|
|
Post by MDG on Apr 11, 2020 6:00:53 GMT -5
There was a time where a lot of people had this poster:  I don't think this means there were a lot of Milt Glaser fans. The same thing with Ross--you can't separate his commercial popularity from the already-popular subjects of his work. That is, Target can sell a Ross print of Batman, but essentially they're selling a picture of Batman. This is different the, say, Chris Cooper or Mark Ryden where the artist is the main selling point, not the subject. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Apr 11, 2020 7:05:21 GMT -5
Not any work of art with Batman as the subject will sell. For example, I seriously doubt you would get much movement on a Moldoff Batman print sold in your retailer example, but Ross? His work is on a level that commands attention.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,222 
|
Post by Confessor on Apr 11, 2020 8:10:04 GMT -5
The same thing with Ross-- you can't separate his commercial popularity from the already-popular subjects of his work. That is, Target can sell a Ross print of Batman, but essentially they're selling a picture of Batman. This is different the, say, Chris Cooper or Mark Ryden where the artist is the main selling point, not the subject. Exactly! Nobody who isn't already a fan of comics -- and by "comics" I mean all comic-related media -- is gonna buy an Alex Ross print. Even then, for most buyers, it will be the superhero/fantasy-related subject matter that sells his art first and foremost because that's all he draws. Ross's artistic talents do play a role, of course, but I reckon a lot of people who would self-identify as comic readers wouldn't even know who he is. A forum like this, where so many of us are knowledgable about the minutia of various comic books, isn't really representative of the majority of comic fans who might like the Marvel movies and buy the odd graphic novel from Barnes & Noble or Amazon. Nobody outside of a small niche of dedicated, hardcore comic nerds is buying Alex Ross prints because it's Alex Ross. Ross's art has never sold beyond its intended audience of superhero fans -- especially not back in the 1990s, which was the original claim. EDIT: Actually, on a related note, I've just remembered that I knew this girl about 10 years ago and one evening I managed to get invited back to her house.  Anyway, in her living room was a massive wall-hanging of Wonder Woman, as drawn by George Perez. I clocked it immediately and exclaimed, "oh wow, that's by George Perez, isn't it?" She looked at me blankly and said, "Ummm...I dunno. Who's that?" Turns out she bought it because she used to like watching the old Wonder Woman TV series with Lynda Carter when she was a little girl, and because she thought it made a cool feminist statement. It's the same thing with Alex Ross's art; the vast majority of people who might buy it do so for the character it depicts and couldn't care less who the artist is. |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Apr 11, 2020 8:18:08 GMT -5
This is the context in which Ross' name was originally invoked here: For me, I am an art lover. If a story has great art and a meh story, I can still deal with it because it is a visual medium. I have a hard time with a crappily drawn story that is good or even great. Those seem rare but hey, the 90's may have some I don't know about because the art across the board was terrific. Pick any era and I can show you something great artistically that would get you intrigued. 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's. The 90's? I have yet to see something that blow me away or that I would even consider nice enough to display on a wall or share with someone. If you can convince me otherwise with something, do it. Otherwise, 90's comics will forever be a meh world for me and one I just prefer not to visit. Not a Lee fan, not a Liefeld fan and their styles seemed to dominate and were emulated and I disliked all of it. Surely Ross' art is "nice enough to display on a wall or share with someone," even if it doesn't move units in the mainstream simply based on his name. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,222
|
Post by Confessor on Apr 11, 2020 8:35:21 GMT -5
Surely Ross' art is "nice enough to display on a wall or share with someone," even if it doesn't move units in the mainstream simply based on his name. Oh, absolutely. Ross's art is gorgeous. But the conversation has moved on since then.  |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Apr 11, 2020 13:54:05 GMT -5
