Suggested Comic Art Pages for the Gallery

39 replies [Last post]
Tom Kraft
Tom Kraft's picture
Offline
Joined: June 16, 2010

Put your suggestions for pages of art to add here.

Anonymous
Anonymous's picture
Not much

Here's a cover which is at Heritage.
http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=816&lotNo=2428#Photo

Krackles
Krackles's picture
Offline
Joined: September 19, 2010
Herb medecine…

Hey Pat, you must have mistaken Wik with WhatifTrimpe!

Tom Kraft
Tom Kraft's picture
Offline
Joined: June 16, 2010
Nothing by John Severin

Sorry Patrick. I checked the archive of almost 2,000 pages with comics.org and unfortunately there is nothing from John available to post...

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
John Severin

Tom, Anything inked by Severin you could add today?

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
Take this job and shove it.

Hans, Leiber makes it clear Kirby was angry. Why was he angry? Makes me think of something John Buscema said.

JOHN BUSCEMA: Yes. We worked on the plot, Stan and I. I was very, very excited about doing the book. I thought, "This is one job I'm going to get away from the Kirby layouts. I'm going to try something different," which I did. I think it had a different look about it from the previous stuff I'd been doing. People were congratulating me on this particular issue. Stan tore the book to pieces! He started with the first page: "Well, okay, not bad." On and on and on. Every second page he ripped to shreds. "This is not good, this should be done this way..." I walked out of that damn office of his; I didn't know which way was up or down. I was completely demoralized. I walked into John Romita's office; John looked at me and saw that I was very upset. I said, "John, how the hell do you do comics?"

Maybe seven or eight years had gone by; I get a call from Stan one morning. We usually exchanged pleasantries - Stan said something; I think he called me an SOB or something (laughter) - and I said, "What's up, Stan? What'd I do wrong?" He said, "John, do you remember that book we worked on, the Silver Surfer and Thor book?" I remembered it very well. "John, that was the greatest thing you've ever done, the greatest comic ever done, the greatest thing you and I ever turned out!" Well, I thought he was pulling my leg, and I didn't say a word.

Stan says, "Johnny, you still there?" I said, "Stan, are you kidding? Are you serious?" He said, "No John, really, seriously." Well, I tried to refresh his memory. He said, "I don't remember ever saying anything like that. I don't remember ever telling you that; the book is beautiful, how could I possibly...?"

Well, I tell this to many, many people. How many guys have been destroyed by an editor - some editor who just happened to get up on the wrong side of the bed, and does this to some guy who's put everything into his job? I know it happened to Don Heck. I remember Don coming to me and saying, "John, help me. I don't know what the hell to do anymore."

Anonymous
Anonymous's picture
Re: It depends on how you define a lot

I can't argue that Ditko is consistent on the subject of returns because he's not. In my opinion, his writings are often contradictory, rambling, angry, and incoherent.

I too have heard Ditko owns two ASM stories: issue #5 and #38. I wouldn't call that a lot in the larger scheme of things considering most of the rest of his pages appear to be stolen.

As far as Jack's torn pages, it may have been act of frustration. But obviously Jack didn't value them enough to keep them. They were obviously important enough to Leiber. That was my point. At a later time when he fully realized the demand for his originals, Jack may have acted differently and saved them.

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
It depends on how you define a lot

I've got Ditko's address myself because someone posted a personal letter from Ditko on a blog and Ditko's address was on it. I won't give the exact address here, but he lives on West 51st Street.
Ditko has at least two complete issues. Theakston says the rest of his pages were stolen by a Marvel editor from the Marvel break area where Jim Shooter left a three foot high pile of key Silver Age art next to the elevator.
The story of Ditko cutting up his art was taken apart by Bob Heer a couple of years ago. As Bob pointed out Greg never saw Ditko cut up any art. Greg saw a page of art leaning against a wall with cut marks on it, and assumed Ditko had cut it, but he never saw Ditko cut the page, and as Bob explains it's more likely Ditko had taken how a page which had been cut up by the production department.
Greg says when he told Ditko he would buy him a cutting board, Ditko said nothing, but instead drew back curtain revealing shelves stacked neatly with original art.
Your quote:
"Steve Ditko's 32-Page Package #5 written in 2000 where Ditko defends his Spider-Man co-creator credit, he laments that much of his original artwork from his days at Marvel was not returned to him."
confirms Ditko did want his art back and contradicts him being disinterested in the art.
Ditko saying he has no claim on the Spider-Man character is a totally different issue.
Kirby tore the Hulk pages in half, out of tremendous frustration, not because he didn't value them. Kirby saved many pieces of original art, and tried during the '60s to get his art back, particularly a stack of rejected pages Marvel used as tests for inkers and writers. Since those pages were rejected Kirby wasn't paid for them, and he felt they should be returned to him. Leiber fishing the torn pages out of the trash is another indication the pages were seen as valuable.
It wasn't only Kirby who saved art when he could, other artists did as well. Hal Foster saved hundreds of his originals. Harold Gray saved almost every piece of original art from Little Orphan Annie, Frank Frazetta always tried to retain his originals. Wally Wood kept samples of his work going back to his childhood. Jim Steranko was able to get all his Marvel originals back in the '60s.

