| Author |
|
Vinny Valenti
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 8045
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 9:39am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
"I'll admit there is something in me that hopes that, if I drew this, even in 1980, it would have been BETTER!"
--
I look at it from the other direction...if it's a forgery, it's one of the best forgeries I've ever seen!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132341
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 10:06am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
I look at it from the other direction...if it's a forgery, it's one of the best forgeries I've ever seen!•• IF it's a forgery, it certainly seems to have picked up on most of my quirks of the time. The haggard faces, for instance. But, well, I hope I would have positioned everything better. And not signed Xavier's chin!!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Eric Lund
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2074
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 10:21am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
It does not look like an original at all.. The line quality is really piss
poor for it to be either gentlemen, even from that time period
sketches that have been around from that period looked a lot better
and more professional.
It looks like a composite, hodge-podged together by a mimic.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jeremy Simington
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 10 April 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 687
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 10:33am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Sorry, I have nothing to add on the authenticity. However, I'm blown away that a piece valued at $17,000 has no provenance at all. I don't have any expertise in art buying or selling, but I have common sense and this seems bonkers. Why would anyone in their right mind pay $17,000 for a supposedly-rare, supposedly-Byrne/Austin piece with nothing but the word of the seller to go on? Is this typical?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Kevin Brown
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 31 May 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 8846
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 11:18am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
I just realized something in continuing to look for that piece online: Cyclops' visor is wrong. Granted, it's possible there was a request to make it look more like the visor from the early 60's as drawn by Kirby, but why?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Vinny Valenti
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 8045
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 11:37am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
As I mentioned upthread, JB has said in the past that he was slowly shrinking down Cyclops' visor from Dave Cockrum's redesign, eventually getting down to the original visor. He left before he got to that final step, but it does make a case of this being JB's work, depicting how Cyclops was going to look once he returned to the team.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6111
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 11:46am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
There isn't a trace of authenticity to those "Austin inks". Too many manglings-- e.g. Cyclops' fist. There is enough "authentic" sense to the underlying pencils that I can believe they're real-- but they were clearly fast enough to lead to unusual mistakes (like Colossus' arm being too thick for his bracelets - something I may never have seen in a Byrne drawing before).
If we know the date this had to come before, we also know the date it (supposedly) had to come after-- after the introduction of Wolverine's new costume. It's a pretty narrow window, which leads to my personal theory:
There's another anatomical error I've never seen in Byrne/Austin work: the way Wolverine's costume fails to wrap around his form, but actually cuts across from shoulder to the belt in a way that makes his chest look concave.
This and the fact that the Xavier was clearly added by the same inker who screwed up the shadows, Cyclops' hands, Storm's cape, Colossus' back foot and Angel's wings (etc.) --My theory is this quick John Byrne sketch was "dressed up" by the inker in Austin's style and the inker switched out Wolverine's costume, getting it wrong.
The fake-looking Austin signature matches the inks-- clearly wrong.
But one interesting detail is the old Cyclops visor which would be an unlikely choice for a Byrne forgery. But JB had spoken of a hope to one day get the old visor back. Was this sketch a chance to see that in context? Or was it a clever forgery, using that detail to add "authenticity"?
Edited by Mark Haslett on 18 July 2016 at 11:50am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132341
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 12:38pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
As I mentioned upthread, JB has said in the past that he was slowly shrinking down Cyclops' visor from Dave Cockrum's redesign, eventually getting down to the original visor. He left before he got to that final step, but it does make a case of this being JB's work, depicting how Cyclops was going to look once he returned to the team.••• You're cross-pollinating, Vinny. It was the buccaneer flares on his boots that I slowly shrank over months, at Roger Stern's suggestion. The visor I was going to change all in one go, with explanations included.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Kevin Brown
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 31 May 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 8846
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 1:27pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
JB, I'm not sure how you feel about it now, but I don't think you or Terry Austin touched that piece.
To me, it looks like a cobbled together piece of work made to look like you and Terry did it.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
marios ksidonas
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 25 March 2015
Location: Greece
Posts: 106
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 1:32pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
As you said before you are not looking for speculations BUT!....
As a fun of this period and having read and studied those byrne/austin issues my eye is well enough trained to identify if it is real or not!
1)when we see wolverine in that costume WE ALL KNOW that both artists were at their prime and not at their first steps where they tried to discover their styles.So this lame compotition which seems to me like a collage from poses from various issues and the place that they are placed is out of this world!
2)Terry is very well known for his excellancy and accurancy in his inks!Here i see crosshatching/feathering that Terry NEVER DID in pencils that John would NEVER DRAW!Look at the eyes!(in proffecor)The left is bigger than the right one and the outline is made by a 5year old kid .I refuse to judge the crosshatching inside them .....it is an offense to enyones intelligence!
3)Terry never drew parallel lines as shades but he used that acid paper which created that effect !Here they are drawn by hand!And even if Terry hadnt that material he would draw it in a better and more proffetional way!
If anyone is going to pay a single dollar fot this piece....what to say...
the flaws in compotition crosshatching feathering and consistency are way too obvious!
Edited by marios ksidonas on 18 July 2016 at 1:47pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
marios ksidonas
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 25 March 2015
Location: Greece
Posts: 106
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 1:35pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
did i mention that i used a magnifying glass to enlarge the artwork so i could study it better ???....yeah that crasy i was those times!!!!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Matt Hawes
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 16432
|
| Posted: 18 July 2016 at 1:39pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
The Xavier head looks nothing like JB's work. The inks are definitely not Terry Austin's inks. The Nightcrawler figure is certainly swiped from the other, actual JB drawing posted in this thread, and I suspect the artist (I refuse to entertain the belief it is actually JB's original art) lifted the other figures from various sources, possibly altering some of them slightly.
I don't have the opportunity or all the materials at hand to research, but I bet an extensive look through various comics and published art in other publications would prove my suspicions. I am certain that I've seen that Angel pose before, maybe from an issue of "The Champions," if not an X-Men comic.
It would be better to determine some things if we could see a high res scan, as sometimes lower res pics will make things look better or cleaner, and harder to determine if things like the line work or JB's signature are legit.
As for the inks looking like JB's (of ANY vintage).... REALLY? Not to my eye.
Nope, these figures are close, but no cigar. I am confident in stating that is a fake.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Topic Closed)