Ross's art has never sold beyond its intended audience of superhero fans -- especially not back in the 1990s, which was the original claim. All you are saying is the equivalent of "nuh-uh", which is not supported by facts. Just two pages back, mrp posted the following in regards to the Marvelocity exhibit: Which is what I witnessed long before the publication of the book or its museum showing: there are many people who are not comic book fans but they know and love Ross' superhero--and for that matter, non-comic work. Moreover, it is not often "comic book artists" (or whatever term one would try to pin on Ross) appear on the most mainstream of talk shows if they are not known in some way beyond the limited readership of comics. You can argue (or whatever else) as much as you choose to, but I can counter as many personal stories as anyone else about this matter, and again, evidence of Ross and his work being known beyond comic fans has already been provided. Oh, then there's that Academy Award business. No one is going to sell the idea that those who run the AMPAS just stumbled over Ross by accident. He was commissioned to create the official poster for the 74th annual awards because he is a known artist. In 2015, of all artists, he was hired by Apple Corps to paint the first licensed Beatles art in more than 30 years; those who handle the marketing of a group still widely considered the most important/popular in history did not need to dig up some "unknown" artist for such a project. Ross was commissioned for a reason: he is known, and that awareness came from that which put him on the map in the first place. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,222
|
Post by Confessor on Apr 11, 2020 16:07:55 GMT -5
Ross's art has never sold beyond its intended audience of superhero fans -- especially not back in the 1990s, which was the original claim. All you are saying is the equivalent of "nuh-uh", which is not supported by facts. Just two pages back, mrp posted the following in regards to the Marvelocity exhibit: Which is what I witnessed long before the publication of the book or its museum showing: there are many people who are not comic book fans but they know and love Ross' superhero--and for that matter, non-comic work. Moreover, it is not often "comic book artists" (or whatever term one would try to pin on Ross) appear on the most mainstream of talk shows if they are not known in some way beyond the limited readership of comics. You can argue (or whatever else) as much as you choose to, but I can counter as many personal stories as anyone else about this matter, and again, evidence of Ross and his work being known beyond comic fans has already been provided. Oh, then there's that Academy Award business. No one is going to sell the idea that those who run the AMPAS just stumbled over Ross by accident. He was commissioned to create the official poster for the 74th annual awards because he is a known artist. In 2015, of all artists, he was hired by Apple Corps to paint the first licensed Beatles art in more than 30 years; those who handle the marketing of a group still widely considered the most important/popular in history did not need to dig up some "unknown" artist for such a project. Ross was commissioned for a reason: he is known, and that awareness came from that which put him on the map in the first place. None of which proves that Ross was selling framed art prints of his work beyond superhero fans in the 1990s, which is what you claimed. Stop trying to move the goal posts. Stick to your guns. I'm still waiting for you to produce some reliable third-party proof that supports your claim. And clearly I'm not the only forum member who is unconvinced. You're the one making this claim; the burden of proof is on you. Otherwise I'm calling bullshit, I'm afraid. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Apr 11, 2020 16:32:42 GMT -5
Confessor, I'm still waiting for you to do more than offer:
You just jumped in here and posted that as if its a fact. It is not by any stretch of the imagination. Again I ask, what are you basing that on? This thread has already provided enough hard evidence to show Ross' work' including his 90s work--which made him famous--was known and (obviously bought) beyond comic fans. Not that it needed repeating, but his prints were also sold at the Warner Brothers Studio Store in the 90s, and no, try as you might, you're not going to post some reaching nonsense suggesting anyone who bought it there had to be comic fans, as WB and its properties cover a wide customer base of nearly every demographic. Unless you were there to ask everyone who bought a Ross print whether they had an interest in comics (and they confirmed it), I will go ahead and call that more unsubstantiated crap, much like that all too conveniently posted Perez story.
All you're doing is grinding your axe about message (and messenger) for whatever reason, which is a trolling, steaming pile of it having no place in this or any thread.
But please, continue pretending Ross and his work is only known to comic fans, meanwhile, someone will have to go back in time and erase his work sold to John and Jane Q. Public, his exhibits, talk show appearance, and while that time traveler is at it, erase the reason Apple Corps and AMPAS even knew who Ross was. The traveler would need to really scrub that last part, as its the only way anyone can continue to lie and pretend no one knew of Ross outside of comic fans, or I imagine trying to argue that the Academy members and everyone else who commissioned his work just had to be comic fans to know the man and his work.
