Sign me on as a supporter of unified grading. If you want a client's opinion, it would be a fantastic help. In the end, any grading system is only as good as the "graders", though. Everyone using it would have to discipline themselves to using it fully and correctly.
DBT -----Original Message----- From: MoPo List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kirby McDaniel Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 1:46 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MOPO] Unified grading system As a dealer, I would welcome it and I can grade posters by any standard that anyone sets up. I've used Warren's C-7, C-8 etc, I've used VG VF NM etc, I've used A B C, I've used 1-10. The practical thing is that with my customers I take the time to enumerate every little detail. And I think I've been successful at communicating to my customers what the actual state of the posters are. But I'm willing to adopt any standard that all or even a preponderance of the dealers and auction houses agree on. I don't have the time to lobby for a standard with all the parties and be the clearing house for implementing the standard (and I know - nobody's asked me !! ) --- but I would sign on. Your idea is a good one, Ron. And no, I didn't want to say that's it's impossible. Improbable...??? Maybe. Impractical? Not really, actually it's quite a practical idea. Kirby www.movieart.net On Jan 23, 2006, at 11:14 AM, Ron Moore wrote: > Hey Kirby! > > How true! But I take it from your comment, that you don't think a > unified grading system can be established? Or that is is next to > impossible? I think it can be done. The other major hobbies like > coins, comics and sports cards are much, much larger than our > relatively small hobby. And frankly, if they can do it and get > their collectors to agree and accept a unified system then I think > we should be able to do it a whole lot easier. Maybe get the > auction houses together and develop a "standard" that they can all > agree to and then get some of the major dealers at galleries, shows > and online sellers to acept as well. Listen to everyone's comments > and try to find a middle ground that meets the majorities standards. > > Ron > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: Kirby McDaniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> I certainly did not mean to demean Michael's post or his experience >> with Bonham's. I simply chose 10 posters - and it didn't hurt that I >> had Freeman Fisher look at them for me - and the posters I got were >> all OK. I agree with Ron that a unified grading system would be >> good, but then so would peace in the mideast. >> >> Kirby McDaniel >> www.movieart.net >> >> On Jan 22, 2006, at 9:47 PM, Ron Moore wrote: >> >>> I wasn't able to attend the Bonham's auction and I was not planning >>> on bidding with them because I couldn't attend- that is until I had >>> a friend in LA look at the items for me in person. Then I felt I >>> could at least bid via phone. My prior experience with Bonhams & >>> Butterfield's has not been a happy one. I never returned anything- >>> but that's only because I felt it was my own fault for bidding on >>> something sight unseen and I should have known better. I bid (and >>> won) many items from one of their sales a little over a year ago >>> and when I got the items listed in A- condition, I realized that >>> these were at best what I would have called VG, what Hershenson >>> would have called "Lesser" and what Grey would have graded as VG >>> 4.5. The only guys I will bid with (at major auctions) on items >>> sight unseen are Bruce and Grey and that's because I know they have >>> enough integrity to acurately describe the material they're >>> selling. I know there are other online/ ebay dealers that are >>> respec! >>> table as well (Deke, Phil, Kirby etc.) but, there's a lot of >>> others that play fast and loose with condition as well. >>> >>> Butterfields entire history of grading posters has been at best >>> horrible. I remember when Michael Schwartz was their consultant and >>> I used to point out severe problems with posters to him that he had >>> listed in their catalogs as near mint or mint. He would look right >>> at the problem I pointed out to him (and we're not talking about a >>> minor problem either- these were MAJOR), and he would matter of >>> factly state, "Looks mint to me". Shocking! Even though Michael >>> is not with them any more- the grading problems persist. >>> >>> You're right in the fact that the old A,B, C grades are the loosest >>> in the hobby. They should be junked as they actually mean nothing. >>> You might as well put on a blindfold and play "pin the grade on the >>> poster". What this hobby needs (like all of the other major >>> hobbies) is a unified grading system. No more ABC, no C8 or C9's, >>> no Fine/ Very fine or does that really mean excellent? What we >>> need is something far more defined. It's the only way to get >>> people's confidence in the hobby to last and to get rid of the >>> frustration. Restoration needs to be detailed and sellers need to >>> let people know what the condition of the item was prior to >>> restoration. Bruce is good at this, but with the sheer volulme of >>> material he unloads on the internet every week even he and his crew >>> can't do that kind of detail. So far, the only major auction house >>> giving this kind of detail is Heritage. >>> >>> Comic books have moved into this direction the best so far (in my >>> opinion) as they list restored books with "Apparent" grades. >>> Meaning, a book may only "appear" in near mint 9.4 condition as it >>> has been restored to that appearance. But even this doesn't denote >>> what condition it was in prior to the restoration. It should have >>> a dual grade- something like "7.5/ AP 9.4" which would denote it >>> was in 7.5 condition but has now been restored to appear as a 9.4. >>> >>> Just an idea. >>> >>> Ron Moore >>> Cinema Icons >>> >>> -------------- Original message ---------------------- >>> From: Toochis Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> I was at the auction and unfortunately won nothing. I >>>> did notice, however, that there were several faded >>>> posters which people won and they were at the auction! >>>> They saw the damage and still bid. Those buyers >>>> knew what they bought. I wanted the IN A LONELY PLACE >>>> insert but when I saw it person, it was so faded. A >>>> couple who was there bought it and not for cheap. >>>> >>>> Toochis >>>> >>>> --- Michael B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> kirby--- >>>>> >>>>> kirby, my guess is that you attended the auction or >>>>> had a dealer-friend look at the items you sought. >>>>> >>>>> clearly, if you attend in person, you cannot get >>>>> burnt. people who bid absentee, like me, must rely >>>>> on the descriptions. the poster i returned was >>>>> based on my absentee bid. no one in the room >>>>> thought much of it. the description said A- . >>>>> wouldnt you think, that would be close to mint? >>>>> >>>>> prior to my bid when i was providing credit info, i >>>>> was told there was a no-return policy. isnt it odd >>>>> that for the issues i raised (not only the gross >>>>> fading), i was given full credit including postage >>>>> both ways? >>>>> >>>>> when a poster is returned, do not overlook the >>>>> disappointment factor of the excited winner. >>>>> >>>>> so, kirby, thank you for your contribution to my >>>>> thread that you have no complaints. perhaps, its >>>>> relevance will come to me soon. >>>>> >>>>> michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: Kirby McDaniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> Date: January 22, 2006 11:29:02 AM CST >>>>> To: Shelly Whitworth-King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> Subject: Re: [MOPO] BONHAM'S DISASTER not a disaster >>>>> for MovieArt >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I bought ten posters from Bonham's and all of them >>>>> were quite good. So >>>>> I have no complaints. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Kirby McDaniel >>>>> www.movieart.net >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 22, 2006, at 11:21 AM, Shelly Whitworth-King >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sorry to hear about your disappointment, Michael. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Pretty shoddy of Bonhams to get the information on >>>>> the colour/fading wrong >>>>> AND the fact it was paperbacked not linen. I prefer >>>>> paperbacking on some of >>>>> the smaller sized pieces myself, but expect the >>>>> auction houses to get their >>>>> facts right. One would think that for framed >>>>> pieces, they would be removed >>>>> from their frames as a matter of course and checked >>>>> to make sure the >>>>> condition matched the description. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Shelly >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----Original Message Follows---- >>>>> From: Michael B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>> Subject: [MOPO] BONHAM'S DISASTER >>>>> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 12:11:47 EST >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> it took about 28 days for me to get my full credit >>>>> from Bonham's on the >>>>> poster i purchased/won last month. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> i won STRANGER'S ON A TRAIN insert. it was >>>>> described in A- Condition, >>>>> whatever that means. for those who know the poster, >>>>> it is a beautiful >>>>> orange >>>>> color. when i opened the package, it was >>>>> YELLOW!!!!! i called BONHAM'S >>>>> immediately, and they agreed to take the poster >>>>> back, and pay postage both >>>>> ways >>>>> (especially because of the defect/issue described >>>>> below). it was back on >>>>> the >>>>> FEDEX truck within one hour and fifteen minutes. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> for a moment, i thought that, perhaps, (maybe) the >>>>> studio, also, issued the >>>>> same art in a YELLOW poster because the color was so >>>>> uniform. i called >>>>> bruce >>>>> h immediately because i knew he had this poster at >>>>> his auction, and >>>>> asked............hey, what color is STRANGERS ??? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> i was warned in advance on this website that the >>>>> last auction at bonhams >>>>> had >>>>> tons of faded stuff. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Also, the poster was described as linen backed. it >>>>> was not---it was on >>>>> paper, and rolled, causing damage and chipping at >>>>> the fold lines. I >>>>> learned >>>>> after the fact that many posters were photographed >>>>> framed, so the photo and >>>>> the >>>>> description insufficient. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> SO,,,,,,,,,,,,, STRANGERS ON A TRAIN insert >>>>> is still on my Want >>>>> List. >>>>> anyone have it? how about inserts for ALL ABOUT >>>>> EVE or THE PARADINE >>>>> CASE? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> CHECK OUT a few quality Sinatra pieces, a >>>>> Marilyn, a Paradine >>>>> Case, >>>>> and some other pieces i Have listed on ebay now. >>>>> LINK: _http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZwitnessfor_ >>>>> (http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZwitnessfor) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _________________________________________________________________ >>>>> The new MSN Search Toolbar now includes Desktop >>>>> search! >>>>> http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> === message truncated === >>>> >>>> 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. >>> >>> 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. >> >> 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. > > 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. 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. 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.