Hans Kosenkranius
Hans Kosenkranius's picture
Offline
Joined: October 26, 2011
Re: Untrue

Actually, I'd say that 'aha' moment occurred when fandom flourished and originals began showing up for sale at the conventions. Then the art became viewed as a sellable commodity. Until then, I don't think the level of concern was very high among many artists about the disposition of their art.

Case in point, Larry Leiber in his recent Marvel deposition said he witnessed Kirby tear up a complete Hulk story and toss it in the garbage can right in front of him at the Marvel offices in the 1960's. Leiber quickly fished it out and kept it. It apparently had no value to Kirby but to Leiber that story had great value. My point is if Kirby knew that his art had any extrinsic value at all at the time, he probably wouldn't have done that.

Hans Kosenkranius
Hans Kosenkranius's picture
Offline
Joined: October 26, 2011
Re: Ditko did get Spider-Man art back - Not!

"Ditko has a lot of Spider-Man art, he just won't sell any of it."

Untrue. In Steve Ditko's 32-Page Package #5 written in 2000 where Ditko defends his Spider-Man co-creator credit, he laments that much of his original artwork from his days at Marvel was not returned to him. What's really true is that not a single ASM pg. ever offered on the open market has ever originated from Steve.

" I'd have to see a quote or article by Ditko before I believed anyone tried to return artwork to him, and he turned it down."

Well...my fan-boy friend Sam in Florida wrote to Ditko a few years ago and tried to return a page of ASM art as a gesture of goodwill. Steve refused stating it's Marvel's property. Ditko has consistently stated he has no legal claim to the character and does not assert one. He only desires proper recognition as co-creator.

It's well documented that Greg Theakston witnessed Ditko using his original art as a cutting board while visiting his studio. Would someone who routinely does that care about the return of his originals?

John S.
John S.'s picture
Offline
Joined: June 11, 2011
Wow, no corruption there, huh?

Makes me glad I'm not a Real Frantic One anymore. Or, as they say in the funny books, "Nuff said, True Believers!"

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.

It should be pretty easy to identify the mystery editor in the following.
http://gregtheakstonteasemag.blogspot.com/2011/06/autobiography-pt-39.html
Who but Lee has enough money to blow off a minimum of one, and probably many millions of dollars, and not even use the donation as a take a tax deduction?
AF #15 along with FF #1-2, Hulk #1-2. and JIM #83 were already missing from the Marvel warehouse when Irene Vartanoff did her inventory.

John S.
John S.'s picture
Offline
Joined: June 11, 2011
So...

...the anonymous donor was probably Stan Lee. And if that quote really was from Ditko, he was clearly wrong, because the "crusade" to have Kirby's art returned wasn't just about Jack; it was, by extension, about Jack, Ditko and all the rest of the artists whose work Marvel had not returned. Because, contrary to what he (supposedly) said, the fans involved WERE interested in the principle that all artists' pages be returned.

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
I'll take the word of Mr. Anonymous

It doesn't sound like something Ditko would say, but he put his name to this.

