Re: [MOPO] Nicks, chips and paper loss - A question.

[Craig Goebel]

What auction isn't buyer beware, viz., use your own judgment but even that is ameliorated by fair sellers offering unconditional refunds. So there's generally an out for buyers and sellers avoid negative feedback, if mistakes are made.   If there's a substitute - a photo -  for having to explain what the relative condition of a poster is, then why have grading?     If there's a time cost savings by not having to spend time or thought explaining the condition of the front, then why bother describing the back? Why not spend the money saved in time and use a photo of the back as well?   Many times, having bought an older poster, I have been taken aback by the large amount of tape and usually bad tape at that, on the back, plus writing, both of which are often described as "some tape on back" and "small amount of writing that might bleed thru". I'd rather have had a picture of the back.   Sellers might well use a photo of the back (and a photo of the front) rather than expect people to read through dense explanations that relate - sometimes -  to a series of condition opinions on which not everyone agrees and that really just are meant to state - look at the photo(s) and make your own judgment. Most buyers end up doing that anyway.   Craig     ----- Original Message ----- From: JR To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 9:31 PM Subject: Re: [MOPO] Nicks, chips and paper loss - A question. The word "chip" come from the world book collecting, where it has been used to describe paper loss forever. Many auctioneers sold books before moving into other areas of paper collecting the term carried over.   But there's no question that condition and condition terms/description are so subjective that to really do a good job you often make the poster sound far worse than it really is. This is why I think Bruce has the right idea -- don't give much of a written condition description at all, just put up an extremely large-size, well-lit and well-photographed high-resolution picture and tell people to examine it closely and let them make their own condition evaluation. That way you only have to mention anything unusual on the back. If you try to be conscientious and accurately describe every tiny little condition detail of a poster, you always end up with something that makes your C8 sound like a C5.   -- JR   ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil Edwards Cinema Arts To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 21:02 Subject: Re: [MOPO] Nicks, chips and paper loss - A question. Just my personal take on descriptions: I'd place a"nick" at 1/8" or less and not necessarily mean that it was including paper loss. A "small" border tear means that there's no paper loss and the tear does not intrude into the image area of the poster. Any paper loss would be indicated. If  a poster has  a wide white border, and has tear/tears over an inch, I'd probably be inclined to give  a better idea of size of tear/s.   Paper loss means missing paper, whether coursed through fold separations (i.e. not a clean split, but actually missing image or white border paper loss) or tears. Anything bigger than that comes more under the term "papr out" or "paper missing".   Of course the more detail one gives often gives a misleading idea of the overall condition of a poster making it sound far, far worse than itactually is. We routinely receive feedback that says, "far better condition than described". Maybve we'd sell more if we were less pedantic about describing condition issues. Even big digital images "lie" as to seeing what's what with a poster, and while it takes longer, we prefer a verbal description. If we say Near Mint-Mint (our top rating, rarely given) it means that there's nothing discernible. Of course when one is wading through several hundred items a week and not using a batallion of "buddy graders" to do the work, itis possible that through eyestrain one misses something.   But we  also live in the age of "condition freak" where 50, 60, 70 year old posters are supposed to still look perfect. And if they don't, through the fact that they were used for the purpose for which they were designed, and were never intended for public collectability, they can have a facelift through linen backing and cosmetic enhancement so they LOOK perfect. It has to look "perfect" because we live in an age of "perfection". One only has to look at the degree that many films are "cleaned up" to for DVD release, but where the "clean-up" has actually removed detail through removal of grain texture from the film as it was shot. It's like the hard, cold sound that so many CDs have when conpared to the "warmth" of the original analog vinyl versions.   There are some collectors who cannot stand the sight of a single fold line, completely forgetting that this is EXACTLY how movie posters were made to be seen when created for the use for which they were created.   Condition is sometimes (often?) in the eye of the beholder. And that eye can be determined whether it's someone trying to sell it or someone trying to find reasons to get a price down.   All sorts of stuff.   Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Rosen To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 9:18 AM Subject: [MOPO] Nicks, chips and paper loss - A question. I was just wondering how others employ terms describing areas of paper loss on poster borders.   I generally use the term "nick" for anything under, say, a quarter-inch at its widest end, usually triangular or V-shaped. I use the term "paper loss" for anything larger than that and/or of a different shape (half-moon or some such, most often).   I've never used the word "chip," though I've seen many other vendors do so (auction houses in particular), and often for quite large and significant areas of paper loss, like missing corners. "Chip" would seem to imply a smaller, less significant area of paper loss to me.   I'm wondering whether other sellers and collectors have specific criteria for how they use or read these terms. Sorry if this seems like a pedantic question, but any opinions would be welcome.   Thanks, Dave Posteropolis www.posteropolis.com   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. Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.1/327 - Release Date: 28/04/06 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.