Messages

The sale even includes "Limited" print run things like the Judge Dredd Sketchbook. Supposedly only 500 were printed and that was back in 2016!

It may not be dead yet though. The producers want to shop it to HBO Max.

A quick follow-up question to this.
Is anything needed to cover the artwork before placing it between cardboard?....

Yes, like I said up thread, use this stuff:
Tissue Paper
or any soft, thin, white paper if it's not that important. Careful using sticky tape on the side near the artwork.

Original art can crack when rolled. Painted, obviously, but also B&W.

Yeah that makes sense. I've only ever had to ship inks/pencils and watercolours/gouache for repro. That's all very flexible. A few artists ship to us flat, so we send it back flat as well.

Interesting choice Jim. I'd be interested in your dislike for tubes.
If I send anything that absolutely must not get damaged (no finger marks or corner dents) I would always choose a thick walled tube. *Very* loosely rolled. Just make sure the art is covered in acid free tissue paper, front and back, with no chance for the art to shift length ways in the tube (foam or polystyrene plug).
If you want to send art on Bristol board or art that can't be rolled for any reason (painted, heavy paper sort), then I mount it between two sheets of hardboard/thick card like Jim said, but then boxed with at least 1cm space (foam/bubblewrap/chip filled) on all sides. No matter how thick the card is, if it gets bent your art is fugged. Air space surround is essential. Always make sure your backing boards are bigger than the art (not the exact same size) and make sure it can't shift so a corner wont stick out.
The amount of effort is of course dependant on how valuable you think it is!

I got a response back from Rebellion about whether the bound page could be left loose for framing:

Now I took your query to the powers that be and discovered that there was already discussion had about exactly what you propose.
Sadly it seems that we get request for both ways round, separate for framing AND bound to increase the perceived value of the object itself.
On this occasion they went bound but there's every possibility that future similar products may have it loose.

I can see why leaving it loose may not be such a good idea for the perceived (resale)value of the book, but it certainly is a shame. Pushes me into the "I'm not sure it's worth it camp". My resistance will probably crumble before October. Interesting comment about future similar products, though.

...

I wonder if it wouldn't be better to leave the signed "bound page" loose as an insert, I'm sure there's quite a few of us that would want that framed.

Might be worth pinging them a line on that...

Done! I'll let everyone know what they say.

This looks really sweet. I hope this sells well as it looks like a lot of effort has gone into this.
I wonder if it wouldn't be better to leave the signed "bound page" loose as an insert, I'm sure there's quite a few of us that would want that framed.

..Bump..
As I don't think this has been mentioned yet; Book #4 in the Essential Judge Dredd series:

Dredd vs Death - out on 20 Jan 2022



https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Essential-Judge-Dredd-Dredd-Vs-Death/John-Wagner/Essential-Judge-Dredd/9781786184818

Nice.

They want to get copies into Bovington Tank Museum shop.

I think there's a pretty good chance that might be on the cards...
https://tankmuseumshop.org/collections/comic-books-graphic-novels

Bovington's shop is really well stocked with all sorts of stuff.

...and you're proud of this?

This is straight-up trolling. I've blocked this little fucker and I suggest you do the same.

Is this sort of language really necessary?
It looks like plain ignorance to me (from Milstar that is). If you want this place to be an echo chamber then by all means block anyone who doesn't listen. Alternatively, show him more evidence that he is wrong or just ignore him. Broadcasting that you are blocking him is not exactly helpful or inclusive is it?

Well, it's always good to have multiple sources. 

I'm just going on the available data

You're using one source, and I don't understand why you're ignoring the thing about the cover date being the "remove from the shelf" date for monthly publications. Why ignore that?

I'm not ignoring it and neither is it gospel, but it is just as variable as all the other data.

...Barney says:

Meg 1.20, COVER DATE: 1st May, 1992
Meg 2.01, COVER DATE: 2nd May, 1992

This is the switch over from the monthly volume #1 into the fortnightly volume #2 - and no, they weren't published a day apart...

It's actually worse than that
Meg 1.20 has a cover date of 20th May and inside says the first fortnightly Meg [2.01] goes on sale May 2nd "in just two weeks". 

I don't think you're missing anything. The editor's letter also mentions having "had a lot of fun with the Meg in 2003. But trust me you ain't seen nothing yet." Kinda implying this is the start of a new year. I'm just going on the available data - of course it's bleedin' obvious there are Xmas episodes in these progs/megs - but there aren't any other available dates and Reb's own site lists 214 as the first issue for the year. If Rebellion think it's issue one of 2004, who am I to argue?