Ditko: "There was a fan crusade in 1986 for the return of Jack Kirby’s art pages being held by Marvel Comics. The fans involved were not interested in the principle that all artists’ pages held by all comic book companies, and all pages held by others not sanctioned by the artist, must be returned to the artist.
That crusade was for only a very special interest, privilege, for only one artist—Kirby—having a moral, legal, right to his art pages held by Marvel, so all other artist’s pages, in effect, “legally”, “rightfully”, belonged to whoever had or could get them, an idea which is believed and practiced today. But it’s an either/or: Either a valid principle for all or anything goes. "

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
Ditko did get Spider-Man art back from Marvel

Ditko has a lot of Spider-Man art, he just won't sell any of it. Since he inked all those pages he didn't have to split issues with the inkers as we see in the Kirby inventory. I'd have to see a quote or article by Ditko before I believed anyone tried to return artwork to him, and he turned it down. He absolutely is on record as saying he objected to the singular effort made by fandom urging Marvel to return Kirby's art, but that was because he felt all the artists should get the same support Kirby was getting. Ditko hasn't been to a convention since the early '60s so I'm not inclined to buy into the idea someone knocked on his door and tried to return Spider-Man pages and was told by Ditko he didn't want them.
Recently there was a similar story reported by Sarah Dukes who accepted the donation of Ditko's AF #15 pages for the Library of Congress. Dukes said an anonymous man donated the pages with the understanding he had more pages of similar historic value. Because the donation was anonymous, and the man turned down an appraisal the donation could not be used a tax deduction. That's at least a one million dollar collection of pages, and if (say) Lucas and Spielberg both wanted those pages the sky is the limit on their value. The donor also said he cleared the donation with Ditko who said something like "I don't care what you do with them."
What is odd is the LOC took the donor at his word, without seeking to confirm it by speaking to Ditko. That's pretty incredible if you ask me. No one knows what Ditko said, or if he was even consulted.
Here is a direct quote from an article Ditko wrote about a year ago.
Ditko: "There was a fan crusade in 1986 for the return of Jack Kirby’s art pages being held by Marvel Comics. The fans involved were not interested in the principle that all artists’ pages held by all comic book companies, and all pages held by others not sanctioned by the artist, must be returned to the artist.
That crusade was for only a very special interest, privilege, for only one artist—Kirby—having a moral, legal, right to his art pages held by Marvel, so all other artist’s pages, in effect, “legally”, “rightfully”, belonged to whoever had or could get them, an idea which is believed and practiced today. But it’s an either/or: Either a valid principle for all or anything goes. "

John S.
John S.'s picture
Offline
Joined: June 11, 2011
Re: It's Obvious

That may have been Steve Ditko's feeling, but it wasn't Kirby's. And let me ask you this: If you had been in Kirby's shoes and the same things that were done to him had been done to YOU, how do you think you'd feel?

John S.
John S.'s picture
Offline
Joined: June 11, 2011
Untrue

Many ARTISTS (like Jack Kirby) gave a shit about the art, regardless of its perceived monetary value at any given time. Kirby almost always wanted his originals back. The reason he, and others, didn't get their pages back in the sixties was because they COULDN'T. Just because Stan Lee (or whoevever) recognized the potential monetary value of those pages before most other people, did that give him a right to STEAL them? Of course not. So it's not a matter of pinpointing when that exact "aha" moment was. But if you insist on establishing imaginary dates, then I'd say it was in the late sixties to early seventies when people like Neal Adams finally started standing up for the rights of artists in no uncertain terms. In fact, the original art began to be returned to the artists in the early seventies, so at that point, the companies agreed that the art was the property of the artists, not the companies. Therefore, all the art that Marvel had in its inventory at that time should have been returned -- and it wasn't. So Marvel as a company, and the thieves it employed, were clearly in the wrong. And this is further proven by the fact that, as Patrick points out, the most valuable of all of Kirby's F.F. pages were strangely "missing" and not returned. What's your justification for that? I guess someone in the company came to that little "aha" moment a bit before the all-important inventory was taken, huh? Funny how that worked out.

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
Inventory of the art returned to Kirby

When Marvel sued the Kirby heirs recently one of the pieces of evidence which came out during discovery was the complete inventory of art returned to Kirby.
The document was posted at the Justia legal blog, and reposted here:
http://ohdannyboy.blogspot.com/2011/04/marvel-worldwide-inc-et-al-v-kirb...
Also he got nothing from FF #s 44,46,48,49,50, 52-62.
So Kirby got almost nothing back from what are considered the peak years of the FF, and if pages of those issues are circulating they were almost certainly stolen.

Hans Kosenkranius
Hans Kosenkranius's picture
Offline
Joined: October 26, 2011
It's Obvious

The reason Ditko never requested return of his art is because he felt it was the company's property not his own. I know he's stated this very fact to collectors' who have tried to return ASM pages to him.

