[MOPO] A good fake is always worth making

[J R]

Barton,   Your description -- and the fact that you can compare it to a known original from the *same* lobby card set -- makes this an open and shut case in my mind. You have a reproduction. Very likely, as you say, a very good color Xerox printed on card stock (but not quite as heavy as the originals, a weight of paper which they really don't make anymore and which wouldn't go through the color Xerox machine if they did).   I get so miffed when I hear people who ought to know better continue to say, "Well, it just wouldn't be worth it for someone to create reproductions of that card... it only sells for $10... $20... $30... whatever." People who believe this simply aren't paying attention to the recent revolution in color printing. At the 11x14 size of a lobby card -- if you have a near-mint or restored original (or have created a high-resolution digital image of one) you can make a convincing reproduction of it for $3 bucks. Less if you work in a print/copy shop or have a friend who does. Now, even if the card only sells for $10 to $20 bucks, if it is a popular title that you *know* you can sell multiple copies of on eBay, then it is a perfectly profitable and easy thing to do. Your cost: is $3 bucks. And you make $7 to $17 or more on each one. And you can make as many as you can sell.   It is a perfectly viable business model, particularly if you have a large inventory of originals that you also sell, so you can just slip it into the mix.   This is happening folks... has been happening for some time. The one mistake the forger made in this case is that he failed to artificially "age" the card a bit. He should have put a couple of light creases or a wrinkle in a corner. Maybe a pin hole or two. Perhaps nicked one edge just a tiny bit... maybe lightly run a bit of fine sandpaper across the points of the corners to dull them just a hair... and maybe left it sitting in a window in full  sun for a few days. If he had done that, you probably wouldn't have even bothered to compare it to an original, unless the paper is really noticeably lighter.   People really need to understand that when you are talking 50 and 60 year old paper that just isn't any such thing any longer as an original in "minty fresh" condition. I don't care if they were pulled from the NSS press and stored in a vault all those years. They would still have some yellowing from the acids in the paper, the paper would have a slightly musty sense to it, from absorbing moisture out of the air for all those years, and the paper would feel a little "soft" for the same reason... particularly at the edges, which would no longer be razor-sharp (they never were to begin with on the heavier card stock). And, of course, the paper would be the exact same kind of paper they used back them, which they simply don't make anymore.   Of course, all of this is impossible to gauge when buying through the mail. You have to actually hold the card or poster in your hands and compare it to known originals from the same time (not necessarily the same title). This is a prime reason for only buying from sellers who offer a no-questions-asked money-back refund policy. The seller may not have looked at the item closely enough and may very well be passing on a reproduction without being aware of it. But if you want to return it -- for any reason or no reason at all -- the seller should be willing to give your money back (maybe not shipping costs, though... a good reason to only buy from those who charge reasonable shipping costs).   -- JR   ----- Original Message ----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 14:16 Subject: Re: [MOPO] Poster allocations and imperfections This is a subject I have been thinking about ever since I bought a lobby card several months ago that I am sure is a reproduction.  The card was from a reputable and long-standing seller from whom I have bought cards in the past, and in this particular case, had purchased several cards at once.  One of the cards was an early 50s noir, and I had another card from the set from an earlier purchase.  The card in question looked immediately suspicious.  I am not an expert, but I have been buying movie paper now for about two years and feel that my eye is pretty "trained" when it comes to looking at 50 to 60 year old paper (I don't buy anything past 1959).  The card in question was flawless - no nicks, dings, tears, or even pinholes.  I have never seen a 50 year old lobby without even so much as some yellowing of the white border, but this had none.  Also, the lobby was not printed on the same heavy stock as the other one I had.  The stock was slightly lighter in weight, and when I held both cards up to a bright light, I could see the color image through the back of the suspect card, but not through the back of the other one. The card was not expensive and the seller offered to take it back, although he maintained that it was an original that had been stored for 50 years and never used (a conjecture on his part).  I kept it as an example of what I believe to be a reproduction (albeit a decent one).  The seller also said that it was not worth the money to reproduce and sell a card that is not a top price getter.  I have heard this argument several times before, and I have to wonder:  You can get a color Xerox now that looks fabulous, and it's pretty cheap to do so.  So, the bottom line for me is, while I don't like glaring deficiencies on my movie paper, I don't mind - and even EXPECT - for them to more or less "look their age."  For me this means definitely some yellowing or tanning of the border, and preferably a pinhole or two.  I suppose these things can be faked, but it can't be as easy to do as it must be to make a reproduction of an old card and make it look "mint." Barton          Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com    ___________________________________________________________________               How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List        Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]             In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L     The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/04 Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.