|
Doug and Sean,
Buying an original for a lot of money just for pleasure can be considered
reasonable if you're rich enough I suppose if you're paying for a rare original
-- but can it be considered reasonable if the poster is only 33% original?
Why not simply buy a print to display for pleasure in that case? Why pay $25,000
for something that is mostly NOT original?
I think we can safely say -- with only 1/3 of the half sheet being original
and the other 2/3 being a "restoration" and the poster selling for around
$25,000 anyway -- that this means that the hobby has *already* reached the point
where this kind of thing is considered "acceptable". And this brings
up a much more important question:
How do we (or future buyers) know that this 33% original FRANKENSTEIN
poster will not show up for sale or auction someday -- WITH NO MENTION OF THE
RESTORATION? If the restoration was as good as it appears to be and the poster
is linenbacked, will most people be able to tell that the whole thing is not
original? Or maybe it will be offered simply as "An original poster on linen
restored to mint condition" with no further details (as is so common in the
auction descriptions we see today). Maybe the claim will be that the poster is
"mint condition with slight restoration" or any one of the variations on that
theme which we see every day?
How will anyone be able to know or say "Hey, wait a minute, this is that
poster that was only 1/3 original before it was restored, isn't it?"
If there is no certification stamp on the back of the poster... and no
other identifying mark or "serial number" embedded in the poster -- then what is
to prevent the new owner... or some subsequent owner... from
representing this 33% original half sheet as a "restored original" or
even just "original" at some future date?
If the poster were offered though a major auction operation with a lot
of experience, history and expert knowledge, perhaps the restoration would
be detected and the poster described accurately. Who knows? But if it were a
private sale, or just a regular auction done by owner or someone, what are the
chances the truth about the poster would even be known -- or revealed in
the description?
Now that the restorers have become so superb at doing what they do, this
has become a very important question.
A couple of years ago on this list, some people joked about starting a
business where they would take one rare original poster, cut it up
into 10 pieces, mount each piece on linen and then "restore" each one to create
10 rare and valuable "original mint posters on linen." Everyone laughed at the
time. With the sale of this 33% original FRANKENSTEIN half sheet for
$25,000, the idea doesn't seem quite so funny anymore.
Why shouldn't all poster buyers start insisting that any linenbacked poster
they purchase MUST have a certification stamp on the back -- so that
there is a way of knowing who did the work and checking on the level of
restoration? I know a lot of people resist this idea -- but what are their
reasons for doing so? And are they honorable reasons (if so, please explain
them to me) or are they reasons based in greed and self-interest?
Ed and Susan Poole at LAMP have been proposing a formal certification
program like this for over a year now (see http://www.learnaboutmovieposters.com/newsite/index/articles/restorationforms.asp )
-- however, they are only "suggesting" that some kind of identification be put
on the back of the poster, whereas to be truly effective buyers should insist
upon there being certification in ink on the back of the linen. There are some
backers and restorers who are doing exactly this. People like Dario at
Resurrection Restoration Studios ( http://www.resurrectionrestoration.planetmopo.com/ )
and several others (please let me know who you are). I would like to create a
place on the internet where people who are having a poster backed or restored
can find out which operations will guarantee putting certification on the back
of the poster as a standard part of their service. I would be glad to host such
a list online at MoviePosterBid, and I think Ed would do so at LAMP as
well.
But I'm sure there are plenty of people who will still resist this idea and
with no greater motivation (by which I mean pocketbook pressure) certification
simply isn't going to become common practice.
So, even with a certification program in place -- and with a list of
those who are certifying their work available on the internet -- it
will take the pressure of the market place to really make certification a
"standard practice". I would love to see the major auctioneers like
Heritage and Bruce Hershenson start refusing to offer linenbacked posters that
do not have certification (or at least stating clearly in their auctions
descriptions that the poster is NOT certified and that they have no idea
what percentage of the poster is "restored"). Yeah, like that will happen any
time soon...
No, not until the vast majority of buyers (particularly those
with real clout... those who are willing to pop for $5,000 to $100,000 or more
for a restored poster) start insisting that they will not buy linenbacked
posters without certification is there any chance of certification becoming a
standard part of every linenbacking and restoration job. But it is
necessary and buyers need to start insisting on it. The danger to this
hobby/industry of heavily-restored posters being offered as "original mint" or
"original with minimal restoration" is a very real danger right now,
today -- and a danger that seems to me to be growing worse every
day.
-- JR
|
- [MOPO] When does a restoration become a fake? J R