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
What Kirby said

John Romita said in the '60s Kirby frequently said comic book art would one day be shown in museums. Romita says he and others scoffed at the idea.
Lee was using art to broker business deals in Japan in the '70s, so it's obvious right there the art had value.
There were comic book shows in New York in the early '60s where original art was for sale.
Lee removing art from the warehouse prior to 1986 is a nebulous area. By 1986 Marvel was returning the originals to the artists, so anything removed after that point was clearly stolen.

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
It's Obvious

The fact there are certain things which remain hidden are a clear indication the people who hold them know the pages were stolen. One really good example are Ditko Spider-Man pages. Dito penciled and inked all those pages, so all of them should have been returned to Ditko, and it is known Ditko refuses to sell any of the pages returned to him, so any page not in his possesion were stolen.
The inventory of original art in the Marvel warehouse was done by Irene Vartanoff. It was very carefully done.
A full report on her inventory, and a complete list of what she found can be seen here:
http://www.tcj.com/archive-viewer-issue-105/?pid=8471
http://www.tcj.com/archive-viewer-issue-105/?pid=8472
http://www.tcj.com/archive-viewer-issue-105/?pid=8473
http://www.tcj.com/archive-viewer-issue-105/?pid=8474
http://www.tcj.com/archive-viewer-issue-105/?pid=8475
http://www.tcj.com/archive-viewer-issue-105/?pid=8477
Vartanoff says Sol Brodsky told her not to show the list to Stan Lee. Brodsky was concerened if Lee saw it he would take artwork from the warehouse as he had done frequently in the past. Notice that at the time of her inventory someone had already selectively removed many key issues.
Fantastic Four 1,2, 48 (first Surfer)
Incredible Hulk 1,2
Journey into Mystery 83

Hans Kosenkranius
Hans Kosenkranius's picture
Offline
Joined: October 26, 2011
Not Really

If people were taking property that didn't belong to them esp. to profiteer from it, yes I definitely agree that is bad behavior. So I would characterize anyone who broke into the Marvel warehouse as a thief.

I would not equate thievery with an employee of the company who gifted art to a fan, used it as an incentive to further a business deal, or saved it from the dumpster. Two out of those three situations are helping to enhance the company's profitability keeping in mind that the art did legally belong to Marvel.

In addition, let's not apply present day morality to the past. For a long time nobody gave a s**t about the art because it had no value except as a part of a production process. It wasn't until it was valuable that suddenly everyone started to have a morality fit. Can anyone pinpoint exactly when that 'aha' moment was universally recognized?

John S.
John S.'s picture
Offline
Joined: June 11, 2011
Not Really

The bad guys are the ones who took pages that didn't belong to them. That's called "stealing". Any items that were on the inventory list from the early '80s belonged to the company -- and by extension, to Jack. If I walk off with hundreds (or thousands) of dollars worth of my employer's property, I hardly think they would view that as legitimate. And regardless of the legalities of it, there are also the "moralities" of it. EVERYONE knows that those pages should and truly do belong to the Kirby family -- and if not, why don't the theiving cowards who took them just tell us where the pages are?

Hans Kosenkranius
Hans Kosenkranius's picture
Offline
Joined: October 26, 2011
Protection Racket

No police report was ever filed. So we don't have a list of what's stolen, Patrick. Only an inventory list of what existed in the warehouse reportedly done in the early 80's. How accurate that inventory is, no one knows.

I'm sure some of Jack's art walked off. But under the work for hire system, it was legal property of the company. That issue wasn't properly settled until Jack's pages were returned to him in the late 80's. Before that point, if some editor wanted to gift a piece of artwork to a fan, send it to a company overseas, or use it to grease the wheels of a commercial deal that was all legit. Apparently, all those things happened.

My point is determining who exactly the "bad guys" are is a very slippery slope.

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
Protection Racket

What is sad is when you read about the material which was stolen, it's clear there is a network of people who "know," but they aren't naming names. It's all buddy-buddy, except for Jack and his family, they are the "bad guys."

John S.
John S.'s picture
Offline
Joined: June 11, 2011
Re: F.F. #50

No pages have ever surfaced because they were stolen sometime after they were inventoried. No one's ever going to come forward with any of those pages...unless they'd like to be arrested.

John S.
John S.'s picture
Offline
Joined: June 11, 2011
Thanks to all!

Keep 'em coming!!

Hans Kosenkranius
Hans Kosenkranius's picture
Offline
Joined: October 26, 2011
ff50

Although FF #50 was inventoried as complete and present in the Marvel warehouse in the early 1980's, no pages from the story have ever surfaced. This is also true of issues 48 and 49. We can only presume that they're still complete somewhere.

