/title). As such, there is really only a minuscule # of truly memorable/important/meaningful modern OA pages. So, if someone wants Jae Lee to ink one of his countless penciled pages, the bottom line is who is really going to give a...hoot. All these guys create hundreds/thousands of pages of art. They may be nice, but, unlike in the vintage era, none of the pages are likely to be particularly memorable to the extent that anyone is going to be upset because it no longer exists in its original form. I say, no sacrilege here, knock yourself out - the inked page looks great/better and nobody's going to miss not having the original penciled version around.

yes, now it's a recreation commission over the original.

I don't think it is sacrilegious. I think it's a crime against original art collecting!

I'm not saying this because I am one of the 2 friends you consulted who thought it is a bad idea. Nor am I saying this because we have a friendly bet as to how many haters you will have. But I think it is a crime and you will go to original art hell!

May your grail be purchased by the Donnelly's so that it is forever out of your reach

now I need other haters to speak their mind. At least six! Please speak up now

Malvin

For the OP, I'm curious, what exactly did you ask Jae Lee to do?? The inked prelim (that's what I'll call it) looks very, very close to the published piece. Was that what you asked Jae Lee to do? I imagine he just lightboxed the published piece.

After 3 years, I'm surprised that Jae Lee would even want to revisit a piece and essentially "copy" the published piece. If he was of the mind of "re-imagining" the page and ink over the pencils without the intention of copying, that might have been more interesting.

I'm also wondering how people would compare this to Gerhard working on comiconxion's pieces. Noone seems to be upset if Gerhard works on other artist's convention sketches. So if Gerhard (instead of Jae Lee) went over Jae Lee's pencils, would the reaction be different ? Are prelims more sacred than convention sketches ? A lot of artists didn't even save their prelims, at least not the bulk of their prelims.

May your grail be purchased by the Donnelly's so that it is forever out of your reach

[font:Book Antiqua]Bwa hahahahahaa...![/font]

I don't think it is sacrilegious. I think it's a crime against original art collecting!

 

I'm not saying this because I am one of the 2 friends you consulted who thought it is a bad idea. Nor am I saying this because we have a friendly bet as to how many haters you will have. But I think it is a crime and you will go to original art hell!

 

May your grail be purchased by the Donnelly's so that it is forever out of your reach

 

now I need other haters to speak their mind. At least six! Please speak up now

 

 

Malvin

We need to do everything we can to make sure "Backstabbin Malvin" looses this bet. No more haters! Only positive feedback. And also I hear Malvin hates Kirby and says Frazetta is overrated!

I'm definitely against it.

I think the original art should remain as it was to produce the comic.

After inking it is no longer the page used to create the comic. It is a very similar page, but not the page

For the OP, I'm curious, what exactly did you ask Jae Lee to do?? The inked prelim (that's what I'll call it) looks very, very close to the published piece. Was that what you asked Jae Lee to do? I imagine he just lightboxed the published piece.

 

After 3 years, I'm surprised that Jae Lee would even want to revisit a piece and essentially "copy" the published piece. If he was of the mind of "re-imagining" the page and ink over the pencils without the intention of copying, that might have been more interesting.

 

I'm also wondering how people would compare this to Gerhard working on comiconxion's pieces. Noone seems to be upset if Gerhard works on other artist's convention sketches. So if Gerhard (instead of Jae Lee) went over Jae Lee's pencils, would the reaction be different ? Are prelims more sacred than convention sketches ? A lot of artists didn't even save their prelims, at least not the bulk of their prelims.

 

 

 

 

 

I simply asked if he would ink it. His reply was "Yup! I'll ink it up right away. Inking that piece will be fun." I gave him no direction and he was enthusiastic about it.

For the OP, I'm curious, what exactly did you ask Jae Lee to do?? The inked prelim (that's what I'll call it) looks very, very close to the published piece. Was that what you asked Jae Lee to do? I imagine he just lightboxed the published piece.

 

After 3 years, I'm surprised that Jae Lee would even want to revisit a piece and essentially "copy" the published piece. If he was of the mind of "re-imagining" the page and ink over the pencils without the intention of copying, that might have been more interesting.

 

I'm also wondering how people would compare this to Gerhard working on comiconxion's pieces. Noone seems to be upset if Gerhard works on other artist's convention sketches. So if Gerhard (instead of Jae Lee) went over Jae Lee's pencils, would the reaction be different ? Are prelims more sacred than convention sketches ? A lot of artists didn't even save their prelims, at least not the bulk of their prelims.

I think you misunderstood what happened. The comic was published direct form tight pencils (that were digitally inked by Jae Lee for publication). Mike bought the pencils, then had Jae Lee physically inked it forever. It was not a "prelim" but rather the only original art to the published page.

Malvin

I probably would have asked him to light box and ink for two reasons - then you haven't changed what many would consider an original published piece, and you could easily compare the two side by side.

I think you misunderstood what happened. The comic was published direct form tight pencils (that were digitally inked by Jae Lee for publication). Mike bought the pencils, then had Jae Lee physically inked it forever. It was not a "prelim" but rather the only original art to the published page.

 

Malvin

As far as I'm concerned, the pencils are prelims. The digital art was published directly, not the pencils.

Does it matter how tight the pencils were? What if they were loose pencils? At the most, I might say these pencils are the "original pencils". I guess that's why it's sacrilegious.

There's plenty of discussion about how the process of getting the art to the printers is changing the hobby. This is another point of discussion.

What was once used to create the book no longer exits anymore and can never be recovered.

I think you misunderstood what happened. The comic was published direct form tight pencils (that were digitally inked by Jae Lee for publication). Mike bought the pencils, then had Jae Lee physically inked it forever. It was not a "prelim" but rather the only original art to the published page.

 

Malvin

 

As far as I'm concerned, the pencils are prelims. The digital art was published directly, not the pencils.

 

Does it matter how tight the pencils were? What if they were loose pencils? At the most, I might say these pencils are the "original pencils". I guess that's why it's sacrilegious.

 

There's plenty of discussion about how the process of getting the art to the printers is changing the hobby. This is another point of discussion.

 

I'm having trouble fathoming why you would consider the pencils in this sort of situation a prelim work.

How do you get there? Are you saying all pencils are prelims and only inked pieces are not?

In my opinion no matter how great the job, it is altered original art. It ruins the value in my opinion even if it looks great. It is not akin to restoration or cleaning which is generally preserving the art. It is literally an unoriginal alteration. The value to me is now a little more than an equivalent commission piece would be. More because the piece was published but less than the unaltered original.

As was previously stated, if you like it and never intend to sell it then bravo. If you do sell at some point, you will be stuck explaining and expect a significant monetary loss.

In my opinion no matter how great the job, it is altered original art. It ruins the value in my opinion even if it looks great. It is not akin to restoration or cleaning which is generally preserving the art. It is literally an unoriginal alteration. The value to me is now a little more than an equivalent commission piece would be. More because the piece was published but less than the unaltered original.

 

As was previously stated, if you like it and never intend to sell it then bravo. If you do sell at some point, you will be stuck explaining and expect a significant monetary loss.

 

I wonder if the younger generation of buyers feel that way about what I did. There are artist who are not using paper at all to create their art. They are selling one of a kind prints of their pages with signature. Millennials are buying them. What I have is far more than that. I now have the only truly inked Batman/Superman page there is and can sell it as such. Do you really think I won't find a buyer in the future? The medium is changing dramatically. If I ever decide to sell I don't think I'll have any problems. There is no one way of making comics any more. The purists are being replaced with a generation far more flexible.