Not happening.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,222
|
Post by Confessor on Apr 11, 2020 16:34:23 GMT -5
Confessor, I'm still waiting for you to do more than offer: You just jumped in here and posted that as if its a fact. It is not by any stretch of the imagination. Again I ask, what are you basing that on? This thread has already provided enough hard evidence to show Ross' work' including his 90s work--which made him famous--was known and (obviously bought) beyond comic fans. Not that it needed repeating, but his prints were also sold at the Warner Brothers Studio Store in the 90s, and no, try as you might, you're not going to post some reaching nonsense suggesting anyone who bought it there had to be comic fans, as WB and its properties cover a wide customer base of nearly every demographic. Unless you were there to ask everyone who bought a Ross print whether they had an interest in comics (and they confirmed it), I will go ahead and call that more unsubstantiated crap, much like that all too conveniently posted Perez story. All you're doing is grinding your axe about message (and messenger) for whatever reason, which is a trolling, steaming pile of it having no place in this or any thread. But please, continue pretending Ross and his work is only known to comic fans, meanwhile, someone will have to go back in time and erase his work sold to John and Jane Q. Public, his exhibits, talk show appearance, and while that time traveler it at it, erase the reason Apple Corps and AMPAS even knew who Ross was. The traveler would need to really scrub that last part, as its the only way anyone can continue to lie and pretend no one knew of Ross outside of comic fans, or I imagine trying to argue that the Academy members and everyone else who commissioned his work just had to be comic fans to know the man and his work. The burden of proof is on you. If I'm as wrong as you think, finding proper evidence to support your claim shouldn't be hard. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Apr 11, 2020 16:39:31 GMT -5
**A-HEM!!!**
Disagreements are fine, but let’s keep the tone civil.
Scatological terms and accusations of ill-intent exceed the limits of proper discourse.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Apr 11, 2020 16:40:27 GMT -5
As I thought. Nothing and still ignoring posted evidence. Your statement:
Is not free from its own need for justification. Just like I can demand you prove that convenient Perez story.
EDIT: Understood, Roquefort Raider.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,222
|
Post by Confessor on Apr 11, 2020 16:50:31 GMT -5
 Again you're unable to provide proof for your outlandish statement. This is a waste of my time, so best to leave it here. I think we can all draw our own conclusion from the lack of evidence. |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Apr 11, 2020 17:06:22 GMT -5
I love Alex Ross, but to say he's a household name is silly. Has he ever done/sold a painting that was not of a trademarked property? I just looked on his site.. he's got Marvel stuff, some Star Wars, Astro City, and some Universal Monster stuff, nothing original.
I can definitely see a casual comic fan picking up an Alex Ross print to hang up because it's a great painting of their favorite hero, but to say he's a known person outside comic fandom is silly.
Even his wikipedia bio calls him a 'comic artist'.
|
|
|
|
Post by electricmastro on Apr 11, 2020 17:16:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by jason on Apr 11, 2020 17:39:02 GMT -5
It didnt help that comics were ever increasing in prices, and I dont just mean for the special covers, they went from a dollar in 1990 up to $2.50 (or sometimes more) by 1999, therefore pricing it out of the way out of casuals or kids. Somewhat ironically, those same issues would more often than not wind up in dollar bins or even quarter bins only a couple of years later.
|
|
Anyway, in her living room was a massive wall-hanging of Wonder Woman, as drawn by George Perez. I clocked it immediately and exclaimed, "oh wow, that's by George Perez, isn't it?" She looked at me blankly and said, "Ummm...I dunno. Who's that?" Turns out she bought it because she used to like watching the old Wonder Woman TV series with Lynda Carter when she was a little girl, and because she thought it made a cool feminist statement. It's the same thing with Alex Ross's art; the vast majority of people who might buy it do so for the character it depicts and couldn't care less who the artist is.