Tom Kraft
Tom Kraft's picture
Offline
Joined: June 16, 2010
Your wish is my command.

Yes I've been posting new pages from 2001, Machine Man and Avengers covers that I scanned last weekend thanks to Bechara Maalouf and Nostalgic Collectables.

Tom Kraft
Tom Kraft's picture
Offline
Joined: June 16, 2010
ff50

Would love to post pages from Fantastic Four, issue 50 but none of the dealers have pages from this issue and no private collectors have come forward to offer their art for scanning. If I ever get any they would surely be posted.

thestikman
thestikman's picture
Offline
Joined: November 1, 2011
please add Fantastic Four 50

Oh so many. But I'll be very specific today.
I'd like to see pages from Fantastic Four 50. for which, (thanks to the Jack Kirby Collector) we know that pencil stats exist.
This would be an excellent format (and forum) to compare hi-resolution pencils to inks on those wonderful pages.

the stiKman

Tom Kraft
Tom Kraft's picture
Offline
Joined: June 16, 2010
Mainly Eternals

You would think we'd archived a lot of Marvel 70s pages but this isn't the case. There are several remaining Eternals Annual pages from Erik's collection yet to post however that's about it for now. I'll post some more of these soon.

The comic con season is starting up this month with the Image Expo in San Francisco, WonderCon in Anaheim in March, the smaller comic con in NYC (with Mike Royer and Stan Le attending), the comic Art show in NJ in April and July's Comic Con International in San Diego. So lets hope the are more Marvel 70s pages to archive...

John S.
John S.'s picture
Offline
Joined: June 11, 2011
I'd like to see...

...more seventies Marvel!

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
Hold On To It

Don't get rid of your original copy just yet. I doubt the reprint will include the folded poster sized collage insert.

ken bastard
ken bastard's picture
Offline
Joined: September 22, 2010
Spirit world

Cool! My old Spirit World copy I've had all these years is pretty dog-eared!

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
Ken, Your Wish will be

Ken, Your Wish will be granted. DC is going to reprint both issues of Spirit World in an oversized hardcover format. It's already been solicited at Amazon.

ken bastard
ken bastard's picture
Offline
Joined: September 22, 2010
Pages

Would love to see the double page spread from "Toxl the World Killer". For some reason over the years this simple little story has been a kind of touchstone for me. So, I guess, I'd like to see anything else from the abandoned Spirit World #2 book. kb

patrick ford
patrick ford's picture
Offline
Joined: September 2, 2010
Personal Pieces

Tom sounds great. Looking forward to a "personal pieces" wing of the gallery which would contain Jack's paintings and collage work not associated with comic book titles.
I almost wish you hadn't mentioned the "several non-comic book" collages you have on hand, certainly something to look forward to.

Krackles
Krackles's picture
Offline
Joined: September 19, 2010
Pages corner

I'm all for Giacoia, Royer and Sinnott inked pages but I guess I would be more helpful if I were more specific.

I still find that the FF is far too much under represented, especially from issues 40 to 80, but I'm sure Tom did the best from what he has scanned already.

I would love some Eternals, more Demon and some DC oddballs, single issues that still need to be reprinted.
I particularly appreciated the Weird Mystery Tales that I discovered on Wik.

On the subject of pencils, I say : Stats or Photocopies. These are the next best thing.
Plus, what about sketches conventions, commissioned work, all the material that has been published by John Morrow in TJKC?
John, if you read this, let them go for Wik!

Tom Kraft
Tom Kraft's picture
Offline
Joined: June 16, 2010
Pages to add

I will use this section for request for additions. Patrick Ford made a recommendation to add the following:

1. Anything inked by Kirby
Don't have many more pages of early stuff inked by Jack, perhaps 2 or 3 more pages. Most inked by others.

2. Any unpublished material in pencil
Most of this is already added if its related to a comic book title.

3. Any colour work...have you been able to scan any of Jack's paintings yet?
Yes I have several color pieces but for the Gallery section it needs to be associated with a comic book title.

4. Any collage pages.
All that are associated with a comic book title are up already. We have several "non comic book" collages but I will need another section to WiK for Miscellaneous art such as collages, pencils etc. These would all need custom titles by piece and a tagging system for searching. This is one of the things yet to add but first I'd like to get a good representation of comic art by title.

5. Any pages inked by Royer
Have hundreds to add for this...

X